Daidalos Team's Room -QUESTIONS AND REQUESTS ONLY - For 4.11

[Romanator21]

I agree. On servers with outside view enabled, it's impossible to maintain any kind of surprise. I feel that F5, F6, etc should be lumped in with "no padlock on" difficulty, and that external views should have the option of being limited to friendlies only.

[Stealth_Eagle]

I found this link and I think it will be quite helpful for new aircraft cockpits.

http://www.world-war-2-planes.com/co...-aircraft.html

Hope this helps and please fix the Go-229 to be Ho-229 and able to carry a bomb load. Thanks

Eagle out.

[Juri_JS]

Please excuse me if this has been asked before. Are there plans to update the landscape textures of the old maps?

The newer maps like Slovakia or Bessarabia have very good looking textures and I think most of us would like to see the same quality on the other maps. Especially the Pacific maps look quite ugly and some have completely wrong textures (Chichi Jima).
In my opinion better map textures would be one of the biggest improvements for the game.

[Gryphon_]

Probably the oldest request of all, but after many months of holding back I have to ask you to look one more time at the low speed turn performance of the Spitfire, particularly the IX. In 4.10 the low speed turn performance of the IX was considerably improved, which was a surprise as it was widely regarded as too good to be true in 4.09. I have no issues with the Spitfire having a better turn rate than the 109 - it should - but when airspeed falls and AoA increases that big wing should produce a lot more drag than it does. But the Spitfire seems to retain energy very well, and pulls off high AoA turns that no other aircraft can follow. In short, the energy retention of the Spitfire isn't realistic, and as it's such an important aircraft in the game I think you need to look at it again.

[DK-nme]

Originally Posted by Gryphon_

Probably the oldest request of all, but after many months of holding back I have to ask you to look one more time at the low speed turn performance of the Spitfire, particularly the IX. In 4.10 the low speed turn performance of the IX was considerably improved, which was a surprise as it was widely regarded as too good to be true in 4.09. I have no issues with the Spitfire having a better turn rate than the 109 - it should - but when airspeed falls and AoA increases that big wing should produce a lot more drag than it does. But the Spitfire seems to retain energy very well, and pulls off high AoA turns that no other aircraft can follow. In short, the energy retention of the Spitfire isn't realistic, and as it's such an important aircraft in the game I think you need to look at it again.

Yes, yes, yes (standing ovation!)


DK-nme

[mceiras]

Any chance of 6DOF implementation for use with trackir and anothers similar devices ?

[Azimech]

Originally Posted by Romanator21

I agree. On servers with outside view enabled, it's impossible to maintain any kind of surprise. I feel that F5, F6, etc should be lumped in with "no padlock on" difficulty, and that external views should have the option of being limited to friendlies only.

+1

Also I'd like to have the online scoring system reworked, instead of the last one that scores a hit gets the points, I'd rather see the number of hits and/or the total damage that has been done. Or maybe a style of distributing the points like the RAF had. I flew online yesterday, first time in ages, and was promptly irritated with the kill stealers. And when I was shooting a bf-110 a single bullet hit the B25 that was spiraling down without it's tail, so I was credited with a friendly kill. Pretty annoying!

[maxim42]

My requests:
-please make full normal widescreen support (there are lot of problems with it) to have normal option and no changes in conf by player,
-better Messerschmits cockpits (G-versions)
-there is a bug - if you take, as a first plane to fly in your game (multi), the AI plane - controls are not working

[JG27CaptStubing]

Airframe Limitations.

Having flown 4.101 for some time now I have to make a few comments regarding the Airframe Limitation. While I like the premise behind having airframe limitations I have a problem with it's current implementation.

Sure one can just go easier on the controls to prevent some sort of overstress of the plane but given there isn't any Real feedback letting you know the plane is being over stressed I think it's rather poor. Flashing the little G is a bit silly given they didn't have G meters in the planes and most pilots could feel the plane and their bodies and know when to back off.

I don't have a better solution at the moment but there has to be a better way of letting the pilot know you're about to bend the plane.

[Romanator21]

One addition that may or may not help the above issue, but I think it would be welcome anyway, is increased "head-shake". Currently, pilots in IL-2 have necks of steel, and when in gun-sight view, there is no movement at all. Leaning forward doesn't make one impervious to G's.