Daidalos Team's Room -QUESTIONS AND REQUESTS ONLY on IL2 Authorized Addons

[nearmiss]

Originally Posted by nearmiss
Approach patterns - the large semi-circle for landings not sensible or realistic.

Flying around in approach pattern circles , especially when the enemy is so close to the airbase, i.e., Henderson field,Guadalcanal. would have been too dangerous. Straight in and straight out approaches was the only way to avoid small arms fire.

Consistent circular fixed patterns also overlap when several airbases are in close proximity.

Straight in and straight out with holding patterns further away from the airbases would make more sense.
We have made several landing patterns, which one will be used depend on mission maker, that change will be included in 5.0 probably.

You will be able to chose between:
1.Normal Left
2.Normal Right
3.Short Left
4.Short Right
5.Straight In

All of them accessible through FMB.

------------------ Excellent!

[nearmiss]

I remember building a campaign for 1943 in the Kuban. I gave it up, because there were no possibilities for implementing tactics.

Pokriskinin developed very successful tactics flying the P-39 and P-40 against the FW190 and 109s. His flight groups flew in tiered altitudes. The higher altitude flights delayed entry until the furrball has progressed enough for them to use their altitude (E advantage) to successfully combat the powerful nimble german aircraft. These were not elaborate tactical schemes, but they were very effective.

In the Il2 it doesn't matter where you position the AI they all drop into the furrball from all levels. This is suicide against the German aircraft, which are mostly successful in those engagements. It doesn't matter what skill level you applied the german aircraft were always the winners.

I gave up on the campaign, because I wanted to produce a winning campaign for users flying Russian side in the P-39 and P-40.

---------------------------------------

I don't know if this is possible, but I've often wondered why we can't have despawn waypoints to get unnecessary aircraft out of the mission. I remember crashing them into mountains and stuff to free up the FPS.

---------------------------------------

[KG26_Alpha]

Originally Posted by nearmiss

I remember building a campaign for 1943 in the Kuban. I gave it up, because there were no possibilities for implementing tactics.

Pokriskinin developed very successful tactics flying the P-39 and P-40 against the FW190 and 109s. His flight groups flew in tiered altitudes. The higher altitude flights delayed entry until the furrball has progressed enough for them to use their altitude (E advantage) to successfully combat the powerful nimble german aircraft. These were not elaborate tactical schemes, but they were very effective.

In the Il2 it doesn't matter where you position the AI they all drop into the furrball from all levels. This is suicide against the German aircraft, which are mostly successful in those engagements. It doesn't matter what skill level you applied the german aircraft were always the winners.

I gave up on the campaign, because I wanted to produce a winning campaign for users flying Russian side in the P-39 and P-40.

---------------------------------------

I don't know if this is possible, but I've often wondered why we can't have despawn waypoints to get unnecessary aircraft out of the mission. I remember crashing them into mountains and stuff to free up the FPS.

---------------------------------------

After hosting 1000's of coops I cant get humans to use those tactics let alone AI

The AI behave as most humans do and attack everything they see no matter what.
Usually after they have died they make a comment about bad mission because they died so fast, followed by my usual comment:
"did you read the brief"
"ermm what brief"
"well if you stayed with your flight instead of taking off along the taxi way...........etc etc etc"

My old Sunday campaigns had some disciplined pilots who would fly high/low tactics and they were very successful in this method, flying 4 high 4 low sweeping out targets areas, same for mud moving too using 2 up 2 down attack plan.

Unfortunately there were the points mongers that just attacked everything and usually died or bailed out as a result of "no tactics" and a must kill everything mentality pretty much like the AI at times.

Hopefully the AI has developed into something a bit more controllable from the FMB point of view and should be interesting building missions again.

[FC99]

Originally Posted by nearmiss

I don't know if this is possible, but I've often wondered why we can't have despawn waypoints to get unnecessary aircraft out of the mission. I remember crashing them into mountains and stuff to free up the FPS.

Why are unnecessary aircraft in mission at all Anyway, I think that despawn waypoint would not be too hard to make but I would like to hear explanation where and when you need something like that, just out of curiosity.

FC

[Lucas_From_Hell]

I think (I only THINK) that what nearmiss mean is those flights that are only necessary for a short period of time, like that pair of fighters who will do a low pass over the runway when you are taking-off, that bomber that will do only a single pass, that enemy that will pass close to you with the aim of dragging you off the planes you should escort so that his friends can have a easy ride when attacking the bomber, that sort of stuff that add much to the immersion but kills the frame rate.

I guess these are situations when it's worth having a despawn waypoint. If I misunderstood you, Nearmiss, sorry.

[nearmiss]

Lucas you are right on.

We are currently restricted on the number of aircraft we can have in the air, along with other moving objects. It varies, but it can be problem in missions.

FPS is affected by number of aircraft. If you have a bomber raid, and the bombers fly off what do you need them for anymore. If your action area is where the bombers dropped their bombs and enemy fighters jump into the contest they can eat up the FPS. Then you couple that with a dozen or so bombers flying off into the sunset with no value to your mission, along with some moving ground objects ...you have FPS slow downs and jerky flying. This can make the difference in the quality of graphics you select for your missions. You cannot select video quality levels as high as you would like in many situations.

Also, after your bombers are gone and still in the air eating FPS you cannot introduce new aircraft or objects without hit on FPS. So, you limit your mission.

Effectively it is all about FPS and the number of moving objects you can have working simultaneously in missions.

I know all this may be for naught in the SOW, but we are talking about IL2. I'm beginning to see on the horizon a lot more of IL2 than I would have ever thought, especially since you guys have dropped onto the scene with Oleg's blessing. So what if we only have 8 poly aircraft graphics. I've been enjoying this old sim for a long time as is. Now that DT is taking such an interest to make such excellent changes in the IL2 the prospects are exciting.

[Lucas_From_Hell]

I totally agree with you, Nearmiss.

And, in my case, this FPS thing just kill it for me. Why? Because I'm a graphic addict. I just can't turn the graphics down. It's a war crime! A game that delivers beutiful images not being pushed to its limits?!

[Aviar]

As a player and mission builder, I'll tell you one thing that has driven me crazy all these years. There is no dedicated command for the camera view. The player needs to cycle through all the enemy planes in order to get the camera(s) view. Very frustrating.

I know that the camera's were not part of the original IL-2 and Oleg was reluctant to add new commands or change the GUI. However, since it has been mentioned that the GUI will be changed, maybe we can get a dedicated command for the camera(s) view?

Aviar

[I/ZG52_Gaga]

Originally Posted by csThor

Neither a 4-engined bomber nor anything regarding radar or triggers were promised for 4.09. All of that (apart from the 4-engined bomber, where did that come from?) was clearly marked as WIP and stuff for the time after 4.09. It would be a nice thing if people started reading what is being posted and stopped reading just what they want to read.

Indeed they were but not in this forum but in personal conversation between a member of
of the 4.09 team and a person i know that compiles Mods ...

Disapointed!!!!

And i'm not People by the way ...

[csThor]

You're not the first who "expressed his disappointment" that the radar and trigger stuff isn't part of 4.09. There were other people who did not read carefully or read what their mind wanted to read instead of what was written. And they got the same answer from me.

So I did not single you out, GaGa. Nothing personal.