Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik

IL-2 Sturmovik The famous combat flight simulator.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 12-06-2010, 10:04 AM
Foo'bar Foo'bar is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Niedersachsen, Deutschland
Posts: 662
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by janpitor View Post
It´s such a shame there will be no Duxford, because that means no Czechoslovak squadrons.
Oleg, will there be an option to pick campaign for squadron that was historically outside of the in-game map?
Or, is there some future plan for map extention to the north?

Thanks
Somewhen Oleg stated that each 10 kilometres extension to the north would mean about 1 year additional development work.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 12-06-2010, 10:35 AM
Wutz Wutz is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 347
Default

I hope the bomber fans get a go at various convoys and ships in the English Channel, as up to now not much has been mentioned about ships, except some nice screen shots I believe of a freighter. As the ship attacks where the kick off for the Battle of Britain.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 12-06-2010, 01:10 PM
nearmiss nearmiss is offline
Global Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,687
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Wutz View Post
I hope the bomber fans get a go at various convoys and ships in the English Channel, as up to now not much has been mentioned about ships, except some nice screen shots I believe of a freighter. As the ship attacks where the kick off for the Battle of Britain.
You need not worry about this, because attacking convoys was a major strategy in the BOB. Be assured this will be very well addressed.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 12-06-2010, 12:07 PM
Insuber Insuber is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Paris - France
Posts: 1,406
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Foo'bar View Post
Somewhen Oleg stated that each 10 kilometres extension to the north would mean about 1 year additional development work.

8-! ... One year of one person, ore one year of the full team? It's maybe also a function of the allocated resources. I cannot imagine however that you need that much, when all the landscape objects are done. But maybe I'm wrong.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 12-06-2010, 12:49 PM
zodiac zodiac is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Belgium
Posts: 29
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Foo'bar View Post
Somewhen Oleg stated that each 10 kilometres extension to the north would mean about 1 year additional development work.
I understand that it would cost a lot of work if a city like Paris would appear on the map to (only then it would have to expand to the east). That would have been a lot more work for something that has nothing to do with this battle of Britain simulator.
Like I said in my previous post, the thing that surprises me the most is that there are no airfields on this map where the Italians where based. (Can someone confirm this?) Maybe that is the thing that would cost a lot of extra work and research: building all the Italian equipment.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 12-06-2010, 01:08 PM
nearmiss nearmiss is offline
Global Moderator
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 1,687
Default

janpitor

Maps and map landscape items

It will be possible to add these items later. Oleg, has mentioned there will be ability for users to build maps.

Also, on large maps Oleg will add landscape items over time...or provide a way through FMB for users to add them.

The limitations of size for the original release maps may never have area enlarged, but if you have the ability to add airbases it should be possible to create an airbase on the map. I know such airbases may not be in exact locations, yet distances we fly aren't really handled as real world anyway.

By that I mean... most users 8X to combat areas after takeoffs, return to base is handled similarly after combat. In other words, for the most part users are never inclinded to spend an hour gettting to combat areas or an additional hour getting to home base.

So... where airbases are actually located on maps is not always that important. Naturally, if would be nice if you could name airbases as you will so they would show up on the maps as what you want to represent them to be. In your case "Duxford".

Last edited by nearmiss; 12-06-2010 at 01:20 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 12-06-2010, 08:00 PM
kendo65 kendo65 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 908
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nearmiss View Post
Maps and map landscape items

It will be possible to add these items later. Oleg, has mentioned there will be ability for users to build maps.

Also, on large maps Oleg will add landscape items over time...or provide a way through FMB for users to add them.

The limitations of size for the original release maps may never have area enlarged, but if you have the ability to add airbases it should be possible to create an airbase on the map. I know such airbases may not be in exact locations, yet distances we fly aren't really handled as real world anyway.

...
I think Oleg said that the user base would only be able to create small maps and that the developers would reserve the large maps for themselves.

So, there really won't be a later solution to the absence of Duxford as far as I can see - even if someone were to make an 'extension' map to the north, there wouldn't be any way to link it to the main map (?)

The real problem here (with the map and the fmb...and soon no doubt a score of other things too) is that as more detail on the real game comes out, people are going to find those perfect, cosy dreams of perfectibility, that thrived in the absence of any real information, starting to look a bit shaky.

The game is going to involve compromises. Better learn to deal with it.

The inability to fly out of Duxford will, it seems, be one of those compromises. But surely the role of the Duxford squadrons can be adequately represented through use of air-starts and delayed arrival times over the main theatre to the south (as actually happened in reality).

p.s. Duxford wouldn't be the first airfield I would have named - wouldn't even make the top 5. Sorry.

Last edited by kendo65; 12-06-2010 at 08:21 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 12-06-2010, 08:44 PM
Freycinet Freycinet is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 696
Default

Duxford definitely wouldn't in the top 5, that's true. It is also true that 12. group mostly arrived late for the action in the BoB. Still, it would have been nice to have their main stations, but it won't happen so no need to cry over spilt milk. We get so much more!
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 12-06-2010, 09:11 PM
klem's Avatar
klem klem is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 1,653
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Freycinet View Post
Duxford definitely wouldn't in the top 5, that's true. It is also true that 12. group mostly arrived late for the action in the BoB. Still, it would have been nice to have their main stations, but it won't happen so no need to cry over spilt milk. We get so much more!
I don't think there is a top 5. The Battle ebbed and flowed with first some airfields taking the brunt or plugging the gap and then others. Sometimes all of them. Some of course had higher 'scores' and fame than others. The key sector stations were Hornchurch, Kenley, Biggin Hill, Tangmere, North Weald, Northolt, Debden, Duxford, etc.. PLUS their satellites/subordinates like Manston, West Malling, Hawkinge, West Hampnett. If you say 'Tangmere' you are also saying 'West Hampnett'. I wouldn't be able to split Hornchurch, Kenley, Biggin, Tangmere, Manston, Duxford, Hawkinge and West Malling and I'm not sure about some others but that's 8 anyway that played key roles in the Battle.
__________________
klem
56 Squadron RAF "Firebirds"
http://firebirds.2ndtaf.org.uk/



ASUS Sabertooth X58 /i7 950 @ 4GHz / 6Gb DDR3 1600 CAS8 / EVGA GTX570 GPU 1.28Gb superclocked / Crucial 128Gb SSD SATA III 6Gb/s, 355Mb-215Mb Read-Write / 850W PSU
Windows 7 64 bit Home Premium / Samsung 22" 226BW @ 1680 x 1050 / TrackIR4 with TrackIR5 software / Saitek X52 Pro & Rudders
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 12-06-2010, 10:12 PM
LukeFF's Avatar
LukeFF LukeFF is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Riverside, California, USA
Posts: 338
Default

This observation about the map was made at SimHQ:

Quote:
I have a bit of a quibble with the inclusion in the SoW map of the Bassin d'Atlantique between Calais and Dunkerque, a feature that was constructed after the war. The whole coastline from Gravelines to Dunkerque was just open beach and dunes in 1940.
http://simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.ph...ml#Post3150692
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:53 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.