Let's help the Developer's of BoM. What would you like to see in the new sim

[Lurker_71]

Gameplay would be a nice change.

[Chivas]

Our input has some effect, as they did include more engine management and start procedures in COD, that they showed no interest in doing initially. That said the development will have set priorities, but even they won't know what will make the final cut in the Sequels release.

The only way the Sequel will be a success is thru smooth gameplay and improved AI, AI commands, and smooth net code.

They've rebuilt the sound engine.
They've rebuilt the graphic engine.
Hopefully the graphic/performance patch has made the sim playable for the majority of users. At first blush it appears the performance patch is working.
They're rebuilding the GUI and working on the AI.

The second priority are the clouds and weather with a lesser priority.
The AI not seeing thru clouds would be huge, but I'm not holding my breath on that one for awhile..
SpeedTree has made the sim playable, but I hate the fact their is no collision model. Hopefully they will be able rewrite SpeedTree or change software at some point without killing the frame rates.

Refuel, Rearm, and Reload is a huge immersion factor that the devs don't appear to be too interested in, but there is still hope as they showed no interest in engine management procedures at one time.

It will be interesting to see if the surprise feature ever sees the light of day.

[Chivas]

Originally Posted by SlipBall

What do you guys think luthier was referring to here, the part in bold. I hope it not something I'm using.

Quote:
Can we increase even more the degree of realism e.g. available & working aircraft systems?
Just a side note, please remove the ever icing clouds, most of them are not, especially flying low, it's not that often sub zero.
We are seriously addressing our approach to modeling various systems. A lot of the stuff that we spent so much effort on with Cliffs of Dover ended up being a dud, no one wants it, no one uses it. At the same time a lot of systems people clearly want and need are not modeled with enough details.
So do expect a more sane approach in the sequels.

It may be engine management and start procedures. That would take alot of work thats still causing the development alot of headaches. Personally the engine start procedures are especially immersive for me, while I haven't flown enough to get a handle of the engine management procedures. It will be interesting to see what the usage figures are, as I think it would be a huge loss if they dumbed down the procedures in the Sequel.

[MadBlaster]

Originally Posted by SlipBall

What do you guys think luthier was referring to here, the part in bold. I hope it not something I'm using.

Quote:
Can we increase even more the degree of realism e.g. available & working aircraft systems?
Just a side note, please remove the ever icing clouds, most of them are not, especially flying low, it's not that often sub zero.
We are seriously addressing our approach to modeling various systems. A lot of the stuff that we spent so much effort on with Cliffs of Dover ended up being a dud, no one wants it, no one uses it. At the same time a lot of systems people clearly want and need are not modeled with enough details.
So do expect a more sane approach in the sequels.

anthropromorphic control would be my guess.

[SlipBall]

Originally Posted by Chivas

It may be engine management and start procedures. That would take alot of work thats still causing the development alot of headaches. Personally the engine start procedures are especially immersive for me, while I haven't flown enough to get a handle of the engine management procedures. It will be interesting to see what the usage figures are, as I think it would be a huge loss if they dumbed down the procedures in the Sequel.

Boy I sure hope not

Originally Posted by MadBlaster

anthropromorphic control would be my guess.

That would not bother me then

[holdenbj]

Navigation and landing lights, where they go? They were great in Il2, especially for on-line multiplayer landings and take offs.

Searchlights that work with the intensity they should rather than a little torch down to its last battery.

Anti-Aircraft that does the appropriate damage.

Working weather and windsocks
Rearm and refuel.

Dynamic off line campaign.Having your "own plane" with kill markings, progressive aging, weathering, repair patches etc.

Working Control tower and communications.

Coop online with Blackjack and Hookers.

[Anders_And]

Engines with some fault variations...

Like a 5% risk that the engine will have for example a overheating water temp no matter what you do, indicating maybe a something wrong with the coolant system or maybe a blockage in the lines...

Same for oilsystem...

This way, one is obliged to keep a look at the systems once in a while...

[kestrel79]

I'd like to see some gameplay innovations, not just IL2 rehashed with prettier graphics.

There was more to the air war in WW2 than being a bomber of fighter. I want to be able to help my team out without firing a single round. Recon planes scouting ahead, giving photographs. I want to fly a resupply plane to a base to allow the fighters and bombers to keep coming back to get rearmed.

Some would say these would be "boring" and the average user wouldn't find them interesting...well MAKE them exciting! Innovate, create. Weave them into the gameplay so they are....FUN.

I'd also like to see a GUI that is more interactive, less boring menus and is easier to navigate. CoD has probably the worst menu system of any flight sim I have played.

[kendo65]

I think you may get your wish in the sequel. It seems there will be a dynamic campaign (possibly online) judging from Luthier's "wink" comments - which I interpret as "Can't say anything officially to confirm this until the official sequel announcement but unofficially YES" !!

Incidently that was the most intriguing part of the whole Q/A for me. Seems to have slipped under the radar though.


Quote:
2. Will a sequel contain the ability or content for a dynamic campaign? or even better, a rolling dynamic online war, where choices your team makes determine the outcome of a battle over a number of days or weeks?
(wink)

Quote:
Agree and support and would like to add to this question...will the sequel include a dynamic campaign?
The community can build missions and static campaigns and for 1946 the best campaigns were comunity made. Desastersoft does great static campaigns. Heinkill does fantastic historic and alt history missions.
(hurts his eye winking, ow)

And the GUI will be redone - confirmed. Would be nice just to have the old-style il-2 QMB even.

[MadBlaster]

I think threads like these have the potential danger to repeat past community mistake. "I hope they do this, I hope they do that"...turns into "I expected this, I expected that" when the sequel comes out. Then when it doesn't materialize...which it won't, then there is disappointment. Fact is, this team still needs to prove to me they can do the job. The bar for me is very low (actually, that's a very bad choice of words, the bar is very high. But I think you understand my point!). Start with simply doing everything the mod 1946 game does with better graphics and excellent performance as the current goal. Why that game instead of warthunder or whatever? Because that is your main competitor 1C! That's it. Very realistic. Very obtainable, I think? Then add in the complexities, one step at a time. The improved damage model, engine managements...etc. Step by step. Each step tested and made bullet proof and released for consumer use before taking another step. This is the path to success I think. Why? Because this is how the modded 1946 game evolved successfully. It's just a matter of turning that evolution into a commercial enterprise. Partner with the modders with the SDK for some things. Use the community to get new gameplay ideas...but do this methodically. Know your limits and capabilities and communicate those to the community for feedback. Maybe they have another way to get the same or similar result?

I guess I'm really talking to Luthier here.

edit:
actually the bar is very high!