Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik

IL-2 Sturmovik The famous combat flight simulator.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 05-09-2010, 05:54 PM
robtek's Avatar
robtek robtek is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,819
Default

@bf-110

Nobody has to feel harassed, but any new member should be so polite and read the thread before asking questions already answered or self-explanatory.
__________________
Win 7/64 Ult.; Phenom II X6 1100T; ASUS Crosshair IV; 16 GB DDR3/1600 Corsair; ASUS EAH6950/2GB; Logitech G940 & the usual suspects
  #2  
Old 05-09-2010, 06:56 PM
ElAurens's Avatar
ElAurens ElAurens is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: The Great Black Swamp of Ohio
Posts: 2,185
Default

Thank you Caspar for mentioning the Pacific.

There is a wealth of things that could be done in this theater that won't touch the Grumman problem.

Mostly maps. I know the wonderful Slot map is coming. A good start as it is a beautiful map. I'm sure you are aware of the NGNB map that is in process. Another beautiful piece of work. Hopefully it too will make some future official release.

Another suggestion is a map of operations in China. An almost totally forgotten battle. It would fill a huge gap in combat simulation.

I will only suggest two aircraft for the Allies and the Imperial Japanese. All of which present no corporate issues.

Curtiss P40 N Warhawk. The highest performing, most produced version of the Hawk 87 series. It was widely used throughout the Pacific/CBI areas of operation.

Curtiss Helldiver. Though much maligned early on, it became a workhorse of the USN.

Nakajima Ki44 Shoki. Seen thoughout the Western areas and in China. A bit of variety for the middle war period.

Mitsubishi Ki51 "Sonia". A very widely used single engne, fixed gear, Army two seat attack aircraft. Seen anywhere the Imperial Army operated. Would give the IJA a much needed attack type.

Just some thoughts.

Thanks for all your hard work.
__________________


Personally speaking, the P-40 could contend on an equal footing with all the types of Messerschmitts, almost to the end of 1943.
~Nikolay Gerasimovitch Golodnikov
  #3  
Old 05-09-2010, 08:12 PM
IceFire IceFire is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,879
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElAurens View Post
Thank you Caspar for mentioning the Pacific.

There is a wealth of things that could be done in this theater that won't touch the Grumman problem.

Mostly maps. I know the wonderful Slot map is coming. A good start as it is a beautiful map. I'm sure you are aware of the NGNB map that is in process. Another beautiful piece of work. Hopefully it too will make some future official release.

Another suggestion is a map of operations in China. An almost totally forgotten battle. It would fill a huge gap in combat simulation.

I will only suggest two aircraft for the Allies and the Imperial Japanese. All of which present no corporate issues.

Curtiss P40 N Warhawk. The highest performing, most produced version of the Hawk 87 series. It was widely used throughout the Pacific/CBI areas of operation.

Curtiss Helldiver. Though much maligned early on, it became a workhorse of the USN.

Nakajima Ki44 Shoki. Seen thoughout the Western areas and in China. A bit of variety for the middle war period.

Mitsubishi Ki51 "Sonia". A very widely used single engne, fixed gear, Army two seat attack aircraft. Seen anywhere the Imperial Army operated. Would give the IJA a much needed attack type.

Just some thoughts.

Thanks for all your hard work.
I'd love to see that happen. CBI theater has so little representation anywhere and it would be fairly "easy" to set something up there and expand the gameplay area significantly.
__________________
Find my missions and much more at Mission4Today.com
  #4  
Old 05-10-2010, 04:04 AM
bf-110's Avatar
bf-110 bf-110 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: SP,Brasil
Posts: 465
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElAurens View Post
Thank you Caspar for mentioning the Pacific.

There is a wealth of things that could be done in this theater that won't touch the Grumman problem.

Mostly maps. I know the wonderful Slot map is coming. A good start as it is a beautiful map. I'm sure you are aware of the NGNB map that is in process. Another beautiful piece of work. Hopefully it too will make some future official release.

Another suggestion is a map of operations in China. An almost totally forgotten battle. It would fill a huge gap in combat simulation.

I will only suggest two aircraft for the Allies and the Imperial Japanese. All of which present no corporate issues.

Curtiss P40 N Warhawk. The highest performing, most produced version of the Hawk 87 series. It was widely used throughout the Pacific/CBI areas of operation.

Curtiss Helldiver. Though much maligned early on, it became a workhorse of the USN.

Nakajima Ki44 Shoki. Seen thoughout the Western areas and in China. A bit of variety for the middle war period.

Mitsubishi Ki51 "Sonia". A very widely used single engne, fixed gear, Army two seat attack aircraft. Seen anywhere the Imperial Army operated. Would give the IJA a much needed attack type.

Just some thoughts.

Thanks for all your hard work.
Agree,along Ki-67,D4Y,G3M and Ki-45.For China,P-43 would come in handy.
  #5  
Old 05-10-2010, 10:29 AM
Mysticpuma's Avatar
Mysticpuma Mysticpuma is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Bromsgrove, UK
Posts: 1,059
Default

Hello TD. I have eagerly watched the news re. patch 4.10. I saw that there was to be an update to QMB which is great news.

Can I ask, will it be possible to choose any map that is available in FMB, as a map to use in QMB?

So, in the drop-down which currently has about 5 maps (ish) Crimea, Moscow, Okinawa, etc,etc, will it be possible to choose any map?

Secondly, are there any new maps being added in patch 4.10 that are currently not available in 4.09m (official).

Cheers, MP
__________________
http://i41.tinypic.com/2yjr679.png
  #6  
Old 05-10-2010, 10:53 AM
JG53Frankyboy JG53Frankyboy is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,162
Default

to add a map available in the FMB to the QMB templates for the quickmissions have to be made...........................................its not only copy and paste.

as already mentioned in the updates, in 4.10 a "Slot" map(from Guadalcanal up to Bougainville)will be included.
  #7  
Old 05-10-2010, 11:00 AM
JG53Frankyboy JG53Frankyboy is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,162
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by ElAurens View Post
Thank you Caspar for mentioning the Pacific.

There is a wealth of things that could be done in this theater that won't touch the Grumman problem.

Mostly maps. I know the wonderful Slot map is coming. A good start as it is a beautiful map. I'm sure you are aware of the NGNB map that is in process. Another beautiful piece of work. Hopefully it too will make some future official release.

Another suggestion is a map of operations in China. An almost totally forgotten battle. It would fill a huge gap in combat simulation.

I will only suggest two aircraft for the Allies and the Imperial Japanese. All of which present no corporate issues.

Curtiss P40 N Warhawk. The highest performing, most produced version of the Hawk 87 series. It was widely used throughout the Pacific/CBI areas of operation.

Curtiss Helldiver. Though much maligned early on, it became a workhorse of the USN.

Nakajima Ki44 Shoki. Seen thoughout the Western areas and in China. A bit of variety for the middle war period.

Mitsubishi Ki51 "Sonia". A very widely used single engne, fixed gear, Army two seat attack aircraft. Seen anywhere the Imperial Army operated. Would give the IJA a much needed attack type.

Just some thoughts.

Thanks for all your hard work.
a flyable D4Y2 would be my favorite , that the japanese Navy would get a little bit more punch (AFAIK able to carry a 500kg bomb....) in the 1944 marianes campaign launched from carriers

the Heldiver would be a locigal AdOn, so both Navies would have the early war Divebomber and the late war divebomber as flyable - but actually not soo much needed as the USN has their heavy loaded fighterbombers available

as the Avenger will never be flyable , the japanese B5N&B6N also should stay AI - unfortunatly

my late war favorite would be a flyable Ki-67 bomber, usefull for Okinawa, Kyushu and Manchirua maps

Last edited by JG53Frankyboy; 05-10-2010 at 11:43 AM.
  #8  
Old 05-10-2010, 01:37 PM
Furio's Avatar
Furio Furio is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 299
Default

Looks like we can sum up all request easily to DT: would you please add all aircraft flown operationally in WWII? All flyable, of course...

In my opinion, the problem is on carrier deck. As you fly missions from any land base, it’s not an historical issue if some type is missing. I like the B26, but if I’m operating from an MTO airfield and I’m escorting (or attacking) B25 only, well, it can be. But on the confined space of any US carrier the situation is different. In the early war years, you should always see Devastators, and Vindicators in many cases. In late war years you’ll always see Helldivers. Of course, the same can be said for IJN carriers. Here you should see B6N, D4Y and late type Vals.

Daidalus Team is doing a tremendous amount of work, but we should be realistic in our requests. In my opinion, an effort in updating Pacific Theatre should concentrate on carriers. Six new aircraft types are a lot of work, and I believe that accepting these as AI only could reduce the workload to a manageable level and deliver a complete package for very interesting mission building based on historical battles.

So, this is my question for DT: generally speaking, how an AI aircraft compares to a flyable one in time to completion? I understand that there are many variables, but a good cockpit is a complex thing, perhaps more than a whole new aircraft, to say nothing of the necessary research in performances and handling.
  #9  
Old 05-10-2010, 03:33 PM
JG53Frankyboy JG53Frankyboy is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,162
Default

you need for a cockpit 2-3 times the time as for the external 3D/texture modell.....in general.

and making the external is much more fun i guess


any wish for a flyable multicrew bomber, like my dream of a Ki-67 , is a pure dream and will most propably stay one - i know that.


a "carrier concentrated" update in 4.11 or even 4.12 ( ) would be realy nice , not only for the USN and IJN, also for the RN - having the AIs Swordfish and Fulamr of 4.10 in my mind.


and not to forgett , TD is thinking about to overwork the midwar channel fighters series - the Spit V, IX, 109 and 190.
IF they dont stop the work for IL2 and wont change to SoW too fast they are SURE not out of ideas for the il2 future.
anyway, its true, this topic is about 4.10 - so any further speculation should stop. they already claimed a lot of changes comming in 4.10
  #10  
Old 05-10-2010, 04:11 PM
EJGr.Ost_Caspar EJGr.Ost_Caspar is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 939
Default

Quote:
So, this is my question for DT: generally speaking, how an AI aircraft compares to a flyable one in time to completion? I understand that there are many variables, but a good cockpit is a complex thing, perhaps more than a whole new aircraft, to say nothing of the necessary research in performances and handling.
I never made an complete external model yet, I just made cockpits. I could easily do a cockpit in 4 weeks. But in the current status of my life I need ~3 months for one for DT.

From what I saw about externals I indeed think, that both is quite equal in work ammount, but different in kind of work. And I also think, that most of the external work (namely everything else than LoD00) is quite boring and sometimes annoying to do, while a cockpit stays intersting as you get it to know with each part you add.

Of course I would be interested in doing an external too, but for now I started with a ship external. ;D
__________________

----------------------------------------------
For bugreports, help and support contact:
daidalos.team@googlemail.com

For modelers - The IL-2 standard modeling specifications:
IL-Modeling Bible
Closed Thread


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 04:54 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.