Friday Update, February 17, 2012

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by bw_wolverine

So complaining about additional content in the game really just amounts to "I WANT MY THING FIRST!!!!"

That may be true for some..

But not all.. Some of us see this new content as 1C trying to be all things to all simmers (land, sea, and air)

Which sounds great in concept

But up to now has been imposable to do AND maintain a level of realism

For example, take BF3, it is all things to all simmers (land, sea, and air) but now take a look at each aspect of the game..

Land.. All vehicals are pretty dumbed down
Sea.. All vehicals are pretty dumbed down
Air.. All vehicals are pretty dumbed down

As nato said it "Jack of all trades master of none"

Now 1C is going to try and be the exception to that long standing rule

I for one hope they do it! In that I love WWII tank simulation!

If they do it and maintain the level of realism we are use to they will be the FIRST to do it!

It is that holy grail of games we have been dreaming about for 20+ years.

In summary, if you thought 1C bit off more than they could chew with CoD the flight sim..

Taking on this task is like taking another bite while your mouth is still full!

[Chivas]

I haven't read all of the thread, but this could be very good for all of us. Someone should post this video in the tank sim forums, if it hasn't been already. This could have many of the the tankers investing in the sim now.

I realize the angst some have of these features watering down a combat flight sim, but I doubt over the long haul this will be the case. The new series is primarily a combat flight sim made by combat flight sim enthusiasts, these features will only draw in money from other genres, that will help finance the sim over a very long haul. The added monies will allow for new features primarily aircombat in nature, and even ships that are sorely needed. The longer this sim stays in development the closer we are to the SDK.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by Chivas

I realize the angst some have of these features watering down a combat flight sim, but I doubt over the long haul this will be the case. The new series is primarily a combat flight sim made by combat flight sim enthusiasts, these features will only draw in money from other genres, that will help finance the sim over a very long haul. The added monies will allow for new features primarily aircombat in nature, and even ships that are sorely needed. The longer this sim stays in development the closer we are to the SDK.

Fingers Crossed!

[David Hayward]

Adding vehicles to the game is pretty cool. People who don't like flight sims can be recruited to drive tanks and act as FAOs.

[zapatista]

Originally Posted by Chivas

I haven't read all of the thread, but this could be very good for all of us. Someone should post this video in the tank sim forums, if it hasn't been already. This could have many of the the tankers investing in the sim now. .......

i think tank simmers will only become interrested in these ground vehicles if the tank guns (and artillery units) are accurate with their guns, and if there is a good damage model for buildings and other tanks and ground vehicles/objects (blowing a turret, disabeling a tank by just having the tracks damaged etc). and there is no indications that this is the case right now for il2/BoB

i hope we will get accurate modeling for the tank and artillery guns (which the sim is already able to do with its advanced physics modeling), and have some good ways to control them and interact with them (which we dont even have for aircraft yet, let alone for ground vehicles). eg, for any kind of gameplay you need to make a tank unit move from point A to B (either by staying on roads, or directly through fields and forrests etc). you need to be able to instruct them as unit leader, so they engage (or avoid) the enemy when sighted, dig into stationary positions when creating a defensive position waiting for an enemy to come to them, get them to disperse when enemy aircraft attack etc.

similarly with ground artillery units, you would need to be able to accuratly lay down an artillery barage at the correct grid points, and have the shells do the desired and historically correct damage where they land (on buildings and ground objects or vehicles)

i think it is great we are about to get some 1e person control over vehicles, oleg and Co have been working on this for years, but we are still a significant step away from it adding a ground sim element or for it to be functional enough to have tank simmers start buying the game

speaking of which, we dont have the 3D craters yet !! (which we know oleg and Co had included in their game design)

but i agree, lets try and post some links to this video in tank sim forums, i am sure some of them are interested in adding an air element to their tank sim, and it will get them keeping an eye on further il2/SoW devellopments (and become future customers once some of these gameplay elements and damage models are added later)

[Chivas]

Originally Posted by zapatista

i think tank simmers will only become interrested in these ground vehicles if the tank guns (and artillery units) are accurate with their guns, and if there is a good damage model for buildings and other tanks and ground vehicles/objects (blowing a turret, disabeling a tank by just having the tracks damaged etc). and there is no indications that this is the case right now for il2/BoB

i hope we will get accurate modeling for the tank and artillery guns (which the sim is already able to do with its advanced physics modeling), and have some good ways to control them and interact with them (which we dont even have for aircraft yet, let alone for ground vehicles). eg, for any kind of gameplay you need to make a tank unit move from point A to B (either by staying on roads, or directly through fields and forrests etc). you need to be able to instruct them as unit leader, so they engage (or avoid) the enemy when sighted, dig into stationary positions when creating a defensive position waiting for an enemy to come to them, get them to disperse when enemy aircraft attack etc.

similarly with ground artillery units, you would need to be able to accuratly lay down an artillery barage at the correct grid points, and have the shells do the desired and historically correct damage where they land (on buildings and ground objects or vehicles)

i think it is great we are about to get some 1e person control over vehicles, oleg and Co have been working on this for years, but we are still a significant step away from it adding a ground sim element or for it to be functional enough to have tank simmers start buying the game

speaking of which, we dont have the 3D craters yet !! (which we know oleg and Co had included in their game design)

but i agree, lets try and post some links to this video in tank sim forums, i am sure some of them are interested in adding an air element to their tank sim, and it will get them keeping an eye on further il2/SoW devellopments (and become future customers once some of these gameplay elements and damage models are added later)

I didn't say the tankers would be able to start playing yet, just invest in a sim with great possibilities. Its very doubtfull that a combined forces sim will be developed until all the theaters are completed, but I can see elements of a combined forces sim being added during the development of the series. Right now the development has more than their hands full fixing the AI, FM, DM, Commands, Graphics etc, but that won't always be the case. Its certainly been an ordeal for them building the game engine thats still not finished, but if the game engine turns out to be as relatively future proof as Oleg and Luthier have suggested the future could be very bright.

[JG26_EZ]

Wow.. made it to the final page.
Lots of speculation from the drama department as usual I see.
Just keep the blinders on.

The first game I played online was a "flight sim", and I remember the first time ..shooting down some pixels on the screen that formed the shape of a plane. But it was SO much more than that. I knew that there was someone sitting at their computer shaking their heads (with a slight feeling of humiliation or disgust) as their plane crashed to the earth. And this feeling still continues just as strong when I'm shooting down planes years later.

When this is all put together and "done", and I shoot down a spitfire, drill a bomb into the cavity of a tank, or hit the old guy driving needed ammo to an airfield's tea party, I can have that same satisfaction that got me interested in the first place ...to know that I just ruined another human's day with my trusted 109 it's awesome..

Friday Updates are great, thanks!

[Sutts]

Amazing update guys, well done and thanks.

I've been wanting to explore all that lovely environment from day 1 - an MG trip to the coast would be very entertaining. Great news on the FM updates too. Feeling very positive about things. Keep it up.

[dflion]

Thanks Blacksix, interesting update. The Ju88A-4 looks very good in summer cammo.

I like the autumn scenery for the BOM map, looks like two maps for the BOM, a winter and an autumn?

Keep working on the aircraft FM, the better it gets the more realistic they fly.

Hope you can get the aircraft decals working properly, especially decals on the ground static aircraft, they are now looking very forlorn and unrealistic.

Now to the driveable ground vehicles. I think this a very interesting new scenario for the game.
In the old IL-2 Sturmovik, when creating historical air campaigns in the FMB, I always tried to recreate an accurate historical land battle going on underneath the air battle. I would look for high points of ground to place bombardment artillery and develop a tank battle between the two sides, fully testing that everything works. From the air you could see the shells exploding on both sides, watch the vehicles moving and shooting, see buildings being destroyed and feel the flak rocking your aircraft and occasionally hitting it.
The ground battle was always an important factor in creating an accurate air campaign.

With this development you can immerse yourself in the ground battle if you wish, it will also help you develop a more accurate ground battle below for the air battle above when working in the FMB. You can see the ‘lie of the land from your vehicle or tank window’.

In the ‘Battle for Moscow’ scenario, the ground battles grew in ferocity as the German army approached Moscow, then the Russian Army did a counter offensive in a bitter winter scenario – the air battle raged and intensified overhead.

In the BOB + scenario, you have the ‘Battle of France’ then later ‘Dieppe’ and ‘D-Day Normandy’. Then there is the Mediterranean (‘The Med’) scenario, hopefully a new map(s) will come along.

Anyway, I can go on and on. The main things I hope part of the team are working on are all the missing parts of the sim, the weather, full SDK for the FMB, static aircraft decals, better communications, strategic campaign situations, refuelling and rearming scenarios, animated pilots, aircraft/airfield lighting, operating radar etc. etc.

DFLion

[Ataros]

Originally Posted by ACE-OF-ACES

If they do it and maintain the level of realism we are use to they will be the FIRST to do it!

It is that holy grail of games we have been dreaming about for 20+ years.

As far as I get from reading sukhoi.ru , they will not maintain the level of realism for ground war. It will be a flight sim for flight simmers and an arcade game for tankman.

In this way developing ground war aspects does not slow down development of air simulation side. It is obvious that making one low-res cockpit for a tank is much faster than making high-res cockpit plus several high-res gunner positions for Wellington. External models of tanks are ready already. Not all vehicles will have cockpits (till made by 3rd parties), but only possibility for a camera to move inside of a car.

ArmA2 has similar approach: it simulates infantry but keeps land, sea and air vehicles arcadish.

From a marketing point of view this is a very strong differentiation point (or USP) needed to differentiate from competition crowd (WoWP, WoP, DCS P-51, RoF, etc.) and to attract newcomers.

Speaking of extra ships for CloD I think ships were done by a different modeller who either left or was working on free-lance basis as special knowledge is needed to model a ship correctly. The reason mentioned by luthier could be said just for the sake of 'fine words' imo. On the other hand his 1С bosses are reading the forums and they could be mad at him because he insisted on developing the 1st ship (German mine-layer) which a few prolific whiners did not accepted on the forums.