Suggesting to devs

[Brucerer]

I know there is an elevator / aileron sensitivity option already, but it seems to limit the maximum value... what i'd really like is an option to make small movements less sensitive but large movements still give the full effect.

So as you move the stick it gives exponentially more effect... I've seen this in other games - they call it stick scaling - and it really helps with control when lining up a shot without losing the ability to perform sharp turn etc.

Currently i often find myself trying to make small adjustments but the smallest possible (just out of the dead zone of the stick) is too much and i end up bouncing back and forth rather than making a smooth movement.

Even if this option was only available as presets, i'd be grateful.

Thanks and congrats on making a great game!

[oblivion91]

there needs to be a penalty for crashing during multiplayer, or at least points awarded for the last person to score hits before the person crashed. Too many times ive had a guy lined up perfectly, and he decides to dive into the ground or water. He isn't penalized, and i wind up with nothing.

[iannik]

I ask to devs:

-how is possible that in SIM mode is not shown heading with Throttle, speed and Altitude. Compass is one of the most important instrument in the cockpit.

-I'd like a simple editor for free flight or for missions. Ora free flight mode where is possible to select the map.

-in some airports there are guard tower at the begin/end of the runway, that is incredible.

-i'd like if in the site will be the opportunity to print scanarios map. This should be really useful for navigation so i don't need to open everytime the map in the game.

I love this game, it is a good start but need few little changes. obviously I'd like cockpit for axis planes and bombers, accuracy for models (macchi prop) and othre things... step by step. ;)

[Ancient Seraph]

there needs to be a penalty for crashing during multiplayer, or at least points awarded for the last person to score hits before the person crashed. Too many times ive had a guy lined up perfectly, and he decides to dive into the ground or water. He isn't penalized, and i wind up with nothing.
This will be fixed in the upcoming patch. A penalty will be given to everyone crashing without damage, or you'll get the kill if you hit him good enough. For now, we'll just have to live with the fact some people are lame.

[beaker126]

Awesome game Anton & Co. Most of what I have to suggest would probably have to be in a sequel, but here goes.

1. Some naval missions. For example, I'd love to see this game's treatment of the Swordfish mission to sink the Bismark, and a convoy escort mission in a bomber would be cool too.

2.Pacific theater and North Africa.

3. A new online mode, Airlift. Players would be tasked flying a transport plane to a friendly airfield and have to land. Both sides would be doing this, and could also be trying to shoot each other down at the same time. It would be a neat way to fly a C-47 or Ju-52.

Thanks for listening.

[Dreetje74]

Since i played iL2-Sturmovik on pc years ago...the only thing i really miss is the ignition of the engine.

I know, it sounds stupid but i really loved the sound of the engine starting with the smoke comming out of the exhausts. :rolleyes:

....or flying back to base after a mission with a smoking/stalling engine....and when it dies on you,...still trying to ignite the damn thing. lol:)

[Gazz6666]

This will be fixed in the upcoming patch. A penalty will be given to everyone crashing without damage, or you'll get the kill if you hit him good enough. For now, we'll just have to live with the fact some people are lame.

But hang on a moment.

Many a time i've been hard on the tail of an enemy in a dogfight, and often using the target camera, i've been too target fixated and flown into the ground whilst trying to follow my target. So this means i'll get penalised because I wasn't looking where I was going, but I get the same penalty as someone doing it to avoid being killed?

[Ancient Seraph]

But hang on a moment.

Many a time i've been hard on the tail of an enemy in a dogfight, and often using the target camera, i've been too target fixated and flown into the ground whilst trying to follow my target. So this means i'll get penalised because I wasn't looking where I was going, but I get the same penalty as someone doing it to avoid being killed?
Wrapping your car around a tree will get you killed, whether you did it because you were looking at a pretty lady or to commit suicide.
Guess you'll just have to be more careful where you fly :).

[Brucerer]

I've been finding it frustrating lately online: i create a dogfight match, someone joins, game starts, i shoot them down a couple times and then they quit before the game is over! This means i dont actually get credited for winning the match which is weak.

[RubberBoots]

I've been finding it frustrating lately online: i create a dogfight match, someone joins, game starts, i shoot them down a couple times and then they quit before the game is over! This means i dont actually get credited for winning the match which is weak.

I'd recommend waiting for more than one player--but in all seriousness, early-quits are frustrating, especially when it's 4v4 and after 2 quits it gets down to 4v2. I had the same issue with Gears of War--I don't like the "you can only join a game before it launches" system--it doesn't work on the xbox because people just games too frequently. I wish you could join games that were in progress.

*Re: my previous post. I now realize the game actually claims to have 1-16 coop. This is not at all true. Elsewhere on the forums I heard the weak excuse that "Strike" is actually coop vs. coop. I'm sorry. This is not what people understand by "coop." They understand player+player(s) vs. AI. This is kind of false advertising and I was very disappointed to learn that it wasn't in the game. It's still one of the best purchases I've made in a while and I'll be playing the CRAP out of multiplayer...but this was the element I was actually most looking forward to: flying with my friends.

[Abbevilleboy]

Great game, but there are some disappointing inaccuracies on show:

The Battle of Britain:
The Spitfire IIb and the Hurricane II were NEVER used in the Battle of Britain. The Spitfires used were Mk.1, Mk.Ia and Mk.IIa (which all has 8 x .303 machine guns...no cannon) and the Hurricane I (which had 8 .303 machine guns) was used. Spitfire IIb and Hurricane Mk.II didn't apprear until AFTER the BoB.

Given the resources available on the battle, there are no excuses for this!

All RAF Battle of Britain fighters were painted green and brown on top...never grey.

A Hurricane Mk.II would be in grey and green on top...not brown and green.

The Macchi Mc.202 had a 3-bladed propeller...not a 4-bladed propeller.

The aircraft you have listed as a P-51B is actually Mustang I - the RAF name for the P-51A (the A had an Allison engine, as opposed to the Merlin on the B/C/D, and 4 20mm cannon instead of 4 x .50cal machine guns on the B/C and 6 x .50cal machine guns on the D)

If I notice any other errors I will post them up.

There are plenty - don't they school people properly in Russia? I suppose they got taught they basically won the war all by themselves and the Battle of Britain was just a side show.

Actually I take it back - we don't school people properly in the UK either. Most of my own countrymen seem to know sweet FA about it either.

[Abbevilleboy]

Mk.IIb Spitfires had cannons...not many made. They were post Battle of Britain (thus another incorrect part of the game) and were camouflaged in grey and green on top...they pretty much looked exactly like a Mk.V. The Battle of Britain fighter marks were the I, Ia and II (possibly IIa...will have to check that). They were all camouflaged in green and brown on top (the BoB day fighter scheme...). Thus why the picture is puzzling...cool pic, but inaccurate. Nice pic...shame about the error...

Sorry, no - Early MkVa & bs did get the green/brown scheme to start off with; the grey/green came along later in the year (1941).

That guy's sig pic depicts MkVb's of 92 Sqn (QJ) in early '41, as he says over the Isle of Wight - The Needles to be precise.

The ranking of RAF officers in the game is all wrong - the Corporals would have been riggers/fitters, not pilots, no matter what the shortage may have been they simply weren't flight trained! Their contribution to the war effort is highly under rated none the less...

Flt Sgt/Pilot Officer/Flying Officer/Flt Lt/Sqn Ldr/Wing Cdr/Gr Capt (rarely flying) etc are the correct RAF ranks.

[rocketassistedllama]

Howdilli...well, as I've waxed lyrical about this game before-and now that I've finally finished the campaign on realistic a few days ago [just started on simulation;] I hope I'm forgiven for offering some harsher criticism-in the interests of forging a stronger sequel!

#1; Unless the flak can be made WAY more dangerous [I have'nt been hit yet...so that's 100000% more lethal??:] I'd scrap all the ground attack missions entirely. Without flak they're weak, dull-and far too easy next to the fighter-type stuff [which shines.]

#2; Some type of secondary zoom for the 3rd person view would be VERY nice, which you have inside. It's even more important 3rd person actually; as you're already a greater distance from the enemy, than in-cockpit...

#3; Ability to fly any plane, in any campaign-once mission unlocked. A staple, for providing replayability.

#4; Training is a bit bare-bones. Something like in 'Battlestations"; where you can choose plane types/formations etc, and then place them.

#6; One way to add replay with the campaign, is the ability to 'slide' the ratio of ace pilots, to rookies...maybe then, less of them will crash into the ground, or fly in a straight line whilst I'm chasing them;0)

#7; After such an inspired gameplay decision in campaign [no consequences for failing a mission...just like real life, you still keep flying;] why is this taken away in the single missions?? Reminds me of 'Heroes of the Pacific'-where I'd fail countless times, for not managing to shoot down xhundred fighters within the first 10 minutes.....means most replay single player, is in the campaign. I mean; 'Heroes', not a sim, was a WAY harder game than this [practically unplayable because of it]...because they'd fail you all the time. Anything that's timed-unless it's in a racing game.....

#8; byebye 'recon' missions. Seriously...I was laughing, wondering what people would think of my new 'game'...which consisted in flying in a slow circle, for 10 minutes. Gameplay??
Again, recon missions in campaign are ok...as stuff at least tries to chase you.

Again; mucho apologido. Love the game...I just want a stronger sequel;0)

[trk29]

#1; Unless the flak can be made WAY more dangerous [I have'nt been hit yet...so that's 100000% more lethal??:] I'd scrap all the ground attack missions entirely. Without flak they're weak, dull-and far too easy next to the fighter-type stuff [which shines.]


Anton stated that Flak is getting a upgrade to be more harmful.

I for one have never been hit by it.

[GCoutinho]

Started to play some simulation games lately, I just noticed something I ignored:
- Now in simulation mode you can use external views by pressing the D-PAD

The virtual cockpit is presently a necessity due to the absence of cockpits for some planes, but external views feels a bit more unrealistic.

Hopefully in future patches / DLC there will be an option to restrict the use of external views and the use of planes that don't have cockpits.

[Ancient Seraph]

Hopefully in future patches / DLC there will be an option to restrict the use of external views and the use of planes that don't have cockpits.
In the next patch most, if not all, planes are supposed to get cockpits.

[Rhah]

In the next patch most, if not all, planes are supposed to get cockpits.


Are you sure? As far as I'm aware, only the 109 and 190 were definitely getting 'pits in the immediate future, and there was no mention of them being part of the forthcoming patch.
I may be wrong, but I don't think there are any plans to provide pits for the bombers, or Italian fighters.

[juz1]

Dear Devs,

would there be any possibility of setting an approx start altitude level for Multiplayer Maps please...I'm thinking this would encourage more high altitude dog fighting, an aspect of your fine game which is slightly lacking in multiplayer...

also a strike variant where one side just takes fighters and racks up multiple tickets for each bomber kill, the bombing team can go with just bombers or maybe escorts too...



also dlc the low-level Romanian oil fields raid in B24s...real eye-candy potential
________
Buy Silver Surfer Vaporizer (http://vaporizer.org/reviews/silver-surfer)

[rocketassistedllama]

Cool...I'm so glad to hear this game's being supported as well as it is by the developers. It's gold-there's simply nothing to touch it on console, and I can see other developers being scared away by Il-2's near dominance of most aspects.
Initially, whilst playing the demo [then the game;] I had the same fear that I did when playing 'GTA 4' for the first time, namely; this is the death of this particular genre...how do they improve upon it?? But there's tons of room...if we don't have to wait for a sequel in order to get decent flak....I would have actually rated that as more important than fully dynamic damage.....the damage in this game is enough to impress anyone, making improvements a thing of dwindling returns.

[moonknight82]

Sorry, no - Early MkVa & bs did get the green/brown scheme to start off with; the grey/green came along later in the year (1941).

That guy's sig pic depicts MkVb's of 92 Sqn (QJ) in early '41, as he says over the Isle of Wight - The Needles to be precise.

The ranking of RAF officers in the game is all wrong - the Corporals would have been riggers/fitters, not pilots, no matter what the shortage may have been they simply weren't flight trained! Their contribution to the war effort is highly under rated none the less...

Flt Sgt/Pilot Officer/Flying Officer/Flt Lt/Sqn Ldr/Wing Cdr/Gr Capt (rarely flying) etc are the correct RAF ranks.

I have never, ever seen a photo or info about Spitfire Mk.V being in green and brown...and I have access to so many Spitfire books it's untrue! Only Aussie Spit Mk.5s were in brown and green (foliage green and light earth, or dark green and dark earth...) RAF 5s were never brown and green.

[GabeFan]

also dlc the low-level Romanian oil fields raid in B24s...real eye-candy potential

+1

Yes Please!!!! A Ploesti mission would be awesome...

[Robotic Pope]

Great game, but there are some disappointing inaccuracies on show:

The Battle of Britain:
The Spitfire IIb and the Hurricane II were NEVER used in the Battle of Britain. The Spitfires used were Mk.1, Mk.Ia and Mk.IIa (which all has 8 x .303 machine guns...no cannon) and the Hurricane I (which had 8 .303 machine guns) was used. Spitfire IIb and Hurricane Mk.II didn't apprear until AFTER the BoB.

Given the resources available on the battle, there are no excuses for this!

All RAF Battle of Britain fighters were painted green and brown on top...never grey.

A Hurricane Mk.II would be in grey and green on top...not brown and green.

The Macchi Mc.202 had a 3-bladed propeller...not a 4-bladed propeller.

The aircraft you have listed as a P-51B is actually Mustang I - the RAF name for the P-51A (the A had an Allison engine, as opposed to the Merlin on the B/C/D, and 4 20mm cannon instead of 4 x .50cal machine guns on the B/C and 6 x .50cal machine guns on the D)

If I notice any other errors I will post them up.

Moonknight, you make a mistake yourself. Read PhantomIIf4's thread here. http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=9791&highlight=developers

Your paragraph should read like this:
The aircraft you have listed as a P-51B is actually Mustang IA - the RAF name for the P-51 (the P-51 had an Allison engine, as opposed to the Merlin on the B/C/D, and 4 20mm cannon instead of 4 x .50cal machine guns on the A/B/C and 6 x .50cal machine guns on the D)

The P-51A was the USAAF name for the Mustang II and had the four .50inch machine guns.

The Mustang I had two .50 machine guns just under the spinner, firing through the propeller. Two more .50 in the wings along with four .30 machine guns making 8 machine guns in total. The early Mustang I planes also had a shorter carbouretta scoop above the engine. This IS NOT the plane in BoP.

By the way the USAAF name for the Mustang I is the XP-51 used for USAAF evaluation before North American was allowed to sell the Mustang I to the RAF.

[moonknight82]

Moonknight, you make a mistake yourself. Read PhantomIIf4's thread here. http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=9791&highlight=developers

Your paragraph should read like this:


The P-51A was the USAAF name for the Mustang II and had the four .50inch machine guns.

The Mustang I had two .50 machine guns just under the spinner, firing through the propeller. Two more .50 in the wings along with four .30 machine guns making 8 machine guns in total. The early Mustang I planes also had a shorter carbouretta scoop above the engine. This IS NOT the plane in BoP.

By the way the USAAF name for the Mustang I is the XP-51 used for USAAF evaluation before North American was allowed to sell the Mustang I to the RAF.

I realise that...I was tired when writing that post, so please forgive that mistake. I am seriously anaemic right now.

[Rittmeister86]

Could you guys put in a patch where you could land and re-arm/re-fuel at the airfields?

[trk29]

Are you sure? As far as I'm aware, only the 109 and 190 were definitely getting 'pits in the immediate future, and there was no mention of them being part of the forthcoming patch.
I may be wrong, but I don't think there are any plans to provide pits for the bombers, or Italian fighters.

You are correct 109 and maybe the 190 as Anton stated.

[DannyBooze]

Could you guys put in a patch where you could land and re-arm/re-fuel at the airfields?

plzzzzzzzzz add this so we can re arm re fuel. on sim theres no point in doing it with limited f/a if u cant rearm refuel :confused::confused::confused:

[TONIJAZZ]

Please, support for this great joystick!!!
If you enable mapping controls and realistic forces this one will be a must have game!!!

[fuzzychickens]

Please, support for this great joystick!!!
If you enable mapping controls and realistic forces this one will be a must have game!!!

I'd agree if it weren't for the fact the MS are a-holes and abandonded flight sticks and the flight sim market - which clearly show MS puts maxing revenue before quality.

Flight sticks don't appeal to the lowest common denominator - shareholders could use that extra half-cent, so bye bye sticks and flight sims.

MS says, "Go play the latest Halo"

[Oyorgi777]

Dear Devs,

Already covered, but just to reinforce this NEEDS for a future update ;-)) :

1- Decrease the Deadzone of Joysticks (or maybe can you make it adjustable??). Now, it is quite unplayable unless decreasing the sensitivity...

2- Create 8 "sight directions" instead of 4, controlable with the hat (with the Thrustmaster Flightstick X). Or maybe a panoramic or rotating seeing mode controlable with the hat with a reset button.

Thank you for your work!!

[Abbevilleboy]

I have never, ever seen a photo or info about Spitfire Mk.V being in green and brown...and I have access to so many Spitfire books it's untrue! Only Aussie Spit Mk.5s were in brown and green (foliage green and light earth, or dark green and dark earth...) RAF 5s were never brown and green.

1) Do you really think this makes you unique in your 'expertise'?

2) Can you tell the difference between earth brown and ocean grey in B&W photos?

The Spitfire MkV entered service in early 1941 and the Land Temperate scheme was not replaced until August 1941.

The first production Spitfire MkVs were factory painted in the Land Temperate scheme, Dark Earth/Dark Green/Sky (Type S refers to the type of paint used - smooth instead of matt - not the colour. There were other Type S paints in use). Squadrons started reequipping with the MkV from February 1941. From 16th August 1941, day fighters were instructed to be repainted in the new Day Fighter Scheme of Ocean Grey/Dark Green/Medium Sea Grey. This was to be done at the first convenient opportunity. From September 1941 manufacturers had to supply new aircraft in the Day Fighter scheme.

[trk29]

Rear gunners need to have a over temp on the guns like the front main guns on all the aircraft.

[Majictoast]

can you add a option in the game to intentionally set up team fights between players? or CLAN SUPPORT? why not have that? im sure people all over the world would love to fight as a team in custom matches.

how about allowing me to play my PS3 music while im playing online? i would really love to jam out to Kenny G while im tearing up the sky's did i say Kenny G? i meant Young Jeezy

also if not that can you add Aircraft editor of some kind?

for online mode. let us create a more detailed profile. log the flight hours like real pilots. and for the love of god PLEASE let us customize the plane a little bit. in WWII pilots had the ability to paint their bombs and paint nice designs on their aircraft? even log how many enemy's they shot down with little painted designs along the body,

let us have options to make an aircraft our own. i feel that if i was able to fly an aircraft that i customized. i would feel much more drawn into the game. that would be a powerful feature to the game.


or allow a ranking system for the more elite players where there will be rewards for players with the best records for flight. a reward could be anywhere from 2 tone paint job to a pimped out MP3 player in the cockpit,

kidding about the last part

[Ancient Seraph]

also if not that can you add Aircraft editor of some kind?

for online mode. let us create a more detailed profile. log the flight hours like real pilots. and for the love of god PLEASE let us customize the plane a little bit. in WWII pilots had the ability to paint their bombs and paint nice designs on their aircraft? even log how many enemy's they shot down with little painted designs along the body,

let us have options to make an aircraft our own. i feel that if i was able to fly an aircraft that i customized. i would feel much more drawn into the game. that would be a powerful feature to the game.

This was possible in 1946, a feature which was awesome. I vote +1 on this. And it's an opportunity for the devs to make some extra money: nose art for €0,50 a piece (not that I'd ever buy it, but it fits in the general Xbox Live Marketplace trend going on atm) :P.

[Mjollnir1975]

In an attempt to introduce my sons to the il-2 series i have the ps 3 version. My question is is there a way to implement the ps3 eye in a manner similar to the track ir? If that could be done that would alleviate the need to push in to look around.


S!,
Mjollnir1975

[Ancient Seraph]

In an attempt to introduce my sons to the il-2 series i have the ps 3 version. My question is is there a way to implement the ps3 eye in a manner similar to the track ir? If that could be done that would alleviate the need to push in to look around.


S!,
Mjollnir1975
I believe this is possible, however, I don't have a PS3, so I'm not sure. Try making a seperate topic for it ;).

[exgavalonnj]

If you can add missions put in a B-17 bombing mission. Add JU88 and more US planes like P40 and P38l. also in STRIKE instead of attacking concrate bunkers put in tanks with AA guns.

[CrankyBulletcup]

They need to add the FW190A-6, well add all of the varients of all planes

[propagandawarmachine]

Give Germys some Cockpits for Online then make a Forced Cockpit Option for realistic and sim. I dont give a rats if the internals actually function I dont really look at em.

hear that we need:

Forced Cockpits!

Say it with me "Forced Cockpits". Virtual is not for the battle hardened!

Also Simulator has a nack of letting planes disappear when you close the distance. You can see the specs and they just vanish which makes a already challenging setting even more frustrating.

[DannyBooze]

Give Germys some Cockpits for Online then make a Forced Cockpit Option for realistic and sim. I dont give a rats if the internals actually function I dont really look at em.

hear that we need:

Forced Cockpits!

Say it with me "Forced Cockpits". Virtual is not for the battle hardened!

Also Simulator has a nack of letting planes disappear when you close the distance. You can see the specs and they just vanish which makes a already challenging setting even more frustrating.

yaaa!!!!!! plz forced cockpit at least as a option setting for a match :!::!::!:

[merro]

yaaa!!!!!! plz forced cockpit at least as a option setting for a match :!::!::!:
/signed

[Tudorp15]

Awesome game. My favorite now by far.

Suggestion: Next one, do a Pacific Theater version, with corsairs, P-38s, P-40s (my personal fav), B-24, etc.. That would make an awesome sequil to BOP. By the way, even some C-47 Skytrain drops would be cool...

Drop me an email when I can pre-order mine <wink>


BTW: I love my P-47 with the D Day livery... Thanks..

[Der Übermensch]

More than anything, there needs to be an option to force random teams.
I don't know how many times I enter a Strike Game to see 3 people all set to "Team A" and sitting in their B-17s. Or worse, when there are 7 people in a room and 5 of them are set to a certain team, and the host starts the game anyways.

I would also really really suggest that game rooms not close after a match. There are not enough games hosted at any one time, so it is hard enough to find one as it is... why not just keep the room together for instant rematch?

While we are on the subject, maybe allow join in progress?

And allow display of all games at once regardless of type. There is no option for this, only quick match, which is to specific, and custom match, which is still too specific. Why not just a simple list of all the games available?

I love this game, and when you get a match going, the multiplayer experience is awesome... but setting up the matches is the most frustrating of experiences, and the design seems to lack common sense... It needs to be fixed if players are to be retained in the long run.

Edit: O yeah, and ability to change planes upon re-spawning would be nice, although it probably shouldn't be an option in simulator.

[TonyPilot]

Hi,
"Il-2 Sturmovik: Birds of Prey" is a great game ok. However, I think,
which like all the games that simulate the piloting of an aircraft,
in mode "simulation",are "overly" complicated to manage.
The "player" pilot has not available all the piloting gears,
to correct the altitude, pitch, roll etc..and the "real" panoramic view
to navigate and orienting itself, and overall, the experience
that has a "real"pilot.
Infact, if you see some video of IIWW dogfight with guncamera,you can observe
that the plane ora "more" stable respect the the planes in the "game" during the
combat. When you play you can see, especially in the sim mode,that the plane
is "to much" instable (too pitch and too roll) as if the plane was in the very
midst of a constant "turbulence".
Then I find it useless, in the game, overloaded difficulty
to piloting an airplane, because it is impossible in a console's game,
actually simulate the real piloting of an airplane.
So, I find that the mode "arcade" is the most suitable,
ultimately, to simulate reality.

[moonknight82]

1) Do you really think this makes you unique in your 'expertise'?

2) Can you tell the difference between earth brown and ocean grey in B&W photos?

The Spitfire MkV entered service in early 1941 and the Land Temperate scheme was not replaced until August 1941.

The first production Spitfire MkVs were factory painted in the Land Temperate scheme, Dark Earth/Dark Green/Sky (Type S refers to the type of paint used - smooth instead of matt - not the colour. There were other Type S paints in use). Squadrons started reequipping with the MkV from February 1941. From 16th August 1941, day fighters were instructed to be repainted in the new Day Fighter Scheme of Ocean Grey/Dark Green/Medium Sea Grey. This was to be done at the first convenient opportunity. From September 1941 manufacturers had to supply new aircraft in the Day Fighter scheme.

Although the Spitfire Mk.V entered service before the Land Temperate scheme was replaced, the Mk.Vb, however, had cannon feed problems (among others) and didn't enter service until AFTER the scheme was changed.
Wrong again...

[imnotgeoff]

yeh heres an idea FIX multiplayer an stop robbing me of my ranked stats

[Kulis]

Just got my copy of IL-2 today for ps3 and im absolutely lovin`it, almost lost hope for seeing a good flight simulator on console. Only thing bothering me about birds of prey is the warning for stall. Pissess me off to see it every time i`ve really gotten in the game and suddenly i realise that i am playing a game, if devs find anything to patch in IL-2 i really hope that theyll make an option to turn warning messages off, it would really add to immersion, it might be off on simulation but the thing i loved about previous IL-2:s was the customisation of difficulty, if that could be implemented in to birds of pray on consoles, it would make it perfect. Thank you guys for an awesome game, GOTY for me :)

[Kulis]

Oh, also customisable control scheme would be awesome, i find the combination in simulation to be a lot better than in realistic. Customisation of controls and difficulty with the option to turn off the warning messages and you sirs have the perfect console flying simulation in your hands.

[Abbevilleboy]

Although the Spitfire Mk.V entered service before the Land Temperate scheme was replaced, the Mk.Vb, however, had cannon feed problems (among others) and didn't enter service until AFTER the scheme was changed.
Wrong again...

See my earlier post, you're clearly part of the 'know sweet FA' club.

[fuzzychickens]

plzzzzzzzzz add this so we can re arm re fuel. on sim theres no point in doing it with limited f/a if u cant rearm refuel :confused::confused::confused:

Or how about at least adding ground start default, and air start as an option.

Air start should not have been in this game as only option. Even the dumbest console player can get a plane off the ground in arcade setting.

The ability to re-arm should added after ground starts are added first or both if possible.

[SgtPappy]

No idea if it's been mentioned.

The P-51'B' in this game is actually a P-51 (with no variant abbreviation; i.e. Not P-51A, just P-51) which is a Mustang Mk.Ia (RAF equivalent)with 4x 20mm cannon. These were requested by the Brits. The plane had an Allison V-1710 engine equipped with a 3-blade prop, noted by the intake on top the engine cowling.

The P-51B's were much different: Merlin-powered, inlet at the bottom of the cowling, 4x 0.50 cals, deeper oil/rad cooling intake. This was the Mustang Mk.III, and is actually considered the best of Mustangs in terms of performance.

P-51/Mustang Mk.Ia/NA-73X
http://www.mustang.gaetanmarie.com/photo%20gallery/us%20mustangs/early/996.jpg

P-51B(C)/Mustang Mk.III
http://membres.lycos.fr/wings2/3vues/p51b_3v.jpg

Strange this mistake could be made since the P-51B/Mustang Mk.III was in IL-2 1946 and was favored by many a Mustang pilot.

Everything looks great other than that.

[Robotic Pope]

Nice Post SgtPappy. I really hope the devs are reading this and can change it in time for the patch. Its such a stupid mistake. Myself and others have mentioned this a few times before, http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpost.php?p=104679&postcount=526
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=9791&highlight=developers

It could be changed to just P-51 but that would still really be wrong. Its an RAF plane so can only be called a Mustang IA.

You would never see an RAF Harrier GR.3 be called an AV8-A for example.

[moonknight82]

See my earlier post, you're clearly part of the 'know sweet FA' club.

I think you need to look in a mirror my friend...I know more about WW2 fighters than you could make up...

[SgtPappy]

I think you need to look in a mirror my friend...I know more about WW2 fighters than you could make up...

Don't we all? lol :-P

[RCfalcon]

Been really having a blast with this game, so I figured I'd join up here. First of all, thanks to the devs for finally bringing a great air combat game to the consoles. I've played these kinds of games since the original "Red Baron" and "Secret weapons of the Luftwaffe" back on the DOS days. Its nice to be able to get back into the genre, especially since Ace Combat had to go Xbox exclusive (boooooooooooo. lol). Im sure most of this has been brought up already, but I figured I'd add my two-cents.

- Clan support (I imagine you could call them squadrons or something). I always fly with the same people, and it would be nice to be able to make a clan, or at least make a clan-tag to stick in front of our names, like they had in COD4.

- Fix headset issues. Headsets will go out completely at random, and this requires a game restart to correct. Also, some people will be faint or unhearable when others can be heard perfectly fine. It can get sort of annoying, especially when working with a team. It doesn't happen on other games, and I've heard it happen with two different headsets.

- More Axis loadouts. There's a fair amount of variety among the Allied planes, and it would be nice to see some more among the Axis ones too.

- More variety in Strike missions. Just to spice things up and add other targets besides storage tanks and ships. Maybe airfields, bases, convoys, etc that are more heavily protected by AA guns, and actually shoot back (like this ships). Also, make AA more accurate, and more of a threat (might help balance the B-17 some if its made tougher to shoot down).

- German cockpits. I know its coming in the next patch, but I thought I'd mention it. I know I can't wait to actually be able to see the inside of my 109.

- Fix the P-51D/Fw-190 series. I know this is probably coming too. I can't wait for them to be fixed, personally. They are some of my favorite aircraft of the war, but in their current forms, they really don't hold up well to the 109s, Hurricanes, Spirfires and those damned Biplanes.

- Some more planes. Some nice ones to add would be:

- P-38 Lightning
- P-40 Warhawk
- Hawker Typoon
- B-24 Liberator
- F4U Corsair (I know its Pacific, but its a damn fine plane)
- B-29 Superfortress (also Pacific, but still awesome)

((some unlikely planes to get added, but they would still be nice to have))

- Horton 229 (It did actually fly during the war...it just killed every pilot that got put in it. Still an amazing plane that was decades ahead of its time.
- Gloster Meteor (so the Me-262 won't be so lonely anymore. lol)
- P-80 Shooting Star (it was initially developed when the Me-262 was discovered, and prototypes did fly during the war years. Also, it would give the jets a little more variety..and it looks awesome. lol)

Anyway, I know it was a long post, but I've been thinking about some things as I've been playing this great game. Just thought I'd state my opinion. Keep up the great work guys. With a lot of dev support, this really could be an amazing game.

[HighFlyer1980]

Can you make a Pacific Campaign DLC, please. ;)

[Tiwatz]

I'm a combat veteran and I've personally seen a dozen different color tracers on the battlefield flying at my side and from my side back at the enemy... the same would have been the case in the skies over battlefields of world war two. different countries used different colors for different calibers and different types of ammunition... So, historically accurate tracer colors and brightness would be very nice on the eyes.

Has anyone noticed that only the tracers in the game actually seem to exist? Traditionally, ammunition for smaller caliber machine guns (or even .50s) would be loaded 1 in 5 tracer, the other 4 being ball or armor piercing, sometimes they'd be loaded with API, Armor Piercing Incendiary, which were generally all tracers- it would look like a stream of red or white lasers coming out of each gun- but the guns would heat up faster. Larger cannons, which generally had a slower rate of fire and less ammunition due to the rounds' actual size would fire all tracer usually because most cannon rounds were tracers, they'd be fire in short bursts to save ammunition because they couldn't carry very much... Look at actual combat footage when large caliber guns hit planes and ever smaller caliber ones with exploding or incendiary ammunition there are a lot of flashes and pieces of things and holes ripped into stuff. So at least for visuals there should be more lead per gun flying out than there are tracers- so there should be more tiny flashes and little holes. there doesn't have to be any change to the damage potential of each tracer- just make each non-tracer round due far less damage so that it won't alter gameplay, just visuals... I think it's kind of odd to see all my half dozen .50s on my P51 Mustang firing at water and only seeing 7 or 8 splashes after holding the trigger down for a second- when in reality it would be a stream of a couple hundred rounds I just let fly... the water would be a torrent of geysers in a stream, the affect of gunnery on that magnitude is like spraying a garden hose.

Another possibility is to make a new setting that would coincide with limited ammo and fuel. Limited cannon ammo only? Or, better yet, just treat cannons as as a secondary weapon like rockets or bombs. utilize the pressure sensitive controller and make the trigger fire only machine guns at light pressure and all guns on higher pressure.

Another problem I've noticed is quite frustrating... The dorsal turret on the A20 is for some reason unable to turn 360 degrees... which in real life- it could... it could even be used by the pilot and fire at the same target as the forward .50s in the nose. the same problem exists for the Dorsal gunner in the B17G... the dorsal turret could in-fact turn 360 degrees and had coverage over the entire top hemisphere of the plane. For some reason I can't seem to use the ball turret on the B17G at all... or at least it wont fire down. The ball turret had complete coverage of the bottom hemisphere of the B17 and could even fire straight down... The ball turret gunner frequently performed flips and spins and was frequently upside down shooting at enemy fighters... So, i think all the turrets should be fixed.

I also would like a new bombardiers view in the bombers, especially the He 111 and the B17G... Even in arcade mode you can't even come close to seeing a target if you fly at realistic altitudes- B17s flew at over 20000 feet on normal missions. Targets don't even show up on the in game radar over 15000 feet.

Also- and this is a stretch... but I'd like to be able to use my squadron from the campaign (the ability to command 3 or at least some AI controlled aircraft) in multiplayer. I think filling the skies with more planes, some commanded by a player, would be sweet. I'd love to have 4 B17G's flying in a formation--- but how'd you have them drop their bombs at the same time as you? Another problem with this is that generally even the most hardened AI plane I've seen in the game is very easy to shoot down... the skill of the AI would have to be beefed up to be like real Luftwaffe pilots in the early days of the war, or to last more than 10 seconds in a multiplayer team battle.

[Robotic Pope]

The Bombardiers view in Sim would be so much improved if all the developers did was delete the plane from the current view. You dont need to see the plane turning and it would make high altitude, level bombing possible without the damn fuselage in the way.
In WWII the bomb aimers didn't stand on top of their plane, lining up the target with the nose of the plane before they lost the line of sight and just had to hope and wait for a red light to drop the bombs. They AIMED at the target.

[TheMarine]

My copy of the game was delivered to me yesterday after 4 agonizing weeks of waiting and reading posts on this forum and I was very optimistic about the level of simulation the game would offer.
I completed all of the tutorials in order to unlock the simulation mode, hoping it would be vastly different from the arcade mode. I must be honest in saying that I was a little dissapointed.
The scenery and level of detail on the ground is absolutely stunning and is leaps ahead of previous installations of the game but the same can't be said for the overall "feel" of the flying experience.
When adjusting the throttle, there is no distinct change in the sound of the engine which is so important in a game like this. The guns, the enemy planes, the explosions, the sirens and communications all sound great but the sound effects of the users plane can be vastly improved.
Another complaint I have I the lack of controls available to the pilot. I understand that given the limited number of inputs available to the average gamer, the devs were unable to include very important inputs such as full control of the aircrafts flaps, prop pitch control, fuel mix, radiator etc. I do feel however that if a gamer is as serious as I am about this particular game - having purchased all previous derivatives of IL 2 - they would have more than a gamepad to fly with. Namely a keyboard, mouse and flight stick.
Would it not be possible to include these advanced controls in simulation mode whereby those who are serious about the simulation side of the game are given the option of controling every aspect of their aircraft using additional hardware? Leaving the arcade and realistic mode with all the assists etc for those who don't have the additional hardware (keyboard, mouse, stick).
Thank you to the devs for a great game. These are just my thoughts as a Virgo...

[bunkaboa]

A little suggestion !

In Flight school mode, you need to choose at least one plane to fight against. It would be appreciated to have the ability to choose 0 plane, to make free flight !

Thanks :)

[Stuka28]

The planes explode far too easily when trying to crash land. Please fix it. It may not be a "crash simulator" but it would be a lot of fun if we could crash land when the plane is damaged. Also, in the training mode, it would be good if you had a squadron with you.

[DannyBooze]

i would like to see more american planes there is only two the p51 and the p51d, i would like to see some p38's sum p47's p39's p40's..... just more american planes would be nice

[Zooant]

I posted before that it is nearly impossible to see ground targets in Simulator mode. Will this be addressed? I suggested earlier that maybe there could be radio chatter patched in to help those who are struggling. Another possibility would be to add zoom to the map. In Stalingrad there is so much going on that you can't even see your own plane on the map when your over the city.
I just beat the game in realistic mode. I think I might have to give up on trying to beat the campaign in simulator mode.

[SEE]

Same as a few others have said

Camera positions for Bombing and Rear gunner moved to 1st person view.

Missions start on the ground and end back at the base in realistic and sim modes with options to end or start in flight.

At last there is a decent WW2 sim for the XBox console and hopefully things will improve but MS need to improve their console with upgrades that allow developers to exploit its full potential.

[DannyBooze]

Same as a few others have said

Camera positions for Bombing and Rear gunner moved to 1st person view.

Missions start on the ground and end back at the base in realistic and sim modes with options to end or start in flight.

At last there is a decent WW2 sim for the XBox console and hopefully things will improve but MS need to improve their console with upgrades that allow developers to exploit its full potential.

I second this...

[NephilimUK]

Suggestions to Developers.

1) Buy/download a copy of Warhawk (PS3) or perhaps Halo3 and look carefully at the lobby systems... Notice how they work? (team balancing, friends slots, clan support, etc) Great! Now incorporate it into your game! :rolleyes:

2) Lose the rubber band effect on the gunsights in sim and realistic mode - the last time I flew, my horizon didn't keep bouncing around every time an adjustment was made to the flight path.:shock:

[Stuka28]

There should be an easier way to unlock planes.

[Tudorp15]

I love BOP. I have spent WAY too much time on this thing, but loving it. I am an older gamer (49) that gets board with games pretty quick and generally never finish them. This is the very first game that I have played all the way through the campain as well as the single missions, and now loving the online battles.

Anyway.. A few things I would like to see. A sequil with the Pacific Theater, and associated planes. Maybe a 3rd with Korean War theme with early jets (F-86, F-4, B-52, maybe even with some air refueling missions would be cool). Maybe even a WWI version on the side. Those old wood planes would be a hoot to buz around in.

Also, it would be really cool to be able to form a team and man the birds with non-AI gunners, etc. I think the B-17 for instance would be cool if we could man it with a pilot, and each gunner over Xbox Live and go on bombing missions and runs as a Bomber crew.

What I would love to see added to BOP, and future sequils is a "Free Flight" training map for on line. I have a handful of friends that we love to go in and just mess around. We like to put on little air shows for each other with low level high and low speed flybys, bombing demonstrations, etc. It is lots of fun. Maybe a map with ground targets to compete against each other on a friendly training basis. We got into private dogfight, or other modes, but if we happen to have a tail gunner, we have to be careful not to shoot each other down, because we like to practice formation flying as well. It is hard to do on the competition maps without a tail gunner going crazy. We like to lock on the other and watch them do stunts while another sits on the ground, etc.. Just lots of fun with this, and it would be cool to have a dedicated map for just this type of thing. Just a practice, or training on line map where we have control on who and when we want to lock on each other, with ground targets that we decide on the fly if they are friendly or foe.. Just sayin..

Thanks for a great game.. Keep this series going, it is the best console flight game out there hands down..

[SEE]

I only bought an Xbox console because I heard that IL2 was being launched and was fed up with forever upgrading my PC to keep up with each SIM generation. I really hope that console based sims develop a huge following and that we can look forward to more titles and continuing upgrades. Its MS who need to address the limitations of their platform for this genre and hope that they do so ASAP.

[JesterMob6]

I was very happy to see IL2 make its way onto the console scene. While I greatly enjoyed the time I spent on the PC with IL2, the AEP, and the Pacific, I definitely got used to the ability to adjust near everything, including flight surface response curves instead of a mere "sensitivity" setting, which leaves out the rudder. With the lack of available controllers compatible with the xbox, would it be possible to provide a means to adjust the rudder controls?
I hear there's a fix on the way to take care of the P51 series and possibly the FW series, so I hope that's true. I admire the P51s, and have a deep obsession with the FW 190s, but they seem to be quite lackluster on the console compared to the tweaked performance they received on the PC platform.

[Tudorp15]

I didn't mention that, but I also bought the Xbox 360 in anticipation for BOP. I was never much of a gamer, still am not. My sons were and they are married and off on their own with their own families, and of course took their boxes with them. They teased me when I went out and bought my own when I heard of BOP about a year ago. At the time, I had already thought it was available, but oh well, I bought a few other games in waiting, Ace Combat 6 being one of them. And enjoyed it, but I have always been an old school type, and loved the early aviation era, especially WWII war birds. I couldn't wait for the game release, and pre-ordered it as soon as I was able to back in May. I played with the demo as soon as it came out as well. I am also a SIM guy, not a gamer. Another good sim type game is Baja Edge Of Control, which until now, was my favorite title. Now, BOP demoted Baja, but I still love the both of them, and they are my #1 and #2 on my XBox. I am now content in waiting for newer versions coming from these developers. I really hope they stick with the SIM type of format in gaming, maybe even other SIM stuff like off road racing as well, or other transportation type of SIM stuff. Trains (I am also a Rail Fan), Planes, and Automobiles. Maybe even some Heli stuff, Tank stuff? I will be watching...



I only bought an Xbox console because I heard that IL2 was being launched and was fed up with forever upgrading my PC to keep up with each SIM generation. I really hope that console based sims develop a huge following and that we can look forward to more titles and continuing upgrades. Its MS who need to address the limitations of their platform for this genre and hope that they do so ASAP.

[Stuka28]

The games tendancey to explode with the slightest damage with the ground. Also, it would be a nice touch if we could fight for the controls instead of the game deciding that there is no chance after a certain amount of damage. It seems that the game has become slightly less immersive than the PC installments.

[DannyBooze]

men of war on consols would be sweet

[AutomaticAddict]

First off, this is a great title and I love playing it when I come home from work/ school. Some things are strange though... I play strike and capture the airfield objective games alot, but when I use up all my bombs on strike where do I get a reload? Just crashing to get more bombs seems a little retarded. Is there any way we could land and get more ammo? Or just make the bombs infinite on realistic as they are on arcade...doesnt seem that much more realistsic with 30 bombs on a fighter as is, also this would keep me from having to play kamikaze when I am on empty. Also too bad cannot make the respawns start off on an airfield instead of directly on top of who just downed the guy, giving an unfair advantage...Also probably my biggest want would be to have custom button mapping...I cant play simulator with my d-pad having to click in the right stick just to look, if I could choose I would make the left shoulder button the look toggle, the use the right thumbstick to look...This would make me happy, good job devs.

[Ancient Seraph]

First off, this is a great title and I love playing it when I come home from work/ school. Some things are strange though... I play strike and capture the airfield objective games alot, but when I use up all my bombs on strike where do I get a reload? Just crashing to get more bombs seems a little retarded. Is there any way we could land and get more ammo? Or just make the bombs infinite on realistic as they are on arcade...doesnt seem that much more realistsic with 30 bombs on a fighter as is, also this would keep me from having to play kamikaze when I am on empty. Also too bad cannot make the respawns start off on an airfield instead of directly on top of who just downed the guy, giving an unfair advantage...Also probably my biggest want would be to have custom button mapping...I cant play simulator with my d-pad having to click in the right stick just to look, if I could choose I would make the left shoulder button the look toggle, the use the right thumbstick to look...This would make me happy, good job devs.
Well, the crashing for ammo is just the sad truth. Not sure why though.
I can see why they made the spawns in the air, it helps maintain the speed of the fight, instead of having to fly to the battle longer than staying in one.
And about the buttons, with the update we're supposed tot be able to remap our buttons, but I'm not sure to what extent (i.e. being able to switch d-pad buttons).

[Soulsurfer]

Rather than have enemies respawn on your six or above you, they should have them spawn on the outskirts of the battle to make it more balanced. I would like to see sim mode locked to cockpit only (obviously we need German pits first) aswell as get rid of the use of the dpad cameras. There is nothing 'sim' about using the dpad to magicaly pan around 360 degrees of your aircraft!

[Robotic Pope]

Rather than have enemies respawn on your six or above you, they should have them spawn on the outskirts of the battle to make it more balanced. I would like to see sim mode locked to cockpit only (obviously we need German pits first) aswell as get rid of the use of the dpad cameras. There is nothing 'sim' about using the dpad to magicaly pan around 360 degrees of your aircraft!

I agree about the D-pad external view in Sim, Its unsimlike but I do have to use the backwards view now and then. So I have an idea to replace the backwards view. Take the current view backwards and delete the plane graphic. Then shrink the view to about 75% and paste it onto a zoomed in view of the rearview mirror.

Edit: I just realised the view wouldn't turn with the plane lol. Anyway you understand what I mean, I want to be able to press 1 button to have a zoomed in clear rearview mirror. When I'm in a plane with a cockpit I try to use the mirror from the cockpit view but it's so clumsy to click right stick, move view up and zoom in all while flying with bullets come at you.

[AutomaticAddict]

Also, I am trying to unlock the bombs for the p-51 mustang. I have the rockets and the forum states you must destroy 50 targets in strike to unlock the bombs but...machine guns and rockets do not reduce ticket count or even seem to damage the strike targets at all! Anton, how am i supposed to unlock the bombs? crash my plane into the target instead? please fix this so machine guns and rockets can reduce ticket count as well as bombs...thank you devs.

[daryld12]

Forgive me if I'm repeating but here's my 2 cents for the title update.

1-ability to put elevator/aileron on the right stick(and/or custom assignments for each control). Also be able to assign zoom to look at instruments.

2-make realistic and simulation mode more flyable and real by lessening the tendency to stall so easily and agressively. I'm a real world pilot and am very friendly with a P-47/P-51 Ace from WW2. We have talked extensively about the performance of these aircraft and as they will go onto a high and low speed stall, it just doesn't happen that easily at the brush of the stick.

3-Fix the screen tearing on the PS3 version. Also the gun fire is more robust and opaque on the 360 version which looks better.

4- Rolling wheels on the airplanes and are there brakes? Cause if there are, I haven't found them.

5-Replays/picture taking and drop/flyby camera

Keep up the great work!!! I can't wait to see what you're going to do next for this and future flight titles. You've got me as a life long customer!
Thanks,
Daryl D.

[probird]

The only suggestion i would ask is to change the controls on the controller as the poster above has also requested. I fly r/c planes with the throttle/rudder on the left and ailerons/ elevator on the right (airplane mode).
Otherwise an exellent game!

[daryld12]

I just thought of something Anton,
I have a some personal video from my friend who flew P-51/P-47's in WW2. He was part of the 325th Fighter squadron based in Italy. They were the checkertail clan. It would be great to see that livery in a game of yours. It is Black&White and Color(Yes color. He had a rich kid on the airbase) and has a lot of footage around the airfield including takeoffs and landings(some good, some crash landings). It also has in flight footage on it including recordings from the gun camera when they did straffing missions. Again, this is not comercial footage. It is good quality personal footage from my friends experience in WW2. I would be more that happy to share it with you. You might even be able to use for future reference on in-game content. Feel free to contact me anytime if this is of interest to you.

Daryl D.
daryld12@msn.com

[SgtPappy]

Forgive me if I'm repeating but here's my 2 cents for the title update.

1-ability to put elevator/aileron on the right stick(and/or custom assignments for each control). Also be able to assign zoom to look at instruments.

2-make realistic and simulation mode more flyable and real by lessening the tendency to stall so easily and agressively. I'm a real world pilot and am very friendly with a P-47/P-51 Ace from WW2. We have talked extensively about the performance of these aircraft and as they will go onto a high and low speed stall, it just doesn't happen that easily at the brush of the stick.

3-Fix the screen tearing on the PS3 version. Also the gun fire is more robust and opaque on the 360 version which looks better.

4- Rolling wheels on the airplanes and are there brakes? Cause if there are, I haven't found them.

5-Replays/picture taking and drop/flyby camera

Keep up the great work!!! I can't wait to see what you're going to do next for this and future flight titles. You've got me as a life long customer!
Thanks,
Daryl D.

First thing's first. Fix the P-47/P-51's lack of maneuverability, the P-51B actually being a Mustang Mk.Ia, the 262's inability to do anything, the 109's lack of performance, the Arado's lack of rear 20mm cannon and the Spitfire XVI's inability to roll quickly despite having CLIPPED wings.

If those are all in the next patch or at least if those arrive with each update, I can give a 100% sure fire go that I will buy it instead of just having it rented once.

Also, don't the brakes activate on the ground if you pull back on the throttle?

[fuzzychickens]

First thing's first. Fix the P-47/P-51's lack of maneuverability, the P-51B actually being a Mustang Mk.Ia, the 262's inability to do anything, the 109's lack of performance, the Arado's lack of rear 20mm cannon and the Spitfire XVI's inability to roll quickly despite having CLIPPED wings.

If those are all in the next patch or at least if those arrive with each update, I can give a 100% sure fire go that I will buy it instead of just having it rented once.

Also, don't the brakes activate on the ground if you pull back on the throttle?

The 262 does not need to be changed. If you are having problems with it online you are probably playing in arcade mode.

In addition, the sim mode has the map function which makes suprise impossible - this needs to be adjusted to only give relative - not exact positions of enemies.

So tweaking the 262 would be unrealistic, it is others things that need to be adjusted.

[Widar]

The 262 does not need to be changed. If you are having problems with it online you are probably playing in arcade mode.

In addition, the sim mode has the map function which makes suprise impossible - this needs to be adjusted to only give relative - not exact positions of enemies.

So tweaking the 262 would be unrealistic, it is others things that need to be adjusted.

The only thing unrealistic about the Me 262 is the way the Me 262 A1a is depicted in BOP. In BOP even the Ar 234 jet bomber can outmanoeuver the swept wing Me 262 A1a fighter. I'm sorry to say you are very, very wrong on the Me 262 A1a. It was an exceptional combat aircraft in real life. Even the British RAE Chief test pilot, and maybe greatest test pilot of all time, Eric Brown called it - without a doubt - the most formidable combat aircraft of WWII. Also read about what Watson's Whizzers (Bob Strobell) had to say about it. And these were not just some guys "flying aircraft" in a "virtual" and artificial "reality", but WWII combat and test pilots that flew these aircraft for real.

Do some in depth research on the Me 262, especially also original WWII reports from the German side, i.e. detailed WWII combat records, detailed WWII test reports, WWII design specifications etc. You will then find out why the top German fighter WWII pilots were ALL so very impressed by it. The current depiction of the Me 262 in BOP is historically incorrect - if I use an understatement and want to avoid using strong language.

[cdogblitz]

alot of people have been ignoring the fact that the fw-190 series of planes were some of the most manouverable planes of the war. me and my friends find the way they turn is absolutely disgusting. it would be nice to be able to actually out turn the p-51 like its supposed to. cockpits would be nice too s

[MorgothNL]

alot of people have been ignoring the fact that the fw-190 series of planes were some of the most manouverable planes of the war. me and my friends find the way they turn is absolutely disgusting. it would be nice to be able to actually out turn the p-51 like its supposed to. cockpits would be nice too s

I agree about the bad flying FW190... but comparing it to the P-51 as if that one is better :-P.
At least the FW190 has some speed and stability. But yeah, like ive said in 20 posts, the boom and zoom planes have to be fix (P-51 is getting fixed, hope FW190 is next)

[SgtPappy]

alot of people have been ignoring the fact that the fw-190 series of planes were some of the most manouverable planes of the war. me and my friends find the way they turn is absolutely disgusting. it would be nice to be able to actually out turn the p-51 like its supposed to. cockpits would be nice too s

This one if iffy. Sometimes 190's would out turn P-51s during the war, but a lot of the time, Allied Mustang pilots stated that they outturned 190's without a problem. Some RAF tests conducted here: http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/fw190/eb-104.html state that "The outstanding maneuverability feature of this airplane is it extremely high rate of roll. The radius of turn, however, is poor and it is only slightly improved by using the maneuvering flap position of 15 degrees. If pulled fast, the airplane tends to stall out abruptly with little warning. Elevator control forces are very heavy in a tight turn, requiring constant use of the elevator trim control."

Again here: http://www.wwiiaircraftperformance.org/mustang/mustang-tactical.html States: "Again there is not much to choose. The Mustang is slightly better. When evading an enemy aircraft with a steep turn, a pilot will always out-turn the attacking aircraft initially because of the difference in speeds. It is therefore still a worthwhile maneuver with the Mustang III when attacked."

So really, it's hard to completely know if one out turns the other. I'm sure Axis reports state something about the matter, likely in favour of the 190, but there's nor definite proof one out turns the other.

What most mean when talking about the190's maneuverability from what I've read is its extremely good roll rate, response and "handling", a broad term in itself. Usually, it is out turned in a horizontal, maximum AoA, edge of the stall turn.

[atomschlag]

- ground targets in training mode
- controls remappable (rudder on shoulder, pov view without pressing stick)
- german plane cockpits
- more AI-only planes in training mode ( Ju-32, Me Gigant)
- unlocks online-independent (what about ppl who don't like multiplayer, don't have live?)
-realistic flight model without stall & spin for arcade mode
-realistic damage model for arcade mode
-possibility to check stats for unlocks

[fuzzychickens]

If you want to see more arcade players be able to make the transition to realistic and sim, plus improve the gameplay in arcade - one thing needs to be done.

Arcade: Use the SAME flight/damage model as simulator and turn off stalls/spins. Nothing more, nothing less.

People would actually use tactics in arcade - energy, realistic speed differences, turn rate differences. Plus it would be easier to finish off and get kills when your target can't take a smoking, swiss cheesed plane and still accelerate to 1000+ km/h.

Realistic: stalls on, but plane wont enter spin, or at least instant spin recovery if you let off stick.

Simulator: full difficulty


But if you really want to improve the sim, just COPY the selectable settings in the difficulty from the PC IL2 1946. Then everyone can play the game the way they want, and host games with the exact settings they want. Allow players joining to see what settings are before commiting to the game - just lke the pc game.

Plus, figure out a way we can join games already underway. This would end people sending you stupid arse messages about how you ruined their game because you left early - sometimes real life interupts and I don't put real life on hold for games.

[Ancient Seraph]

(...)
Arcade: Use the SAME flight/damage model as simulator and turn off stalls/spins. Nothing more, nothing less.
(...)
Right.. so what do you suggest happens when somebody goes 90 degrees nose up?

[fuzzychickens]

Right.. so what do you suggest happens when somebody goes 90 degrees nose up?

Exactly how is this a problem? This never was a problem and it isn't a problem now. The difference is it doesn't enter a spin and the plane just noses down.

Play 1946 and see how it handles when stalls/spins are turned off. It is not an issue. You go 90 degrees straight up and it does the same thing, the nose comes down to build speed up but you don't lose control in a spin.

It's a perfect solution from the original game that should have carried over to arcade mode for BOP.

[Ancient Seraph]

Exactly how is this a problem? This never was a problem and it isn't a problem now. The difference is it doesn't enter a spin and the plane just noses down.

Play 1946 and see how it handles when stalls/spins are turned off. It is not an issue. You go 90 degrees straight up and it does the same thing, the nose comes down to build speed up but you don't lose control in a spin.

It's a perfect solution from the original game that should have carried over to arcade mode for BOP.

Ok, so just turn of spins. Got it ;).

[Das_Ubersoldat13]

I would like them to fix the Fw 190 Series.. it could TURN WITH the Spitfire MkV and was leaps and bounds better than the BF 109 in all areas of performance. So why on this game does it handle like a heavy beast? Did they accidently over load this one with fuel too? The Luftwaffe LOVED their Fw 190. The poilots loved the new fast extremely AGILE plane with incredible visibility. there was none of this plumiting to the earth like a stone if you tipped the nose down. Please.. You may not like Germany for what ever reason.. but respect their fighters. and PLEASE PLEASE FIX THE Fw!! I beg you.

[SgtPappy]

Actually in every test conducted by both the RAF and Luftwaffe that I've ever read, the 190 turned worse than any Spitfire. In fact, in RAF tests, for some reason, it turned a little better than a 109G.

But that's besides the point. For the record I DO think the 190 should turn better but it CANNOT turn better than a Mk.V given equal pilots with equal energy states.

If you're referring to the article where Johnnie Johnson was out turned by a Fw 190 in his Spitfire Mk.V, you are actually quite mistaken.

Now before you rant and go crazy, let me say it was TRUE that Johnson was out turned by that 190 in his Spitfire V. And I'm not making excuses here when I say that Johnson could have easily been tired or something, a fact we CANNOT simulate in any game with any degree of real accuracy.

In another excerpt from the same article, he states that the Spitfire IX out turned the 190 easily. But how does this make sense at all? A 1941 Spitfire Vb's wing loading is less than 27 lb./sq. ft when fully loaded with fuel and ammo. The Fw 190's is somewhere past 40 lb./sq. ft. The Spitfire IX's is somewhere around 30 lb./sq.ft. Wing loading is not the only factor in turning ability, but with WWII planes, it's generally a good indicator of turning ability. But with the Spitfire IX and Spitfire V having virtually the same airframe with the IX having much better performance, they should turn similarly. In fact, RAF tests say they turn the same.

You must remember all the factors that determine how a plane turns in real life. In the article, there is little to no indication of energy states, pilot condition (i.e. wounds, tiredness, etc.), pilot ability to sustain G's or aircraft condition. No two aircraft ever perform the same whether they both are Spitfire Vb's or Fw 190A-5's.

[kozzm0]

Mapable controls! Now im a happy bunny:grin: oh yeah Please sort the P-51 Cockpit out please.... Sorry for repeating that :?

No kidding, every PC sim has assignable controls, why doesn't the ps3 version.

I hate to be long-winded but I can type good and after finishing SP on sim and then playing online, I got some details.

1) Regular layout forces you to choose between looking around or using the rudder. Aviator is better, but it sets the rudder to digital (-1,0,1). Whether there's control mapping or not, please make an option for using L2 and R2 for the rudder, and making it analog, not left/right/neutral like it is now. Also missing from aviator is the "target camera." While it mainly just gives people bad habits of wasting ammo, it is useful for target ID so if it exists, it should be on both layouts.

2) The wheel brakes don't work when using aviator layout. Unless there's some secret combination of buttons. They work automatically in regular layout. I know everyone's already said it about their flight sticks but it happens in aviator too.

3) the system for crediting kills online needs some work. People bail when their engine or wings are failing, and nobody gets credit. Or they just suicide when you're on their 6. There should be a penalty for losing a plane.

4) limited ammo online is kind of pointless for the above reason, whenever someone's gun stops they just jump out and respawn. How about adding a disengage area, with a long respawn interval, for reloading. Limited ammo has to work for the online to be even close to realistic. Otherwise, it's just a mad thunderstorm of bullets and cannon rounds shot from far away. Most people don't bother to maneuver to where they can actually see what part of the plane they're shooting at, at least not before their enemy is already limping and easy to catch.

5) I think there's some kind of secret agenda in SP to wean people off the tacmap, cause in Battle of the Bulge it doesn't hold anymore, you can't maneuver while looking at it, and it always kicks out to HUD view, which is no fun cause I like to use cockpit view.

6) for improving online:

- a system for clan matches
- add cockpits, accurate or not, for the German planes and then an option for "cockpit only" matches, no HUD's.
- run a host bandwidth check to set the player max. Most people are short of upload bandwidth and can't host more than 6 to 12 without lag, but they set to 16 anyway and it lags.
- make the matches browseable, and continuous instead of ending so you have to start them all over again, (and wait for someone to show up, all over again)
- make custom matches actually work, or if they already do, instructions.
- since the tacmap gets harder to use in SP, why not make the option of no tacmap in online simulation. Finding and ID'ing targets is fun! We don't all have short attention spans.
- leaderboards are gonna be a bitch to navigate if and when there are thousands of people on them. Defaulting to player's position would be good.

7) I've gone through as many SP missions as I can on sim and limited ammo, but a lot of them have objectives that nobody in their right mind would even attempt with limited ammo. Those ones should have more realistic objectives to match the realistic ammo. A good example is Free Hunt. In about 10 minutes you must down 12 heavily armored ju-52's from all over the map, using a fighter that can't fire twice in the same direction and whose rounds are about as effective against armor as a volley of marshmallows. And hope that your wingmen don't fail cause you'll never catch up with their targets. Stalin must have hated those poor dudes and sent them on a suicide mission, maybe cause they let the Party brat get killed in the Babysitter mission. Anyhow there should be a platinum trophy for Free Hunt/simulation/limited f/a.

8) some of the English names for the trophies are a little off. "Threat from the Air" would sound much better as "Death from Above." Разговорнее. "Real Feelings" sounds like a token from a psychiatrist. "The Real McCoy" or "The Real Thing" would be better. Лучше сленг.

IL-2 is the best flight game on console, there's just glitches from changing platforms.

PSN: AR_Kozz

[beaker126]

What I would love to see added to BOP, and future sequils is a "Free Flight" training map for on line. I have a handful of friends that we love to go in and just mess around. We like to put on little air shows for each other with low level high and low speed flybys, bombing demonstrations, etc. It is lots of fun. Maybe a map with ground targets to compete against each other on a friendly training basis. We got into private dogfight, or other modes, but if we happen to have a tail gunner, we have to be careful not to shoot each other down, because we like to practice formation flying as well. It is hard to do on the competition maps without a tail gunner going crazy. We like to lock on the other and watch them do stunts while another sits on the ground, etc.. Just lots of fun with this, and it would be cool to have a dedicated map for just this type of thing. Just a practice, or training on line map where we have control on who and when we want to lock on each other, with ground targets that we decide on the fly if they are friendly or foe.. Just sayin..

Thanks for a great game.. Keep this series going, it is the best console flight game out there hands down..

Seconded

[Das_Ubersoldat13]

Actually in every test conducted by both the RAF and Luftwaffe that I've ever read, the 190 turned worse than any Spitfire. In fact, in RAF tests, for some reason, it turned a little better than a 109G.

But that's besides the point. For the record I DO think the 190 should turn better but it CANNOT turn better than a Mk.V given equal pilots with equal energy states.

If you're referring to the article where Johnnie Johnson was out turned by a Fw 190 in his Spitfire Mk.V, you are actually quite mistaken.

Now before you rant and go crazy, let me say it was TRUE that Johnson was out turned by that 190 in his Spitfire V. And I'm not making excuses here when I say that Johnson could have easily been tired or something, a fact we CANNOT simulate in any game with any degree of real accuracy.

In another excerpt from the same article, he states that the Spitfire IX out turned the 190 easily. But how does this make sense at all? A 1941 Spitfire Vb's wing loading is less than 27 lb./sq. ft when fully loaded with fuel and ammo. The Fw 190's is somewhere past 40 lb./sq. ft. The Spitfire IX's is somewhere around 30 lb./sq.ft. Wing loading is not the only factor in turning ability, but with WWII planes, it's generally a good indicator of turning ability. But with the Spitfire IX and Spitfire V having virtually the same airframe with the IX having much better performance, they should turn similarly. In fact, RAF tests say they turn the same.

You must remember all the factors that determine how a plane turns in real life. In the article, there is little to no indication of energy states, pilot condition (i.e. wounds, tiredness, etc.), pilot ability to sustain G's or aircraft condition. No two aircraft ever perform the same whether they both are Spitfire Vb's or Fw 190A-5's.

I didnt say turn better.. I said turn with.. meaning about the same .. it couldnt out turn..

[PhantomIIF4]

Has anyone suggested that we be given the ability to choose any plane in any single-player mission? I feel like being restricted to one plane type per mission limits the replay value? I figure that can't be a hard thing to implement in a patch.

Thoughts anyone?

[SgtPappy]

I didnt say turn better.. I said turn with.. meaning about the same .. it couldnt out turn..

When people say that plane A turns with plane B, it means just as good, which in combat means that plane A can turn either slightly worse or slightly better sine it's impossible to determine if 2 planes ACTUALLY turn the same.

Just proving that the latter is false in our case.

Also, one more thing. I only rented the game for the PS3 for a day so far, had little time to play. So i got the demo. P-51D's cockpit is actually that of a P-47D series.

Actual P-51D cockpit from IL-2
http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g157/micksaf/p51duw2.jpg


BoP P-51D cockpit
http://i215.photobucket.com/albums/cc128/hereward1971/IL-2SturmovikBirdsOfPreyDEMO_13.jpg
http://www.simhq.com/_air13/images/air_413a_003.jpg

[fuzzychickens]

[QUOTE=SgtPappy;111212]When people say that plane A turns with plane B, it means just as good, which in combat means that plane A can turn either slightly worse or slightly better sine it's impossible to determine if 2 planes ACTUALLY turn the same.

Just proving that the latter is false in our case.

Actual P-51D cockpit from IL-2
http://i55.photobucket.com/albums/g157/micksaf/p51duw2.jpg

Hey, are you running mods on your 1946? The graphics look better than my 4.09m running at max settings. If so, what mods?

[atomschlag]

make zoom a toggle

[rocketassistedllama]

Yup...being able to pick any plane you goddamn want-even a unicorn, or Me 262 in BoB; is a staple of replayability....a mistake that should'nt be made for the sequal. Unfortunately, without the 'net [I'm borrowing someone's computer;] I may never be able to enjoy any of the downloadable content...and all the ground-attack missions will hence forever remain tedious to me; as the flak simply can't hit me;0( Not once...and I finished the game weeks ago....but I've complained about that before. It's a very good thing there'll be a patch for it anyway; I would support it if I could;0(

Anyways...how about making the lock on camera pressure-sensitive; allowing you to zoom riiigghht in....;0) How awesome would that be; and it would be easy to implement;0) No great programming/hardware challenge at all. Zooms are always cinematic, and usefull too.

The main improvement I want to see for the true sequel...is a battlefield that's massively alive with flak-a true [and truely dangerous] spectacle to behold [the patch is sorely needed; but will still result in only a few random AA guns following you around.] It should be awe-inspiring at low level, and intimidating. Have just finished Rudel's book 'Stuka Pilot'...destroyed more than 500! tanks, shot down 30 times....only once by fighters.

Dynamic damage modelling I would consider less important...as what's in the game, is impressive enough already=diminishing returns. Instead, if the developers still have some extra cpu power they think they can squeeze out of the console...better clouds would'nt go amiss. Clouds with shape, that don't dissappear as soon as you fly into them.

Anywho...that's enough for now;0)

[ravage27]

Would love to see more fighters and bombers in the game and a patch to select planes on missions and maybe some more missions with new planes, like flying the night missions of world war II, but more planes por favor :grin:


planes
Hawker Tempest
Hawker Typhoon
North American B-25
Consolidated B-24
Tupolov Tu-3
Petlyakov Pe-2
Petlyakov Pe-8
Avro Lancaster
Short Sterling
Handly Page Halifax
Chance-Vought F4U
Martin B-26
SIAI Marchetti SM.79
SIAI Marchetti SM.81
Mikoyan Gurevich Mig-3

it would be cool to see more planes, but let take the shattered night skies of war torn europe

[kozzm0]

Yup...being able to pick any plane you goddamn want-even a unicorn, or Me 262 in BoB; is a staple of replayability....a mistake that should'nt be made for the sequal. Unfortunately, without the 'net [I'm borrowing someone's computer;] I may never be able to enjoy any of the downloadable content...and all the ground-attack missions will hence forever remain tedious to me; as the flak simply can't hit me;0( Not once...and I finished the game weeks ago....but I've complained about that before. It's a very good thing there'll be a patch for it anyway; I would support it if I could;0(

Anyways...how about making the lock on camera pressure-sensitive; allowing you to zoom riiigghht in....;0) How awesome would that be; and it would be easy to implement;0) No great programming/hardware challenge at all. Zooms are always cinematic, and usefull too.

The main improvement I want to see for the true sequel...is a battlefield that's massively alive with flak-a true [and truely dangerous] spectacle to behold [the patch is sorely needed; but will still result in only a few random AA guns following you around.] It should be awe-inspiring at low level, and intimidating. Have just finished Rudel's book 'Stuka Pilot'...destroyed more than 500! tanks, shot down 30 times....only once by fighters.

Dynamic damage modelling I would consider less important...as what's in the game, is impressive enough already=diminishing returns. Instead, if the developers still have some extra cpu power they think they can squeeze out of the console...better clouds would'nt go amiss. Clouds with shape, that don't dissappear as soon as you fly into them.

Anywho...that's enough for now;0)

Plane choice for the replay wouldn't amount to all that much if it was kept reasonable, since the available planes are so limited, there'd be 1 or 2 appropriate planes from the right air force for each mission

but I agree the flak is way to easy, you can pretty much just ignore it even in simulation. Unfortunately I've already finished the whole thing so it would all be replay.

I started up a practice mission on Targetware yesterday and was immediately destroyed by flak every time I suicidally attacked Tobruk with my bf109e.

Good flak would also make Strike mode much more interesting online.

[SgtPappy]

FuzzyChickens, that shot is just a screen off the internet.

1946 on my computer has the lowest settings and no mods.

[Leweegibo]

A free flight mode(training with no enemies) so one can just fly around, perform landings and aerial manouvers...

Or am I an idiot and you can select no enemies on training, I'm not at home so can't check!...

[Irishmandkg]

The update would be greatly appreciated...still play the game, but I would love German cockpits.:grin:

[Leweegibo]

German missions, IMO there is no political incorrectness, because nearly all soldiers (pilots) fought for their friends and country, and not for the "political" reasons
although I may feel guilty shooting down my grandfather (actually no, no wimpys in the game!!!!)
....Wellington, hallifaxes, and please ....the lanc

[dazz1971]

HOW ABOUT REALEASING THE GODDAM PATCH THAT YOU SAID YOU HAD RELEASED OVER 2 WEEKS AGO ???
THEN MAYBE WE MIGHT WANT TO SPEND SOME CASH ON DLC
but you are not getting another penney out of me till you fix your game !!!!

[David603]

A free flight mode(training with no enemies) so one can just fly around, perform landings and aerial manouvers...

Or am I an idiot and you can select no enemies on training, I'm not at home so can't check!...
Just put up an enemy plane that has no chance of shooting you down, and then ignore it and do what you like. The Po-2 is good for this.

[FOZ_1983]

Just put up an enemy plane that has no chance of shooting you down, and then ignore it and do what you like. The Po-2 is good for this.


Select the arado, it has no guns so just flies around doing nothing haha.



Anyway my suggestion to the devs -


Some info on the patch please. You said your worknig on it and it would be out soon, but we've heard ntohing since. An update would be nice. :)


cheers

[Gripweed62]

Make the mission "Hornet's nest" easier - I dont' want to have to give up the game because I am not able to manage this miossion (about 20 tries - no success)

[Lord-Tuinboy]

Probably been said before but please please: give the host the option to start of in the air or from the airstrip for strike this would be so much fun.

For capture the airfield you could make us start from another airfield that can't be captured !

[Flyboy69]

More info on when the next DLC will come would be nice. Working to
fix this game is better than working to make the sequal better. I find it
that these guys wont even keep their promise. They need to work on this
game to even call it a sim, because flying in 3rd person of a BF-109 aint
exactly sim like. Also the P-51 is in need of fixing, like it's cockpit and how
it handles.

[Leweegibo]

How about the ability to join online games in play, will help ease the trouble with finding games
it was this issue that drove me nuts in far cry 2

[ravage27]

I would love to see more planes, but let add more Heavy and Medium bombers, and some more fighthers

Heavy
Consolidated B-24
Avro Lancasters
Short Sterlings
Handly Page Halifax.....and more

Medium
North American B-25
.............and some more fighters like the Mig 3 or added more mission, but show the night war the the Brits and Bomber Command fought against the Germans, but make the flak intresting if it possible with the current game engine to show how it was flying into germany during those times

[Fenriswolf-SH]

Hi,
coming from playing many years IL2 on PC I'm badly missing german missions and campains, planes as well.
It was a very bad feeling finding no german or other "axis" campain, only "allies" campains give to me the felling of having purchased a "political correct" game :confused: instead of a historical flight sim for PS3.

[Shadowcorp]

Firstly congratulations on a very good and incredibly playable game. This is where my suggestions begin
1- The option to kick players; when setting up a game with those from my squadron, we quite often get a guy who jumps in switches to our side and refuses to change completly unbalancing the teams. Being able to kick these glory supporters would make me very happy.
2- The ps3 is still unable to handle 16 player matches, unless the host has over 100mb connection..... not many people have these outside of japan
3- Being able to set the time period so that it can exclude planes from earlier periods, for example 1943-1945 rather than 1940-1945 i think would improve the game for many players
4- more planes i'm sure many have mention avro lancaster the p37 lightning being only two of many i could suggest.
5- a non ranked multiplayer game. this option already currently available on the pc should be brought to the consoles post haste.

[kris155]

Thanks for the great and playable game at first.

I also would like to see additional planes (first of all heavy bombers) and a new location (Afrika, Pacifik). Matbe it is a theme for next game in the series Il-2.

I look forward for a DLC.

For Birds of Pray a have only one very very very small sugestion: change the icon in the Trophy Collection on PS3. Change it for the blue game logo (like in the Game Saved Data) please.

Regards

[DannyBooze]

More american planes

[DannyBooze]

We Also need some bombs of the bf109 all the german planes that have bombs are heavy ones we need them on bf109s so we can dogfight and bomb on strike missions

[SgtPappy]

First thing's first.
Fix the planes we have now instead of adding more planes, many of which may be over/undermodeled.
P-51B, P-51D (cockpit), Spitfire XVI roll rate, performance of the Fw190, Me 262 maneuverability of the P-51D and P-47 to name a few.

The most important thing in a flight sim is proper graphical and flight model representation.

[Sandylowlead]

A few things i would change about the game is one the rudder in realistic mode and sim mode is totally retarded its VERY unrealistic. Also fix the p-51d and the folk wolf two of the best fighters in the war but in BOF they handle like fat pigs. Then make it so EVERY plane has a cockpit^^ that is all

[Ancient Seraph]

A few things i would change about the game is one the rudder in realistic mode and sim mode is totally retarded its VERY unrealistic. Also fix the p-51d and the folk wolf two of the best fighters in the war but in BOF they handle like fat pigs. Then make it so EVERY plane has a cockpit^^ that is all
Actually, I'm not quite sure the rudder is that unrealistic. In fact, I believe it's accurate. The problem is that in a real plane you'd have to use a lot of force to use full rudder output, while on the joystick it's not trouble at all.
The P-51 and some other aircraft (not confirmed which) will be improved. Their fuel quantity wasn't optimal.

[kozzm0]

...2- The ps3 is still unable to handle 16 player matches, unless the host has over 100mb connection..... not many people have these outside of japan


actually download speed has little or nothing to do with server performance. What matters is the host's upload speed, which in most games works out to about 60 to 100kbits/s needed for each player. For a 12 player game, a host would need an 896kbit-max upload line, which tends to be around 600 kbits in practice. Most connections are sold on the basis of download speed only, leaving a lot of people with only 256kbit upload, enough for 4 to 6 players, but they don't know it and set the max to 16 anyway. A simple bandwidth tester like most games have would fix that.

[Sandylowlead]

Actually, I'm not quite sure the rudder is that unrealistic. In fact, I believe it's accurate. The problem is that in a real plane you'd have to use a lot of force to use full rudder output, while on the joystick it's not trouble at all.
The P-51 and some other aircraft (not confirmed which) will be improved. Their fuel quantity wasn't optimal.


I'm a pilot IRL and its 100% unrealistic

[Ancient Seraph]

I'm a pilot IRL and its 100% unrealistic
Yeah, that doesn't really work, me too. I'll believe you in an instant if you say you've flown a WWII plane and say it's unrealistic, but I can imagine fighters needed to be able to use quite a lot of rudder to perform certain manouvers, unlike a 172 or Warrior.

[Sandylowlead]

Yeah, that doesn't really work, me too. I'll believe you in an instant if you say you've flown a WWII plane and say it's unrealistic, but I can imagine fighters needed to be able to use quite a lot of rudder to perform certain manouvers, unlike a 172 or Warrior.

I've been up in a t-6 and it handles far differently then any plane in BOP on realistic/sim mode

[Flyboy69]

Is there any more info about the update yet. I do hope they get it in
before the year ends like they said.

[condorz38]

Fix the servers; disconnecting ruins the whole game

[kozzm0]

hey maybe this is in the patch but it's clear now that there are several planes that can sustain a 10-second turn in simulation, which is about twice as good as any of them could really do... I'm not suggesting you go back and redo the whole engine, but a lot of it could be fixed if there were an online option to disable WEP in games.

One of the biggest reasons for the crazy turns that lose no energy is WEP. Online matches without WEP would be WAAAY more realistic.

[haitch40]

hey maybe this is in the patch but it's clear now that there are several planes that can sustain a 10-second turn in simulation, which is about twice as good as any of them could really do... I'm not suggesting you go back and redo the whole engine, but a lot of it could be fixed if there were an online option to disable WEP in games.

One of the biggest reasons for the crazy turns that lose no energy is WEP. Online matches without WEP would be WAAAY more realistic.

wep should be alowed just it wrecks your engine (which is what hapens as far as i know)

[Sandylowlead]

One of the biggest reasons for the crazy turns that lose no energy is WEP. Online matches without WEP would be WAAAY more realistic.

I support this idea^^. Personally a mix between arcade and realistic would be the most fun. Have the controls like arcade but have the dangers of stalling, complex damage system, and bullet damage buffed.

[kozzm0]

WEP wrecks your engine - but only after using it for quite a while, longer than most dogfights last. Planes can go through at least 10 loops with WEP on full, where they ought to stall.

No-wep matches would involve a lot more maneuvering and dodging, instead of impossible flat-loop circle fights.

I don't mean ban wep, just make it an option for online, like fuel and ammo.

[Ancient Seraph]

WEP wrecks your engine - but only after using it for quite a while, longer than most dogfights last. Planes can go through at least 10 loops with WEP on full, where they ought to stall.

No-wep matches would involve a lot more maneuvering and dodging, instead of impossible flat-loop circle fights.

I don't mean ban wep, just make it an option for online, like fuel and ammo.

I'm guessing the red-/black-outs will also decrease the amount of flat-loop circling, as you call it ;). However, WEP or not, those turns are still possible, they'd just be a bit slower.

[kozzm0]

I'm guessing the red-/black-outs will also decrease the amount of flat-loop circling, as you call it ;). However, WEP or not, those turns are still possible, they'd just be a bit slower.

Almost twice as slow, the yak-3's level sustained max is 19 seconds. Which would create more realistic ways to disengage.

I said flat loops but you're right, they do get pretty oblique without any danger of stalling at all. Kind of like a yo-yo contest. Without wep a plane turning its minimum radius wouldn't be able to do that.

<> I hate to beat a dead horse but the online score system just continues to get more and more mysterious. Yesterday I finished a round with 0 kills and "mission failed," but nobody else had any kills either. This was vs two I-16's, where I decided to demonstrate how useless that plane really was due to its low speed and inability to climb, I merely climbed and bnz-ed them the entire round. Since the I-16's crashed and I didn't, the game handed me the dogfight champion trophy even though it said I lost the round.

I've also noticed that I seem to drop in rank every time I decisively defeat a higher-ranked opponent, even with limited ammo and good accuracy. I'm starting to wonder whether there's any formula at all for the "level," or whether the devs just entertain themselves by watching people play and saying "that looked good, up 1 level" or "you only won 5-0, down one level."

So either deaths DO matter in dogfight, at least as tie-breakers, or it all depends on whether the devs thought the fight was any good.

[MACADEMIC]

Hi Anton,

I would love to see added sceneries (maps) in either an update or a sequel:

- The Alps: it would be just stunning to add this, it would give the dogfights even more 3D appeal if they were to take place over mountain tops and in steep valleys (which feeling you partly have in the Ardennes but they're not that high)

- Malta: well, perhaps because I live there, but mostly because historically it was the most bombed place in WWII. Would give an interesting background for new missions.

- North Africa: would imagine a desert landscape a very attractive addition to the game, plus a good scenery for new missions.

All in all, many thanks for an amazing product.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

MACADEMIC

[kozzm0]

WEP wrecks your engine - but only after using it for quite a while, longer than most dogfights last. Planes can go through at least 10 loops with WEP on full, where they ought to stall.

No-wep matches would involve a lot more maneuvering and dodging, instead of impossible flat-loop circle fights.

I don't mean ban wep, just make it an option for online, like fuel and ammo.

It would still have been better to reduce the WEP to a realistic level, it just seems too powerful in climbs which plays hell on altitude advantage. But the blackouts have solved the dang 10-second sustained problem, more or less.
Now if a plane starts flying oblique loops at 280kph it's in trouble. Problem fixed.

But the scoring system isn't really fixed. Docking 1 point for a crash still gives a player with a damaged plane no incentive to keep it in the air, unless they're good enough to win 4 out of 5 times with a winged plane. Gun kills are always credited but only if there's enough damage. If you wing your opponent, then outmaneuver them till they stall and crash, or run into a tree, still no kill. It would be better if a crash death deducted 3 points.

Also is there any explanation anywhere of how the online rankings work? The stars are as mysterious as ever.

[InfiniteStates]

Also is there any explanation anywhere of how the online rankings work? The stars are as mysterious as ever.
Silvernige came up with a great theory on the yuPlay forum that I keep meaning to test, but don't really look at the leaderboards. He basically suggested that when your stars hit a certain level (200 he said, but I suspect the value will vary across game modes) then your level goes up 1 and the stars reset...

[kozzm0]

Silvernige came up with a great theory on the yuPlay forum that I keep meaning to test, but don't really look at the leaderboards. He basically suggested that when your stars hit a certain level (200 he said, but I suspect the value will vary across game modes) then your level goes up 1 and the stars reset...

yes, I see my stars on the board go up and down, but not any connection between that and the stars awarded at the end of matches.

The most annoying thing is winning a match 5-0, or with the patch 20-0, getting 20 stars, only to see that my level dropped. It's happened several times now.

This is a wild guess, but maybe you have to get more stars than the difference between your level and the opponent's highest level.

[InfiniteStates]

Someone else (can't remember who) also suggested that accuracy had a big part to play. To be honest, I haven't paid the leaderboards too much attention... but I would love to know how they work (lol - if they work as intended).

[winny]

The best way to deal with how the leaderboards work is to try and not think about them. They appear to make no sense whatsoever.

I'm pretty good at arcade and was floating around the top 20 for a while. I played 2 games where I was the highest scoring pilot on the losing side and I dropped from 5th to 150th. I now couldn't tell you where I am because I don't care. It's a mystery!

[InfiniteStates]

I'm pretty good at arcade...
He's not lying either :evil::-P

[MACADEMIC]

Hello Anton,

I'm coming across a lot of sim players who love to fly in cockpit view, so we arrange matches in cockpit view only via messages or headsets. This of course goes by gentlemen's agreement only.

It would be great to have the option to host a game which only allows planes with cockpit view and excludes virtual cockpits.

That would be a fantastic add on, especially for tournaments under such rules.

Thank you. Keep the good work up!

MACADEMIC

P.S: I started a poll to support this request: http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=11745

[Hrok81]

Hello Anton,

I'm coming across a lot of sim players who love to fly in cockpit view, so we arrange matches in cockpit view only via messages or headsets. This of course goes by gentlemen's agreement only.

It would be great to have the option to host a game which only allows planes with cockpit view and excludes virtual cockpits.

That would be a fantastic add on, especially for tournaments under such rules.

Thank you. Keep the good work up!

MACADEMIC


+1

[ontheborderland]

This is a small thing in the grand scheme of things, but when you're in cockpit view, depending on where the sun is, sometimes when you look at your wing you can see the shadow of the cockpit, and where it ends. It really kills the illusion that you're actually flying an aircraft. I'd suggest making the cockpit models longer so that the shadows give the correct shape.

[haitch40]

Hello Anton,

I'm coming across a lot of sim players who love to fly in cockpit view, so we arrange matches in cockpit view only via messages or headsets. This of course goes by gentlemen's agreement only.

It would be great to have the option to host a game which only allows planes with cockpit view and excludes virtual cockpits.

That would be a fantastic add on, especially for tournaments under such rules.

Thank you. Keep the good work up!

MACADEMIC

+1

[ivanrdgz]

Guys,

I can't see a thing on this game. I would like to be able to change the color and the contrast of the HUD indicators, specially the aiming cross.

Thanks,

[hangtime253]

Can't a patch be made so that the controls match Radio Control Transmitters?

Here in the US the controls are throttle and rudder is on the Left and the elevator and ailerons is on the right.

I find the game difficult and undesirable as it is.


http://www.hooked-on-rc-airplanes.com/rc-airplane-controls.html

[Stanrosquain]

Hi, :)

I have a question for Anton : Is it possible that the next IL-2 contains a view of the turrets in the first person or this possibility is completely ruled ?


My suggestions for the sequel :

-all cockpits (bombers and fighters)

-real bombsights for bombers (as in IL-2 on the PC. Passing in the interface of bombardment by pressing the stick RS)

-possibility to put in options "real cockpit only" in multiplayer

-possibility to choose a camouflage for planes

-editor mission more complex in order to extend the life of the game to infinite

-possibility to play at parts of multiplayer in "single player" with AI Enemies and AI friends (CTA, Strike, Deathmatch... in "single player")

-possibility at others players to join the "editor mission" of one player (the player can play alone with AI until other players come in his "mission editor").

-German campain

-view of turret in the first person (at least for planes with only one turret like Il-2, Pe-2, Ju-87, Bf-110)

-alarm for the Stuka (during dive-bombing)

-possibility to put in the option "Show names above the aircraft for sim mode" in multiplayer (as Il-2 on PC)

-to keep the inside view when our plane is shot down

-put the real voice with subtitles (as Il-2 on PC)

-"destruction of the enemie airport" : There are 2 team. Everyone must take of in his airport (or their airports) in the beggining. The objective is to destroy positions in the Airport opposing as the DCA or sheds. A team wins when it has destroyed all positions opposite of the airport opposing and then it destroyed all the aircraft that remained in the air.
When a plane is shot down, he must take off again later. Few sheds intact = the time of respawn is long.
We must landing to fill up with petrol and ammunition.

-possibility to choose in the option in multiplayer "only one chance" (a person who is shot down is eliminated and disconnected from the party with his points)

-Operation theatre : USSR, battle over London, Africa, Perhaps the pacific (enven if i prefair russians and germans planes)

-possibility to control a bomber with two bodies or more (3 or more if there is a view of turret in first person) The bodie who chose the bomber before the party start can drive this bomber and control its turrets. Bodies who have decided to join he can only control the turrets

-possibility to play in spit screen (one body drive a plane during the other take the gunner. It will be interesting if a view of turret in the first person and if it will be possible to play in spit screen on line. For example, one body drive a Il-2 and the other body take the gunner in the Il-2)
We can therefore play Il-2 to several on the same console and play together online. The person who drive the airplane will get all the points.

-aircraft over : Pe-2, Ju-88, He-177, Fw 200 Condor, Tu-2, Do-335



I hope my suggestions will be useful for the next IL-2 :)

I congratulate Gaijin for his great work given to IL-2 BoP and I thank them to have provided the first flight simulator in console (sorry for my bad english)

[MACADEMIC]

Dear Anton and team,

The inclusion of Headtracking Technology in an future update or sequel of your brilliant game is very high on my list.

There is a thread on that topic in the forum, in case you haven't checked it out yet, please do: http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=12014

Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays!

MACADEMIC

[kozzm0]

what is the headtracking tech? LIke in Gran turismo where if you move your head, the driver's head moves?

If it's about changing the view, it would never work. You wouldn't be looking at the screen anymore.

How come your avatar is Победная Звезда but you haven't joined the battle for Europe for USSR? Битва ещё продолжается!

The draft is today, so if you haven't joined, it's probably too late, depending on the rules

[MACADEMIC]

what is the headtracking tech? LIke in Gran turismo where if you move your head, the driver's head moves?

If it's about changing the view, it would never work. You wouldn't be looking at the screen anymore.



Hi,

Have a look here, this video shows how headtracking works. You only move your head slightly so your eyes can stay on the screen. It looks very intuitive and natural:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zU8ZnA02g2g&feature=player_embedded

Video from a thread by Houndstone Hawk: http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=11935

MACADEMIC

[PaulDPearl]

There are a few bugs with the game...

When viewing from 3rd person, the X and Y axis of the camera are oppisite that from the HUD only and Cockpit view... this has got to be a bug...

If you have a custom control setup you can no longer "press select to Continue" when on missions... even if you haven't changed the "select" button's features... ((you have to change the layout to "wirless controller" and then press "select" - then you have to change the layout back to "custom" to continue to use your workable controls...))

If you can make the game compatable with the Track IR (http://www.naturalpoint.com/trackir/), you would have the greatest combat simulator ever. ((Though I haven't tried it with a joystick yet...))

[kozzm0]

Hi,

Have a look here, this video shows how headtracking works. You only move your head slightly so your eyes can stay on the screen. It looks very intuitive and natural:

(a video)

Video from a thread by Houndstone Hawk: http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=11935

MACADEMIC

doesn't look like the dude was able to check 6 though.

Would the ps eye be capable of this?

[MACADEMIC]

doesn't look like the dude was able to check 6 though.

Would the ps eye be capable of this?

Have a look further down this thread: http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=12014

It seems like the Eye Toy can pretty precisely monitor headmovements, angles etc. Regarding checking his six, I'm not sure but that would depend on how much headmovement translates into change of viewing angle. It should be possible to finetune it that way.

MACADEMIC

[kozzm0]

It's the PS Eye, the Eye Toy was for ps2 and it's much weaker

I just bought one used for a good price, and have spent about 30 hours trying to get it to work in linux. The driver is still partly in development and works for a lot of people but not for me, I am probably going to have to compile it into the kernel which I'm not looking forward to, but compiling it as a 3rd-party module won't seem to work

But once I get the Eye working, I'll be able to capture decent video of BOP on my pc. I've made test recordings on the ps3 of pc and ps2 stuff, and it's better than I expected. The Eye is a very good webcam, 480p at 60fps with a 4-mic array.

[MACADEMIC]

It's the PS Eye, the Eye Toy was for ps2 and it's much weaker

Yes, you're right, and Sony seems to have a few things planned with that thing, plus some other tracking devices (see the threads).

Good luck with your programming!

MACADEMIC

[PaulDPearl]

If you could please fix the camera controls. One of the Four mode's is reversered from the other 3... (Third Person).

Virtual Cockpit - Left goes left, right goes right.
Cockpit - Left goes left, right goes right.
Gunner - Left goes left, right goes right.
Third Person - Left goes Right, Right goes Left...

And if you use a "custom" layout - both X and Y axis are reversed from the other two... meaning you have the rest setup to push up and look down, and when you push up in 3rd person you look up.


All you need to do is make the 3rd person camera axis (both X and Y) a seperate control that can be reversed by the user in Custom Layout > Settings.. . As it takes the user customizing his settings to find this problem (or changing to wireless controller setup 3).

I beleive the settings are setup in this way because in the default controls, you push the R3 button to "look" and when in 3rd person, the "look" button causes you to look backwards first (look up), but this doesn't happen if you don't use a look button...

((interestingly enough, if you map a button to "look up" and use it in the cockpit view, you will look at your instruments.. this could be handy for those of us who know how to read the instruments...))

[hypertek]

I just bought this game, its cool, just kinda sad that it is very underrated with the general mass of people who never look at these games.. Would love to see populated online play *i have ps3*. Like online servers instead of always joining a "host" game.

And when in 3rd person view, alot of things going on at the same time, i notice a frame rate drop can get a lil choppy, perhaps some better optimizing if its possible. Would turning music off free up a lil more power from the system? I suppose its at the limits of the console.

Otherwise cool game. I had to call around to find it and the gamestop that had it only had one copy *If anyone whos been to Gamestop knows, they will open one copy for display purposes, and sell that copy to you as new. Perhaps a more attention grabbing box art would have got more people interested in it. I know alot of people talk about those "other" console flight games cuz they got prettier boxart.

[hypertek]

what would be nice is be able to turn down teh transparancy of the on-screen indicators, sometimes its hard to make out the direction of the plan because the target indicator around it is soo bright.

[kozzm0]

I just bought this game, its cool, just kinda sad that it is very underrated with the general mass of people who never look at these games.. Would love to see populated online play *i have ps3*. Like online servers instead of always joining a "host" game.

And when in 3rd person view, alot of things going on at the same time, i notice a frame rate drop can get a lil choppy, perhaps some better optimizing if its possible. Would turning music off free up a lil more power from the system? I suppose its at the limits of the console.

Otherwise cool game. I had to call around to find it and the gamestop that had it only had one copy *If anyone whos been to Gamestop knows, they will open one copy for display purposes, and sell that copy to you as new. Perhaps a more attention grabbing box art would have got more people interested in it. I know alot of people talk about those "other" console flight games cuz they got prettier boxart.

if you play in sim mode at all, add AR_Kozz

To find a copy of IL-2 I had to go to 3 stores including Blockbuster, none of them had it, then I went to Game Crazy (Hollywood video) and they had one copy, the dude working there had never heard of it.

It's all the fault of graphics and shooters. It was the same when I was a kid playing games on Commodore 64, all anyone talks about is graphics, graphics, graphics. People will buy all kinds of garbage as long as it has Graphics. Like Killzone 2, it's just a shooter but it has GRAPHICS! It's the 2,000th sequel to Quake with new maps, weapons and graphics.

So is Call of Doo-doo, I'll probably be called a heretic for saying so. Hey, wait, Heretic was another one - a mod of Doom with a new theme, maps, missions and graphics.

[haitch40]

if you play in sim mode at all, add AR_Kozz

To find a copy of IL-2 I had to go to 3 stores including Blockbuster, none of them had it, then I went to Game Crazy (Hollywood video) and they had one copy, the dude working there had never heard of it.

It's all the fault of graphics and shooters. It was the same when I was a kid playing games on Commodore 64, all anyone talks about is graphics, graphics, graphics. People will buy all kinds of garbage as long as it has Graphics. Like Killzone 2, it's just a shooter but it has GRAPHICS! It's the 2,000th sequel to Quake with new maps, weapons and graphics.

So is Call of Doo-doo, I'll probably be called a heretic for saying so. Hey, wait, Heretic was another one - a mod of Doom with a new theme, maps, missions and graphics.

hmm il add race driver grid to that list its ok but it could of been soo much more but it has good graphics so no1 cares

[SimonSays132]

This may have been said before but either way I think it is a needed thing in the game and something that should be brought to the attention of the developers. I am talking about the cockpit option. I got the game recently and was rather enjoying the game. I swore to play the game on simulation as I love realistic and simulation games (yes that means the only time I have played the game on any other difficulty is during training, I also have turned off the HUD completely and I have gotten used to using the active dials.). Anyway, I was annoyed and astonished to find that some plains don't have a cockpit. I know that at the start there were only supposed to be 12 planes that could be flyable and I understand but please in the next DLC or update please have a cockpit in EVERY plane. It would make everyone a lot happier.

Also, me being British, would love to see more maps of Britain, Germany or any other county as a matter of fact! Along with that a free-flight mode so I could fly with little worry of anyone attacking me till my hearts content.

Whether this would be DLC or a title update, paid or free I don't care. I just want my cockpits and my maps.

Also, as an after thought, I would really love the option to turn off the plane representing your position on the map. Would make navigating quite a fun thing. Actually, anything that makes the game more realistic!

Love the game,
SimonSays132.

[hypertek]

I will be satisfied with this game if we get a few more patches to improve the control options, maybe a way to turn down or off some of the target markers, and turn off the annoying "pull up" message that flashes on the screen when your flying level. I wouldnt mind affordable download content if its content that is actually worth buying, say a optional additional planes content and skins would be worth it.

I could do without the lil cockpit pilot animations, most of the time the plane is incorrect anyways, best to just leave it out. Might free up some console horsepower by making some of these things a lil simpler.

Maybe some way to help the netcode, I joined a multiplayer game last night that was full 16 players, and it was lag city, though I understand that this could be due to the host if they have a bad connection.

We just need more people playing this online!!

[haitch40]

This may have been said before but either way I think it is a needed thing in the game and something that should be brought to the attention of the developers. I am talking about the cockpit option. I got the game recently and was rather enjoying the game. I swore to play the game on simulation as I love realistic and simulation games (yes that means the only time I have played the game on any other difficulty is during training, I also have turned off the HUD completely and I have gotten used to using the active dials.). Anyway, I was annoyed and astonished to find that some plains don't have a cockpit. I know that at the start there were only supposed to be 12 planes that could be flyable and I understand but please in the next DLC or update please have a cockpit in EVERY plane. It would make everyone a lot happier.

Also, me being British, would love to see more maps of Britain, Germany or any other county as a matter of fact! Along with that a free-flight mode so I could fly with little worry of anyone attacking me till my hearts content.

Whether this would be DLC or a title update, paid or free I don't care. I just want my cockpits and my maps.

Also, as an after thought, I would really love the option to turn off the plane representing your position on the map. Would make navigating quite a fun thing. Actually, anything that makes the game more realistic!

Love the game,
SimonSays132.

you can sort of have a free flight mode just chose your enemy as a single po2

[juz1]

I've got an idea...


someone please give us an idea about whats happening with the patch...

if you replied "we are on holiday for 3 weeks" good for you, we'd all be happy, but no news ain't good news for alot of people.

Happy holidays to all...

Kindest regards,

Justin

ps don't forget to write:grin:
________
VAPORIZER (http://vaporizers.net/vaporizers)

[McQ59]

I would first like to say that I really love this game. Thank u for every bit of it.

I often fly bombersupport in strikegames in a fighterplane, and a lot of the fights and action takes place over enemytargets. My first aim is of course enemy fighters and not the groundtargets, but the "automatic targetswitch" or whatever it is, keeps switching between groundtargets instead of enemy fighters. So do the "manual switching" I do myself on my flightstick. So I wonder... Is it possible for u guys to kind of "switch off" the ground targets for the fighterpilots? (I know this will be a problem for the fighters that carries bombs, but they may be less annoyed. Maybe... I don't know).
Now it's like I have to press switch target buttons abot 10-fifteen times before I "hit" the nearest fighter, and again is able to follow with the followcamera-view.
(I hope u understand what i am writing here. My english writing could be better, I know...)

[AV 1611]

I second that! :)

[danscirocco]

maybe a good idea would be to hold the target button for a fraction of time to select the nearest target ...im sure someother flight game has that ??!

[AV 1611]

I hear it's coming to console, "FUN!" Icing on the cake!":grin:

[Rotor Trash]

It's probably be said already but:

Host option to boot people (ie kamikazis in CTA) :( , or make crashes count more against your team.

Ability to select the match you want in the list, so we dont have to keep exiting out of a room that a host doesnt start for over 20mins...

[AV 1611]

Personally, I think the "FLY-BY" camera view is more essential than the reply feature.

Is the "FLY-BY view" a possible DLC/ SEQUEL? - I hear "FLY-BY" is coming to Wings of PREY?

Why didn't the DEVs just apply this in the first place? This may be over said but I think w/out the "FLY-BY" view, 75% of the game is lost. :confused:

[Varcus2]

Hello,

First I just want to say i love this game, but 2 points frustrated me:
1 can't have cockpit view with axes airplanes.
2 last but not least lol is the very big camera deadzone when using stick controler (HotasX)
Can you make something in the next update please??

[RazgriZ-FX]

For the 360 version of the game, the weapon unlock requirements are ridiculous. This is more of an achievement completionist shout out.

The game is dead online.

To ask to get 50 ground target kills with the P-51D-5? You're kidding right.

To do that legit without boosting it is impossible.

To do that by boosting is a tedious task begging to not go near these kind of games produced/published again if there ever was one created for console.

[InfiniteStates]

To ask to get 50 ground target kills with the P-51D-5? You're kidding right.

To do that legit without boosting it is impossible.

To do that by boosting is a tedious task begging to not go near these kind of games produced/published again if there ever was one created for console.
I can understand your pain, (most of) the unlock levels out of the box are ridiculous, and the lead designer admitted as much and apologised. And it doesn't help that there is little online activity.

But if you do go for some of the harder strike target kill objectives, unload your bombs on approach one time*, then fly your plane into the target at full speed. MG/Cannons also do damage, so hold those down as you fly in too. You can kill 3-5 targets per match like this with any plane - even if it doesn't have bombs...

Obviously set a high time limit, low ticket count and go for a map that doesn't have ships.

* Don't unload a second time, even though you can, because your bombs will destroy you before you can hit the target. And your plane does more damage than the bombs.

[MOH_Hirth]

My sugestion to SOW:

1-Let SOW more opened if possible: sound files, smokes, tracers, cockpits... all you think you can, like is with the skins files.

2-Try do a new sound channel to "Fly by view sound", or let opened a way to mod communities.

3-Show more rotation(RPM) in spinner of propeller.


Thank you Oleg and Team and all the best to you in 2010!

[Doktorwzzerd]

well if any devs still are reading this thread, which I am doubtful of, my biggest suggestion (for a sequel) is doing something to improve visibility of long range targets. I don't know if its the draw distance or the scale of objects relative to the cockpit or what but in sim mode objects beyond 1000yds are extremely hard to see, if not impossible. I'm playing on a 42" 720p screen and I can testify that it really hurts the gameplay, if this problem can be solved in any upcoming title I think you will have gone a long way to making a more successful game.

[highflyer]

The only suggestion I have for the developers is this; try posting some sort of response you spineless cowards.

[Robotic Pope]

The only suggestion I have for the developers is this; try posting some sort of response you spineless cowards.

You need to read some of the previous threads about this before saying words like that. The Devs have been ordered by the Publishers to ignore all questions. So Redirect your anger towards 505 Games.

[highflyer]

Is it a breach of contract for Anton and co. to just divulge the information? Because if not, the game's, and indirectly his, reputation is lying in tatters; and after making a reasonably good game - it's just been disappointment after disappointment really.

[Robotic Pope]

Is it a breach of contract for Anton and co. to just divulge the information? Because if not, the game's, and indirectly his, reputation is lying in tatters; and after making a reasonably good game - it's just been disappointment after disappointment really.

It probably would be a breach of contract yes. Now most of us understand the situation the devs are in, their reputation for making first rate WWII sims is still intact. The Devs have been screwed just as much as we have by 505.

I guess that how 505 manages to take the risk and release new niche games. By giving the developers of the game very few privalages and very little in return. Hopefully BoP will have sold enough to convince a different publisher (that can afford to look after its developers) that the sequel can be a sucessful and not such a big risk.

[InfiniteStates]

Suggestion to devs: approach Atlus for a publishing deal for the sequel. They must be rolling in cash now after Demon's Souls ;)

[BRIGGBOY]

More variety of planes such as the Lancaster, Mosquito, Beaufighter, Meteor, Boulton Paul, Hawker Tempest, A26 Invader, P40 Warhawk, XP38 Chain Lghtening, P61 Blackwidow, B32 Dominator, A36 Apache, ME 410 Hornet, DO 17, JU 88, JU 188, Mikoyan-Gurevich Mig 1/Mig 3. Also in CTA games i think it would be cool to use aircraft carriers as the runway to capture instead of airfields in some of the games. Also in strike games be able to use torpedos on ships.

[AV 1611]

After the BOP sequel get crack'en on a new MODREN AIR COMBAT SIM!

Please include the F-15 & SU-27 VARIANTS/ family and don't forget the "FLY-BY CAMERA VIEW" this time. The rest of the planes are up to you! How's that? :-P

[kozzm0]

After the BOP sequel get crack'en on a new MODREN AIR COMBAT SIM!

Please include the F-15 & SU-27 VARIANTS and don't forget the "FLY-BY CAMERA VIEW" this time. The rest of the planes are up to you! How's that? :-P

Including su-35 with the OVT done accurately so I can do double backflips and fly backwards like the real ones, without having to buy a pc

Flying backwards during a double backflip may be a useless combat maneuver, but it's still the most amazing

If you do patch BOP again, consider making every death -5 points, and if nobody has more kills than deaths, everyone gets "mission failed." The current scoring system makes everyone fly around at 300kph or less in a furball, except it's not a furball since it's always at ground-level. Being near lots of targets lets you rack up kills quicker, regardless if you get killed twice as much. There's no incentive for staying alive. It turns low speed and low altitude into an advantage, it's a mockery of real air combat.

For more realism, why not eliminate dogfight mode entirely. When in history has there ever been a free-for-all dogfight? It's only good for 1 on 1 battles, which can also be done in team battle.

[McQ59]

If you do patch BOP again, consider making every death -5 points, and if nobody has more kills than deaths, everyone gets "mission failed." The current scoring system makes everyone fly around at 300kph or less in a furball, except it's not a furball since it's always at ground-level. Being near lots of targets lets you rack up kills quicker, regardless if you get killed twice as much. There's no incentive for staying alive. It turns low speed and low altitude into an advantage, it's a mockery of real air combat.

For more realism, why not eliminate dogfight mode entirely. When in history has there ever been a free-for-all dogfight? It's only good for 1 on 1 battles, which can also be done in team battle.

I totally second this one! The only incentive u have to stay alive and avoid crash/deaths now is u'r own dignity and honor. Not bad incentives per se, but u have to reckon them seriously after all...

[BRIGGBOY]

After the BOP sequel get crack'en on a new MODREN AIR COMBAT SIM!

Please include the F-15 & SU-27 VARIANTS and don't forget the "FLY-BY CAMERA VIEW" this time. The rest of the planes are up to you! How's that? :-P

no lets keep it in tune with ww2 we have had so many modern fighter games on the console and to be honest they are a bit boring using missile lock all the time. I also agree with the kills to death ratio

[SEE]

I wouldn't bank on any sequel irrespective of what was said or promised in the past! BOP, I'm sad to say, appears to be regarded as a console failure by the Devs and publishers. The market for flight sims is best suited to the PC seems to be their current atttude. The problem is that a good quality flight sim needs to evolve with add ons (missions, a/c, maps, etc) that they can charge for. Any DLC, patches and upgrades just don't work on consoles due to the costs, licensing, QA requirements, file size limits, etc. The market is just too small to be profitable. Though the developers are not allowed to discuss the current title, due to contractual reasons, I cannot see any reason that would prevent them divulging development of a sequel. Which poses a question - when was the last comms from the devs regarding a console sequel? I would be most happy to be proved wrong or overly pessimistic believe me!

[AV 1611]

I'll be waiting...

[LordVonPS3]

Guys,

Suggestion for you here. I've noticed quite a bit of tearing & the odd stutter in this game, particularly when pulling up, diving or flying through clouds and have an idea or two for how you might like to have another go at fixing...

1. A few bits and bobs...
- Move all back face culling / triangle culling routines to run on CELL SPE's.
- Use what main executable RAM you have remaining to add & store oft-used textures, then copy these from main RAM to VRAM instead of loading / streaming those from the HDD (assuming you do use the HDD during game play and don't just load all the textures in per level)!
- Make smoke trails dissipate a little faster, no-one will notice.

2. Triple buffering & maintain v-sync (assuming enough memory).
Render an additional frame and hold it in reserve so that instead of displaying a torn frame the reserve is displayed instead. For a good example of how to do triple buffering effectively - see Uncharted 2 / ask Naughty Dog who will help you.

[delaner]

XBox: I'd love to have a free-flight mode where I could simply practice take-offs and landings. Since we don't have brakes, I have to search around to find a gigantic field whilst I'm learning... so...

Also, I feel the play of the game would be transformed if I were able to change the dead-zone in my Saitek AV8R. It has been stated that it's up to MS, but I know in Over-G Fighters (which doesn't work with my Saitek), you can adjust the deadzone - and that game is a few years old!

I love this game - I'm a bit addicted! =)

Of course, cockpits would be wonderful and all, but I'd be happy with

1) a deadzone/control adjustment for XBox and
2) a training field and training mode with no opponents, just the opportunity to practice take-offs, landings, touch-n-gos, and enjoy the beautiful graphics and pretend I'm flying around in one of these beautiful aircraft!

Oh, and 3) make the engine noises work properly, please! ; )

Fantastic development; beautiful game, tons of fun, fantastic price. =)

Cheers!

[trk29]

XBox: I'd love to have a free-flight mode where I could simply practice take-offs and landings. Since we don't have brakes, I have to search around to find a gigantic field whilst I'm learning... so...

Also, I feel the play of the game would be transformed if I were able to change the dead-zone in my Saitek AV8R. It has been stated that it's up to MS, but I know in Over-G Fighters (which doesn't work with my Saitek), you can adjust the deadzone - and that game is a few years old!

I love this game - I'm a bit addicted! =)

Of course, cockpits would be wonderful and all, but I'd be happy with

1) a deadzone/control adjustment for XBox and
2) a training field and training mode with no opponents, just the opportunity to practice take-offs, landings, touch-n-gos, and enjoy the beautiful graphics and pretend I'm flying around in one of these beautiful aircraft!

Oh, and 3) make the engine noises work properly, please! ; )

Fantastic development; beautiful game, tons of fun, fantastic price. =)

Cheers!


Great post and welcome to the forum!

[kozzm0]

no lets keep it in tune with ww2 we have had so many modern fighter games on the console and to be honest they are a bit boring using missile lock all the time. I also agree with the kills to death ratio

They said after the BOP sequel, not the sequel itself

We've had plenty of modern fighter "games" on the console but there's yet to be a "simulator" unless f-16's that carry 80 all-purpose missiles, turn sustained circles in 5 seconds, and aren't subject to g-forces counts as simulation.

Hawx was so bad that maybe it will single-handedly kill the arcade-jet genre. I remember the demo where at the end you're attacked by 4 su-47's, which is ridiculous enough. But then I killed them with a volley of 4 of those long-range missiles.

[BRIGGBOY]

Please, send all your suggestions about the game Title Update - here.
We'll try to do whatever we can, if there will be Title Update.
Please, stay reasonable - we can't add Pacific Theater or Mission editor in title update.
I don't promise we'll do everything, or even anything :) but we'll read all of your feedback carefully.

I can't read all these treads, and I do not read private messages either.
And, please, no flood or repeative suggestions here.

Thanks in advance!

P.S. As for sequel suggestions - let's wait for game release first.

a leaderboard that actually makes sense i mean i was playing a game the other day and killed all my targets had no deaths and shot them down several times and doing all this without losing a single ticket and guess what i droped down the leaderboard can someone please explain the madness

[Burtonboy05]

Just a complete game for the xbox will be suffice :grin:

Oh and a P-38 lighting

[dce21b]

Is it possible with a patch to have the view controls at least snap to views like in the pc where as on a 8 switch hatch i would have:

Up as: look up like just above the canopy frame
Left: directly left
Right: directly right
Down: Look all the way up into the canopy

Up Right: 2 o'clock postition
Up Left: 10 o'clock position
Down Right 5 o'clock position
Down Left 7 o'clock postion

That is how I had my hat set back in Il2 sturmovik the original before Track Ir came out Im so lost with out Track IR an I love sim mode but the hat switch view control is horrible. Also like some have suggested allow for toggle between free look and where it will snap back to the middle maybe a center view button as well.

But as for what Im talking about the settings are in both versions of IL2 for PC how could something so essential be overlooked? With how the view is now i find myself having to keep taping the hatswitch just to keep it in on place which makes keeping my SA completely immposible.

I just dont understand why this game cannot cater towards flight sticks more. Leave the standard controls for the ps3 there for the arcade kids but for us sim players make the controls available. I have a X52 with over 20 buttons let me use them also i cant even zoom in sim mode with the x52 wtf?

[BRIGGBOY]

Please, send all your suggestions about the game Title Update - here.
We'll try to do whatever we can, if there will be Title Update.
Please, stay reasonable - we can't add Pacific Theater or Mission editor in title update.
I don't promise we'll do everything, or even anything :) but we'll read all of your feedback carefully.

I can't read all these treads, and I do not read private messages either.
And, please, no flood or repeative suggestions here.

Thanks in advance!

P.S. As for sequel suggestions - let's wait for game release first.

no virtual cockpits only in plane cockpit view in sim mode

[Riceball]

Give thanks to any who buy your game. Don't ditch a particular system b/c your bosses don't think it's feasable.

[MACADEMIC]

Hi all,

I'm not sure if the developers are still reading this, but not giving up my hopes for either some improvements for BOP or a sequel including improvements.

Here it goes. I discovered there seems to be a calibration error of the game in conjunction with the pad when it comes to moving the elevator of the P-51 Mustang (both -B and -D5 versions) in full sensitivity.

Let me explain. I found out about this in a training session with my head down in the cockpit. With the elevator in full sensitivity, pulling back on the elevator moves the flight stick (in the cockpit) very finely to a point near the lower end of the visible cockpit. The flight stick in this position is still fully visible. However, if you keep pulling back there is a sudden jump of the flight stick which moves out of visual range in an instant, followed by a stall.

What that means is that a fine movement of the pad at this point does not longer correspond to what the flight stick in the cockpit does. It is as if a pilot would, already close to a the performing limit of his airplane, suddenly decide to violently pull back on his controls. The result is of course a violent and sudden stall.

What is interesting is that, with elevator sensitivity reduced to +10 from bottom/-8 from top, there is no more jump of the flight stick out of visual range, the flight stick remains always visible but travels considerably further than it does with full sensitivity before 'the jump'. At this flight stick position the wings produce maximum lift, and since under this sensitivity setting it is impossible to move the flight stick further back, stall is impossible (at least at normal speeds).

It's a pity that due to this calibration error in the game it's not possible to fly the aircraft in its full performance envelope with full elevator sensitivity (i.e. the same flight stick position that is achievable with reduced sensitivity), and still be able to stall. With a correct calibration, there would be much finer clues as to when a wing begins to stall, which could then be avoided by finely releasing some back pressure.

Therefore, the sudden and violent onset of stalls we experience on our Mustangs in full sensitivity do not come from the inherent characteristics of the P51 with it's laminar airfoil wing, but from a calibration error of the game in combination with the PS3 controller (pad).

It would be great if this could be corrected, either as a patch for BOP, or at least for a sequel.

Best Regards,

MACADEMIC

[MACADEMIC]

no virtual cockpits only in plane cockpit view in sim mode

+1 :!:

[lothar29]

We need that has to work with all the cabins of aircraft, because I think you draw on sale without finishing games because your dealer, I tightened the screws, if not, because Wings of Preys PC has them?
I think it would be time that ye would work a little as consumers of this game we paid € 70 for it!!

It should also Change the configuration of the tail rudder control, since it could be configured so that the buttons "R1-R2" outside the control of the tail rudder ..

The booths of the 109's are the most necessary I think along with the Fw190.

Good luck with this and I hope it was not too tough and realistic, but is that what it seems

[Dizzy]

Maybe add blackouts when turning at high speeds?
(on simulation)
Gt: dizzypotatoman

[chromehead]

Lancaster and B17 bombers,replay function
the ablity to open your cockpit
you dont need to do alot the game is great anyway

xbox360 version

[Abbevilleboy]

Would like ability and time to land and re-arm/re-fuel during missions on realistic and sim.

Would like cockpits for German a/c and missions from German perspective.


All of this may be just wishful thinking as I read somewhere that 1C/505 are too tight to do game updates because they have to pay to put it on XBL/PSN - they've never done this for any games in the past and BoP has been out for over a year with sweet FA in the way of new content.

If this is the case then why don't they just offer some paid-for DLC such as new map and skin packs to fund it???

Do we need some independents to put their heads together and make the very necessary improvements to this great but also deeply flawed game?

[Bond007]

Hi,

I have recently purchased the game IL2 STurmovik. And I have applied a patch that was recommended during the install process. thereafter I find the following.

When I do the tutorial no. 3 which is named "Aerial Combat", I am unable to complete the mission since the plane continues to show a primary target and on chasing that virtual target the game displays "Return to Battlefield". Kindly let me know if I am doing something wrong or if other people are also facing this. Also is this a side effect of the patch ?

I looked through the forums but didn't find anything on it.

Kindly let me know.

Thanks,

Bond

[trk29]

Welcome to the forum.
The devs are not responding to questions in here anymore. Your best bet is to use the search function on the main page and if you can not find the answer start a new thread and someone will try to help you, a lot of great people on this forum with a lot of knowledge.

[Korsakov829]

MiGs, Yaks, more weapons, zooming while in Gunner view, Japan, Finnland, Greece, Crete, Pearl Harbor, France, more cockpits. So much was left out of the game!

[drkdeath5000]

May be a bit late to be posting suggestions but if a sequel is still in the making my only suggestion would be to improve the lobby. More importantly we need a pre-game which would allow the game sessions to fill up more so instead of going straight to the lobby when a game is created it would instead go straight to the game allowing the host to fly around while players join. Also, we need the option to switch teams while games are running or at the very least a team balance function which auto switches. I have loads of suggestions but these two i think would help boost il2 the most. More game modes would also be beneficial ie zones and capture the flag, that way the players that enjoy a more casual experience can get involved.

If you want to see any of these ideas in action just play warhawk for ps3, while warhawk may be an old game its still one of the best and thats due to how well its all setup. I havent yet seen a game thats beaten warhawks setup and its going on 4 years now so please dev's use these ideas !

[ATAG_Doc]

Not happening.

[ATAG_Doc]

I wouldn't bank on any sequel irrespective of what was said or promised in the past! BOP, I'm sad to say, appears to be regarded as a console failure by the Devs and publishers. The market for flight sims is best suited to the PC seems to be their current atttude. The problem is that a good quality flight sim needs to evolve with add ons (missions, a/c, maps, etc) that they can charge for. Any DLC, patches and upgrades just don't work on consoles due to the costs, licensing, QA requirements, file size limits, etc. The market is just too small to be profitable. Though the developers are not allowed to discuss the current title, due to contractual reasons, I cannot see any reason that would prevent them divulging development of a sequel. Which poses a question - when was the last comms from the devs regarding a console sequel? I would be most happy to be proved wrong or overly pessimistic believe me!

Very true. Flight sims are a niche all alone. Even a bigger niche on console. These devs are extremely busy putting the finishing touches on their latest creation IL-2 Cliffs of Dover that is due out in the west April 19. Already out in beta in the east.

[Cryptic Phant0m]

I wouldn't bank on any sequel irrespective of what was said or promised in the past! BOP, I'm sad to say, appears to be regarded as a console failure by the Devs and publishers. The market for flight sims is best suited to the PC seems to be their current atttude. The problem is that a good quality flight sim needs to evolve with add ons (missions, a/c, maps, etc) that they can charge for. Any DLC, patches and upgrades just don't work on consoles due to the costs, licensing, QA requirements, file size limits, etc. The market is just too small to be profitable. Though the developers are not allowed to discuss the current title, due to contractual reasons, I cannot see any reason that would prevent them divulging development of a sequel. Which poses a question - when was the last comms from the devs regarding a console sequel? I would be most happy to be proved wrong or overly pessimistic believe me!

From the Macademic and Yudintsev interview.

MACADEMIC: Okay. Let's talk a bit more about the future...you mentioned earlier that you are very busy with a new game?

Anton Yudintsev: Yes, we are

MACADEMIC: As you can imagine your loyal audience is very interested to hear more...

Anton Yudintsev: Well, we have given a hint in Wings of Prey launch trailer (unintentionally). As for features, we have summarized community feedback, and also our own ideas. Unfortunately, I can unveil all details until announcement, but we are going to keep flight sim spirit, and make the game more online focused, and more community-friendly.

MACADEMIC: Hm...maybe a few more details? Can we expect the game to remain in the same time period? Will it come to all platforms PS3/XBOX360/PC?

Anton Yudintsev: It will be good old-fashion propeller planes. I can't announce platforms. We are working for consoles, but I won't give you exact list. Although you can guess.:)

[Jihad_Joe]

Whether arcade, realistic, or simulation mode, I wish the following to mimic real wwii air war:

1. When you are killed, you get deducted the same points you gained when killing another.
2. Ammunition and fuel are always limited according to the maximum payload of the plane. The only way to replenish is to land in a nearby friendly base.
3. When you are shot down, re-spawn should happen in the nearby friendly airbase and take off from there.
4. If you attempt to capture a hostile airbase, you can get shot down by AAs. To capture a hostile airbase you must reduce the AAs and parked fighters by say 80%.
5. There should be no free for all dogfight. Team planes should be grouped as either allied or axis, i.e. German planes cannot team up with British planes.
6. Planes should have rated performance according to maneuverability, durability, maximum speed, and firepower. An I-153 might have a rating of 10 for manueverability but 1 for durability and speed. A spit can have a rating of 5 for manueverability but 10 for speed and firepower, and an 8 for durability. In this way, we can realistically mimic the characteristics of the real planes.

[Jihad_Joe]

no lets keep it in tune with ww2 we have had so many modern fighter games on the console and to be honest they are a bit boring using missile lock all the time. I also agree with the kills to death ratio

Right on! "Dogfighting" online with modern jetfighters are indeed boring. WWI & WWII scenarios are more challenging.

[Robotic Pope]

Whether arcade, realistic, or simulation mode, I wish the following to mimic real wwii air war:

1. When you are killed, you get deducted the same points you gained when killing another.
2. Ammunition and fuel are always limited according to the maximum payload of the plane. The only way to replenish is to land in a nearby friendly base.
3. When you are shot down, re-spawn should happen in the nearby friendly airbase and take off from there.
4. If you attempt to capture a hostile airbase, you can get shot down by AAs. To capture a hostile airbase you must reduce the AAs and parked fighters by say 80%.
5. There should be no free for all dogfight. Team planes should be grouped as either allied or axis, i.e. German planes cannot team up with British planes.
6. Planes should have rated performance according to maneuverability, durability, maximum speed, and firepower. An I-153 might have a rating of 10 for manueverability but 1 for durability and speed. A spit can have a rating of 5 for manueverability but 10 for speed and firepower, and an 8 for durability. In this way, we can realistically mimic the characteristics of the real planes.

Whoa, deja vu? Did you read my reply to this the first time?

The developers don't visit here anymore by the way. You need to go to their new forum.

[Malka4re]

look around the cockpit is a tap of the stick.

[quptj7196lasjdf]

Cannon armed Spits only made a very small and brief appearance with 19 Sqn during the BoB period, and then again briefly with 92 Sqn after the Battle in November.

The Spitfire featured in the XBOX Live demo and on the website is a MkVb - these did not become operational until Spring '41.
http://www.makemoneymakemoney.net/huang4.jpg
http://www.makemoneymakemoney.net/huang2.jpg
http://www.makemoneymakemoney.net/huang3.jpg

[wilmamiller32]

Thanks so much for posting this! This is a great help.
http://www.cuinsurance.org/7.jpghttp://www.cuinsurance.org/2.jpg http://www.cuinsurance.org/3.jpg

[Gin33a44]

Accurate P-51 cockpit!!!

edit: this is the only update I will request for this game.
http://www.makemoneymakemoney.net/1.jpg
http://www.makemoneymakemoney.net/2.jpg
http://www.makemoneymakemoney.net/6.jpg

[Dolly8663]

Accurate P-51 cockpit!!!

edit: this is the only update I will request for this game.http://www.worldwidegamingexchange.info/jh2.jpg
http://www.worldwidegamingexchange.info/22.jpg
http://www.worldwidegamingexchange.info/6.jpg

[bobbysocks]

dolly and roset...the devs dont watch this site very much any more because they have a new game coming out within the next several months. your comments are best directed to here:

http://forum.gaijinent.com/index.php?/forum/23-birds-of-steel/

but know its pretty late in the game for them to make many changes and hit the planed release date. if you check out that site and the game site

http://birdsofsteel.com/en/start/

you will probably be well pleased with what is coming out....very pleased.

[CrashLanding]

but know its pretty late in the game for them to make many changes and hit the planed release date. if you check out that site and the game site

PLANED release date? You mean there's an actual release date now? ;)

[bobbysocks]

PLANED release date? You mean there's an actual release date now? ;)

i am sure there is.... but that pearl of knowledge hasnt been bestowed to us mere mortals as of yet.

[m-bachmann]

http://www.webcam-steamate.com/cookies/35/b/happy.gif


Days ago, one of my firends blog that iOS has a fixed resolution for
iPhone and iPad while Android and other OSes have not. It makes very
different experience for application programmers and users. Apps for
iOS usually provide better user experience than apps for other OSes.
Because, iOS programmers have better chance to optimize UI for
devices.

It reminds me that PC has defacto(?) standard resolutions. Although,
you can use some wier resolution, but most people use 800x600,
1024x768, and recently 1280x720. Programmers have a chance to
optimize their application for these frequently used resolution,
although we don;t full-screen for most time.

For mobile devices, screen size and resolution are various today. If
there is an API that devices can suggest frequently used resolutions
(QVGA/WVGA/...), it can help app programmers to improve app UI. For a
device that does not provide frequently used resolution, it suggests
apps to use one of frequently used resolutions that the device can
rescale it well. For example, if the screen of a device is very
closed to WVGA, it can suggest applications to use WVGA, and rescale
and shift screen properly to get better user experience. All that app
programmers have to do is to optimize their UI for some (a few?)
frequently used resolutions to get better output. It also encourages
vendors to produce devices with frequently used resolutions.

I don't know UI well. It is just an idea that I got suddenly. I post
it here for finding some one who really knows this issue.

[GaryDroBro]

After playing another PS3 game I came across a host migration system. This stop a game from ending if the host quits. This would prove very useful in the new game.

[irishjg10]

After playing another PS3 game I came across a host migration system. This stop a game from ending if the host quits. This would prove very useful in the new game.

hey big G. welcome man. there's a new forum for BoS. I've asked the very same question so we're thinking exactly the same. Not much point requesting anything from the devs on this forum as nothing new is being added to BoP OK. Try this link instead ok big G. See ya over dover this evening bro.

http://forum.gaijinent.com/index.php?/forum/23-birds-of-steel/

[Mi7ch3a2el]

haha ,awesome!humor...
http://www.qmmv.info/12.jpg
http://www.qmmv.info/13.jpg
http://www.qmmv.info/14.jpg

[darlasxm54]

these did not become operational until Spring '41.http://king.dedungecrawl.com/9.jpghttp://king.dedungecrawl.com/10.jpghttp://king.dedungecrawl.com/11.jpghttp://king.dedungecrawl.com/12.jpg