Beyond 414 wish list

[Marabekm]

In my opinion, perhaps it would be best to work on the theaters of war that haven't received an updated game. For the Eastern Front and Western Front in Europe there are now all the Battle of _____ games now with much updated aircraft and gameplay. However, IL2 1946 remains the latest game version for us interested in the Mediterranean/North African and Pacific theaters! (With the small exception of the Macchi in Battle of Stalingrad?

So I'm not saying I would ignore the European side of things in IL2:1946, but maybe put a little more emphasis on the other theaters for the guys who have no other options.

That being said, my wishlist:
Italian and Royal Navy ships
Italian and British ground objects
Flyable Swordfish and Blenheim
Ba. 65
Vichy France Army option, and the Dewotine 520

Japanese cruisers
Flyable TBD-1 Devastator
D3A2 Val
A6M2-22 Zero
F1M2 Pete

Will I ever see all of these? Probably not. But... One can wish!!

[Volksfürsorge]

Originally Posted by Marabekm

In my opinion, perhaps it would be best to work on the theaters of war that haven't received an updated game. For the Eastern Front and Western Front in Europe there are now all the Battle of _____ games now with much updated aircraft and gameplay. However, IL2 1946 remains the latest game version for us interested in the Mediterranean/North African and Pacific theaters! (With the small exception of the Macchi in Battle of Stalingrad?

So I'm not saying I would ignore the European side of things in IL2:1946, but maybe put a little more emphasis on the other theaters for the guys who have no other options.

That being said, my wishlist:
Italian and Royal Navy ships
Italian and British ground objects
Flyable Swordfish and Blenheim
Ba. 65
Vichy France Army option, and the Dewotine 520

Japanese cruisers
Flyable TBD-1 Devastator
D3A2 Val
A6M2-22 Zero
F1M2 Pete

Will I ever see all of these? Probably not. But... One can wish!!

Future efforts should go in all directions! Il2 1946 is still the best.

[Music]

A few questions and suggestions:

Why do so few planes have full trim, they almost all have ele and rudder trim, I-16 has no ele, but thats the only one I can think of. But so many don't have aileron trim. Is that historically correct, to keep the pilots from setting it up and falling asleep in a 3 hour flight?

Is it my bad flying, or is the F6F a concrete pig, it does not climb, and for the Best the Navy had, a Zero Killer, it does not have the maneuverability or acceleration one would expect.

Did the P-39 really flat spin so easily? And was there no way to get it out of one, dropping the flaps and gear does nothing, and no matter how close you can get to stabilizing it, it never breaks out of that flat spin. I can't even see how you could bail from it when it's doing that, the door instead of a top opening would make it almost impossible to get away from the plane before it swung around and broke your back.

Were the Russian planes really that bad, The only one that can compete with a German fighter is the La, and it has no chance against a Spitfire. At least when I am flying one. And so few bullets, 400. And to back that up a bit, there are a few maps on th AleXserver that only have Russian for Red planes, and most guys take the p-39. And when there are a whole lot of Allied planes from all nations on a map, almost no one takes the Russian fighters. the il-2 is popular because it has a tail gunner and is tough. You are more likely to see some one flying the I-153 than the later planes, even if the models go up to 1945.

Suggestions for features:

Losing F6 when a enemy plane enters a cloud: when you pad lock in side the pit, if the plane stays behind the cockpit cage long enough you lose the lock, can the same be done for the F6 and clouds.

I like using the clouds as a defense when playing on line, and F6'ing the guy chasing you makes that a even better tactic because it's not to hard to find them when leaving the cloud, But when chasing some one into a cloud, you can tell which way they are going if you can see the outline of your plane. and of course, you know exactly where they are as soon as you break out of the clouds. This suggestion is more for realism.

this one is going to get a lot of flack: Can you make it so that you can't fire your guns unless in the Pit. Seems to be a lot of guys have learned to fly from out side ala third person video game, they can see where their tracers are going from that vantage when turning tight and just hose the sky until they get the angle right. At least it seems that way, I can't prove that's what is happening, (and it does not matter, we all have that ability so it's not a advantage per say) but it is the only explanation for some of the times I have been shot down, (and thats a lot), when definitely invisible to some one sitting inside a cockpit. And it allows them to fly unrealistically because they don't know they are going to black out or that the plane is having tremors from G forces. You kind of know someone is flying like that when you pass head on at 300Kmph and they seem to turn on a dime, and some how catch up to you even if you just flew straight at top speed.

I'd also like to see servers kick people for turning on wingtip smoke, it (the server) announces it, but no one seems to care. Oleg trying to get the 13 year old girl crowd.

Of course, all would be selectable options in difficulty or Server setting, the game as is does not need to change unless the player/server wants these options.

Zero problems with 4.14.1 in the functions I use regularly. ** only thing I can think of is if you move artillery in FMB, they stay at the height th they were originally set, so if you move a position down a slope a bit, you need to drop all the artillery as a separate move.

(I see the Hs129 can jettison their cannon, don't know if that's new, never noticed until i had them (A.I.) attacking a base in my soon to be Famous "Almost All Maps OnLine Mission Pack" http://www.mediafire.com/file/p0omf7...gfight.7z/file 704kb, and one did it when it was all flacked up from aaa. I added a few new maps, the Battle of Moscow and BoDonbass, and the Arctic circle one).

Cheers! Ypa!

[baball]

Originally Posted by Music

A few questions and suggestions:

Why do so few planes have full trim, they almost all have ele and rudder trim, I-16 has no ele, but thats the only one I can think of. But so many don't have aileron trim. Is that historically correct, to keep the pilots from setting it up and falling asleep in a 3 hour flight?

As a matter of fact a lot of planes only had elevator trim because thier aileron and rudder trim were set for specific cruising speed and engine settings on the ground, or maybe because it could weight down the plane or create unneccessary complexity for the pilot. The Bf-109 and IL-2 didn't any trim except for elevator for example.
However, I still agree with you about some planes being annoying to fly. I've rummaged through the buttons file and fixed trim setting for some planes already for myself. If you want to alter trim settings for you could DL a decompiler available on modding sites and fiddle with the trim setting in the FMs.

Originally Posted by Music

Did the P-39 really flat spin so easily? And was there no way to get it out of one, dropping the flaps and gear does nothing, and no matter how close you can get to stabilizing it, it never breaks out of that flat spin.

Oh yes they did. For example, emptying the 37mm cannon's magazine made the p-39's CoG move so far aft that aerobatics were out of question unless you had a death wish, and transfert flight meant that lead weights had to be put in the nose to compensate for CoG shift. IIRC, some Bell engineers had to fly to USSR to see with the Russians how this problem could be resolved.

[iMattheush]

What about I-16 Type 10? A major version used in Spain, China, Soviet-Japanese border conflict (1938-1939), Soviet invasion of Poland and Winter War, before newer types 18 and 24 were available. Also, it is the only one major I-16 version not included in the game.

[27cricket27]

Japan needs some more bomber types for late war scenarios as the Ki-21-II and G4M1 can only go so far.

Here are some that would be very easy to add in the meantime as the Ki-67, Ki-49, D4Y, etc. will probably take a bit:

G4M1 - The initial version of the Betty had many modifications; there could easily be 1941, 1942, and 1943 "summarized" versions of the aircraft.

G4M2 and 2a (maybe 3?) - Once later G4M1 models are added these are pretty easy to make (especially with the 2e already being in game). The 2a even easier after the 2. The 3 wasn't used or built nearly as much as the other types, but it might be nice to have.

Ki-21-IIb - Really easy to implement as it requires a new turret and some changes to the canopy.

D3A2 - This is really needed for later 1942 and 1943 Solomons missions. It also had some small carrier usage in 1944.

B6N1 - This isn't as high priority as the others, but this would be nice for some 1943 missions, like Bougainville.

[taly001]

For the flight model of Hellcats to be reviewed......screwed in patch 4.11 causing excess drag and performance loss

In 4.13.4 the F6F-5 tested speed and climb is correct to common data, both on ADIwep and off. It has a large bonus maneoverability fudge in its flight data already! The 4.13.4 F6F-3 has same engine coding without ADI so I didn't test fly it.

There are lots of cool planes already made for il-2 that mod makers have not ported over to official il2 as mod makers prefer 4.12.2

Its infuriating that even all the super MEGA-mods are missing 1-2 diffferent planes that I would really like for a complete theatre

[JacksonsGhost]

Originally Posted by taly001

In 4.13.4 the F6F-5 tested speed and climb is correct to common data, both on ADIwep and off. It has a large bonus maneoverability fudge in its flight data already! The 4.13.4 F6F-3 has same engine coding without ADI so I didn't test fly it...

Thanks very much for the feedback and info taly001. I guess it is possible that my expectations for the F6F-5 performance are too high. I haven't tested it against official performance figures myself. In 4.14.1 I do remember having more difficulty chasing SU-2s at sea level than I expected, without resorting to WEP, and I was also influenced by comments made by baball and others in the M4T forums last year, where it seems to be a common complaint.

baball said "The main problem with the current Hellcat FM is that its lift coefficient at 0° AoA has been doubled, going from 0.17 to 0.36. What this means is that you have to pitch down way more in the post 4.11 patch as you gain speed, which in turn increases the drag of the aircraft more than it should."

Patch 4.14.1 was already out when baball made this statement, so I'm not sure how that fits with your 4.13.4 testing.

Here's a link to the full M4T discussion if you want to read the rest of the criticisms and mod solutions:

https://www.mission4today.com/index....wtopic&t=25460

[dimlee]

Originally Posted by Music

A few questions and suggestions:

Why do so few planes have full trim, they almost all have ele and rudder trim, I-16 has no ele, but thats the only one I can think of. But so many don't have aileron trim. Is that historically correct, to keep the pilots from setting it up and falling asleep in a 3 hour flight?

Is it my bad flying, or is the F6F a concrete pig, it does not climb, and for the Best the Navy had, a Zero Killer, it does not have the maneuverability or acceleration one would expect.

Did the P-39 really flat spin so easily?
....

Were the Russian planes really that bad,
....

I like using the clouds as a defense when playing on line, and F6'ing the guy chasing you makes that a even better tactic because it's not to hard to find them when leaving the cloud, But when chasing some one into a cloud, you can tell which way they are going if you can see the outline of your plane. and of course, you know exactly where they are as soon as you break out of the clouds. This suggestion is more for realism.
....

!

Trim / F6F/ P-39 - I'd suggest to play with your joystick/rudder settings to see what is the best for you in each aircraft. Multiple profiles might not be easy to handle, but they can help.
Spin in P-39 - yes, there are ways to stop it. With significant loss of altitude, of course. I did not fly this bird for years so not able to advise now, but if you search old forums you will find a lot of information. Spin was very hot topic in the community when P-39 was just introduced.

Soviet (not Russian, of course) planes good or bad?
Again, another popular topic of the old days. IMHO, they are not bad or good, just suited for the roles they were designed for. Some of them as La-7 are considered "unrealistically" good according to many "blue" virtual pilots.
If you can beat any La-5FN/7 in your Spit - great for you! Now it's time to turn tables and try La-7 vs Spit - why not?
I have not been on Alex for ages and surprised to learn about deficit of La pilots. In good old days (ah, yes, again...) La-5FN/7 were the most popular a/c of red pilots, especially of novices. And I-185, if available.

Clouds as a defence... I don't use padlock (this is F6, right?) so can not evaluate your suggestion. Just to note that online clouds can be deceptive. What I mean - exact position of the cloud on your PC and your adversary's PC can be slightly different. You might think you are safe but still to be exposed to him.
Otherwise I love "cloud defence". What can be better for the lonely SB-2 jumped by a pair of trigger happy 109F?

[gaunt1]

Some of them as La-7 are considered "unrealistically" good according to many "blue" virtual pilots.

Not according to "blue" pilots. Unrealistically good according to NII VVS tests. Ingame La-7 FM is based on the prototype. La-5F performance is also boosted by around 10%, base La-5 boosted even more. Only the FN is more or less correct, at some altitudes it is actually underperforming. Yaks on the other hand, almost perfect in terms of FM.