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

[WTE_Galway]

Originally Posted by nearmiss

Right, I understand your interest. Just remember ONLINE what it would mean. Flying offline against the AI, who cares.

When you check into Hyperlobby look at all those involved on Forgotten Battle servers. Look at all the other game servers. I'd say don't fix it... if it isn't broke.

There is a continued huge following on Forgotten Battles and it all is caused by the way Oleg has done the IL2 for Online Play.

I am not really sure of your point.

Whilst its true a lot of online players treat the game more as a 3d first person shooter I played online for several years back around 2002/2003 and my observation was most online players are not stupid, they can manage quite complex engine management for example. It also seems to me there were a lot of online players, especially playing co-ops and virtual wars, that actually liked historical accuracy.


However ASIDE from all that pointless online versus offline nonsense which can be fun to argue about but is really totally off topic:

- if you recall 3 or 4 years back a lot of online players were unhappy with the switch to box/pattern harmonization on the American planes like the P51

- the ability to optionally switch aircraft currently using a box harmonization to a point bore sighting would greatly increase the lethality of the 0.50 cal for online players who are a good shot whilst allowing new players to keep the box pattern


To be honest I don't see this as an offline/online issue at all.

[Tempest123]

As we are getting radio navigation in 4.10, I was wondering what system the Japanese had for find their way home to the carriers?

[Viikate]

Originally Posted by Tempest123

what system the Japanese had for find their way home to the carriers?

Normal RDF equipment and carriers have NDBs. Check the IJN carrier-borne planes. They have D/F-antennas and instruments in pit.

[Erkki]

Originally Posted by WTE_Galway

I am not really sure of your point.

Whilst its true a lot of online players treat the game more as a 3d first person shooter I played online for several years back around 2002/2003 and my observation was most online players are not stupid, they can manage quite complex engine management for example. It also seems to me there were a lot of online players, especially playing co-ops and virtual wars, that actually liked historical accuracy.


However ASIDE from all that pointless online versus offline nonsense which can be fun to argue about but is really totally off topic:

- if you recall 3 or 4 years back a lot of online players were unhappy with the switch to box/pattern harmonization on the American planes like the P51

- the ability to optionally switch aircraft currently using a box harmonization to a point bore sighting would greatly increase the lethality of the 0.50 cal for online players who are a good shot whilst allowing new players to keep the box pattern


To be honest I don't see this as an offline/online issue at all.

Yes, if something was done historically, and actually in action and not just tested far from the frontlines, and was extensively used, it should be in the game. More convergence options would , after some learning, help people flying all fighters with wing mounted guns, not only US fighters, but also my Fw 190.

[swiss]

Originally Posted by Erkki

Yes, if something was done historically, and actually in action and not just tested far from the frontlines, and was extensively used, it should be in the game. More convergence options would , after some learning, help people flying all fighters with wing mounted guns, not only US fighters, but also my Fw 190.

The fuselage guns of the FW190 were parallel, the wings guns intersected at 600m.

Makes we wish I could have parallel guns in the game too.

[-=MadCat=-]

A big hello to everyone !!

I'm reading this forum for quite a while already and now finally registered to participate.
(In case i find somewhat like a welcome thread, I'll soon further introduce myself there )

First off a big THANK YOU to Team Daidalos, you guys do a great job !
Like many I'm very impatient for the patch, but take your time to do it right !

I'd like to throw in just a little idea too.
For a long time im working on a Reno Air Race map and so far im already very pleased with it.
Only thing left would be pylons like they really are at Reno (normal pylons and home pylon), unlike the 50m tall pylons that already are in game.
I don't know if there is anything copyright on them, but maybe there are more people who'd like to have them so it might be worth considering to add them to the FMB,
in case it's not too much work for just 2 objects for a rather small ammount of people air racing.

Let me know please what you think about this humble idea.

Many happy landings and greetings to all
-=MadCat=-

[ImpalerNL]

First I would like to thank Team Daidalos for their work on Il2.

Ive got a few suggestions:

1)Bumps in grass runways.

Right now the grass runways are way to smooth.

2)Option to set the weather, winddirection and windstrenght at the airfield or aircraftcarrier.

Something like in MS flightsimulator where you can adjust weather and wind at diffrent weather stations.

3)Ground effect during landing.
Right now, you just have to wait untill the right time to flare, and you will land no matter what, even at higher speeds.

[ElAurens]

The problem with bumpy runways is that the aircraft in the sim seemingly have frozen suspension systems. The oleo struts have no compliance at all. The smallest of bumps sends you careening out of control or, flipping you over.

One of the limitations of a 10 year old game engine.

[Letum]

Originally Posted by ImpalerNL

3)Ground effect during landing.
Right now, you just have to wait untill the right time to flare, and you will land no matter what, even at higher speeds.

Ground effect is already modeled.

[ImpalerNL]

MS flightsimulator 2004/X has the best groundeffect model i think.