Creating aircraft 3D model content for BoX, so for example....

[Mysticpuma]

....as it stands at the moment, we have enough of the South of England to create some great Battle of Britain content, as can be seen by the Mods from @kraut1 and @Sandinourcoffee6

 

Just out of interest, I assume that the BoX team who are now moving on to BoK, probably won't be interested in adding much more content to BoX.

 

Out of interest, what is the current situation for modellers offering content to the team to include in BoX?

 

For example, if someone wanted to offer a Spitfire MKI or Hurricane MKI to the team to include in BoX, would it have to be offered to include as a free update, paid for content with a profit share to the BoX team, etc?

 

I am just wondering what the BoX teams thoughts are if an outside modeller or group wanted to support BoX with extra content, what would the process be (if this is at all a possibility)?

 

Cheers, Mysticpuma

 

 

 

[AndyJWest]

I'm fairly certain that if any team was serious, they'd be well advised to begin the process by contacting the developers privately, explaining what they were proposing, and what resources (i.e. coders, 3D graphics artists etc, with the necessary skills) they had to be able to carry it out.

 

As for pricing, I'd think the developers would expect such content to meet existing standards, and be priced accordingly. Again though, this is unlikely to be something that gets discussed on the forum, since it could involve commercially-sensitive information. As would a great deal of other data necessary to add such content. 

 

 

 

Edited November 11 by AndyJWest

[Mysticpuma]

Appreciate it is unlikely to be discussed on the forum about fiscal renumeration, but I think the question of approach, contact and viability could be discussed on here, at least for any independent interested parties.

[AndyJWest]

I don't think the developers are likely say anything here beyond 'we are not currently interested in such proposals', or alternatively 'contact us privately, with a detailed proposal'. It really isn't in their interest say much more, as that would likely just encourage the usual forum speculation, over-analysis of every word, and acrimony when things the developers never said were going to happen don't. 

[Mysticpuma]

Contact who on the team?

[AndyJWest]

I've no idea, but I'd imagine that any serious proposal would get passed on to whoever was going to deal with it. The developers very likely get non-serious (or utterly unfeasible) offers to develop stuff quite regularly. Game developers in general get a great deal of this, mostly from people who don't have even the minimal understanding of what is actually involved, and will either bin the lot, or appoint someone to do some preliminary filtering if there's a possibility that something viable might be found amongst the drek.

[Juri_JS]

If anyone really has any intent to create content for the game, it's a good idea to show the devs some previous work first, to demonstrate that you can meet the games standards and most importantly that you can work without too much assistance.

[Sayan]

New planes are good...

But I wouldn't give her up even for a maps in the ROF.

And even if they "don't meet the HIGHEST standards of quality", I would gladly fly on them in BoX/

Channel Map, Fantasy Island, Lake, Tarnopol... I miss them)

[Avimimus]

5 hours ago, Mysticpuma said:

Contact who on the team?

 

Han would make sense. Although, contacting the community manager (LukeFF) could also be a way to go.

 

As previously mentioned, demonstrating an ability to produce a model of sufficient accuracy and quality would likely be necessary. They would also need to consider whether the coding and flight model work is worth it on their part. They'll also need to be pretty focussed on Korea at this point. However, they are considering accepting additional Collector Planes for the Finland map - so they might be open to some other ideas as well.

 

A good start might be offering to produce a free ground object? Possibly for the Finland team? That'd allow demonstrating competencies and also get a feel for what it is like to work to their specifications.

[ITAF_Rani]

They could simply offer a serie of collectors planes as standalone with mini maps where  expand the game possibility...

[ITAF_Rani]

https://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/92942-mc-205-veltro-in-rheinland-map/

[BlitzPig_EL]

Why not ask the Finnish team how they went about it?

[LukeFF]

6 hours ago, ITAF_Rani said:

They could simply offer a serie of collectors planes as standalone with mini maps where  expand the game possibility...

 

If only it were that easy. 🙂

 

3D modeling (and doing it well) is a difficult task. I sometimes look back on the work I did for the He 162 in the original IL2 and wonder how in the world I ever convinced the team it was acceptable. 

[Stonehouse]

Possibly a good starting point would be props (eg airfield objects, additional static aircraft undergoing repair etc), extra vehicles, ships, trains etc rather than aircraft even though aircraft is what is most desired. It would seem to me that such non aircraft objects/models would be a much simpler proposition.

[ITAF_Rani]

15 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

If only it were that easy. 🙂

 

3D modeling (and doing it well) is a difficult task. I sometimes look back on the work I did for the He 162 in the original IL2 and wonder how in the world I ever convinced the team it was acceptable. 

I m going to sending you a pm..

Check mail later

Txs mate

[Juri_JS]

11 hours ago, Stonehouse said:

Possibly a good starting point would be props (eg airfield objects, additional static aircraft undergoing repair etc), extra vehicles, ships, trains etc rather than aircraft even though aircraft is what is most desired. It would seem to me that such non aircraft objects/models would be a much simpler proposition.

From my perspective as a mission builder, additional ground objects would be highly welcome. We are still missing lots of important stuff. For example we still don't have ww2 observation balloons, although they saw wide spread use on the eastern front.

[Sandmarken]

On 11/12/2025 at 4:02 PM, Juri_JS said:

From my perspective as a mission builder, additional ground objects would be highly welcome. We are still missing lots of important stuff. For example we still don't have ww2 observation balloons, although they saw wide spread use on the eastern front.

We lack static aircraft for almost all new models. The C-47 is perhaps the most important since it was present in so many places. If you want it, or a Hurricane, or perhaps an IAR-80 at the airfield, the only way to do it is to use real planes, and because of their heavy resource usage, despawn them after takeoff. (Works but not ideal) Also, there should be more ships: a German destroyer, some Western Allied patrol crafts, and a British military ship. For the Kuban and Odessa maps, we don't have a single Romanian ship to use (even though they were the naval force there), and of course, a German and Soviet counterpart to the American and British infantry units!

[BlitzPig_EL]

Some light cruisers for all sides would be good too...

[357th_KW]

A British High Speed Launch or Motor Torpedo Boat would be nice as a foil to the E boat we already have.

 

A downed pilot in a dinghy and some various colored dye packs would be amazing for setting up some more complex interactions with those boats.

 

Rhine river barges would be another nice addition.

 

A horse drawn supply wagon would also be good.