Daidalos Team's Room -QUESTIONS AND REQUESTS ONLY on IL2 Authorized Addons

[Burdokva]

Dear Team Daidalos,

I've been following the progress of your work ever since patch 4.09 was announced - in fact, I had send some requests via email quite a while back. In any case, I say this just to let you know I appreciate all the work that's being done and I've checked what you've said on the issue I'm about to point out -

AI (nearly) unlimited ammo, no overheat, no blackouts is the single greatest issue of Il-2. I've been flying since the days of Forgotten Battles and more actively since 1946 was released, almost exclusively offline and I can honestly tell you that the quirks in the AI that allow it to "cheat" greatly reduce the immersion and overall enjoyment. I would dare to say that there wouldn't be a single complain from the Il-2 community if the AI was given an overhaul that allow for engine overheat, limited ammo and blackouts. As an option setting, at least.

I can't count how many times I've attacked an AI plane only to have it pull an incredible manuevre that I can't follow due to G-force blackouts, or have had to evade the constant stream of bullets the enemy fighters carry (the last is especially unnerving on planes that historically had low ammo loads, such as the Yaks).

So far, the G-force effects you plan to implement sound more scary and potentially irritating than useful, if they don't affect the AI planes. It's already way more capable than a human player with its lighting time reactions. Having it "cheat" to compensate for less intelligence than a human (that is a general problem of AI, not just Il-2, of course) doesn't help though.

I don't know, the improvements such as radio navigation, AI visibility etc. sound great, but with the AI in its current state it feels like Il-2 is incresingly geared for online play where everyone's on an equal footing regarding flight mechanics.

Please, consider revising some of the AI plane quirks such as non-overheating engine, no-blackouts and huge ammo supply.

[nearmiss]

Originally Posted by MBot

What a great idea, the Catalina would be perfect to go along the new SAR mechanics that have been shown.

After 10 years of IL2, regardless of how many aircraft we have someone always wants more aircraft.

I realize converting a non-flyable isn't as big a job to build as a plane from scratch. It is just that for all the requesting I've often wondered just how interested those users are and remain interested if they do get what they request.

Was it really worth it for some developer to spend a huge amount of time trying to supply those requests? Seriously, I've often wondered why don't developers make a response to those requesting such things and spell it out.

By that I mean... Making the PBY flyable, at least the one in IL2 will take approximately 190 hours of work, and I'll have to acquire 4 java addons to make it happen. Then I'll have appx. 200 hours in beta testing.
So... if you really want this aircraft will you please send a donation to my website at --- allreadyoverworked.com for at least $10 USD. At least, I'll believe my work is worth at least what is donated.

I't really like to do this for you... so please send your donations ASAP, and I will ASAP your flyable PBY.

The Il2 is certainly no exception of course. Every air combat and flight sim is plagued with requests for new and flyable aircraft, EAW, BOBII WOV, WW2 Fighters, FA-18, FS2004, CFS2,CFS3,FSX and on and on.

There are so many additional very valuable things that could be added to a sim like IL2, i.e, AI performance, additional programming in FMB, etc. All things that make the game/sim more exciting and interesting.

TD is pumping out so much stuff, this posting probably won't change anything. I'm basically trying to say, that it takes alot of time to address many requests, and users should reluctantly make requests.... unless they are very determined to use what they request more than a couple time.

I am not speaking for TD. I am speaking for myself in this thread.

[MBot]

Originally Posted by nearmiss

After 10 years of IL2, regardless of how many aircraft we have someone always wants more aircraft.

I realize converting a non-flyable isn't as big a job to build as a plane from scratch. It is just that for all the requesting I've often wondered just how interested those users are and remain interested if they do get what they request.

Was it really worth it for some developer to spend a huge amount of time trying to supply those requests? Seriously, I've often wondered why don't developers make a response to those requesting such things and spell it out.
The Il2 is certainly no exception of course. Every air combat and flight sim is plagued with requests for new and flyable aircraft, EAW, BOBII WOV, WW2 Fighters, FA-18, FS2004, CFS2,CFS3,FSX and on and on.

There are so many additional very valuable things that could be added to a sim like IL2, i.e, AI performance, additional programming in FMB, etc. All things that make the game/sim more exciting and interesting.

TD is pumping out so much stuff, this posting probably won't change anything. I'm basically trying to say, that it takes alot of time to address many requests, and users should reluctantly make requests.... unless they are very determined to use what they request more than a couple time.

I am not speaking for TD. I am speaking for myself in this thread.

Don't worry, I am perfectly aware how much time new flyable require to create, especially multicrew aircraft. I have not demanded that a Catalina is supplied, but merely commented that I think this would be a fine choice. Especially considering this it would be a fairly unique, yet quite significant, aircraft. As I understand it, DT is going to add some more aircraft. As resources are limited, so is the number of potential new aircraft. With my comment I wanted to express that I prefer those last few aircraft be somehow unique, yet significant WWII aircraft, rather than more of the already very numerous fighters.

I do not seriously expect to ever see a PBY in Il-2 and I will not lose sleep over it.

[BM-03]

Question about multi-crew.
Will be accessible bombardir(navigator) sight for player-gunner? Or it is planned?
Thanks.

[nearmiss]

Originally Posted by MBot

Don't worry, I am perfectly aware how much time new flyable require to create, especially multicrew aircraft. I have not demanded that a Catalina is supplied, but merely commented that I think this would be a fine choice. Especially considering this it would be a fairly unique, yet quite significant, aircraft. As I understand it, DT is going to add some more aircraft. As resources are limited, so is the number of potential new aircraft. With my comment I wanted to express that I prefer those last few aircraft be somehow unique, yet significant WWII aircraft, rather than more of the already very numerous fighters.

I do not seriously expect to ever see a PBY in Il-2 and I will not lose sleep over it.

I used your posting to focus on an ongoing discussion topic we have all read thousands of times before.

Posters are just expressing themselves.

No harm done, no dev takes on a project he/she doesn't want to do anyway.

The purpose of my posting was just to infer there are many more substantial things that could be done with IL2. Things that would make the IL2 dramatically more exciting and interesting than new aircraft or objects.

[ElAurens]

Originally Posted by MBot

What a great idea, the Catalina would be perfect to go along the new SAR mechanics that have been shown.

Amphibious aircraft cannot be accomodated by the game engine. An aircraft must be either a land plane, or a seaplane, it cannot be both. Hence if you took a PBY and made it a seaplane in the game engine and lowered the gear and tried to land at an airfield the engine would register it as a crash and you would in all likelyhood explode. The reverse is true if you made the PBY appear as a land plane to the game engine and had the gear up and landed on water the game would see it as ditching and the plane would sink.