Will SoW be boring and superficial?

[Feathered_IV]

The Il-2 series is pretty. I have no doubt that SoW will be very pretty too. The weather will change. The AI will occaisionally sh*t their pants and the FM's will be great.

And we'll all go around, doing the same things as we are doing now. Just in a more detailed environment.

But really, don't you think there should be more to the future of air combat simulations than just cookie cutter dogfights and dropping a stick of bombs? Do you really just want to play the exact same pair of missions all over again for another five to ten years ?

What if other mission perameters were coded in? What other options could we get?

Maybe instead you'd like to pilot a Lysander for SOE. Fly over to France at zero altitude in the dead of night. Alone in the dark, you would struggle to find 'that little field' marked on your map and glide into it, engine off so as not to alert the Jerries.

Perhaps you'd rather fly a Storch, evacuating wounded from the combat area. Or maybe spotting for the artillery? What if you could give directions and targeting information to ground units?

What about unarmed photo recon? Take your Blenheim across to France to take photographs of the invasion barges. Photographs that the campaign generator can judge and pass you on.

Coastal Command perhaps? Why not have a crew that can actually call out the sightings of distant ships and other objects and give an intelligent description of their range, type and heading?

Or nightfighters with AI radar operators that can actually guide you to the kill?

Wouldn't you like to try to fly a danerously overloaded Ju-52 into the icy landing strips of Stalingrad one day? Or a C-47 over the Himalayas?


There has to be more to this genre than, fly to waypoint and shoot stuff down. Or fly to waypoint and drop some bombs. There has to be.

[HR_Zunzun]

Agree 110%

thrilling of air combat wasn't always the encounter with enemy, weather and navigation, for example, can be very demanding too.
I think that what we really want is the feeling of being part of a huge organization such as an air force (RAF of Luftwaffe).

[I/ZG52_Gaga]

Well said i couldn't agree more ...

[jurinko]

I think who want more real stuff should join USAF until there won´t be some kind of 3d helmets or electrodes connected to our brains, we will be still staring on 19´flat screens. I will definitely enjoy this gaming a lot when being retired..

Byw some guys from our squadron started to fly the gliders, the real stuff

[BadAim]

I wouldn't be suprised if a bit of that is already in the works. I must say that I am impressed with your list, I think I would try all of those things at least once.

[choctaw111]

That is a good list and does sound good, and a refreshing change from what we have been doing. If it can be done in such a way where you can actually feel the pucker factor, that would even better.

[wgvette]

Feathered-
Excellent post! I also enjoy more than just flying to point "A", shoot or be shot and then fly back to point "B". While on-line flying can give you more of a "group sense" it still doesn't supply the additional challenges you mention. I have found myself trying to make more challenging missions by adding little things...I made a mission where you scramble off the carrier to intercept incoming Zekes, the twist being limited fuel. I placed the intercept point about ten minutes from the carrier and adjusted the fuel level where you only have 18-20 minutes depending on how hard you fly. Then it's back to the carrier and usually a dead stick landing...while this can be challenging, it still doesn't get to the point your describing. I would especially like Recon type missions in unarmed aircraft...these types of missions are near impossible in IL-2 with the all seeing AI; very unrealistic that you can't escape and evade using natural terrain, clouds and your flying skill.

wg

[_1SMV_Gitano]

Originally Posted by Feathered_IV

Or nightfighters with AI radar operators that can actually guide you to the kill?

This is what i always missed most...

[Raven2B]

Agreed 100 %

All of this is very good ideas and hope that even some comes possible. Anyway I been flying IL-2 many years (offlline but some day comes to online ...)

[Feathered_IV]

It is heartening to see so many people feeling the same way about this. I just hope that Oleg and the team do too.

Taking the SOE Lysander mission type as an example, certain parameters would need to be coded in to make it work convincingly. Most particularly target waypointing and ground unit AI behaviour.

Imagine this:

Having crossed the Channel in the dead of night, you bank and circle "that little field" that you were directed to in the briefing. The target has a rendezvous time (get there too early and the enemy ground units will arrive before your friends do). At the appointed time you get a flashlight signal from the from the ground. (Hidden Target Complete). You cut the motor and sideslip in. The game engine is designed in such a way that it can recognise just how close the player is to the rendezvous point when their aircraft rolls to a stop. When you are on the ground, the clock is ticking. Land close to the friendlies and there is not long to wait. The further you are from the landing point the longer you have to sweat it out. If the friendly units make it to your aircraft, you get the Mission Complete and you can get the hell out of there.

While this is going on, you have AI enemy ground units that are smart enough to detect your presence and converge on your location. Maybe they will get there first....

Similar mission building parameters can be used for air-ambulance missions or supply drops, providing the builder can vary the duration of the stay on the ground. It is a simple enough idea, but versatile and effective. It just needs devs who care enough about it to put it into practice.