A request for more features to make IL-2 a better game, not just better software.

[furbs]

Yep, and not because most of the mission making community cant read.

[addman]

I can't see why we can't have both, C# coding for people with the skill to use it extensively and drop down menu preset triggers for the rest of us retards, everybody's happy!

[Heliocon]

Originally Posted by EvilJoven

Most of the talk on these forums these days have been for fixes to technical issues and adding more aircraft, ships, drivable tanks etc to the game.

Hardly anyone brings up the serious lack of attention to gameplay elements that will actually make CloD fun for the wider player base. The vocal minority (and the most active posters here are mostly a vocal minority) don't seem to think this is an issue but I've seen in other flight sim communities that this lack of gameplay elements is driving away a lot of players.

I, for instance, hardly have any technical issues with CloD. Despite this, I have 8 hours in this game. Most of that was in free flight configuring my controls and since November, I've only launched CloD twice and only out of curiosity to see how many people are playing online, which isn't a lot.

I play with people who enjoy varying levels of realism on different sims; in IL-2 we use CEM, in DCS A-10/Blackshark we fly full realism. In FSX we're flying procedure approaches on VATSIM in everything from bug smashers to 737NGX's. Some of us have never been in a plane before but there's a good portion who are working on or hold private and commercial pilots licenses.

I say this so you know that we ARE the target audience for IL-2. We are NOT a bunch of 'children who should go back to Ace Combat' like some people suggest we do when these issues are brought up.

So, time to get down to the point. Nobody I play sims with finds IL-2 Cliffs of Dover worth their time. The single player is bland. The multi player is worse. There's no dynamic campaign and the development teams refusal to compensate for the fact that this is a sim played on a computer monitor leads to unrealistic engagements.

So, the game needs to be fixed. So far nobody I've spoken to is impressed with the direction IL-2 is headed and a few have already taken a 'won't get fooled again' stance when it comes to the Moscow expansion coming out. If you want us back, you need to make this a better game.

Here's some examples of what we want.

Better Target Recognition

This is a serious complaint a lot of people have. It's harder in CloD to pick out targets than in any other sim we play or IRL. Take a look at the little black airplane sprites in 777 Studios Rise of Flight game. There's a reason why they put those in. Do something like that.

Easier Mission Editing

Why is this so terribly documented and so difficult. Everyone I know who's tried to make a mission in CloD has thrown their hands up in frustration.

Dynamic single player and co-op campaigns

This was hinted at before release but it never materialised. IL-2 1946 has these and Lowengrin made an even better third party generator. The fact that this isn't in CloD is a major step back.

Multiplayer dogfight mission generators

Making missions is hard and time consuming work. Take a look at what Lowengrin's DCG can do in a few clicks. Somewhat decent dogfight maps in a matter of minutes. Hell, there's even support for AI planes in dogfight. This will take a lot of burden off of hosts who want variety but don't want to spend hours making missions. This is sorely needed in CloD.

Mandatory Tree Collision

We make fun of the trees in IL-2 (the common cry when slamming in to one is OLEG TREES!) but in CloD we only get either fully rendered 3d forests or none at all. Because players get to chose, tree collisions is off. The few times I've bothered with multiplayer it's been common to see people flying under the forest canopy. If the average player can't handle full 3d forests, at least put in some Oleg Trees and turn collisions on. This way people flying with trees off can't fly UNDER the forest canopy. Add 2 sprites to the trees though so they aren't almost invisible from the side.

These are the sort of things that CloD needs if your development team is going to survive after releasing the Moscow expansion. Adding more plane variants, more tank variants, making vehicles drivable etc IS NOT going to win us over.

The people here counting the rivets on panels and comparing the paint colors to 75 year old photographs are your vocal minority. If you keep listening to them alone, you won't make enough money off of future releases to keep food on your plates.

Give us a good game if you want us to keep giving you our money.

Been said before but still a strong +1!

Originally Posted by ACE-OF-ACES

That is one way to look at it but there is a flip side to that coin..

As in it speaks volumes of the users willingness to go to the FMB, Mission & Campaign builder Discussions section and 'read' the step by step examples provided by community members.

This is the best way to make sure nobody new ever plays this game! Exposing casual players to the 1C forums is pretty much guaranteed to drive anyone away from the series. The devs are just hoping that the community will do all the work they should have had done over a year ago.

[Insuber]

Originally Posted by speculum jockey

This is the best way to make sure nobody new ever plays this game! Exposing casual players to the 1C forums is pretty much guaranteed to drive anyone away from the series. The devs are just hoping that the community will do all the work they should have had done over a year ago.

I agree, the poor interface has kept 99% of the mission builders away from mission building.

[KG26_Alpha]

One problem is CoD has no live online community except in game and ts, Hyperlobby still supports all those that make it to IL2 1946 and get online via HL.

HL supports CoD but there's no huge attraction until the squads become more active.

In fact I have helped CoD pilots in HL's IL2 lobby before and plenty of casual pilots gather there.

Its usually in these help session the discussion as to why IL2 1946 pilots are not migrating to CoD comes up.
One of the main reasons is no CooP mode, the other is the limited theatre compared to IL2 1946.

================================================== ============================================

The FMB interface is almost identical to the old one, the problem is understanding the C# features and why they went that way.

99% mission builders can handle the CoD FMB
Only
1% can handle the scripts.





.

[slm]

> One problem is CoD has no live online community, Hyperlobby still supports all those that make it to IL2 1946 and get online via HL.

IMO a big reason is the number of planes. Compared to IL2 there are so few flyable plane types that it gets boring quickly. With Battle of Moscow things should improve. And getting the patch with doubled FPS won't hurt either.

[ATAG_Bliss]

Originally Posted by KG26_Alpha

One problem is CoD has no live online community, Hyperlobby still supports all those that make it to IL2 1946 and get online via HL.

HL supports CoD but there's no huge attraction until the squads become more active.

In fact I have helped CoD pilots in HL's IL2 lobby before and plenty of casual pilots gather there.


The FMB interface is almost identical to the old one, the problem is understanding the C# features and why they went that way.

99% mission builders can handle the CoD FMB
1% can handle the scripts.





.

Well, HL will come when the game is fixed. Servers like ours have soo many variables to look for to keep automatically running 24/7 that to add another program into the loop atm would be a royal PITA atm.

If we can make it stable, we'd be using HL too. But there's no point until the game gets there in the 1st place.

As far as the FMB, it's very similar. And there isn't a single thing you can't do in the FMB (besides the broken stuff) compared to the old game that would require any scripting/coding. The main difference is not having a set mode distinguishing online types.

So the 1% about people not coders is probably true, but it only adds to what you can do between both games. You can still spawn planes, ships, trucks, or any other object without a single line of code.

All the other stuff you did to setup missions in the old game were all created by 3rd party - Dgen, FBDj, etc., etc.,

I understand the need for COOP integration and eventually somebody will probably make a program that does all the work for you, just like the old game. But you're making it sound as if what you did FMB-wise / comparing the old and new IL2, one requires code - which is false. But with the new one it allows you to expand missions with programming if you want to / know how.

[KG26_Alpha]

Originally Posted by ATAG_Bliss

Well, HL will come when the game is fixed. Servers like ours have soo many variables to look for to keep automatically running 24/7 that to add another program into the loop atm would be a royal PITA atm.

If we can make it stable, we'd be using HL too. But there's no point until the game gets there in the 1st place.

As far as the FMB, it's very similar. And there isn't a single thing you can't do in the FMB (besides the broken stuff) compared to the old game that would require any scripting/coding. The main difference is not having a set mode distinguishing online types.

So the 1% about people not coders is probably true, but it only adds to what you can do between both games. You can still spawn planes, ships, trucks, or any other object without a single line of code.

All the other stuff you did to setup missions in the old game were all created by 3rd party - Dgen, FBDj, etc., etc.,

I understand the need for COOP integration and eventually somebody will probably make a program that does all the work for you, just like the old game. But you're making it sound as if what you did FMB-wise / comparing the old and new IL2, one requires code - which is false. But with the new one it allows you to expand missions with programming if you want to / know how.

Im not comparing the new/old.

The difference is the new is sometimes it's unnecessarily difficult, look at the old ac delay spawn, then the new for example ??

If you took 100 that can use the FMB in IL2 then gave them the CoD one 99% wouldn't know how to use the scripting only 1% would is what I meant.

I have made around 2-3 thousand missions in IL2 series and used sometimes the Lowngrin DCG and Starshoys in game DCG in the past to host squad campaigns under CooP conditions, we have tried DF & MDS it don't really work.

Yup its a bad sales point leaving out the CooP interface, but there's more pressing things to sort first for 1C Team and hopefully we will all get what we want from the thing at some point.






.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by furbs

ACE why are you starting another fight in this thread? Stop trolling or you will end up with another holiday.

Please..

My initial reply was to spec.. To point out the fact that it did not take 'everyone' a year to realize C# was NOT needed to make missions

Seeing that was not the case, but still wanting to condemn 1C in some way you chimed in and tried to spin it the topic into another direction. At which point I pointed out to you I already addressed it

As for my answers.. it is pretty simple.. If you don't like my answers, don't ask me questions. Problem solved.

As for trying to start fights.. I have another suggestion for you.. Instead of you trying to play 1C MOD by chiming in with your assessment of posts and punishments.. How about you keep it to yourself and simply report the post? Because if you truly believed what you said, than you know your reply would only escalate the situation.

Agreed?

Now with that said, in light of your other posts in this thread I think you need to read or re-read my post again.

Why?

Because I never said the problem stemmed from people not being able to read (your words not mine)

What I said was their willingness to read!

As in they did not care enough about making missions to read all the info provided here in this and other forums.

Which imho means the only reason they are chiming in on it now is they see it as just another opportunity (more ammo) to talk ill of CoD.