Daidalos Team's Room -QUESTIONS AND REQUESTS ONLY - For 4.11

[IceFire]

Originally Posted by nearmiss

Always someone wants more aircraft.

I remember it from MSFT CFS1,CFS2,CFS3,IL2 1.0 up todate.

It doesn't matter we have a huge number of aircraft in IL2 and it's never going to finish.

I spent over 3 years with IL2 building missions and flying the year 1941-1942 on the Kuban map right after Barbarossa. I had all I could do with the aircraft that were available and the one map. The terrain was mixed and the aircraft were fast enough and hard hitting enough to enjoy.

The IL2 is a huge application with enormous object library.

Naw... I really should keep shut, because I know it's just the nature of the beast. Everyone wants some new aircraft, object or map thing we don't have. LOL

I want to see viable improvements within the core programming, the fmb and the things that really make the sim experience more exciting like the recent release of navigation.

Of course we do. And thinking deeply about it why not? Variety is the spice of life and having so many types of aircraft available to us means that the variety is extremely good here. We can realistically and accurately simulate so many areas of the war now. There are still some holes and missing types that I'd love to see filled in... realistically not every gap will be filled in (that'd be just too much) but I do love getting new aircraft to fly. It makes my experiences enjoyable and opens up new options for mission building for both online and offline.

[ImpalerNL]

Adding more of the same doesnt equal better gameplay in my oppinion.
Its fun for missionbuilders yes, but why do we need more airplanes if most arent even used by the majority.

I gave up flying iL2 because ive mastered my favored aircaft, and i dont want to invest time in mastering another 1000 other aircraft.

Unless there will be really new stuff like multicrew, and new maps, i think most people will move on to something else.

[ElAurens]

In your opinion of course.

Personally new aircraft have been one of the hooks that have kept myself and most of the guys I fly with in the sim for 9 or 10 years.

New aircraft have the opportunity of opening new areas of operation, or making some of the ones we have actually useable.

For instance just a couple more Imperial Japanese aircraft could finally make the CBI/Asia/Pacific theater a really doable thing. The new soon to be flyable Hawk 75 opens the door to operations in the Netherlands East Indies, even without a proper map of Java or Borneo. Not to mention more varied choices for the Winter and Continuation Wars, and the Battle of France.

Even with all the planes we have there are several gaping holes in the plane set that if filled could insure a few more years of viability for the orignal IL2 franchise.

Not all of us care about late war operations over Europe you know.

[ImpalerNL]

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

[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

[Romanator21]

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.

[Fafnir_6]

Originally Posted by ImpalerNL

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

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

[IceFire]

Originally Posted by ImpalerNL

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

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.

[Fafnir_6]

Originally Posted by IceFire

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

[Mysticpuma]

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