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

[Ace1staller]

Originally Posted by Daniël

Tail looks like a Hurricane, other parts like a Spitfire!

I disagree with that, Yes the tail might look like a Hawker Hurricane. The engine and the propellars doesn't look like a Spitfire.Also the front of the Avia B-145 model looks more like a Typhoon. But skins doesn't make it look like a Spitfire or a Hurricane.

[Daniël]

Originally Posted by Ace1staller

I disagree with that, Yes the tail might look like a Hawker Hurricane. The engine and the propellars doesn't look like a Spitfire.Also the front of the Avia B-145 model looks more like a Typhoon. But skins doesn't make it look like a Spitfire or a Hurricane.

If you imagine a bit Those wings and canopy...

[jermin]

Hi, TD.

First, I would like to thank you for your continuous hard work on the development of IL2. As follows is my request for the incoming patches.

Would you please fix the high altitude performance of late-war 109s in the incoming patch? Both historically and according to IL2 Compare, late-war 109s should outrun and outclimb P-51 and P-47 at high altitude. But in the game, what 109 pilots can do is merely struggling for a level flight above 8000m. Let alone maneuvering and climbing.

This problem has been existing ever since the birth of IL2. Oleg once mentioned that the inaccurate high altitude performance was due to the limitation of IL2 engine, which was originally designed for low altitude air combat scenario. But while P-51 and P-47 can perform normally high up. I believe there should be a way to fix this problem.

Also, is it possible to modify the cockpit of late-war 109 variants? The cockpit struts are just too big compared with real 109s, which make 109 pilots suffer from a great SA disadvantage in combat.

Thank you!

[Ace1staller]

Originally Posted by jermin

Hi, TD.

First, I would like to thank you for your continuous hard work on the development of IL2. As follows is my request for the incoming patches.

Would you please fix the high altitude performance of late-war 109s in the incoming patch? Both historically and according to IL2 Compare, late-war 109s should outrun and outclimb P-51 and P-47 at high altitude. But in the game, what 109 pilots can do is merely struggling for a level flight above 8000m. Let alone maneuvering and climbing.

This problem has been existing ever since the birth of IL2. Oleg once mentioned that the inaccurate high altitude performance was due to the limitation of IL2 engine, which was originally designed for low altitude air combat scenario. But while P-51 and P-47 can perform normally high up. I believe there should be a way to fix this problem.

Also, is it possible to modify the cockpit of late-war 109 variants? The cockpit struts are just too big compared with real 109s, which make 109 pilots suffer from a great SA disadvantage in combat.

Thank you!

Jermin, I think it mite go to the 4.12, because that 4.11 patch is almost done from my view. But Very good request.

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by jermin

Would you please fix the high altitude performance of late-war 109s in the incoming patch? Both historically and according to IL2 Compare, late-war 109s should outrun and outclimb P-51 and P-47 at high altitude.

This comes dangerously close to the typical "chart war" complaint, which is extremely difficult to prove and lends itself to endless online arguments. By 1944, there were so many factors which muddied pure plane vs. plane performance of German vs. Allied fighters - fuel quality, pilot skill, operational factors, manufacturing quality - that it's very hard to tell which was the better plane - Bf-109G, P-47D, P-51D, Yak-9 or La-7.

A better strategy would be to fix IL2's high altitude performance. Personally, I don't understand why modeling high altitude performance should be a problem, since atmospheric pressure, oxygen content, temperature and similar factors all vary as a constant with altitude, which in turn affect engine and aeronautical performance in a predictable fashion.

[Ace1staller]

Originally Posted by Daniël

If you imagine a bit Those wings and canopy...

Well yes, but it looks like a mix of parts from the Hurricane,Spitfire, and Typhoon. Well yes the wings and canopy may look like a spitfire but the front of the aircraft looks more like a Typhoon.

[Zorro]

Hi Team Daidalos,

first I want to thank you for your dedication to make IL-2 better and listen to the community. Excellent job.

Now coming to my main point. It seems that most of the German Squadron markings and color codings are incorrect somehow. As an example sqadron 4 is green and have the character of a Gruppenstab, but it should be blue and have the letter of a Staffel (squadron). As a reference please look at http://www.luftarchiv.de/index.htm?/.../kenungen2.htm. I cross checked this source with other I have like Flugzeug Classic Special 7 or Ju 87 from Planes and Pilots. Also the Geschwaderstab is always mapped to I. Gruppe when set to 4. Staffel. So instead of showing XX + A(in green)A it shows XX + A (in green)B. My recommendation to fix this would be a 0 for Geschwader or Gruppenstab in the squadron selection, than 1 -4 for the Staffel of each Gruppe.

Regarding the markings it seems to be wrong as well. As an example take IV. Gruppe/KG 27. The IV. Gruppes Shield is blue regarding the link to http://www.lexikon-der-wehrmacht.de/...wader/KG27.htm. I have seen similar issues for other Geschwaders as well e.g. Lehrgeschwader 1 or KG 26.
I would appreciate if you can fix this, because I fly missions that are based on historical data. And I want to use the proper Squadron for this, which is not possible at all. I know, this might seem to be a little bit picky, but there are a lot of Geschwader, Gruppe and Staffeln out there in the community that want to have right markings for there online squadrons as well.

Thanks!

Zorro

[csThor]

Quite frankly the marking system is inflexible and often downright wrong. I have tried to correct it as much as I could but my influence was limited. As for the unit emblem found on the internet - I have learned not to trust any of them without checking myself. There is a lot of conflicting information around.

Bottom line: Il-2 would need a completely new marking system to fix all the issues and that isn't going to happen.

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by csThor

Bottom line: Il-2 would need a completely new marking system to fix all the issues and that isn't going to happen.

Is this due to limitations of the game engine, restrictions on DT's license with 1C, or lack of time/interest on the part of DT?

Personally, I don't think it's that big a deal, since the marking system can easily be altered by add-ons or custom skins.

[WWFlybert]

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

Is this due to limitations of the game engine, restrictions on DT's license with 1C, or lack of time/interest on the part of DT?

Personally, I don't think it's that big a deal, since the marking system can easily be altered by add-ons or custom skins.

If it can "easily" fixed by mods, then why don't you talk to the author(s) of said mods and ask them to contact TD with the solution ?

or perhaps, the decal-markings system, may indeed have limitations you are not aware of (proper positioning for different dates comes to mind, as well as some skins having slightly 'off' positions that the decal-markings overlay incorrectly)