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

[The_Stealth_Owl]

I would really like it if you guys updated the F-8 view, so it stays level with you when diving and climbing with a plane.

This would be wonderful if we could have it in 4.10.

I currently have it mapped to my second trigger button, because I like to fly outside the cockpit.

S!


Owl

[Mustang]

I wish ..

If you could..

Fix the FW 190´s taxing power.

Check P/W ratio vs other planes. ... Many planes P/W

I like ...

mathematics/physics.

[Insuber]

It's the well known and longly debated acceleration issue of the FW190, Jumoschwanz did extensive tests (check the Ubi US forum), and the Würger is the worst one by far. The common objection against the correction of that regard the overall balancing of strengts and weaknesses to keep a more or less balanced game.

Regards,
insuber

Originally Posted by Mustang

I wish ..

If you could..

Fix the FW 190´s taxing power.

Check P/W ratio vs other planes. ... Many planes P/W

I like ...

mathematics/physics.

[Azimech]

You mean that all these years the FW190 has been underperforming?

[ElAurens]

You can find "underperforming" or "wrongly modeled", or "porked" aircraft everywhere in the sim. Especially if you look at them out of the context of the overall plane set. Every aircraft's fan boy base has their favorite complaint. I know, because I champion my favorites as much as anyone does. However, and this is the important bit, taken as a whole the sim does a very good job of putting the aircraft in their proper place vis-avis their adversaries.

Just my thoughts after 8+ years of playing.

And really the FW 190A series are far from being the most problematic.

The worst IMHO, in no particular order:

P38 rate of climb. (underperforming)

P38 compressability (too pronounced at low altitude)

A6M series speeds. (too slow)

A6M roll stiffness at speeds. (too early an onset)

Wildcat top speed. (too high)

Hellcat top speed of late version. (too low)

Ki 61 turn/maneuverability. (underperforming)

P40 series turn/maneuverability (underperforming, P40 should out turn Spitfire I and II below 15,000 ft. Hawk 75 was even better.)

Ki-100. Underperforming in general, especially maneuverability.

All bombers. Too robust. (The in game version of the death star)

[P-38L]

Hello

When you are playing on a LAN configuration, your companion doesn't see the surface movement of your plane. Example: If you move your ailerons the other person doesn't see the movement.

It is possible to fix this?

I will list what the other person can see on a LAN game.

Ailerons NO
Rudder NO
Elevator NO
Folding Wing YES
Open canopy YES
Tail hook YES
Flaps YES
Lights YES
Radiator NO
Landing gear YES
Spinning wheels YES
Spinning propeller YES
Guns (all) YES
Bomb bay door YES

Thank you

[JG53Frankyboy]

Originally Posted by P-38L

Hello

When you are playing on a LAN configuration, your companion doesn't see the surface movement of your plane. Example: If you move your ailerons the other person doesn't see the movement.

It is possible to fix this?

I will list what the other person can see on a LAN game.

Ailerons NO
Rudder NO
Elevator NO
Folding Wing YES
Open canopy YES
Tail hook YES
Flaps YES
Lights YES
Radiator NO
Landing gear YES
Spinning wheels YES
Spinning propeller YES
Guns (all) YES
Bomb bay door YES

Thank you

there was a time when
Ailerons
Rudder
Elevator
were visible in multiplayer - it was deleted to save traffic.

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by ElAurens

All bombers. Too robust. (The in game version of the death star)

I agree with all your points except this one. A big plane can take a lot of damage, especially from small caliber bullets, unless some of that damage hits a vital point. I don't find the bombers themselves to be difficult to shoot down - as long as I use historical tactics and aim for the cockpit, fuel tanks or engines.

If I'm going against a big (or tough) bomber using a plane armed with pellet guns, like a Ki-43 or Hurricane I vs. a TB-3 or B-24, I just have to get close and try to start a fire or kill the pilots.

What I do find unrealistic are the uncannily accurate gunners who have perfect situational awareness and seemingly limitless ammo, who can ignore G-forces and sometimes defy even death itself.

[Pursuivant]

While I know that ships and vehicles don't have AI and that it would be difficult/impossible for them to have it, would it be possible to incorporate the following options into a future patch:

1) The ability to automatically make a ground vehicle/ship make zig-zagging deviations as it travels along a set course instead of traveling in a straight line. That is, on the FMB map, the vehicle's waypoints go in a straight line, but in the game, it zig-zags/swerves as it travels. This was standard procedure for ships during the war, and was sometimes practiced by ground vehicles, either to avoid attack from the air or to present a slightly angled armored surface to potential enemies directly to the front.

In the FMB, the option to zig-zag could be set up as a checkbox. If left unchecked, movement would be straight by default.

2) The ability to make ground vehicles/ships move in formation, centered around a central point, without having to define individual waypoints for each individual vehicle. This would allow mission builders to quickly set up historical formations such as convoys of merchant ships traveling in a "box" flanked by destroyers or a squadron of tanks advancing in a line abreast or an echelon. With proper spacing between vehicles, formations could zig-zag/swerve in a realistic fashion.

3) The ability for a ground vehicle/ship to swerve if it gets within a set distance of a certain object rather than colliding and doing the "bumper car" routine. Currently, ground vehicles back up one vehicle length, turn 30-45 degrees and then try to go forwards. It would be more realistic and more elegant to have the vehicle turn immediately when it gets within a set distance from another vehicle (less than 1 vehicle length?), make travel along a < or > or ( or ) course (an arc or two opposing 30-45 degree turns) and then continue along its previous heading.