This has possibly been requested before, but in case it hasn't, can something be done about AI planes flying on indefinitely after the pilot has bailed? It doesn't always happen, but when it does it deprives you of a legitimate kill, unless you want to go chasing after it rather than engaging sensible targets. I doubt that many WWII aircraft would have behaved like that in real life.

Why not? If a pilot made a decision to bail while no crucial flight systems were damaged... for example instruments and oxygen, then correctly trimmed the aircraft would have no problems flying on until the fuel tanks were empty or another mechanical failure occured.

There's a fairly recent story of an aircraft that flew with their dead passengers and pilot due to hypoxia, for hundreds of miles before running out of fuel and crashing.

Maybe the moment of bail out should be considered a kill. or PK.

Autopilot on or off?

Even if perfectly trimmed, I doubt there are many WWII aircraft that would remain that stable after the pilot had bailed - this will alter the balance. Unless someone can produce evidence for unmanned, non-autopilot WWII combat aircraft flying on for any length of time, I'll assume it is a bug. I certainly can't trim most aircraft to show the stability needed in IL-2, even without allowing for the destabilising factors a bailout would cause.

Another factor to consider is that the safest way to bail from most single-engined fighters was to roll inverted first. In any case, why the heck would anyone bail from an aircraft with only instrument or oxygen system damage? If the plane is sufficiently undamaged to remain flying unmanned, why not stick with it? (actually, the oxygen failure case is probably one where bailing would be a dubious decision - if you open the chute high you risk hypoxia, and if you don't you may pass out on the way down...)

This has probably been brought up before but can we get left and right wheel brakes mapped to the rudder pedals, i.e diff. braking.

Again on Breda SAFAT ...
 

Dear DT,

Some months ago I asked about the possibility to review the Breda Safat 12.7 issue. Even if they weren't very powerful, they look really too weak in this game, alterating in the end the balance with contemporary fighters, and stealing most of the fun of flying certain planes.

We have now some new interesting experimental data by TinyTim, showing that the Il2 Breda SAFAT are some 75% weaker than the well known Anthony Williams' table calculations. The effectiveness of BS and UBS are respectively 36 and 97 in those tables, and 7 to 33 in Il2 according to TinyTim's findings. It's 1/3 instead of 1/5.

TT found experimentally that in Il2 you need an average of 79 bullets to kill a plane with a BS, vs 28 bullets for the UBS and 39 for the M2. I think that this says it all.


Other machineguns are affected as well by this issue. Herebelow the link to the UBI forum discussion.

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/t...9271044048/p/2

I know that you have too much to do in too little time, but a good look at the weaponry of this game would be wortwhile IMHO :). Maybe starting from uf_josse work... ;).

Regards,
Insuber

What a great idea, the Catalina would be perfect to go along the new SAR mechanics that have been shown.

or Russian MBR-2 ... Greate plane too ;)

I'd like to see improved ground handling. A lot seem very reluctant to steer with differential breaking.

Dear Team Daidalos,

I've been following the progress of your work ever since patch 4.09 was announced - in fact, I had send some requests via email quite a while back. In any case, I say this just to let you know I appreciate all the work that's being done and I've checked what you've said on the issue I'm about to point out -

AI (nearly) unlimited ammo, no overheat, no blackouts is the single greatest issue of Il-2. I've been flying since the days of Forgotten Battles and more actively since 1946 was released, almost exclusively offline and I can honestly tell you that the quirks in the AI that allow it to "cheat" greatly reduce the immersion and overall enjoyment. I would dare to say that there wouldn't be a single complain from the Il-2 community if the AI was given an overhaul that allow for engine overheat, limited ammo and blackouts. As an option setting, at least.

I can't count how many times I've attacked an AI plane only to have it pull an incredible manuevre that I can't follow due to G-force blackouts, or have had to evade the constant stream of bullets the enemy fighters carry (the last is especially unnerving on planes that historically had low ammo loads, such as the Yaks).

So far, the G-force effects you plan to implement sound more scary and potentially irritating than useful, if they don't affect the AI planes. It's already way more capable than a human player with its lighting time reactions. Having it "cheat" to compensate for less intelligence than a human (that is a general problem of AI, not just Il-2, of course) doesn't help though.

I don't know, the improvements such as radio navigation, AI visibility etc. sound great, but with the AI in its current state it feels like Il-2 is incresingly geared for online play where everyone's on an equal footing regarding flight mechanics.

Please, consider revising some of the AI plane quirks such as non-overheating engine, no-blackouts and huge ammo supply.

After 10 years of IL2, regardless of how many aircraft we have someone always wants more aircraft.

I realize converting a non-flyable isn't as big a job to build as a plane from scratch. It is just that for all the requesting I've often wondered just how interested those users are and remain interested if they do get what they request.

Was it really worth it for some developer to spend a huge amount of time trying to supply those requests? Seriously, I've often wondered why don't developers make a response to those requesting such things and spell it out.
The Il2 is certainly no exception of course. Every air combat and flight sim is plagued with requests for new and flyable aircraft, EAW, BOBII WOV, WW2 Fighters, FA-18, FS2004, CFS2,CFS3,FSX and on and on.

There are so many additional very valuable things that could be added to a sim like IL2, i.e, AI performance, additional programming in FMB, etc. All things that make the game/sim more exciting and interesting.

TD is pumping out so much stuff, this posting probably won't change anything. I'm basically trying to say, that it takes alot of time to address many requests, and users should reluctantly make requests.... unless they are very determined to use what they request more than a couple time.

I am not speaking for TD. I am speaking for myself in this thread.