Patch 4.10 - Development Updates by Daidalos Team

[bf-110]

Originally Posted by ElAurens

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.

[Mysticpuma]

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

[JG53Frankyboy]

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.

[JG53Frankyboy]

Originally Posted by ElAurens

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

[Furio]

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.

[JG53Frankyboy]

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

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

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

[JG53Frankyboy]

true, i forgott the LODs - indeed , THAT most be a annoying work......................

[Furio]

Thank you, Caspar and Frankyboy for your reply. And you’re right: this is now off topic. My mistake. Next post will be in the proper thread (funny: it was started by me six months ago...). Since I have more curiosity on the flyable-AI matter, I’ll go on there.

A p.s. for moderators: perhaps these last posts may be moved in the other thread...

[Ernst]

May 10, will you need more " Olegian two weeks" for release? No problem, our friends here are patient. Are not, folks? Hehehe...