I only fly 1940-1945 ETO aircraft yes.

Adding indiscriminatly new aircaft and content only makes it difficult to understand wich part of iL2 is going to be improved.
I think that it would make more sence if we get udates (new aircraft, maps etc.) for all 3 theaters of operation. This will satisfy more people and will improve iL2 as a whole.

for example patch 4.11 could contain the following:

new ETO map
new PTO map
new Eastfront map

one new flyable ETO aircraft
one new flyable PTO aircraft
one new flyable Eastfront aircraft

improved ETO aircraft cockpit
improved PTO aircraft cockpit
improved Eastfront aircraft cockpit

4.11 Requests - Redwulf_42
 

Some suggestions for your consideration:

1. Differential Braking for both Rudder Pedals - I use pedals in game and fly Cessna 172P a bit in real world. Currently (to my knowledge) you can only assign one pedal brake and it only becomes differential (side to side) at full rudder extension.

2. Toggle button for Combat Flaps Only - I occassionally jam my flaps in combat by inadvertently double clicking the flap down button. I often hear others complaining that they've done the same as well.

3. Assignable fuel loadouts for planes in dogfight servers - As is done in the coop servers. In Redwulf we strive to keep things historic by flying full switch (or nearly full switch) and by using historic plane sets. We also horse around alot. In my opinion, fighters with a 25% full load would have historically been on a return leg to base or hanging near a friendly base over friendly territory. If folks want to fly that way for improved turning capability fine, but I'd like the option, to set full fuel loadouts for our missions.

4. Hi-res National Markings - The plane skins and cockpits have improved dramatically since the game was released in 2001. But the national emblems (crosses, roundels, red stars) seem jagged and un-weathered when you zoom in on the planes in F2 mode.

Thanks very much for your hard work on the sim!

S!

Redwulf__42

On some planes, apparently differential braking was achieved with a single handbrake (sometimes mounted on the control column), and by deflecting the rudder one way or another. Not many planes used toe brakes at the time, as far as I know.

You forget that DT has limited resources. In addition, they are working for free and only do stuff they wish to do (in their free time). They are sometimes able to add mods from third parties (such as the Pe-8 ) but the sheer amount of stuff not in IL-2 already means that many potential additions will not be added in a DT patch. Besides, mandating a rigid mix of potential additions for all future patches will restrict the work allowed and likely drive some of the talented DT team members away (something none of us wants). If you have something (map, aircraft, cockpit, game function, etc) you want in a future DT patch, you can do the following: 1) Request the desired feature here 2) If DT doesn't have the time or interest to do this themselves, see if someone in the greater IL-2 modding community is willing to work on it, co-ordinating with DT to comply with DT's legal, contractual, specification and accuracy standards. If you do this, I think you will find success. I haven't heard of any DT compliant, third party mods that have been turned down by DT. Be prepared for a bit of a wait, though...:)

Cheers,

Fafnir_6

Hi Team Daidalos, was wondering if any of you had a view on the above ideas/requests. fully appreciate if not possible to do or if there is a good argument not to (bandwidth/server load was mentioned as this was apparently a feature that was disabled in one of the first few IL2 patches (anyone any idea which one?) - surely though 10 years later this would not be a problem?)

Many thanks for all your hard work, fantastic results!

if you look at the latest dev update you will see that point one has been confirmed as being part of 4.11 with added confirmation that head movement will be also included

? sounds great - but can't find the update you are referring to - any chance for a linky? can only see this: http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=20318 but no reference in it?

edit: OK, after some digging think you were referring to this, at 5:10:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CNjbe...mbedded#at=309
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpos...&postcount=182

one word: FANTASTIC. Thank you TD. One last Q - what about rudder?

I think realistically as part of a true development group that was salaried and on a project timeline this would make a lot of sense. Very logical. I even thought about things that way myself.

From what I can see, within the TD group they do focus some efforts on specific areas, however, some of the content that we see is from external contributors with TD support. They work on whatever they want to work on... largely because it's hours and hours of their own time and effort spent researching, modeling, coding, etc.

The interest would lessen (IMHO) if a more rigid structure was imposed.

We seem to agree :).

Fafnir_6

I'd just like to see the P-38 Mesh remodelled so that the skin isn't reversed on the opposite side, this way Historically accurate markings can at-last be added to the P-38.

This has been one of the reasons I don't use the P-38 very-much as I hate to see numbers reversed on the opposite side of the aircraft due to the 'Mirror' Mesh.

Rather than asking for a new MTO Aircraft, this would be a great addition and allow some great skinning opportunities?

I'm just asking ;)

Cheers, MP