4-12 wish list (Merged)

[JtD]

Well, ElAurens and fruitbat, I respectfully disagree. Setting up various airfields with lots of AAA to effectively prevent/severely reduce vulching eats resources which can be put to much better use when this necessity is replaced by a simple rule. Just the other day I came across a large enemy fleet and when the AAA started firing, and promptly the chat got flooded with complaints about lag.

[IceFire]

Vulching doesn't work in a-historical circumstances. Many dogfight servers have short flying distances (less than 50km) so one team can effectively camp the other team and all it does is prevent players from having a decent time and ultimately from the server being popular.

Saw it happen all the time in the early days. The servers that are still around don't allow vulching and aggressively kick those who do.

The servers where it makes sense to do so have more realistic flight distances. You have to cover considerable territory to make it to the enemy base and should you get there and decide to attack that seems fair enough but you'll have to brave the AAA and then the prospect of flying 100km on a damaged airframe. With the longer distances it makes it nearly impossible to have full time camping over an enemy airfield.

[nic727]

And do you know if it can be possible to make smoke shadow in directX mode?

[Viking]

I'd like to see longer wakes after the ships. More realistic.

[ECV56_Guevara]

In 4.13 Could be adresssed the Ju52 + glider issue?

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

Originally Posted by Bolelas

i think it definitly could have a thinner frame. A so small map with that amount of frame looks like a painting from the XVIII century! (what i mean is we could have more map in the same occupied space, or less space used).

Thats in 4.12.

[panzer1b]

although this'll be for 4.13, can we model 3 things which if i am correct were present on most or at least many planes in ww2:

separate fuel tanks: (so that if i get hit to a non self sealing tank in a bomber for example i am not basdically as good as dead unless im close to home base)......currently (to my knowledge) once a single leak is made it seems to affect every tank in the plane at once....i mean didnt almost all planes have devices set up to keep something like this from occuring?

engine fuel cutoff switch: (so the engine fire can be put out and not be a ticking time bomb waiting to explode exentually).....i mean no fuel to engine means fire has nothing to burn (well maybee oil or some engine parts could be flamable but thatd eventually run out unlike now with the indefinite unextinguisheable fires)

fuel dump: (so when we take very heavy damage we could dump some fuel).....im pretty sure most bombers had such an option as im sure i read somewhere that if a ju88 (maybee he111 dont remember) lost an engine immediate fuel dumping was necessary to loose enough weight to keep it afloat at least some amount of time.....im pretty sure fighters may have lacked such a feature at least some of them but still would this be hard to accomplish? im not sure how complex this would be but id love to see the option to dump some fuel from a specific or if necessary all tanks.....



a few more unrelated things:


can we add an option (within reason) to have crews shift positions incase one dies? (a good example would be the ju88...if you for example loose the top rear firing gunner why cant another crew member switch to that position?).....ofc it wouldnt be possible with a gunner in a ball turret or tail mount that is inaccessible from inside but is planes with historically switcheable crew positions can this be done?




also not sure if this was ever mentioned but could we get 2 top gunners in the ju88?

i know it was often historically limited to one in order to save weight but with just a single top gunner the ju88 is not exactly very hard to kill.....heck ive gotten killed so many times by having some guy just park himself a bit above and spam all his ammo into me with the gunner doing absolutely nothing to them.....at least 2 would make it a bit harder to attack....

personally id prefer it to be loadout based (such as a light bomb load like 2 or 4 sc250s would get the gunner, while maxed loadouts like sc1000s or 2000s would have him removed to save some weight)......




regardless if any of this gets into the game, i still have to say u guys at DT are doing a great job improving the game immeasureably especially with all the cool stuff in 4.12....

[Artist]

Could you please, please, pleeeeeze make the new mixture axis available through DeviceLink, too? For those of us, who use more than the supported 4 game controllers (and therefore have to use e.g. YaDeLi), this would be just wonderful!

Artist

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by panzer1b

fuel dump: (so when we take very heavy damage we could dump some fuel).....im pretty sure most bombers had such an option

Most planes didn't have the fuel dump option. There were a few like the PZL P.24 (where you could jettison the entire fuel tank), however.

Originally Posted by panzer1b

immediate fuel dumping was necessary to loose enough weight to keep it afloat at least some amount of time.....

Actually, tanks full of Avgas sort of act as flotation devices since oil is less dense than water.

Originally Posted by panzer1b

can we add an option (within reason) to have crews shift positions incase one dies?

This might be an option for some planes. For example, if a left waist gunner gets killed, it should be reasonable for the right waist gunner to take over against attacks against the left side, or vice-versa.

But, against this, there's currently no mechanism for damage to flexible guns or turrets jamming. Assume that the hit that killed the gunner also rendered the gun station inoperable.

If you want more realism, though, you'd need to have some roleplaying aspects, such as keeping track of which crew have which skills. Realistic simulation of multi-crewed aircraft would be a lot of work. But, it would be cool to track things like intercom failure, frostbite, oxygen failure, etc. which plagued bombers crews. It would also be nice if you could command crew to do things like bring ammo to compatible gun stations where's run out (and keep track of ammo for flexible guns), unjam bomb bay doors, release stuck bombs, render first aid, put out fires using hand-held extinguishers, etc.

Originally Posted by panzer1b

also not sure if this was ever mentioned but could we get 2 top gunners in the ju88?

Or, allow a single gunner to switch between the two guns.

Even so, I don't think it would help much. A single rifle caliber MG with a very limited arc of fire isn't that effective a defensive weapon and an extra one won't help. Any fighter pilot worth his wings should be able to make an attack on a Ju-88 which avoids the rear cockpit guns.

Despite that, the Ju-88 was a relatively fast, tough plane. I prefer attacking He-111 to Ju-88.

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by Viking

I'd like to see longer wakes after the ships. More realistic.

+1

But, it depends on how fast the ship was going and how big it is.

Of course, what would be really cool is if ships could try to take evasive action against bombs and torpedoes, making the wake effects look like period pictures.