PDA

View Full Version : Per popular request, your ideas for improvement of IL-2 series and future sims.



Pages : [1] 2 3

crazyivan1970
05-15-2005, 03:26 PM
Topic speaks for itself, Fire away folks http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

idonno
05-15-2005, 04:05 PM
The sleep function for the ship ack is absolutely great! But could we PLEASE have the same for the ground based air defenses as well? Those guys didn't live with their fingers on the trigger either. If you pop up over the trees on an NOE attack, you should have a little time before the gunners can get to their guns and start shooting.

Here's a link to the original discussion thread, in case anybody is interested in reading it or commenting there. http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/63110913/m/8111094023

MEGILE
05-15-2005, 04:06 PM
When we open the canopy in flight, can we have the sound of our scalfs flapping in the wind?

Thanks.

Hunde_3.JG51
05-15-2005, 04:14 PM
A squad-mate mentioned this awhile ago, but I would like to see some way of implementing useful recon flights.

There would be recon versions of historically appropriate aircraft. When you hit the fire button, or drop bomb button, instead of ordinance being released you take a snapshot/picture. Maybe allow 3 to 5 per plane.

Then the recon aircraft has to land in order to make use of photos. Maybe a "recon" button could be put in the briefing screen (or wherever you hit refly from), and the latest photos taken could be viewed there with "time taken" and "grid location." If that isn't possible maybe photos could immediately be sent to a specified website or something.

This would be great for online wars or anytime recon is needed. I know this won't happen with FB/AEP/PF, but maybe down the line in BoB though it might prove more useful after it is expanded some. Just an idea.

CKY_86
05-15-2005, 04:42 PM
the ability to raise all objects in FMB & to move the x & y axis of all objects & have it stay in the position you left it as when you satrt the mission

Kannaksen_hanu
05-15-2005, 04:59 PM
Triggers in FMB.

AI-Disengagement when things start to look bad.

More compex engine management (warm-ups, accidental failures, etc)

IVJG51_Swine
05-15-2005, 05:01 PM
Support for wide screen monitors to give a wider view(16:9).

LEXX_Luthor
05-15-2005, 05:14 PM
Good ground grafix helps keep flight simmers interested, but the air combat environment is the sky and clouds. Creating Fantastic sky and clouds grafix is one of many ways to bring back flight sims to higher popularity. Both Newbie and bored Old Timers would find it hard to resist flying among Fantastic clouds. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Below, Royal Aussie Air-Commodore O. G. Heffernan, OBE, AFC, describes Towering Cumulus clouds he encountered when flying Bristol Bulldog fighter during the 1930s...


Sometimes during a flight one would encounter huge <span class="ev_code_yellow">towering cumulus clouds</span>, and it was a sheer delight to play chasings around them€"through the valleys and then a dive into a mass of cloud, a couple of minutes of clammy wetness and out into brilliant sunshine. In fact we were not supposed to do anything other than climbing and gliding, as there was some theory that violent manoeuvres upset the thermometers; <span class="ev_code_yellow">but it was hard to resist the temptation of this type of sport</span>; and as I said earlier, because of the limited number of aircraft around the sky in those times, there was virtually no risk of collision. One morning however, I was frolicking around a big cumulus cloud and was actually about to loop the machine through a hole in it when, as I came over the top of the loop, I saw to my horror another Bulldog looping in the opposite direction. Both of us were upside down and pointing straight at each other! I've forgotten what type of avoiding action we took, but I know that I fell back into the cloud and prayed that the other chap had gone the other way. On returning to the tarmac I was greeted by my friend, and we both made the same remark: "Were you the bloody fool that was mucking around that cloud?." Thereafter, we treated cumulus clouds with a bit more respect.

O.G. Heffernan in Stand To€"January-March 1966

Page 249 ~ http://www.austehc.unimelb.edu.au/fam/0249.html

Heffernan text begins on page 248.

Combat Environment of P~51D and Bf~109K (and B~17 for those who like more than just fighters)
http://www.photolib.noaa.gov/historic/nws/images/wea00084.jpg
National Weather Service Pic Library ~ http://www.photolib.noaa.gov/historic/nws/


also need...Flyable Bristol Bulldog... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

harryklein66
05-15-2005, 07:09 PM
BUMP for recon AC

and it would be cool if they can add smoke or fire IN the cockpit when the engine start to smoke/burn.

rr9
05-15-2005, 11:00 PM
Better support for more than 1 monitor.

Many graphics cards have connections for 2 monitors today. It would be nice if that second monitor could be used for displaying another window. Examples: map during flight, object viewer in Full Mission Builder.

ColoradoBBQ
05-15-2005, 11:26 PM
I wish to see the radio changed so the amount of chatter would be different according to the experience of the group. You can have rookies screaming at each other and making a mess of the situation and have the veterans make some chatter but not screaming at each fighter to bail out when damaged.

LeadSpitter_
05-16-2005, 01:12 AM
No offense Keeping all suggestions for improvements all jumbled in one unorganized thread kind of defeats the purpose of people seeing or responding to each individual suggestion.

That leaves nothing but complaint, fm whine threads, and your the best oleg thredds only allowed in orr.

Just my 2 cents.

JtD
05-16-2005, 01:45 AM
A damage model for buildings and bridges that makes them survive a lot better.

Same for train cars.

Better damage model for ships with longer sinking times. More fire.

An option that allows to control loadouts in dogfight maps.

Skill attribute for AAA.

Firing range for ships.

Built in configurations menue for Campaigns (using config.ini and other files is not state of the art).

The AAA ZIS truck should also be there as artillery, not only as immobile or moving object. (For dogfight maps.)

Damage model: Punctured tires.
Damage model: Hit oxygen tanks.
Damage model: Hit ammo storage.

Option to turn off the arrows that appear with icons/no cockpit settings.

Padlock/blackout settings also for external views.

LeLu_Repo
05-16-2005, 02:24 AM
For offline
===========
1. Dead is dead campaign option, no ability to refly if you get killed.
2. No need to complete the mission to advance in campaign.
3. Multimedia briefings.
4. Personal logbook for writing.

General
========
1. Ability to test convergence on ground (as they did in real life).
2. Personal notes for aircrafts.

SUPERAEREO
05-16-2005, 02:33 AM
Originally posted by Hunde_3.JG51:
A squad-mate mentioned this awhile ago, but I would like to see some way of implementing useful recon flights.

There would be recon versions of historically appropriate aircraft. When you hit the fire button, or drop bomb button, instead of ordinance being released you take a snapshot/picture. Maybe allow 3 to 5 per plane.

Then the recon aircraft has to land in order to make use of photos. Maybe a "recon" button could be put in the briefing screen (or wherever you hit refly from), and the latest photos taken could be viewed there with "time taken" and "grid location." If that isn't possible maybe photos could immediately be sent to a specified website or something.

This would be great for online wars or anytime recon is needed. I know this won't happen with FB/AEP/PF, but maybe down the line in BoB though it might prove more useful after it is expanded some. Just an idea.

Totally agree with Hunde and his team-mate (I was thinking this myself actually), it would be great to have recon versions of fighters (Bf.109 G-8, Spitfire, Mustang the first which come to mind) and be able to have offline missions with them, and have them collect points in online missions if they take correct snapshots of the target.


S!

SUPERAEREO
05-16-2005, 02:34 AM
Oh, and a WW1 Sim!!!

http://www.fokkerdr1.com/Dr1_2_3dr1s.jpg


S!

Mysticpuma2003
05-16-2005, 02:46 AM
S! Crazy Ivan, and thanks for the Luckboy termination http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

As posted before (and if you want to delete the threads previous feel free).

Recent threads I have seen have been effects of smoke leading to a slow blacking out and sluggishness in response of the joystick, a wind sock at the airfield that works, the ability to decide when to release the parachute canopy, voice activeated wingmen in offline games.

And we really need some different sky boxes and clouds (although I think these are coming!).

Could we also see more than one animation cycle for objects destroyed on the ground, in particular trains that go from 50mph to static when destroyed!!

Cheers again Ivan.

csThor
05-16-2005, 03:11 AM
One danger I see in such threads is the general rise of excitement among the posters. They post countless messages with suggestions/ideas and might fall down a very large cliff once the next game is out and not 10% of the suggestions have been implemented. Then the outcry (What? We said we wanted XYZ months ago!) is gigantic.

Baseline: Post suggestions, but don't expect most of them to be in. This way you can't get disappointed and if some are in they're a nice surprise.

269GA-Veltro
05-16-2005, 03:25 AM
BUMP for the recon aircraft, also from a battleship!

Great idea!!!!

CKY_86
05-16-2005, 04:13 AM
forgot one:

the ability to stick objects to other objects
EG: search light on battleship
EG: lights on carriers

Tipo_Man
05-16-2005, 05:06 AM
- Reduce the probality of an explosion
Planes should not explode like a 500kg bomb and disappear when they touch the ground with 200km/h in a 10 degree dive

- add recoil effect for the bombers defensive armament. The funny thing is that when you fly as a pilot and the gunner fires, you plane shakes, but when you switch to the gunner your plane becomes stable

- Water cooling system damage, Oleg said it will be included in PF, but it's not

- Trains (in)durability. You can kill a 100tonn steal monster with several rifle bullet hits?!

-DOTS and planes visibility !!!!! You can not leave the tnings this way, at least give us an option!

corsairf4u
05-16-2005, 06:06 AM
Originally posted by Tipo_Man:
- Reduce the probality of an explosion
Planes should not explode like a 500kg bomb and disappear when they touch the ground with 200km/h in a 10 degree dive

- add recoil effect for the bombers defensive armament. The funny thing is that when you fly as a pilot and the gunner fires, you plane shakes, but when you switch to the gunner your plane becomes stable

- Water cooling system damage, Oleg said it will be included in PF, but it's not

- Trains (in)durability. You can kill a 100tonn steal monster with several rifle bullet hits?!

-DOTS and planes visibility !!!!! You can not leave the tnings this way, at least give us an option!


it would be good too if you shoot at rear gunners you kill them instead of them continually shooting at you ?

womenfly
05-16-2005, 06:27 AM
Originally posted by SUPERAEREO:
Oh, and a WW1 SimS!!!!

<span class="ev_code_PINK">I second that!!!!!</span>
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v716/womenfly2/kit-D8.jpg

<span class="ev_code_PINK">There is enough information to make it very accurate sim, does not have to be perfect!</span>

JuanT
05-16-2005, 07:31 AM
In case you have missed it, there is a post here

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/63110913/m/5151049703

suggesting to include Spain, and later on the Spanish Civil war, in the game, with more than 5,000 reads and 100 contributions. I am not going to repeat arguments and ideas here, in synthesis this would provide:

-an new and varied, yet international scenario
-several nice new planes to fly

on a more general/technical side:
-The ability to move several objects at once in FMB
-More realistic ships (sinking,submerging subs)
-A more efficient voice comm such as everyone can benefit from Teamspeak-like comms on line

Thanks

B.Mamba-DK
05-16-2005, 07:46 AM
I would very much like to see some easy use options in misionbilder, where u can set a target for online dogfights. I know u someway can code it, but not all know how to do it or have a dedicated server or don€t have the code. it cut really bee a big help. Then the game are not totally for ace only, but it cut be fun to have a bombs to drop on a target. And it should count for a kill like in the air. Mabye then wee cut have a real war, where some bombs and some protect/defence bombers/targets. But what do I know? I only wish it cut be more dynamic instead of only dogfight. It is boring in the long run.

The ground objects cut bee better in my opinion.

6DOF for the people. Only the best sims have it. Should it be on of the best or is this sim just not that serious?

crazyivan1970
05-16-2005, 08:49 AM
Some nice suggestions here http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

LS, if you have nothing to add - don`t. This thread is about suggestions for IL2 and future sims... not a discussion about should we suggest something or not, ok? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif If people would like to express their opinions, the have all rights to do so. Whether it`s organized or not... doesn`t matter. What matters is...they care.

Cheers!

Cossack13
05-16-2005, 09:10 AM
I'd like to see the ability to set victory conditions for both sides in the FMB. If both (or neither) of the sides make their victory conditions, the game is a draw.

For campaign games, considering that tactical air warfare is supposed to focus on influencing the ground war, include some sort of operational-level ground game as the basis for the campaign. This would allow for the placement, movement, engagement and supply of the ground units. I'd image something along the lines of unit counters portrayed on a hex grid. Quite a few of the online wars attempt to supply this element, but having it included in the game (or linked via an official product release - are you listening, Oleg?) would be a real plus.

SeaNorris
05-16-2005, 09:22 AM
In Full Mission Builder we can do this:
http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v289/HH_Beebop/Rescue_01.jpg

We then go into the game, and its right again http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/cry.gif

Also skin ground objects, planes, cars, tanks etc.

Same Damage model on ground aircraft as flying aircraft.

The ability to 'nose over' the static planes using the F3,4,5 buttons.

ships must have longer sinking time (not essential)

Being able to place your aircraft in the taxi way as a takeoff point.

Default skins copied into folders named 'Generic.bmp' for editing such as personal skins.

Selectable flags on the Generic carriers/ships either side so we can vary.

Placeable 'default' airfields (like the test runways already in the game)

More to be added......

Thanks
SeaNorris

CapStratos
05-16-2005, 09:23 AM
The possibility of Take off in QMB, as simple as this

Grue_
05-16-2005, 09:23 AM
A huge desert map of the north African coastline from Tunisia to Egypt.

Next week alright?

Cheers!

Buzzsaw-
05-16-2005, 09:25 AM
Salute

I am not an offline player much, but the majority of the buyers of Flight Sims are. PACIFIC FIGHTERS lacked some elements.

So I think Oleg needs to look at the following and make sure they are found in BoB:

1) Detailed and extensive Single Player Campaigns, for all the various nationalities involved in significant numbers in the battle. Ie. German, Italian, British RAF, Czech RAF, Canadian RCAF/RAF, Polish RAF, French RAF, Australian RAF, etc.

2) Detailed AI modelling, which takes into account aircraft performance characteristics. Ie. different behaviour from the AI depending on whether they are up against a) better maneuvering but slower aircraft, b) Faster but poorer maneuvering aircraft. As it is in FB/PF, the AI seems to react similarly to whatever they are up against.

3) Ground enviroments which are 'alive', ie. with humans and other objects present in numbers. This does not have to be done so much in other areas, but airfields should really have a sense of a working enviroment with vehicles moving, people present etc.

4) The non-flying aspect of the game, ie. the GUI screens and rooms need to create more of a sense of the time. I'd like to see historical photographs, voices, sound clips, etc. to give a player involved in a Campaign the feeling they are living the era. A look at RED BARON 3D's Campaign enviroment will give some ideas. It is still one of the best. So is WWII Fighters, which although it was not that good a Flight Sim, had great atmosphere.

5) 6 degrees of freedom for views, ie. ability to lean left or right, as well as rotating in place and tilting head.

6) Real Ground control, with radar intercept, etc. and controllers being able to vector players onto opponents.

7) A real Nightfighter Campaign for BoB would be nice, with airborne radar, etc. However, this should only be included if the day Campaign is completed and with nothing missing. Otherwise, better to leave the NF to an Addon.

Tater-SW-
05-16-2005, 10:20 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/26310365/m/507107524/p/15

A hundred something ideas for FMB improvements.

tater

triggerhappyfin
05-16-2005, 11:01 AM
Originally posted by Hunde_3.JG51:
A squad-mate mentioned this awhile ago, but I would like to see some way of implementing useful recon flights.

There would be recon versions of historically appropriate aircraft. When you hit the fire button, or drop bomb button, instead of ordinance being released you take a snapshot/picture. Maybe allow 3 to 5 per plane.

Then the recon aircraft has to land in order to make use of photos. Maybe a "recon" button could be put in the briefing screen (or wherever you hit refly from), and the latest photos taken could be viewed there with "time taken" and "grid location." If that isn't possible maybe photos could immediately be sent to a specified website or something.

This would be great for online wars or anytime recon is needed. I know this won't happen with FB/AEP/PF, but maybe down the line in BoB though it might prove more useful after it is expanded some. Just an idea.

This was one of the best sudgestions on recce flights and there usage I´ve seen so far. I second this proposition. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

Bull_dog_
05-16-2005, 11:14 AM
1. more scalability with Icons/Arrows/weapons strength

2. Belting options for ammo

3 Field modifications allowable or not...check the box and you can have options to do different things depending on what was available.

4. For mission building...the ability to make a "formation". It could be ships, vehicles, an airfield or whatever...but you arrange objects and save it and can call it up again at a later date....you might make a task force of ships and save it for later use...or a fire base etc.

5. Japanese Cruisers and submarines and other small killable objects like sanpans, frigates, Horse drawn cart

6. Ability to take photos or add photos to a mission brief with arrows and text editing to indicate targets.

7. Weather generator where you can have fronts blow up/move through changing conditions.

8. True warp function for those far away missions

9. AI can't shoot through clouds

10. Ability to add islands and airbases to existing maps or cut out a section of a big map for a smaller online map...in conjunction with a warp fucntion, might be able to take a huge area like the Solomons and cut it into playable, downloadable chunks.

JtD
05-16-2005, 11:36 AM
Option in FMB to either see where aircraft on an airfield will spawn (dofight map) or even better the option to place individual spawning points.

Highscore for dead-is-dead offline campaigns.

Time acceleration like in 1942 PAW. Not a black screen, but a map with icons when going faster then x8.

Tater-SW-
05-16-2005, 12:08 PM
They could make "spawn points" available tomorrow in PF.

Make a new "test runway" object that has zero thickness (or minimal such that you can taxi off it). Make said "runway" only the size of the landing gear footprint of the largest bombers. Make it transparent.

There ya go, place one, and link a plane to it, instant spawn point wherever you like. Like CVs, you can make planes have 0 gas and park them where you like as well.

tater

RocketDog
05-16-2005, 01:10 PM
1. Coherence in the aircraft sets we are offered - e.g., So far we have oddities like the Horten flying wing, but no Mosquito. Ridiculous. Don't let the whims of third-party contributors push the sim in foolish directions.

2. Some coherence in the quality of modelling - e.g., the glazing on the Hellcat is murky as anything, yet crystal clear on the Russian aircraft. Why? The P-47 cockpit is very poor, yet the J8a's is superb. Why? Basic quality control please.

Regards,

RocketDog.

clicken
05-16-2005, 01:27 PM
The Korean War...ok not all of it but think about it. We have jets and some prop planes already, great scenery, no silly fire and forget weapons just dogfighting with Mig 15, Yak 9, IL4, F-86 Sabers, P-80 Shooting Star, Meteors, P-51 Mustang, B-29, F9F, F4U-5N Corsair,
We have the U.N, ROK, North Korean, Chinese and Russians....well I could go on but I think you have the general idea by now. I have been looking for a good Korean War flight sims for years....still waiting.

Jatro13th
05-16-2005, 01:39 PM
S~!

I have already posted these two suggestions in other threads, but since this one is THE thread for whining, then... here goes:

1. I would like to see my pilot's head move sideways in a displacive manner also, rather than just rotational. The cockpit bars sometimes obscure the enemy at the most crucial point! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_mad.gif

2. The sensation of the Gs is completely absent. It is difficult to unload your plane to 0 Gs in order to achieve maximum horizontal acceleration when you have no indication of perpendicular acceleration whatsoever!!

Thanks a bunch!!

bienenbaer
05-16-2005, 01:54 PM
A "warp away" waypoint was great. Then one could setup interception missions against bombers without having them to land at a nearby airfield or circling eternally.

As for the bombers and their escort, reaching the point would be like a "survive" point.

Probably hard core simmers will not like it as it can be easily abused for non-sense and planes just do not warp, but I feel it would provide more realistic strategic bomber interceptions/escort missions on the smaller maps.

----------------------------------------------
Edit 2006-01-31: O.K., I found some time ago:

1.) you can edit mission files and set waypoints out of the map
2.) you can use a time out on target setting

=> no need for any warp points

NorrisMcWhirter
05-16-2005, 02:01 PM
Hi,

To re-iterate some of my old suggestions:

a. "Spotter" points on maps that trigger a message to the friendly side if enemy planes spotted within a certain radius. For example,

"Attention! Observation point 5, grid D7 reporting 5+ bandits; approximate altitude 4000m+)

b. Idea a. can be extended to radar.

c. Pilot fatigue modelled where function of g force and exertion from moving flight controls reduces performance temporarily (extension to idea possibly prolonged high altitude flying reducing pilot performance, also due to cold etc).

d. Arrows on external view completely decoupled from dot ranges.

e. Arrows optional even with cockpit on.

f. Smoke in cockpit when engine hit blocking view.

g. Fixed quotas of aircraft available even for DF servers.

h. AI can't see through clouds.

i. Wingmen commands available even when you assume command because previous leader killed...saves AI smashing into the ground when you land because you can't instruct them to return to base.

j. Skill rating of aircraft affects gunner positions (they all appear to be snipers at present).

That'll do for now I think.

Ta,
Norris

BlackStar2000
05-16-2005, 02:20 PM
What about a realistic loadout for Bf109 f2/f4,
fw 190A(it has even torpedos plus other stuff)

Even check if some allied planes have their correct loudouts, maybe something is missing.

Better DM for tanks and some other ground objects, right now some stuff is more resistant than others.

i think some aircraft should be inserted to the game, things like recon planes + bombers for germans and allieds, but for sure some projects should be finished, dont let good models out of the game because of time.

What we have right now (FB+AEP+PF)its unique, will be very hard for any other developer achieve such number of planes + maps, so if the game goes to the final stage of its development, at least should consider finish good ideias left out maybe cause of time or other things.

Kapt_A
05-16-2005, 04:09 PM
I still think it would be cool to have an option in the FMB to change the numbers on the deck of the carriers. That way you could customize your squads ship and make it more recognizable.

DarkBlueMan
05-16-2005, 04:54 PM
In FMB be able to assign waypoints to static cameras in a similar way to aircraft. Of course they would no longer 'static' but if you'll follow me...
This way you could have (for example) a camera descending down through clouds at a speed of 300+ following bombers to their objective. You could have a camera following a convoy of vehicles or tanks or have a camera moving alongside a ship at the same speed.
Or simply be able to attatch a camera to a moving vehicle.
A spectator camera (free-roaming) would be neat, but only for track playback. Could be used unfairly online...

Oh, and just to add.
A bomb-cam (speaks for itself!)

Atomic_Marten
05-16-2005, 05:57 PM
About *claiming kills* in game.

1. Online it is bad to have flak that 'steals' our kills

2. We *should* have shared kills

3. In campaign mode (career) there should be strict rules about claiming victories over enemy aircraft. AFAIK, I can hit enemy aircraft which eventually fall down from sky 100km inside his territory (I can be as well 100km away from him and no other friendly unit near him -- no witnesses), and I would still be awarded a victory ("enemy aircraft destroyed"). That did not happen often in WW2 (unless the other side provide info about event http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif).
Anyhow some kind of restricted -claiming victories- procedure should be implemented IMO.


Maybe we can fill up some papers (info & events in sortie etc.) in which we can claim victories just after combat sortie? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif LOL

Bull_dog_
05-16-2005, 05:59 PM
ohhh ohhh one last suggestion... have an interactive wingman...a guy who talks to you all the time, warns you of bandits, talks to you about the external condition of your aircraft, summons you when needed, provides flight and navagational information, updates on mission status etc.... most importantly of all, allow this wingman to fly with you online too! Selectable of course.

Lose your wingman and you lose your eyes and your best friend...now that would create immersion and something to fight for! Lots of programming work i'm sure, but i'm convinced that one of the many keys to a sim is immersion and the learning curve, coupled with your interaction with the game is the key...take advantage of your sense of sound...music too, it produces emotional reactions in people which is why movies rely on it to set the mood...sims can do the same. Janes was good with that...the best if you like that sort of music. FB doesn't do much for me...but nothing like a victory song when objectives have been cleared.

Enforcer572005
05-16-2005, 10:36 PM
AI develpment-aggerssion levels, such as ai bugging out instead of fighting to the last man.

bombers that can be programmed to act like bombers-I just had blenhems trying to dogfight.level bombers v CAS behavior.

the ability to add wind in the Full MB; kinda strange not to have wind in a carrier sim, also would add more realism as far as smoke effects.

damaged AC should stay on the ground, not dissapear, even if they block the runway.

Kinda hard to have a naval sim w/o appropriate ships.....hopefully next generation carrier sim will be included earlier in the life of the series.

ability to have static AC in same markings/colors as flyable planes....P-47s in VVS markings on ground while youre flying OD green american ones.

Foo.bar
05-16-2005, 11:39 PM
SAR-planes wich will pick up bailed pilots.
imagine: bailed and survived pilots (weather enemy territory or not) have to wait for a SAR-plane (ju-52, fi-156 or something) wich will pick them up and bring them back to friendly base.
iff the pilot has been brought back he will be able to refly.

could be nice to commit SAR via teamspeak over enemy territory...

Monson74
05-17-2005, 01:33 AM
A Burma map.

The ability to set new or mark existing buildings as targets with score count.

Loadout restrictions for bases (same as parachute restriction).

Plane marking restriction for bases in DF missions.

Please fix the point system - now we get points for planes that return safely. Negative score for being shot down.

A "ShipGunners=n"-function in the conf or mission file that sets the maximum amount of aaa firing at the same time on ships. The ROF is good but the big ships fire salvos that takes much CPU - if only a restriced number of guns fired - the game could run more smoothly with better immersion & it would be more dangerous to attack ships if the gunners didn't take a coffee break every 20-30 seconds.

Random skill level of AI rear gunners in DF missions.

The ability to warn your wingmen off-line.

myg22ro
05-17-2005, 02:29 AM
Originally posted by NorrisMcWhirter:
Hi,

To re-iterate some of my old suggestions:

a. "Spotter" points on maps that trigger a message to the friendly side if enemy planes spotted within a certain radius. For example,

"Attention! Observation point 5, grid D7 reporting 5+ bandits; approximate altitude 4000m+)

b. Idea a. can be extended to radar.

c. Pilot fatigue modelled where function of g force and exertion from moving flight controls reduces performance temporarily (extension to idea possibly prolonged high altitude flying reducing pilot performance, also due to cold etc).

d. Arrows on external view completely decoupled from dot ranges.

e. Arrows optional even with cockpit on.

f. Smoke in cockpit when engine hit blocking view.

g. Fixed quotas of aircraft available even for DF servers.

h. AI can't see through clouds.

i. Wingmen commands available even when you assume command because previous leader killed...saves AI smashing into the ground when you land because you can't instruct them to return to base.

j. Skill rating of aircraft affects gunner positions (they all appear to be snipers at present).

That'll do for now I think.

Ta,
Norris

k. autotrims

Moka.21
05-17-2005, 03:10 AM
I have wished for this before, but:
The pilot should be able to determine when to open
the parachute and thus avoid being shot dead when
hanging in the air.
Complex FM and DM for the pilot AND his/her chute
when falling outside the plane, so they both can
be torn apart by the remains of an a/c.

nickdanger3
05-17-2005, 03:14 AM
Moving ships in online play, especially carriers.

Better bailing out sequence - more detailed and realistic.

Obvious ones would be better models and maps, but that will come of course.

Ground effect for planes taking off/landing.

More complicated, random, strange damage/failures/weather/wind.

Ability to export tracks to video files within program - ie. no need to use third party software like FRAPS.

FMB that has building units that can be stacked up.

And it may be sacriledge to all of the WWII fetishists out there but I have to say it: There needs to be a large city eating monster.
Just one.
Godzilla.
King Kong.
Gamera.
Mothra if you want to dogfight it.
Take your pick. Something that red or blue, axis or allied, we can agree on - a 200 foot tall radioactive beast to kill with planes. Yeah yeah yeah. It's a WWII combat flight sim. But cmon...wouldn't it be fun (every once in a while) to avoid a huge reptilian tail blasting away and trying not to hit the beautiful damsel in distress? Fun to model too I bet. Stick one in there and let us find it - a fire breathing easter egg.

There, I said it. I feel better.

Takata_
05-17-2005, 03:21 AM
- Possibility to have each Map_Named_Place on a separate file we can edit and change for building custom missions.

RAF_Loke
05-17-2005, 05:16 AM
What I would like to see is some more realistic smoke and fires like in this pic.

http://www.thewarpage.com/ww2/pacshore/heading3.jpg

A WW1 add-on would be great too.
And the possibility to add wind in FMB.

womenfly
05-17-2005, 06:42 AM
<span class="ev_code_PINK">How about seeing your arms and legs when fly in cockpit view. Noticed some of the jet sims have this feature. ....</span> http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif

Tater-SW-
05-17-2005, 08:44 AM
They could make smoke like that right now if they made a version of all the new smoke/fire objects that were transparent boxes with the smoke or fire effect as the damaged version of the empty box. Like right now there is a train car object, and a burnt hulk of a train car, only this would be invisible undamaged, and the damged version would be the current smoke object. Easy to do, no code changes, it's just a few new ground objects---that are blank, or already modelled!

Put a soke box object on the target, and when it gets hit by anything, it smokes. They could have the smaller smoke effects be damaged by anything (same DM as a car or motorcycle) and the larger smoke or fire might take a bomb or rocket to set off.

tater

SeaFireLIV
05-17-2005, 10:34 AM
Thanx, Ivan. Most of this is about immersiveness. I don`t expect all these ideas to happen, but who knows?

1. An option to REMOVE the cockpit joystick so those of us who want to use the cockpit dials can (often the Navigation, etc readings are obscured).

2. To have volume-oriented speech to avoid confusion with other squads in offline Campaigns.
Basically, the speech/calls of other flying squadrons would be quieter than that of your own Squadron. This way, the player-pilot knows what commands are for him. This volume could be adjustable.

3. AI not seeing through clouds (I suspect we may fully get this with the better clouds in 4.0) http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

4. Greater smoke, like you see in all the war pics. Billowing smoke that wends away from almost any burning object. I don`t suspect we`ll get this, but after playing SHIII it`s upped my hopes!

5. Allow AI fighters to sometimes waggle wings (to indicate enemies) and to even make a victory roll after a fighting sortie.

These AI rolls could be random and based on a percentage chance of occuring - as long as that side has won the battle. I know this was not allowed by the authorities, but every now and then a pilot did it.

6. Practise gunnery boards, that actually allow us to set our convergence on the ground until we felt we had it right (set in the hanger or outside?)

7. Malfunctioning radios in the I16 (not just the early japanese planes).

8. More Pacific based speech, ie
"Our carriers been hit!"
"It`s a kamikaze!"
"My god, she`s going down!"
"Woohoo! Carrier destroyed"
"Our carrier is out of action, please land on our sister carrier, over".

Just stuff to make the seas a little more alive.

8. a Seagulls/ birds. Yep, after playing SHIII, Seagulls are on my mind!

9. Gunners at guns on the Eastern front. Allow them Pause moments (as being stunned by near hits or reloading).

10. Very important: The ability to take command of a Squadron if your Squad leader is killed and you are in command. This really needed fixing a long time ago for us off-liners.

Thanks for reading.

idonno
05-17-2005, 12:56 PM
I could sure use some indication of trim tab settings so I can trim my plane the same way every time.

For example, proper trim for the F4U for take-off was 6 degrees nose right, 6 degrees right wing down, and 1 degree nose up.

Mysticpuma2003
05-17-2005, 01:51 PM
1) To be able to remove icons from .ntrk files, so that online games can be used for movie footage.

2) In QMB to be able to have more than 16 planes on each side.

3) In QMB more variety of the maps that are in the game.

4)A flyable four engine bomber

5)An active oxygen cylinder that randomly gets hit by enemy attack, leading to player getting woozy and eventually blacking out unless he dives to an air-rich level where O2 is not needed.
Imagine flying along after being attacked and suddenly your moniter get blurring, double vision and the joystick starts to get sluggish. You realise it's O2 deprivation and have to dive for your life.

6) Body specific hits. Enemy attack hits pilot in right-leg....can't push right rudder. Plane difficult to turn right. Pilot gets hit in arm, loses 50% of stick control. An idea is all it is, not definate effects of injury.

7)Just an overall better damage model on the planes, where when the back of the plane breaks off it has a jagged edge. The same applies to a wing, not just the straight-line cut.

8)Haven't seen this for a while but when wings get shot-up, I have seen in the past one wheel of the undercarriage drop down, maybe it still does, but I haven't seen it for a while.

9) Photo recon missions of the areas to be attacked.

10) Drifting smoke over a target area.

11) Ground troops (actual bodies not vehicles) needing to be saved by straffing runs against attacking side.

12) Weather maps for briefing

13)Steam coming from trains that are being straffed, with eventually a huge explosion from ammunition on the train load, or massive explosion (satisfying) of steam when boiler get breached.

14) Does the campaign mode (I don't know this) have the ability for the AI to call up an air strike in a certain location if the ground troops are under attack?

15) A Bomb Camera

16) A completely free floating camera, effectively a hard-coded alpha channel plane that can be flown in .ntrk or .trk playback, making it effectively an invisible camera plane.

17) When playing back a track, the ability to jump into another cockpit to see what the other player saw....ONLY for offline play!!
Many times I've beaten a plane up online, but not got the kill. I'd like to jump into his plane in the track playback to see how he avoided me and learn for future gaming.
This feature was available in European Airwar, and old game with great camera angles. Not sure if it had track playback though, just in-game.

18)More varied debris falling from plane, rather than just speckles

19) Point sharing for online kills. Nothing worse than beating up a plane to the point where it's falling apart and then someone getss one shot at it and gets all the points.
Couldn't the 'game' share points between all the players who have got active shots on a plane or target. It's like ships. Seven planes, seven torpedos, only one get's the points. Every plane that scores a hit on the target, should get a share of the overall points.

20) If my plane gets shot, but through skill I bring it back to base with oil everywhere, overheating, manually lowering the UC and bringing it in to land, when I hit refly "Mysticpuma was blown out of the sky by...). Hang on, I survived, I never bailed and let the plane crash, I didn't blow up.. I landed safely. Please don't award points as a penalty against skill!

21) It appears that there is no "Co-Op server" software so that we can run dedicated Co-operative servers for the community. PLEASE.....let us have this. The Co-Op community is virtually dead and I'm sure that dedicated software would been guzzled down! Please!


Well that's enough for now...Cheers.

SleazeyWombat
05-17-2005, 02:39 PM
1) Realistically persistent amounts of fire and smoke in cities, villages and battlefields. All fire, smoke, and dust clouds should be responsive to the wind.

Different colors of smoke, dependent on what's burning.

Burning vehicles, buildings, targets, installations, ships.

Grass and forest fires as a result of combat.

Fires settable in the mission builder.

Small fires that grow into larger fires over time. Fires that spread. AI that reacts to fires.

Fires that burn out after a sufficient amount of time.

Fires, smoke, and dust supported in the mission editor.

2) I want the player log in XML, to make it much easier and more reliable to parse, via the many XML parse libraries available for Java, C++, etc.

The log should note every thing damaged or destroyed, with as much detail as feasible, i.e. "Destroyed", "Damaged", "Burning", "Burned out", "Demolished", "Sunk", "Sinking", "Listing", "Leaking", "Beached", "Wrecked", "Abandoned", "Crashed", "Belly Landed", "Overturned", "Bombed", "Strafed", combinations thereof. Maybe damage levels could be reported numerically. All this should be supported by the mission editor.

3) Tracking of every ground object damaged or destroyed, to allow persistent damage in campaigns.

4) Troops on the ground, with their own AI. A front line that means something to the game, with trenches, and combat. AI troops manning the front lines and the rear.

All kinds of stuff on the battlefield. Artillery, AA positions, flak towers, mortars, mortar pits, MG nests, trenches, rifle pits, fox holes, pillboxes, bunkers, OP's, pontoon bridges, Bailey bridges, engineer battalions, bull dozers, engineer equipment, repair shops, communications antennas, telephone wires, power lines. More ground battles. Flares. Medics working on wounded.

Proper amount of animals on the battlefield. Horses pulling wagons, cavalry troops scouting, etc. After all, Germany was very much a horse-powered army even in WWII. So were the Russians. Camels in the desert.

In general, a livelier battlefield. Mission editor support to build a realistic battlefield.

5) Bridge, road, and RR repair teams and equipment doing their job as needed.

6) Dust from moving vehicles, combat, etc, needs to be more pronounced, especially on desert maps.

7) Cities and villages that look more "lived-in". Livestock, cars, trucks, wagons, on the streets or roads. People walking around, or fleeing, etc. Refugees with overloaded wagons or cars or trucks. Bushes around the houses and villages, and in the towns. Vehicle traffic in the towns. Streetcars.

8) Oil slicks on the water, burning oil/fuel on the water as a result of sinkings or crashes. Naval bases with drydocks.

9) Aircraft recognition panels on the ground, colored flares, recognition signals, markings on the tops of vehicles.

10) Clickable cockpits.

11) More and better radio traffic. Falcon 4 was the best in this area.

12) Approach and landing patterns displayed on the map for human pilots, not just the AI. ATC both AI and human.

13) Livelier airbases, mechanics working on planes, people walking around, the alert pilots in their chairs, windsocks, people manning the tower, Very pistols, lights, trucks and jeeps driving around. The meat wagon (ambulance) parked near the runway. Livelier naval bases, cities, villages, and towns, battlefields, etc.

14) I run a set of USB earphones. Sometimes I wish that I could have all the radio traffic coming through the earphones, while all of the game sound effects came through the sound card and speaker system.

I would like this to be a preference setting, so I could have (a) all sounds through the headphones, (b) all sounds thru speakers, or (c) radio communications through the earphones, and external sounds thru the speakers.

15) Building damage models should include: (a) totally burned-out buildings, (b) totally demolished buildings (unburned), (c) partially burned-out, (d) partially demolished, (e) combinations. Rubble in the streets after bombings or combat.

16) Better support for multiple joysticks, rudder pedals, throttle quadrants, etc.

17) Ability to simultaneously control multi-engines, with each engine throttle/mixture/pitch/cowl flaps/etc. assignable to separate joystick/throttle/quadrant axes.

18) Separate left/right toe brakes.

19) Support for multiple monitors.

20) GCI communications, both AI and human.

21) FAC's, AI and human.

BlakJakOfSpades
05-17-2005, 10:44 PM
on the subject of having a damage model for the player (right leg gets hurt, right rudder nearly unusable) as suggested by mysticpuma i think it would be awesome with the addition of 6DOF in BOB if the player could do such things as duck down behind the head armor when being shot from behind, or if he was leaning to the right checking his six get nailed in the head and the screen goes black.

JungleGeorge061
05-17-2005, 11:46 PM
Forgotten Battles / Pacific Fighter,
is a such a lonely world.
One ideal just to add feel to the game, Put AI people into the game, at least at the airfields. Such as real ATC and ground control (follow me trucks / ramp personel with hand/wand signs for parking) at the large airbasis. Mechanics, fuelers and armors servcing the aircraft. At least somebody doing something http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-indifferent.gif .

Tachyon1000
05-18-2005, 12:25 AM
I'd like to ask for more realistic AI plane movement in two aspects. First, if indeed AI planes are capable of performing manuevers that humans are not, I'd prefer that were not the case. Second, AI planes often seem to perform strange looking flight manuevers like turning strictly with rudder or manuevering into a particular attutide or position and then bobbing mysteriously through the axis they moving through.

In both instances, it breaks the immersive feel of the sim and looks a bit strange. It's bad enough that the AI can perform a scissors or split S better than I can, let alone performing it without what would the same restrictions placed on human pilot performance in the game.

RAF_Loke
05-18-2005, 12:33 AM
Oh yeah almost forgot.
Right and left breaks, so you actually can taxi a twin engine plane that only have one engine running. Just like in FS.
And the option to refuel/rearm instead of respawn http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif.

A.J.Rimmer
05-18-2005, 03:39 AM
1. Living airfield would be nice.
2. Flak gunners can be killed, ragdoll http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

3. As the future is in Multiplayer. I would like have the MP of IL2 like Warbirds. Ability to capture Airfields with Paras. Rich statistics.
War 1939-1945 in 14 real days.Radar, etc.

4.Much better chat(warbirds like is better).

Frenchminem
05-18-2005, 04:28 AM
-clickable cocpit

-moving in cockpit (stick the rear armor, when being shoot from 6 is a godd idea... and beeing able to wke up, and look up the motor, cuz, I just can't see If i got a plane before me, when taking off...

-autoupgrade skins and planes marking (air victories, and ground kills, with personnals icons, and placement on the plane (under canopy, on tail, on nose...)

-being able to apply skins too squadmembers... to be able to recognize them inflight...
(and whynot, a more powerfull tool, to make a data, and parameter all the skins for real squads... so a skin made from a JG2 plane, would be auto applied in game, when my squad would fight the JG2, for example...)
(and we could then, know who we fight... and see wich plane they got... in where are they coming from (wich airfeild... know they might be an ace in that ennemy flight...)
(real pilots used to know things about ennemy formations , like that... and with planes marking (imagine a WWI game without a red skin for the fokker of Von Richtofen...)

-give work to third party developpers, to put objects on map, cuz I think 1C, can't spent is time to add trees, or houses, or cars, or each typic monnument, of cities in each city... but It would be so great (i think they can do this yet in FS 2004...)
(maybe a citizen of Paris could make monnuments of his city.. and indicate where to place It!! the same for other smaller cities too... (it would be nicer , and look more human...)
(so, 1C would only have to realease a simple ground object editor, and If it's well done, i guess good quality things would be easily done... cuz many people would participate to upgrade their game... and I'd like to build small things too... customize city I live in... cuz i know It!!
(for example , a person from eah city could send data about his city... find the plans, turn them into a color code... for streets, house type, places, gardens, monnuments place and type... with this data, the developpers could turn it in the game map, with correct streets of the city concerned, places, gardens, and house types...)(it's just an ideea... and, 1c got to see how it can be done... i don't know how the build the land, and place objects at all...)(can be easy to go, and take shot of houses, and get a skin of a real building type and model it maybe... while developpers can't go everywhere to got correct building types...)

AAA_Mohican
05-18-2005, 04:35 AM
Four engine bombers flyable:

B24, B17, B29, Lancaster, etc.

RAF_Loke
05-18-2005, 06:02 AM
Originally posted by Frenchminem:
-clickable cocpit

and beeing able to wke up, and look up the motor, cuz, I just can't see If i got a plane before me, when taking off...

Ever tried to sit in a real WW2 plane?
Cuz you can't see a s**t infront of you, that is also the reason why most WW2 planes have to zigzag on the taxiway.
If you ever comes to Duxford and see the Flying Legends Airshow you will see it done.

But it would be nice to be able to lean out to the sides.

Cheers

KOM.Nausicaa
05-18-2005, 06:07 AM
On Scenery:

1.For the future (like BoB), the "octagonal style" layout of maps should be abandoned for something looking more realistic and diverse.

2.try to find a playable solution for forests looking more realistic (no "look through") when being on ground level)

3.diversify the ground textures. You should be able to see clearly fields, grass, a different more harsh texture on mountains and hills etc. You see what I mean. In resume, make the ground-textures more realistic and convincing looking.

4.make the clouds less "fluffy coton" style. Diversify the possible shapes and looks.

On AI:

1.The AI should have the same limitations the player has. Means: no looking through clouds, no looking through the plane. The AI should have a visibility that is defined more or less by the shape of a cockpit. This hasn't necessarily to depend on which plane they fly (I think that would become to complicated to program) but give them a default cockpit that limits the view, that would be enough and change gameplay radically IMO.

2.Of course, the AI planes weight and fuel etc should be realistic and in no way "lighter" or "better" then the players plane.

3.AI squadrons should sometimes disengage. This was a essential part of air-combat tactic. Pilots where tactitians, not pitbull dogs that bite and never let you go. And that leads me to the next:

4.AI pilots should not pursue you forever. Especially in BoB, this is really a point. No RAF pilot would cross the channel to come after a german and pursue him until his airbase in France or Belgium. This was stricty forbidden, and tacticallly seen, total madness.
There should be a feature in the FMB that allows to set something like a "rubberband" to define a point AI pilot's will not cross. Means that you can set up a limit of combat zone for them. In BoB, this should be for the RAF halfway the channel for example. As a german pilot, you would know that crossing the channel back to France can bring you safety. This is very important IMO, and would add a great notch of realism to the upcoming BoB. It would break my personal immersion terribly if I would see a squadron of RAF Spits over a Audembert airfield in July 1940
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

On the "Game World":

1. More impression of "life" down there. I know that this is a difficult balance to find, and almost all flightsims have rather "empty" worlds for the sake of playability and CPU power, but it should be possible to liven the things up on some points, for example airfields. Include some walking and working personnel on groundbases. Some mecano's around a plane, an officer walking from one building to another, etc. Of course, it should be possible to set these up in FMB too.

2. do the same for the ground armies. There should be at least some walking troops, for example some 20 soldiers, treated like a "vehicle". The german army was essentially a walking army, especially in Russia. Think of horses too.

3. more ships, especially freighters. This is crucial for BoB. The strikes of the Luftwaffe during the first phases, but also during the complete BoB, where against shipping supply, never or rareley warships (most of them weren't even in the area). Means we need freighters and coastships of all kind.

4.more vehicles, and not necessarily all military

5.think about the option do lit some city houses or streets in the night. Black outs were never total.

On mission builder:

1.All objects should have the possibility to be changed of vertical "height". This would create many possibiliies to combine them and to create "new" buildings and such. Think about sandbags for example. You could pile them up and get some very nice and good looking results.

2.a new object: lit streetlamps (also very nice for airfields)

3.new objects like different groundtextures, which have no "thickness", but can be applied to the ground like a carpet. This could include the following: a) bombcraters, b) squares and rectangles of different form and color, simulating "concrete", "worn out grass" "naked earth" etc (all kind of things are possible here) This would allow to set up more convincing looking installations somewhere in the field, and reduce the effect you always get of "litte houses on a green carpet". If you are a creative scenery builder, you could get some way more convincing looking results.

4. It should be possible to set a starting point for a plane that is not necessarily on the runway, but elsewhere on the airfield, so that the player has to taxi to the runway first.

Thanks for reading!

Nausicaa

Frenchminem
05-18-2005, 06:13 AM
no need to go to Duxford to see WWII planes... it's not the "center of the wrold"... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

as you know everythink... can you tell me how I can zigzag when I 'm the flight deck of a carrier...
the real problem is, i got to use external view to check If I have a plane before me on the runway... not to start and hit him... so I was wondering, If we couldn't add an otpion to just look up to the canopy, or as high as possible... without staying seated... (the Zero offer the possibilty to up your seat, when canopy is open... but I didn't found any other plane like that with suck option... maybe cuz any other one allowed to up the seat... but did pilot where f*** stupid enought not to get the idea to up their f**** *** to have a look!!
(anywya... true pilots got radio, and before entering the plane, they could easily see there own position of take off, and then have to wait control tower to tell them, or that teammates announced their starts...) (I only do zigzag when I wanna take off BEFORE the plane whose in front of me, cuz the base might be under attack.. so I take off faster... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif)

NorrisMcWhirter
05-18-2005, 11:16 AM
Hi,

How about another?

The 190 having a nose down attitude (as it did in real life as reported by Pierre Clostermann) ?

Cheers,
Norris

Dolemite-
05-18-2005, 12:57 PM
<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">Editable hud log</span>

adriatic
05-18-2005, 02:32 PM
I see IL-2 as a process, extremely good development, and I'm sure Oleg will drive it in a good way...

So, I will write how I se future of all virtual life.

1. Maps- Starting point should be Earth. Full globe, with parallels and meridians.. This should be developed by another publisher, and should be same for all reality simulations. (All game engine should support same maps). Should be possible to choose year, and download more detailed terrain on places of interest.

There should be huge servers with earth with real time going on.. (More later about this.)

2. On-Line play- Different simulations should get connected... If we have one Earth for all, we have one war for all. People crazy for strategy make plans , moves, orders. Shutting games download buildings and other stuff detailed, and fight on the ground. Tank simulation freaks download their detailed interest, and we our... But we all fight on the same ground, only that I don't see inside buildings, and little solider don't se all gauges in my plane, but if he manage to take flak in his control, we can have influence on each other...

In praxis, it will look like these; after choosing side (once for whole war) and getting identity code, I connect to briefing where I can find what strategy people decided for that day should be done. Chose some action, and jump in some free place. Virtual war will be done by virtual intelligence. We will be there to help them. So, also when I disconnect-war continues...If I want to change course of war, I have to fight.
After getting killed, will have to start again from lower rank. Of course-all this for full simulation freaks.

But, more servers, with different year of fight, different reality settings, but always with possibility to jump in all vehicle and situations-it will depend only which game you have installed.

3. IL-2-
Support for above written.. so, we hawed same world, but our game decide how far can we see..which planes we have and how realistic they fly. With planes which will have green light from server can be possible to get connected. So, you can fight there against planes from another simulations, Microsoft combat flight for example, if they get green light also. Server decide which planes from which game meet their requirements.
Depending on personal PC power it will be possible to chose amount of earth battle around you that will be downloaded and displayed to you..5, 10 , 20 ..., 50,... 100...Km

Moving to person-ability to walk to your plane, or change it for another one, to steer your self after bailing, to decide when to open parachute, to walk after getting on ground, because there will be real people on the ground in on-line play. View will be from person head. 3D, with head on display, head movement tracking.

Planes-with game we should get simplified world map and planes, but which will fly realistic. After choosing airplane of interest, you download all interior stuff,how much money, so much gauges. So-developer will se on which planes is biggest interest, but they will have to create all of them in simplified versions,also because it will be needed for virtual war for artificial intelligence.

Weather-yes, it should have impact like in reality. Real world weather should be downloadable.

That's all how I see future in 10 years...or 20...



And hopes for BOB...

Weather, with wind, termic, temperature, and all things about I don't know nothing.
Moving to person-having possibility to tilt head, and to hold that view also after bailing.
Having possibility to link more PC to get more hardware power....(I know it is not development of IL-2, but if it came ;IL-2 should support it.)
More handling possibility in full mission builder, to rotate objects, to copy/paste complete situations from another missions. (Maybe this things can already be done...but it should be better explained.)
To buy game from 1C-Maddox.

LuckyBoy1
05-18-2005, 03:26 PM
Now Ivan, don't do that, I'll just go copy and paste it in here again.

crazyivan1970
05-18-2005, 03:28 PM
What do you have to ruin this thread? Personal agenda? There are many good requests, so stay out of it. Wanna turn into flame war? Not gonna fly. If you don`t respect me, at least respect others...

mistral_73
05-18-2005, 03:30 PM
A good idea originally from RBJ:
Make some area of the cockpit bars "semi-transparent", to simulate the fact than you can see through them using your two eyes.
I don't know if I'm very clear. RBJ gave the good example that you can see a whole image (or read some text) although you have one of your finger between your eyes and the image (or the text).

That would be very appreciated in "full difficult" servers, where planes often disappear behind the bars of the cockpit.

Mistral

Mistral

LuckyBoy1
05-18-2005, 03:43 PM
This thread is entirely at least as evil as clowns! Isn't the game already demanding enough on our PC's? Asking for all this nonsense when we can't even get the bomb loadout for the P-47 correct is beyond irresponsible.

So, I guess guys you are going to have to look elswhere and here for my really cool bomb loadout idea.

Urufu_Shinjiro
05-18-2005, 05:21 PM
LB, I usually agree with most things you have to say, I appreciate your down to earth view. That being said, I think your way off here, I agree that we shouldn't clutter this game up anymore, but I disagree with your tactics to end all discussion of this. Can't you just trust oleg and crew to know what they're doing and laugh to yourself at these guys, do you have that little faith in the man who's baby this game is. I'm not a screeming oleg fanboy but I do believe that he has this games best interests at heart and won't do anything to screw it up just cause a bunch of people want to be able to hang it out the pit window and leak on the enemy. Have faith and don't waste time on this anymore, we need the NEW AND IMPROVED guide for complete users http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

redfirey
05-18-2005, 07:23 PM
I always liked the IL2 series very much, and always play it.
Many times I watch the Campaigns, as a spectator.
I really appreciate, all the external views.

I almost never posted a response before.

I'd love to see working "Horsa", and "Waco" CG-4, gliders, along with many active ground troops.
My favorite theater is The China, Burma, India Theater (CBI).
I'd really love to see more Japanese mediam, to heavy Bombers; Top Priority to th Ki-21, Ki-48, G3M Nell , as well as others like the Ki-10, and Ki-15
Would love to see you produce the CBI theater,
(China, Burma, India).

Thanks again, for the best flight sim.

idonno
05-18-2005, 07:52 PM
A minimum range setting for icons would be great!

Once the other airplanes gets close enough there's no need for type or distance icons.

Ltn.F.Baracca
05-19-2005, 01:29 AM
Hi all Pilots!

Which improvements can be made in Il2-FB?... could be a good beginning if:

A) Will be made a new review of the conduct for some aircrafts, or, like says, a real FM (... goes well that it is a game, but, some are to the limit of the aceptable like--> http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/34.gifSpitfire--La-5/7--KI-84--Mig--Yak 3...... and others instead too much penalize -- >...BF-109 -- P-51-- P-47 -- Hellcat -- Hurricane..... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif!).

B) New sound effect......sees CFS 3 as an example-->(i dont like to admit it but....the sound effect it is thousand times better! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1072.gif).

C) It's undeniable that does not exist a "excellent" setting Joy for all the aircrafts http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif, if they applied one option,for exemple... to the window of the Chosen game Aircrafts, where, through a list of setting previously from we it saves to you, we could decide which to use in function of the chosen aircraft.
If it were possible,yes....it is, we would have finally the possibility to enjoy fully all the Aircrafts and not...... great for the P-40 but bad for the Fw190, often I hear to say http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif:
I would like try to fly whit P-51.....but i get another Joy-conf. ..... are not suited http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif!!!

D) A relations proportion-distances for Aircrafts and not (......indifferently from the used monitor, creed that, in order to make an example, a B-25 to 10Mt, seen from a cabin of a fight, would have to completely fill up visual and the not partial one like if it were... a Cesna http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif!!).
..It is just a personal opinion...of course!! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Good wind Pilots!! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

jwecross
05-19-2005, 07:40 AM
As a host of multiplayer matches, I would like to see some changes to the creation of multiplayer dogfight matches:

1. Equipment Tracking: equipment added to bases and other sites is persistent during a mission. If you destroy specific aircraft in the air or on the runway, they are removed from a "Pool" number of available aircraft of that type. So, if you have 3 BF109G's parked on the runway and two of them are strafed and destroyed, that team only has one left to work with.

2. Player aircraft start from where the static models are placed on an airfield.

3. Scoring system shows points AND an air-to-air kill number.

4. Non-static equipment can be placed in dogfights (i.e. AI aircraft, moveable armour etc.)

5. Mission spawning tree a-la FBDaemon: success or failure of each team in an on-line matchup spawns a particular sub-mission.

6. Dynamic "front" based on air-to-ground success or failure in missions. This would allow for the creation of on-line "wars" similar to those available in the RB3D community.

7. (for some day far from now) Database of available equipment for each "team". The database is populated by set time periods, and as equipment are lost in dogfight "campaigns", they are removed from the "pool". New equipment is added to the pool "as reinforcements" at specific time intervals. Pooled equipment includes aircraft, ships, vehicles, armor etc. Respawn in a battle can only draw from this pool, and when an item in the pool runs out, it is unavailable for respawn or placement in a subsequent mission until the "reinforcement period" is complete. If it is possible, fuel should also be a part of this system. In addition, there should be options to account for equipment and fuel availability for each team at specific periods during the war.


These would pretty much make the IL2/PF or impending BOB games true leaders in the on-line arena as well as the single player market. These tools would give me the ability to make more "representative" historic dogfight campaigns covering specific battles or the entire war. More importantly, these would force players in the multiplayer world to adopt real-world strategies such as airfield CAP, bomber escort, ground facility attack, formation flying etc. Furthermore, it would force players to try to return damaged aircraft to their bases to avoid losing them from the "pool". Maybe at some far future date, damage and repair could also be incorporated across missions, depending on mission date? Tha would mean that aircraft "shot up" in one mission would carry their damage across to the next one, unless a specific "repair period" had elapsed.

Well - that's about all I can think up for now. I hope some of these ideas get you folks thinking about other suggestions for future features or improvements, or spark the mod community to come up with even more creative solutions!

Mysticpuma2003
05-19-2005, 09:48 AM
Dedicated Co-Operative server software.....PLEASE!!!

csThor
05-19-2005, 11:03 AM
This thread has developed exactly into what I feared it would. Some folks should take out a glossary and look up "self-delusion".

I really really fear some folks are expecting miracles from what is still a man-made piece of software which is imperfect and limited per definition. Please folks - be reasonable and don't ask for stuff that would strangle even HighEnd PCs of the year after the coming. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

KOM.Nausicaa
05-19-2005, 12:23 PM
Well this is a thread of "what if's". It is perfectly clear that they do not necessarily reflect the future, but this kind of thinking and brainstorming is necessary in the conception of future projects. Before you conceive anything, your first have to dream it after all. I do not agree with the attitude of refusal of ideas that might look utopistic. Firstly, they aren't all of them unconceivable (another combat flight sim I know has some of the things I mentioned in my post, another upcoming will have them and more of those you would probably believe to be unworkable) and second, we know very little of the future of computer power, except that it will be very powerful http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

Brainstorming has no cost of whatsoever, and its fascinating and interesting to hear what prorities other people have. Also a good way to get to know each other. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

DarkBlueMan
05-19-2005, 03:31 PM
Originally posted by csThor:
This thread has developed exactly into what I feared it would... ...be reasonable and don't ask for stuff that would strangle even HighEnd PCs of the year after the coming. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

You're missing the point of this thread. It is just for ideas and not flames. Ideas only. Think of it as a worldwide brainstorm. Oleg is an intelligent man and will not get sidetracked by trying to turn every every single idea into a reality at the sake of performance. It will be nice if he has a browse through this thread and maybe picks one or two ideas.

It has turned into what you feared? It is exactly what it is. A place for ideas. It only deviates when people post anything other than ideas.

Let it be and let Oleg make his decisions for himself...

Wolf-Strike
05-19-2005, 04:27 PM
Get rid of speed bar and be able to drag and drop what gauges you want to bottom of screen in cockpit view.Me personally,I would love to see the altimeter/horizon/speedo/boost/tach/engine temp.

Also have trim work like this....your diving down and you just hit down trim button and slowly release stick and hear a click when trim is set.Isnt this how trim really worked.....you held stick and moved trim wheel until resistance was felt....let go of stick and it stays where you last left it.

Have AI tower control in online play...telling you that your clear to taxi to runway/clear to take off/clear to land/vector to homebase/vector to airplanes in radar range/GET UP GET UP were being ATTACKED!!!!!..........................have it so that if radar is taken down you lose this online....same with control tower.

idonno
05-19-2005, 07:04 PM
When padlock is released, the view should stay where it is instead of moving forward.

I use TrackIR, but I still like to use padlock just so I can zoom in and see what the enemy is doing. However, it's really annoying losing sight of him when I release the lock and the view rotates forward.

BBB_Hyperion
05-20-2005, 12:23 AM
CI good luck compiling this list http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

I wont post mine here http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

diomedes33
05-20-2005, 10:34 AM
Originally posted by Hunde_3.JG51:
A squad-mate mentioned this awhile ago, but I would like to see some way of implementing useful recon flights.

This is the idea that Hunde was talking about. Over time I removed the pics off the
server, but I'll dig around my computer and see if I can find them again.

Recon (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/63110913/m/521109174/p/1)

F19_Ob
05-20-2005, 06:14 PM
The importance of implementing good trees in the full missionbuilder.
I explain in this thread with 7 big pics.

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/63110913/m/7441059223

thanks

ManicGibber
05-21-2005, 09:41 PM
1. The option to reduce the size of onscreen fonts.

2. I would like the dots to dynamically increase in size as planes approach and for them to decrease in colour, tone, saturation, brightness/contrast, as they move away and then instead of just suddenly appearing or disappearing they would blend into the atmosphere, in other words they would slowly slowly fade out of sight.

3. For the FMB more trees, shrubs, plants, hedgerows as well as being much much larger, plus dead trees and trees/shrubs in full blossom or totally leafless as in deciduous vegetation.

4. I hope Oleg or whomever, reads this far into this large thread as there are heaps of great ideas in these pages.

HotelBushranger
05-21-2005, 11:02 PM
What I want most is good sounds. Some other cool stuff is:
Clickable cockpits including openable canopies for all aircraft
Moveable spaces in bombers, i.e. clicking around the positions like in SHIII
When manning gunner positions, gun recoil and shake, and also better modelling. I saw some screenies of a B-25 in FS 2004 I think, and I was blown away, all the guns were omg so much better looking

And going beyond the realms of reality, something like a complete mix of CoD and FB/PF. So, you could have some players attacking an aircraft, some defending it manning guns, aa artillery, tanks, and then you could have some players in fighters skimming the treetops strafing everywhere. Mmmmm I gotta warm feeling just thinkin bout that http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Enforcer572005
05-22-2005, 12:16 AM
oh yeah, various skill levels for ai vehicles and forces on the ground.....tanks, arty, aa, etc. you could make a more realistic recreation of various historical events, like outnumbered forces defeating superior ones.

eliminate most of the smoke trails from AA....ive never seen much of that in combat films, and it slows the CPU alot.

Snuff_Pidgeon
05-22-2005, 12:41 AM
hOW ABOUT WINDSOCKS?

Mysticpuma2003
05-22-2005, 02:33 AM
Now when I play online, beacuse servers can accomodate upto 128 players, i'd like it so that when I bring the score table up that lists the player names, I could scroll it down or have the font-size reduced so that I can see all the player names and who is online. Not the top 30 that the server lets me see!

Jetbuff
05-22-2005, 07:40 AM
I'd like to see replicable object groups. i.e. add a "save group" and "load group" function in the FMB for BoB. That way, innovative mission builders can create authentic, highly detailed ground installations such as flak batteries, supply depots, dispersal areas and even motorized/armoured divisions once and replicate them as they please. Ideally these groups would be open to manipulation as a single object, i.e. allowing repositioning and rotation of the entire group after placement on the map.

willycrashagain
05-22-2005, 09:36 AM
Please make the rudder more effective and give us more forward elevator authority in all aircraft types. As it is now, full rudder only displaces the nose a few degrees and full forward stick is barely enough to hold the nose up when flying inverted...Both controls should be much more effective if you want them to emulate real airplanes, especially fighters. Other than that, what a great sim, keep up the good work!

joe3rd
05-22-2005, 08:46 PM
Please rework ypur convergence mathamatic's,
100meters = 109.361yards
I sincerely beleive a 20mm cannon was not sighted in to a
convergence below 1500yards

Enforcer572005
05-23-2005, 12:18 AM
ok, another one. ability to have static aircraft be in custom skins, to add to realism. kinda makes me feel a little strange to be flying a desert spit and passing parked ones in euro camo.

oh and a Spit Mk2 to go along with the P38F, P47N, and B24D in my fantasy pacific cmpns.

and one more...the guadalcanal map should have the island at the southeast corner of hte map, not the norhteast., as most of the events happened from there to the north and norhtwest.

really limits the events you can re-inact there.
having some more islands up to the russels would make it alot more historically enactable.

Monson74
05-23-2005, 01:46 AM
Just one wish: To be able to set buildings (both new & existing) as targets to justify level bombing. That would be awesome http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

MOH_Hirth
05-23-2005, 12:02 PM
My sugestion is a auto change head position when we are tracking a plane, dont let cockpit parts between vision and enemy plane.(sry my bad english)

Scen
05-24-2005, 02:41 PM
I would like to see reflections play a bigger part in seeing aircraft at greater distance.

Aircraft can be seen for miles if the sun hits them just right.

Scendore

TacticalYak3
05-25-2005, 08:51 AM
Add additional comm so that escorts and their bombers can communicate their coordinates to assist in formation flying.

Lodovik
05-25-2005, 09:05 AM
Here´s my wishlist. Hopefully there aren´t too many items that have been presented in previous posts.

-More flyable bombers and other multiengine
aircraft. At least one flyable medium and heavy bomber for each nation in the game. This would create lots of new mission building possibilities both on and offline.
-More different bomb types for the bombers, including ****busters, Grandslams, different incendiaries etc.
-Bombers´ gunner and bombardier positions controllable online by different players than the pilot. I know this would be difficult to implement for data traffic reasons, but if possible, would enable large AC that were fully human controlled.
-VERY IMPORTANT: gunners need to speak up and tell when they see AC from their position (eg. "Bandit at 6 o clock, high!". I mean, this was done in B-17 Bomber game for the Mattel Intellivision system back in 1986. Surely it can´t be hard to implement today http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
-At least one flyable recon/artillery spotter plane for each nation in the game, like Storch and Lysander. This would add variety and thus more mission possibilities.
-Map building tool enabling third party maps. I can understand the need to keep aircraft modelling in the hands of the dev team, but I don´t think that being able to build ones own maps and make them available for the community and online play would affect game balance. This would let the developers to consentrate on other matters and give more possibilities to mission makers.
I really want a Balkan map as well as south-western Finnish coast, but don´t really expect the devs to ever make them. Also, I want to see more detailed maps than the current ones, I mean, where´s the Viborg castle, for instance?

CSL_Kocour
05-25-2005, 07:27 PM
Some items on my list are unique, some have been mentioned here before but I still keep them there to givem a bump http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

1. No sonar. Engine sound roaring over everything apart from gunnery and loud blasts...coming close to my enemy without him ever knowing I am there...if he does not look around...that´s the thrill I am still missing...at least optional in difficulty settings http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

2. Instructor view - ability to jump to other pilot´s cockpit and see how he is flying from his point of view - if he let´s me.

3. Cattle grazing, people walking, birds flying in the skies or startled flocks of birds fleeing from trees etc. more life in the sim.

4. Semi-transparent vertical cockpit bars - or at least ability to switch them on and off - like in real life we can see around vertical obstacle without moving.

5. Interactive AI wingmen - though I can´t imagine how we would controll them...maybe voice recognition? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

6. Manual parachute opening

7. Custom ammobelts loading

8. REAL! engine sounds both in and out of plane

9. More realistic smokes and fires - moving with wind etc.

10. Seeing legs and arms move in cockpit and co-pilots in twoseaters, bombers etc.

11. Gunnery boards for setting convergency and seeing dispersion + ability to chock plane anywhere...or at least in front of the gunnery boards to stop recoil shaking

12. Frost in open cockpit planes + planes that did´t have oxygen masks should not be able to fly in 6km alt


13. Separate buttons for Radiator settings - or at least Cycle, Open and Close buttons

14. Ability to take control of plane during track playback and follow in place where things went wrong like in AOE

15. Ability to move back and forth in track and fast forward etc.

16. Ability to convert tracks to .avi etc.

17. Grass moving on the ground in propeller slipstream http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif ok maybe not in the next sim but the one after? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

18. Livelier airbases, mechanics working on planes, people walking around, the alert pilots in their chairs, windsocks, people manning the tower, Very pistols, lights, trucks and jeeps driving around. The meat wagon (ambulance) parked near the runway. Livelier naval bases, cities, villages, and towns, battlefields, etc. - could not help pasting this one from other post - big bump from me to this one

19. Support for more monitors - ability to have several views on several monitors

20. Smooth motion of planes not so jerky like sometimes in IL2

21. Real shiny and gleaming surfaces on planes that had them...currently too dim...ability to make shiny skins

22. Only very little flyable planes...maybe like 5 or 6 but extremely detailed and complex FM as realistic as possible

23. Better proportions...planes should not be as large as houses, airfields should not be as large as cities etc.

24. Ability to choose instruments for HUD - variometer etc.

XX. And finally, graphics like this http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/PublicPhotoAccount2/G1SoloSkyB2_v008_0279c.jpg

Irish_JG26
05-25-2005, 09:20 PM
S~ All,

1. AI pilots cannot see you in the clouds so that you can disengage.

2. Ability to man and fire the AAA guns on the ground.

3. If bailed out over contested ground, the mission morphs into a escape and evasion first person shooter so that you can take your pistol, pick up a few nades and link up with partisans to work your way back to friendly turf.

4. Flyable JU88 and B17 and PE2's

5. Set up an AI radar unit feature to feed target intel to the fighter interceptors with range and accuracy consistent with the era.

6. Some more on-line friendly WTO maps such as the channel coast near Abbeville, Scily, Anzio, Dunkirk, etc.

7. Flyable FW190A2 and A3 and Bf109D

Irish

SeaFireLIV
05-26-2005, 04:47 AM
Wow! Some really wild ideas here that I doubt will make it into BOB, let alone Patch 4.0, but Oleg will obviously filter out what`s possible and what`s not.

Who knows? Maybe even the more adventurous ideas will happen without killing dead the average PC?


But probably not.

dazzy2g2
05-26-2005, 09:41 AM
hey,i dont know much about whats possible and whats not but i think it would be cool to have a flyable b-17,b-29 and a lanchaster.

I know its probably not possible but just a thought.C:\Documents and Settings\Dazza\My Documents\My pictures\fw 190.jpg

Slapp
05-27-2005, 01:13 AM
@ CSL_Kocour, where did you wonderfull pic from m8? Any more?

The_EDF_Legacy
05-27-2005, 02:55 PM
I would like to see unflyable bombers to be flyable via external view in a co-op mission, but at the same time have an option when creating a co-op where these types of aircraft are or are not available. This way a lot of the unflyables can be, like you already can for dogfights only.

Another idea is to release some modding tools, so the community can make aircraft for the team, to speed up the process! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

---

P.S. Dazzy, you can't link avatars to your PC. It will only show up to you, and no one else. You'll need to use a web-based host to host your image for you. Try imageshack.

CSL_Kocour
05-27-2005, 03:27 PM
Originally posted by Slapp:
@ CSL_Kocour, where did you wonderfull pic from m8? Any more?

I saw it on some forum and forgot where...but your question made me do some research and by the signiture on the above picture I googled the artist´s website http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif ...and I am happy I did because what follows was worth it! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

much more here:

http://www.luijken.com/

http://kiwi123.military-meshes.com/images/inprogress/ME109duo_water_r2099.jpg

Enforcer572005
05-27-2005, 10:31 PM
ditto on user made maps, or any way to make them bigger. one of the few advantages CFS2 has are the huge maps. they dont have to be that accurate, just generally so.

the guadalcanal map is an example.....we really need all the way to rabaul, like cfs2 has.

thanxxxx

Tater-SW-
05-28-2005, 12:12 AM
How about a slider on many ground objects for how hard they are to destroy.

For example a tree could be set so that if MG fire hits it it goes poof, or set so that it requires a 5000kg bomb, or even is indestructable.

You could also add a pull-down for what damage state the object is in when placed. If a ship has 3 major versions of the way it looks damaged, then you can chose which one.

Combined with the idea above, you could have a 1/2 sunk ship that is indestructible (a beached wreck).

tater

masaker2005
05-28-2005, 05:41 AM
Infatry and flyable heavy bombers! Oh yes and this: More planes in one flight not just four.
Ability to change formation in the briefing and ability to fire with AAA guns on ship's and ground!

corsairf4u
05-29-2005, 03:26 AM
it would be nice for when we shoot at rear gunners they actually die rather than keep on firing at you,and when you bail out over enemy lines you might be able too make it back?

MOH_NoXiuS
05-29-2005, 07:49 AM
My suggestions are:

1) Possibility of jamming weapons even if not hit by the enemy.

2) Parachute shoudn't always open and under certain conditions, it could catch fire.

S!

Marc-David
05-29-2005, 10:04 AM
My wishes are quite basic andsimple:

a consistent user-interface. Including normal use of cursor, scrollwheel on mouse, arrow-keys. Alphanumerical search in dropdown-menues.

Yours, MD

GerritJ9
05-29-2005, 02:23 PM
1) Possibility to create single flight with several types of aeroplane, e.g. 2 Brewsters and one Hawk 75 (result of emergency scramble for instance).
2) Possibility of running several languages per side, e.g. flight of Polish pilots communicating with each other in Polish and switching to English when communicating with other flight/squadron/ground control.

FlyTyer1970
05-30-2005, 04:27 AM
1. Improved AI for the ground control that let damaged a/c's land first.

2. windsock

3. ability to take off side by side with your wingman.

4. a crewman sitting on your wing and signaling to you while you're taxing.

5. ability to take guncrews by surprise.

6. confirmed kills/unconfirmed kills/shared kills.

7. variable radiochatter

8. windaffected smoke.

9. "Schr¤ge Musik"

10. Radar equipped nightfighters

11. AI that don't TnB with BnZ A/C's

12. guncamera

13. recon missions

14. possibillity to make harder crashlandings without turn into a fireball, player can still die if unlucky but the a/c don't have to explode.

15. random skill for AAA crews, as an example late war german AAA crew often consisted of poorly trained youths.

16. vechicle columns create a certain degree of dust while on the move and make 'em easyer to spot from a distance.

That's some of my ideas for improvement, of course there's some a/c's that I'd like to see in this or a future sim but as I understand this thread isn't the right place for a/c requests.

NorrisMcWhirter
05-30-2005, 04:41 AM
Couple more:

a. New online message: "User <user> has performed a printscreen"

b. Ground controller can warn of landing gear not down.

c. User configurable "% probability" that AAA units etc will fire on friendly aircraft.

d. Flares used for night mission landings.

e. For planes with 'trim tabs'; these can only be adjusted while stationary on the ground.

f. Aircraft can suffer realistic component failures (i.e. not caused by enemy fire) such as complete engine failure or prop pitch governers freezing up/failing etc

g. AI aircraft will only _randomly_ steal kills I know stealing kills is is to simulate online play but it's almost too representative... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

h. "% probability" of dud weapons (e.g. torpedos and bombs)

Ta,
Norris

vonStahlhelm
05-30-2005, 10:02 AM
try to get so much original engine sounds as possible - there are many flyable "oldtimers"
out there, so it can be possible to get some authentic "in flight" sounds. i think thats only a question of time, travelling and money - maybe to much........

ku101-Shrike
05-30-2005, 08:50 PM
Flares for marking bombing run ground targets. and for Signaling Emergency landing for bombers.

TX-EcoDragon
05-31-2005, 01:04 AM
-OF course more realistic FM and ground handling are at the top of my list for any sim no matter how good.

-Spawning system where pilots don't have to worry about another plane spawning in front of them out of thin air.

-Better trim system that reacts at a realistic rate, yet doesn't change the overall controll throw (currently trim acts to increase the surface travel).

-More realistic start-up/shutdown. Perhaps even a refuel/rearm capability that would allow you to re-use your aircraft (perhaps you could get bonus points for not returning a trashed airplane!)

-Improved netcode to reduce pauses when other players spawn/join/crash/exit the game.

-FMB object that includes all flyable aircraft as a single object so that pre-loading aircraft is easier for map makers.

-Manually controllable wind (in FMB or at hosts arming screen), perhaps in a few user definable altitude layers. This should include speed/ direction/ gusts/ turbulence, a randomized weather feature would be cool, as would the ability to specify improving or deteriorating weather conditions over time to give a more realistic atmosphere.

-Windsocks to go along with that wind!

-More realistic control jammings (surface jams at the current surface position, or near it) and failures, including cable cuts where only partial control failure should occur.

-Greater cockpit functionality including clikable instuments, levers etc., would be cool.

-The ability to lean left and right in the cockpit.

-White (and exhaust stack produced) smoke for us aerobatics types.

-Multicrew bombers that can have a pilot separate from the bombardier.

-A Dedicated server app that can host COOPs.

-An input page that can better handle multiple controller IDs so we don't have to edit the conf ini to adjust stick sensitivty (for example.

-Less random collision detection that wouldnt blame the guy getting rammed with minus points.

-The old IL-2 sound engine! Or better yet, a whole new one that might include a better representation ofthe unique sounds of these aircraft (I'd love to have a Merlin!!)

-Moving objects in DF servers.

-Shared points/team points etc. to better advocate team play instead of lone wolf point collection and arguments over "kill stealing".

-Tower communications in a df would be pretty cool, in particular if it could actually do some sequencing or at least alert pilots who are sharing the same runway. ;-)

-Manual parachute deployment, and a first person view of the process.

-Clouds that provide some cover from AI aircraft and AAA.

-Trainer aircraft and a more comprehensive and realitic training mission set, and maybe even a dual control or dual instrument panel option in appropriate aircraft for onlien dual instruciton would be cool, but I concede that's alot of work for a limited audience.

I'm sure I have more, but it's time for dinner. . wish you didn't ask yet Ivan??

;-)

Tvrdi
05-31-2005, 08:29 AM
ability to refuel and rearm after landing in online coop....



better sound


better sound

kameron1974
05-31-2005, 04:15 PM
Read most of these. Some great ideas.
1. Cockpit smoke and seeing your legs/co pilot etc.
2. Panicky rookies. I will volunteer for sound.
3. Ground crews doin stuff.
4. Flyable Me-410.
5. More panicky idiots on the radio.
6. Gore for dead bomber crews. Broken glass. Totally.
7. More detalied and variable bail out sequence based on ww2 footage.
8. Kills automatically added to your skin. Tail bars for Germans, etc.

Any of this stuff couldn't take up too much more RAM or whatever.

xTHRUDx
05-31-2005, 05:09 PM
AIR-START BASES!!

the ability to set a spawn point at any place and at any altitude and control the amount and type of plane that can spawn there.

the whole thread here:
http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/63110913/m/1031...691019062#1691019062 (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/63110913/m/1031007062/r/1691019062#1691019062)

Bolt40
05-31-2005, 05:44 PM
The most important for me and many others is

Engine sounds , the correct engine sounds would be awesome ..Merlin , Allison , Pratt & Whitney , Daimler Benz engines all had their own distinct sounds and it wouldn't be hard at all to fix the code where we could add the correct engine sound files ...Aces High , CFS3 among others allow you to not only skin your planes but change your engine sounds too .
1. Engine sounds
2. Ability to change fuel tanks. this did help
some planes FM in combat
3. Fix the voice chat in game .players shouldnt need to rely on Ventrilo or Teamspeak .
4. And please addon more aircraft to the IL2 series before going on to the next game engine . I would gladly pay for an addon disc or 2 to have the above fixes plus several new aircraft , . My wishlist below :
1. TBF Avenger ( this is not a dead issue )
2. Ju88 : 2 or 3 variants
3. Pe-2
4. Spitfire Mk1
5. Definitly Italian birds ..C202 , C205 , Re 2000 series , maybe an SM79 bomber .
6. NiK1 George , J2M3 Jack , '43 Ki43 IIc , Ki44
& Ki45 Nick so the IJAAF could have a twin-engine fighter . and the B5N Kate .
7. And since Mr. Maddox likes to add fantasy jets ..maybe a Mig 15 & F86 Sabre for a Korean map . Not sounding too greedy I hope http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/icon_twisted.gif

nickdanger3
06-01-2005, 01:54 PM
Whistling wind and more engine noise when your cockpit gets holes in it (as long as this is realisitic, I assume that it is).

Spellchecked messages/HUD readouts

flatlander5
06-01-2005, 05:14 PM
I dont know if its been mentioned before (I dont have the patience to sift through 7 pages of replies), but....

I think Aces Artwork files for weathered/faded national markings etc would be great.

Cheers,
Flatlander

JZG-Pedro
06-02-2005, 03:09 PM
A few ideas, most free of polemic:

. Differential brakes, for those who have pedals and toe-brake buttons.

. Axis for Mixture

. Several game controller IDs in INPUT. Much easier to adjust things ingame rather than in config.ini.

. To have the option to select what guns you want to have removed. For example, I'd appreciate if I could remove the twin-MG17s from the 190 A4/A5. The gunsight is already veyr low, and those two pop guns blind your aim even more.

. To have the option to choose what kind of ammunition you want to carry. HE, AP, API...

. Update the OBJECTS VIEW link. Or maybe implement IL2compare in the game, with accurate values.

. Gunsight adjusting controls. And option to switch it on/off.



*!* farewell!

XyZspineZyX
06-02-2005, 03:58 PM
Radiator damage, glycol smoke pouring out if rad is hit, leading to eventual overheating and finally engine failure would be cool

RAF_Loke
06-03-2005, 02:21 AM
Originally posted by ku101-Shrike:
Flares for marking bombing run ground targets.

Agree, would be perfect for Mosquito pathfinder missions http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Dutchfalcon46
06-03-2005, 04:40 AM
The one thing that i miss the most is....
wenn you defend your base you must have the abbility to refuel and rearm your plane. And woud't it be nice wenn you see from your cockpit the trucks driving to your plane stopping and move away befiore you taxi to the run way again.

Second of all it's to bad that Bomb craters (and other ground damage) disappear and not stay visibel in the game only the holes on the runway shou;ld be repaired before the next mission.

RAF_Loke
06-03-2005, 04:47 AM
Originally posted by Dutchfalcon46:
The one thing that i miss the most is....
wenn you defend your base you must have the abbility to refuel and rearm your plane. And woud't it be nice wenn you see from your cockpit the trucks driving to your plane stopping and move away befiore you taxi to the run way again.

Second of all it's to bad that Bomb craters (and other ground damage) disappear and not stay visibel in the game only the holes on the runway shou;ld be repaired before the next mission.

Agree 100% mate http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Mysticpuma2003
06-03-2005, 09:59 AM
I'd like a higher resolution cockpit so that I could hang a photo of my kids on the facia using photoshop. Would just add a little individuality to an impersonal cockpit.


Also I agree with the messages about variety in missions when bombing for BoB.

However as a game addition it would be nice if Pathfinder missions were only available in a campaign. Why? Well to fly a pathfinder mission in WW2 (ref: Bomber Crew and Tail end Charlies) you were considered the elite of the bomber squads. Able to get into areas and mark them for easier bombing by less experienced crews.

So in a campiagn mission you'd have to prove your bombing accuracy on previous missions to be given the call up to Pathfinders.

I've never tried this to see if it's in Il2 in Co-op mode, but if it isn't there how about co-op missions where a Lancaster is crewed by seven/eight online players into a mission. Is this available on the B-25 or Heinkel?

If not, definate inclusion for the future,cheers, Puma.

VF-1_Jagua
06-03-2005, 03:22 PM
Originally posted by JZG-Pedro:
A few ideas, most free of polemic:

. Differential brakes, for those who have pedals and toe-brake buttons.

. Axis for Mixture

. Several game controller IDs in INPUT. Much easier to adjust things ingame rather than in config.ini.



Agree!

[]s,
Jagua.

VF-1_Jagua
06-03-2005, 03:27 PM
FMB:

The only suggestion I have is to implement multiple objects select, move, copy, paste, rotate and delete. It would make a complex mission building a breeze...

Rgds,
Jagua.

corsairf4u
06-05-2005, 12:42 AM
Originally posted by Mysticpuma2003:
I'd like a higher resolution cockpit so that I could hang a photo of my kids on the facia using photoshop. Would just add a little individuality to an impersonal cockpit.


Also I agree with the messages about variety in missions when bombing for BoB.

However as a game addition it would be nice if Pathfinder missions were only available in a campaign. Why? Well to fly a pathfinder mission in WW2 (ref: Bomber Crew and Tail end Charlies) you were considered the elite of the bomber squads. Able to get into areas and mark them for easier bombing by less experienced crews.

So in a campiagn mission you'd have to prove your bombing accuracy on previous missions to be given the call up to Pathfinders.

I've never tried this to see if it's in Il2 in Co-op mode, but if it isn't there how about co-op missions where a Lancaster is crewed by seven/eight online players into a mission. Is this available on the B-25 or Heinkel?

If not, definate inclusion for the future,cheers, Puma. what about having lancaster and halifax night missions as well against german targets with mossie and lancaster pathfinders too ,,

corsairf4u
06-05-2005, 12:44 AM
Originally posted by corsairf4u:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Mysticpuma2003:
I'd like a higher resolution cockpit so that I could hang a photo of my kids on the facia using photoshop. Would just add a little individuality to an impersonal cockpit.


Also I agree with the messages about variety in missions when bombing for BoB.

However as a game addition it would be nice if Pathfinder missions were only available in a campaign. Why? Well to fly a pathfinder mission in WW2 (ref: Bomber Crew and Tail end Charlies) you were considered the elite of the bomber squads. Able to get into areas and mark them for easier bombing by less experienced crews.

So in a campiagn mission you'd have to prove your bombing accuracy on previous missions to be given the call up to Pathfinders.

I've never tried this to see if it's in Il2 in Co-op mode, but if it isn't there how about co-op missions where a Lancaster is crewed by seven/eight online players into a mission. Is this available on the B-25 or Heinkel?

If not, definate inclusion for the future,cheers, Puma. what about having lancaster and halifax night missions as well against german targets with mossie and lancaster pathfinders too ,, </div></BLOCKQUOTE>is it possible too take your own photo and stick it in the pilots profile ?

JG54_Lukas
06-05-2005, 04:46 AM
Improvements to the campaign, namely:

-aircraft fly from their historically correct airbases and with their historically correct units

-the player, when in a command position, decides which pilots will fly the next mission

-morale that changes over time for each pilot in a camapaign

-damaged objects (e.g., ships), will remain damaged over the course of several missions, (being gradually repaired) until they are back to their original, undamaged state.

Kadin1
06-05-2005, 05:37 AM
Rearm, refuel, repair "pads", maybe with a user controlled timer, added as objects in Mission Editor to be used in all types of missions.

Valjack
06-05-2005, 06:47 AM
The MOST IMPORTANT THING : please let us have a server with COOP MISSIONS that everyone can JOIN (via UBI or HL)like a dogfight one, even if presenting some "Wait until the end of ongoing mission" screen, so it can refill without going back to Lobby after some players disconnect !!!!!
PLEEAASE !!!!!
PLEEAASE !!!!!

Freycinet
06-05-2005, 07:28 AM
I suggested this a long time ago:

Let's have a training plane function. Just the possibility to view from inside a plane while it is being flown by somebody else. It would be good if the trainee pilot viewpoint is slaved to the viewing of the pilot. Also it would be good if pilot and trainee could swap controls as they wish during flight (and slaved view swapped accordingly).

This would be great online. You could "fly along" with others who allow it, and see how they fly, learn their tricks. Or simply just arrange for online flying schools, where experienced pilots show the ropes to newbies.

Coupled with teamspeak, this would be just fabulous. Not too hard to implement either, since no new cockpits would be needed.

GADGET_101ECV
06-05-2005, 07:40 AM
WAKE TURBULENCE

Tactically very important in combat.

Raz_Bama
06-05-2005, 08:47 AM
My requests for new options during Track-file playback;

- Switch to cockpit view of other planes. (Exception if plane is AI only with no cockpit)

- Ability to begin flying any 'Flyable' plane at any point in during the playback of a track.

GADGET_101ECV
06-05-2005, 02:25 PM
WEAPON JAMMING AND SYSTEMS FALIURES

Also very important and part of normal operation on all fronts.

This brings into account spare suplies and maintenance, in campaigns.

Old_Navy_One
06-05-2005, 04:19 PM
Further map development.

The ability to have any map size, and delete that border thang around it.

A map mode that would be like a real navigator's map, showing just paths and waypoints with compass vectors and distances between waypoints, including options for km, miles, or nautical miles. Maybe even an option to show the elapsed time between the waypoints based upon a user entered speed.

Show the radio beacons' location on the map and give them the ability to be destroyed with a subsequent appropriate result on the RDF indicator for a particular plane and particular type of beacon system.

H_RexMagnus_H
06-05-2005, 09:33 PM
The single player is basically lame. I'm not talking about the AI, which is cool to get in a dogfight with. Instead, it's the very linear-repetative-no-purpose progression through campaigns that is boring. Each campaign consists of basically 2 or 3 types of missions that are repeated over and over again. I remember the hype with the "random mission" generator, but i think its of little value when you only have a couple of types of missions within a campaign. Nobody can tell the difference when the the campaign is repeating the same 3 mission types over and over again, who care if its scripted or there is some lame weighting algorithm switching missions around. I cant remember what type of mission i played 4 missions ago because they are all basically the same, which is to say, they are very forgetable.

Other than the sensation of simulation, there is nothing fun or interesting about the single player. I suggest a MORE SCRIPTED single player with some sort of interesting plot. Somehow it needs to feel like the player is in a "real-virtual" world with events going on around them. It currently feels like the whole game is a random generator.

Basically, what i believe Maddox is doing with the Xbox game "Blazing Angels" is just what there pc sim series could use. There seems to be a single scripted story path, which should give pilots a better reason to fight = better reason for more people to buy the game = more money for 1C, Ubisoft, and the hard working developers.

Enforcer572005
06-05-2005, 10:01 PM
You can get some pretty good scripted user made campns....anything by bird brain is pretty good.Ill post my own in a couple of mos.

I think the most important area of developement in future sims is probably AI. IL2's is probably the best, but its still too simplified and not too bright at times.....ie. flying into hills in broad daylight, sticking around fighting till the last man, not leading targets, level bombers action like fighters and dive bombers etc.

a more advanced and realistic ai would really be the revolutionary developement. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

Zander1971
06-06-2005, 01:55 AM
PLEASE could someone actually spend some time in the South of England! There are a few real pointers regarding the Battle of Britain which developers should look at eg:
1. The glow from the docks burning in the Blitz stage of the battle
2. The Bombers usng the needle of Kent (church in Blackheath) to aim for when running in to the docks
3. That Kent IS NOT FLAT!
4. One Oleg is usually great at - the use of outlying aircraft in the battle eg Defiants, Oxfords, Heinkel 51, Walrus etc etc
5. A tricky one - Populating the South of England - its a crowded crowded place - a list of large stately homes would be good too as there are hundreds of them!
6. Particularly putting in Speldhurst, Tonbridge, Tunbridge Wells, Sandhurst and Farnborough (these are all places I have or currently live!)

PB0_Roll
06-06-2005, 05:06 AM
weather:

bigger clouds (towercumulus type)

stronger winds defined in mission builder, possible even in "fair weather"

comms:

squadron and radar station and tower identification ("turnip blue leader", "rabbit red two", and so on)

"calm" and "excited" different voices:

"red two (calm), request landing"

"green four (excited), i'm hit, i'm hit !"

Landing procedures: more realistic, planes spread after overflying runway, and land one after each other or in patrols of 2/3/4, depending on nationality, year and runway type.

No more successions of 11 go arounds to land 12 planes.

Short start up procedure (magnetos on, fuel on, starter, as a minimum)

Fuel tanks management.

flyin_scotzzman
06-06-2005, 07:58 AM
How about "flamineroes" http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif as described by Albert Ball the British WW1 ace. This was the term he used to describe pilots that bail out of a stricken aircraft that has caught fire, and plunge to the earth themselves on fire.

He had a great fear of dying like this (no parachutes allowed in WW1, they thought it would encourage pilots to bail out of a perfectly servicable aircraft at the first sign of trouble !!)
Unfortunately for Albert Ball this is exactly how he met his death. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

DDastardlySID
06-06-2005, 09:38 AM
My wishlist:

1. Working support for 3D shutter glasses. ATM the game looks amazing in 3D, but many ground objects are drawn at an incorrect depth or for only one eye (eg airfields and some trees) which makes the game unplayable in 3D unless you're flying over the sea. Also, it would really help if range/plane-type icons could be drawn at the same depth as their planes instead of at screen depth as they are currently (making them useless in 3D).

2. Full support for 6DOF headtracking. Ideally this should include a simplified cockpit interior volume for each plane defining valid head positions to prevent the pilot moving his virtual head through the seat or cockpit glass. Crucially there also MUST be a mode in which movement of the head is restricted along a line running from the default head position to the gunsite. Then you could enjoy the full 6DOF during normal flight, and switch to this "combat mode" when about to shoot. In combat mode you could still rotate your view but you wouldn't be able to slide your head to the left and right or up and down thus ensuring that your virtual eyes and the gunsight are lined up correctly for firing.

3. An instantaneous "warp to action" button and a save game facility so that you could save a mission eg just prior to the action kicking off and replay it from that point rather than having to endure a tedious half hour flight in a straight line each time you play. I've spent hours of my life looking at that depressing black time skip screen and frankly I resent the loss.

4. More control and flexibility when choosing a mission to fly. I'd like to see similar control to that offered in windows media player, allowing you to sort missions by author or plane. There should also be an option to rate a mission after you've played it -you could then sort missions according to their ratings or, for example, choose to play a random mission with at least a 4 star rating, or flying a certain plane. Similarly you could choose to play a random mission which you've not played before. (ATM it's very easy to loose track of which missions you've tried or enjoyed, particularly if you've downloaded a lot of user-made missions and campaigns). The rating system could also be very useful to the developers and 3rd party authors if the ratings could be collated and displayed on a web page somewhere, giving them a much better idea about the kind of missions players enjoy. It would also be nice if those 3rd party missions which score highly could be included in future official patches allowing them to be enjoyed by all instead of just by those who are willing to spend the time trawling the web looking for them.

5. The ability to bind keys or buttons to BOTH zoom out and zoom in on the map. Having to cycle through several levels of zoom just to zoom out one step is very annoying. It would also be useful to be able to lock the map to your plane so that it remains in the centre without you having to drag the map.

6. Include optional voice packs in English for each country (but with appropriate accents). You could argue that it's more realistic having each country's pilots speaking their own language but irl pilots didn't have to read subtitles to understand what their wingmen were saying.

7. A replay mode similar to that in Grand Theft Auto so you could pause the game and then watch the last 30 seconds or so of action from any viewpoint. This would be great for finding out what the hell just blew you out of the sky or for reviewing a landing without the hassle of saving a track, going back to the main menu, playing the track and then timeskipping for half an hour till you get to the bit you wanted to see.

8. Include a cinematic camera option when watching tracks. This would automatically turn your track into a mini movie without the user having to laboriously switch views themselves. It would automatically switch the camera to areas where action was taking place and would include interior views from your cockpit of whatever you were looking at during the flight, flybys, exterior views of planes taking damage, bombs hitting targets etc etc. All the user would have to do is sit back and enjoy it.

9. Support for all maps in the quick mission builder.

10. The option to have much more detailed debriefings, telling you exactly what types of planes and ground targets were destroyed, what damage you received (and when) and even the type of damage you inflicted on others eg "12:36 You killed the rear gunner in an HE-111. 12:37 You downed the HE-111 by blowing off its left wing with cannon fire" etc.

11. Independantly settable view ranges for different types of objects so you could, for example, choose to have fires and smoke visible from 50 miles away, ships and wakes from 30 miles, planes from 20 miles, and smaller ground objects from 10 miles etc.

Cheers,
DD

Uthervl
06-06-2005, 10:25 AM
1. Moveable view inside the cockpit. The ability to lean also.

2. The ability to see down the nose like the IL2 ships. Accurate repesemtation of view from cockpit. Currently view is too low in most aircraft.

3. AI that don't jump out of pipper

4. AI that cannot see into clouds.

5. AI that cannot perform manuvers that players cannot. No super acceleration, G turns above what a player can withstand.

6. *****A campaign system like "Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe" and "Their Finest Hour: Battle of Britain."**** The ability to choose targets (Strategic and Tactical), change outcome of battles, and outcome of war.

7. ***Individual FM that are unique to each aircraft.****

8. Separate convergence and distance sight calibrations. IE An option to calibrate distance and convergence independantly.

9. Improvement of mid and long range visual model.

10. Ability to open cockpits.

11. Realistic complex engine management. To include mixture and prop angle.

12. No high altitude wispy fog like IL2 Series.

13. Realistic looking clouds, fog and rain.

14. Accurate haze that restricts vision at different ranges. No haze that reduces visibility to near zero at short range.

15. More detailed damage model

16. Accurate collision damage. No all or nothing collisions.

17. Come as close as possible to what was required to fly these aircraft. The more detail the better; Scaleable of course.

18. Options for ammunition carried. Tracer (or no tracers), AP, Incendiary, Minen, etc.

19. Bombers that do not act like fighters. IE They remain in formation, do not attempt to dogfigth fighters that attack them.

20. AI that will try to save themselves once they have received major damage.

21. Random Road, Air, and Naval Traffic.

22. Tail gunners tweeked to realistic accuracy levels and accuracy decreases with hard manuvering.

23. Scaleable view angle like LOMAC.

24. AI That uses tactics representative to the year or phase of war. IE Early in BoB AI will form up in VIC or try the "Big Wing."

25. More human targets like manned AA batteries, Ground personell at airfields, ship gunners, Infantry, etc. While a fighter may not be able to destroy equipment, it may be able to kill crews.

26. More icon options.

27. Scaleability wherever possible.

28. The option to buy an indepth paper manual.

29. Last but not least, a 60-80 USD price tag. That's right, I want you to charge more as long as you plan on doing what you have done for us with the IL2 Series. Build all of WWII airwarfare! You deserve the money!

Graphically this sim is beautiful. With the exception of some environmetal effects and mid to long range aircraft model improvements, I don't think it needs much more graphical increases. I hope not to get a better looking sim that is basically what it's predecessor was. This is usually the trend with other flight sims.

Focus should be on scaleabilty, realism, and campaign immersion.

Good Luck Oleg! I can't wait to see what you do next!

Tater-SW-
06-06-2005, 10:51 AM
Add the ability to join a plane as a gunner IN FLIGHT.

Make it so that if your pilot is killed in a COOP mission, he can join another plane as a gunner. Sucks to get killed early in a coop, and not get to participate any more.

tater

Obi_Kwiet
06-06-2005, 11:55 AM
Place a bunch of 3D trees around the fakes "forests" to makes them disperse realistically instead of having stark forest outlines.

3D hedges and bushes for those who's PC's can handle it.

Roads lined with trees. You see allot of that in gun cam film but hardly any in sims.

Scaleable ground clutter.

Keep the world more alive by making the patchwork of fields lined with bushes and small trees.

People, busses and civilian life.

Lights in cities at night.

The menu music from that excellent BoB campaign, which I think was made by Extreme_One. This is an absolute must.

SMOKE! When I hit an Aircraft with my guns I want to see lots of dust and particles come up form it. Also, where their are fires, their would be much, much more smoke and much less fire.

I'd like the explosions to have force to them, and not be little fireballs that give a little "woosh" when they explode. Tones of dirt and dust and very little flame. Any fire in them should be quick flashes.

Support for PPUs to help simulate dust and physics.

A good sound engine. When I start my engine I want to feel it. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

The ability for users to make maps and skin cockpits and all other objects in the sim.

Support for 3rd party sound packs?

NerdConnected
06-06-2005, 03:34 PM
- SMP/Multithreading/Dual Core ;-)
- 64 bits tuned optional executable

- AI
* real tactics for type of plane
* fatigue for human and AI
* heavy breathing due to high G's
* run away tactics (lack of fuel or just scared because outnumbered or inferior plane)
* don't always attack the leading plane
* don't see through clouds
* use clouds for cover
* circle above/around clouds and wait for others to pop up
* don't circle at low altitude above strong defended AAA places
* change altitude and direction when fired upon by AAA
* Ground vectoring
* head on pass by veterans and aces on bombers
* fighter cover that stays with bombers while other attack enemy fighters (if not outnumbered)
* single pass for ace and veterans that do B&Z (do not even try to T&B)
* 'learning' AI (a bit hard I'd guess)
* Ground AI that defends itself (Ships that produce smoke screens, enemy columns split up formation)
* AI that position themselves above and behind you while you try to get a good position for some bombers (i.e. sound tactics)
* AI, especially veteran and ace, that take advantage of a given situation. I you're outnumbered and/or fly a inferior plane, you're f*cked ;-)

- takeoff and land in pairs when possible on wide runways

Graphics, FM and DM improvements are, for me, just icing on the cake ;-) Superior AI is what this game needs...

Mark

R-Syke
06-06-2005, 03:59 PM
if it would be possible to model some filtering at 109 (and other planes which went stiff at high speeds) elevator and roll rates when speeds over 450kmh, like when u dive with 109 over 500kmh and start pull the stick, plane doesnt rightaway answer to input, but with little delay and filtering, yet you are still able to pull efectively from stick at high speeds (its like modelling that pilot takes both hands to stick for pulling stick, thats why lil delay on pulling till 750khm IAS limit is reached and stick goes solid.
While P-51 could be almost like it is now. so that makes high speed maneuvering in P-51 more better and easier. this would for sure give Pony pilots the advantage they had in ponys and still 109s would be able to turn till real limits of the plane, not imaginery made limit like what we have now.
So what u think?

R-Syke
06-06-2005, 04:01 PM
umm

No105_Swoose
06-06-2005, 04:10 PM
Please forgive me if this has already been mentioned, but here's something I'd like to see:

Initial mission briefings similar to those European Air War had including: a squadron ready room setting, a map with the ingress and egress routes to the target, and a short "pep talk" speech by the squadron commander. And while you're at, why not something similar for after the conclusion of a mission: a barracks room where you could click on objects like a radio to hear World War Two era popular music of a particular country, or your log book and awards?

LLv34_Stafroty
06-06-2005, 04:51 PM
id like to see real difference between cannon and machineguns, now both make graphically same kind of damage. Would want cannon hits (especially He) decreace planes maneuverability and slow em down.
overall i want much more complicated damage model with also blast effect modelled.

Uthervl
06-06-2005, 05:06 PM
A big one I forgot:


An accurate recommended hardware list.


I need to know what PC to build by the time this sim hits the market.

CrushingMachine
06-06-2005, 05:44 PM
[General
========
1. Ability to test convergence on ground (as they did in real life).
2. Personal notes for aircrafts.[/QUOTE]


Ability to test convergence on the Ground..... OMFG

Give this man a Rubber taco.

Yes yes yes That would be the only thing this game needs. NO jokes no sarcasim I love this Idea due to I had the same one.

PLEASE make it so Please.......

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif

LLv34_Stafroty
06-06-2005, 06:32 PM
why you need to test guns at ground? you dont believe numbers you input for your guns?
u can expect them to do what you made em to do without doin any ground tests. 100m convergense means that ammo meets at 100m dist sam with 500m.. so whats the prople,?

finastkind
06-06-2005, 06:43 PM
how about fire in the cockpit or a real bailout type scenario.must open canopy then jump if not too wounded too do this that is.

Valjack
06-07-2005, 03:43 AM
I report that from FLA at SimHQ, as i totally agree with him and noted that too:

1) The ability to give commands "Attack all Flak" outside of 2 KM... Right now you almost have to be ontop of the flak in order to give the command.

2) In relation to #1. When you do give the command, if there is a flight of bombers, they target the first closest flak and drop all their bombs on it (30,000 pounds sometimes for the bigger aircraft). Killing 1 flak, leaving 10 others at an airbase. Have the flight AI pick different targets.

3) LOD Bias. I play entirely realistic with no icons... When planes are about 400-500 meters away (and closer), their mesh changes to include more detail. Which is great, I can now see the "flags" on the wings, but I'd like to be able to see that detail a bit farther away. With big planes such as bombers, you should be able to see the big red japanesse dot on the wing/tail, farther away than 400-500 meters.

4) Reduce the "follow the leader" which is common with the AI flights. You sometimes get 4 AI chasing 1 enemy plane and they spin around not catching each other forever. There should be some sort of time limit, if they can't gain any ground in 1 minute, abort and pick another target...

5) The "nearly miss" firing of the AI... It seems if you pull up slightly with an AI on your 6 firing, it will always miss you by a few feet, and it will never stop firing. Eliminating all its ammo in a short amount of time. It should do a few burst, if it doesn't hit, wait for a better shot.

6) Add some more ground textures/randomness. Some maps seem to be the same sea of green and never really changes. Add some variety.

7) Add a TRUE dynamic campaign. The one in IL2FB is not a dynamic campaign. If you fly over an airbase that is NOT on the mission roster, you will never see any planes scramble and intercept. The missions are premade before the mission loads (even if that part is dynamic) but things that happen during the missions is not dynamic at all. You always seem the same flights, flying on the same waypoints... Thats not dynamic. In fact, enhance the dynamic campaign to be alot better to add more immersion. The "slap together a random mission" just doesn't really cut it. Gives you a dry atmosphere. Make it more like Falcon4... Where during missions starts there can be activity going on. Other missions taking place, etc. Make you feel like part of a greater war.

This was his thoughts, and i share them...:-)

kidneuro
06-07-2005, 07:58 AM
Waypoint management/planning during briefing - ability to set altitude, speed, coordinates, formation etc.

Better waypoint switching during flight - switch to next/prev waypoint with at least one message at the right side of the screen like: "WP#3 Spd:300 Alt:1200 Hdg: 223" - and the current waypoint should be shown on the map with a different colour or something - right now if I want to skip long flight with the autopilot, sometimes it starts flying backwards because I don't know which one is the currently selected waypoint. In case of no map icons the waypoint details shown on screen would help navigate.

The radio messages from my flight and wingman should be shown with a different colour. When I get a message "One, check your six" I don't know it refers to my plane or the leader of some other flight 200 kms away.

Better immersion during briefing and debriefing, better user interface, more music, more bacground information, more stats on the pilots and planes in my squadron.

NP_Jason
06-07-2005, 09:25 AM
Hey guys,

Oleg,

Don't forget full 6DOF support for TrackIR!

Jason Williams
TrackIR Product Manager
NaturalPoint, Inc.

CrushingMachine
06-07-2005, 09:45 AM
Originally posted by LLv34_Stafroty:
why you need to test guns at ground? you dont believe numbers you input for your guns?
u can expect them to do what you made em to do without doin any ground tests. 100m convergense means that ammo meets at 100m dist sam with 500m.. so whats the prople,?

Well if your shooting a 108 round at 500m convergense vs a 20mm round or 50cal round the rate of drop and also is the gun in the wings... or the nose... this also makes a issue. But if you have never flow all the fighters to the point were you notice this then im wasting my time talking to you about it. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

CrushingMachine
06-07-2005, 09:48 AM
Originally posted by NP_Jason:
Hey guys,

Oleg,

Don't forget full 6DOF support for TrackIR!

Jason Williams
TrackIR Product Manager
NaturalPoint, Inc.

Hail the great ones of the TrakIR... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

If you dont have a Joystick, Mouse, and now a TrackIR you can't say you are armed for cyber air war today .... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

I second the idea of making the game more 3d interactive.

Salute. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

NP_Jason
06-07-2005, 02:19 PM
Thanks Crushing.

Oleg has stated BOB will have 6DOF. I'm just reminding him ;-)

Jason

CrushingMachine
06-07-2005, 09:22 PM
Originally posted by Megile:
When we open the canopy in flight, can we have the sound of our scalfs flapping in the wind?

Thanks.

ya this is needed... lol NOT.....

I hope you were joking http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/784.gif

sc1949
06-08-2005, 03:52 AM
Please forgive me if this has already been mentioned, but here's something I'd like to see:
Please forgive me if this has already been mentioned, but here's something I'd like to see:


THE PATCH!

Deadmeat313
06-08-2005, 12:46 PM
A few ideas to improve this already excellent flight sim. I play offline, so this is primarily concerned with AI performance:

1) AI bombers that ditch their bombs abort their mission and immediately head for home. Currently they have a tendency to mosey on over their target area despite having lost all offensive capability, seemingly for the pure joy of getting shot to bits by flak.

2) AI pilots more inclined to bail once their aircraft is torched. Fear of burning to death in the cockpit was a big thing for WWII pilots, but the AI seems quite happy to sit in the fireball and scribe big black smoky patterns on the sky until one of your squadron-mates beetles over and shoots him down.

3) Dead stick controls: Presently if a pilot (player or AI) is killed or bails out, the aircraft seems to continue flying as if the stick is held in the last recorded point. Pilotless aircraft will then fly for ages before stalling or otherwise encountering terrain. It seems to me that the stick would probably fall to one side and pull the plane into a corkscrew pretty early on. This might actually be modelled into AI planes already as I've seen them do some pretty crazy stuff when shot. I've had my disabled Bf109 safely belly land itself in the past though, once. After I'd bailed out.

4) Kill markers on the skins would be cool. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

5) As per (1) above - Damaged aircraft should head for home when they are ordered to. Inevitably they sit and follow their waypoints round with everyone else until they crash and die.

6) AI should lose you in clouds. I lose them in clouds all the time.

7) AI should be very wary of mountains. I tried the New Guinea Beaufighter dynamic campaign only to find that the squadron could not actually get to the enemy! They would invariably perform a formation crash into the nearest flank of the Owen Stanley mountains! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif
Realistically I see there might be serious coding difficulties trying to make the AI so situationally aware, but if something could be done it'd be cool. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

8) It'd be nice if the AI had a harder time spotting you if icons were turned off. Then the player (me!) would not be at such a disadvantage in such dogfights. It'd be cool if they were not always 100% on their target ID (at least until close up) as well. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

My sincere thanks go to Oleg for giving us such an amazing flight sim. I'm sure my co-workers will never tire of my tales of nailbiting edge-of-stall dogfights against MIG-3s and I-16s in my tracer-dodging Bf109E. This game rocks! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

T.

orenge
06-09-2005, 04:15 AM
maybe i'm just blind and can't figure out how to get it set up, but flyable torpedo planes for america and japan in pacific fighters would be nice

Sterf21
06-09-2005, 05:13 AM
More armor on the Jap planes !!!

oh wait, that would be historically incorrect... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


No, serious, I would like to see some more german/russian/japanese/english chatter between pilots in singleplay.

rr9
06-09-2005, 09:48 AM
a very simple change to Full Mission Builder:

When adding a new object to the map, could FMB remember the last object orientation that was used before?

This would be useful when adding several objects that should be facing the same direction. You'd add the first object and rotate it. Then when next objects are added, they'd have to correct rotation immediately. You wouldn't have to rotate every added object separately.

Larkatak
06-09-2005, 01:04 PM
Originally posted by orenge:
maybe i'm just blind and can't figure out how to get it set up, but flyable torpedo planes for america and japan in pacific fighters would be nice

AYE!! where are the torpedo planes?!?! PF is lacking some major aircrafts. how come a Pacific Theatre without flyable Helldivers, Avengers and Kates?! i was shocked when i first found out they are missing http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

bn880
06-09-2005, 06:26 PM
COMMS

I would appreciate seeing proper radio communications, not even necessairly voice ones, but a text description of who's voice I am hearing. Is it: Red 1 Blue 1 Yellow 1, ?etc. etc.

Currently things are a big mess in this department. Someone yells "Bombers 4 oclock" or "Requesting immediate assistance", well who the feck are ya and where are ya is sometimes the BIG QUESTION.

Please, give the radio comms some battlefield sense by inculding callsigns other than plane numbers alone, and give us grid/city/etc locations when needed.

Currently we are also unable to issue the X plane go home, Y plane go home commands, only by flight or wingman can we control things.


Likely an entire rework of the comms would be good.

Regards

InsaneDruid
06-10-2005, 02:09 AM
Proper support for non-4:3 resolutions

Would be great, if the devs could fix a little bug, that occurs whenever the game is in non 4:3 resolutions, as on widescreen panels or at the very popular 17/18/19 inch TFT displays with their 1280*1024 resolution.

If you set Il2 to a non 4:3 resolution in conf.ini (SaveAspect=0, and custom resolution), then the "haze" layer, that is rendered in high altitudes, or when inside of clouds is only rendered on the 4:3 area of the screen, leaving the rest of the screen (left/right on widescreens or top/bottom on 1280*1024) without the haze.

http://photobucket.com/albums/v103/cvmIh6EV/Bug/th_grab0003.jpg (http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v103/cvmIh6EV/Bug/grab0003.jpg)

Would be greatif this could be fixed as soon as possible.

CVK_Monkey
06-10-2005, 04:31 AM
Hello all,

I would like to share my idea about a future of air combat simulation games.

As we know there are two main groups of players today: offline and online. Internet is still growing almost in every country in the world where is electricity and will never disappear from our life. That means that players from offline group will move to online group.
Online group can be currently divided to three big groups - dogfight group, coop groop and online campaign group.

As you maybe know I have some experience with third group - we shared with il-2 community our czechwar online campaign based on original bellum war.
I must say that we just hit the ball, when we opened it to the public - first we just wanted to have there 5-10 squadrons of our friends and play it as our small campaign for fun... But then suddenly people were joining...
Now we are somehow stable and on our system is let say average 100 reported missions per day. We are not proffesionals so we also make some mistakes in the running...
Our team is still developing new features in our campaign. This project is just living being and there is so many way to go and explore..
I am sure, that air combat simulation game which will be based on il-2 standards(FM, DM modelling) but it will be made as MMORPG will just make a hole in the world. People(young people) like to compete with other people. They love a track of their achievements. They tend to be "the best" or the part of the "best team". This is human nature. Offline part of game shouldn't be anymore main goal of developement team.
If you 1C are able to continue in this way there won't be any need from Czechwar or VEF in the future..
There is huge number of people they want to play it like that. A real green meadow...
There is also some experience how it should work what people likes and what they expect. And also there is experience what ppl hates.
Don't know about fees - but nobody likes them. So the best way is just to buy a copy or data disks and join main game server for free. It is huge project, but anyway - someone will try it, you can be sure. 1C has everything to try it(I mean source, know-how and experienced developers) so maybe you can think about it.
Sorry for my english..

Salute all!

CVK_Monkey
http://czechwar.vwings.org/

Gigglefits
06-10-2005, 06:58 AM
Good Morning,
Coming from another fligh sim, I would like to see a LIVE,Help Room staff, for us dummies that need it.

Parachutes that you can actually guide.

Better way to chat in the flying rooms, the way it is now, is well.......needs improving.

FILM, PLEASE, PLEASE, fix it so we can advance film, FF, STOP, slow mo.. this would be most helpful.

Have one room set up for taking of territorial, maybe it is now, but i don't see much of it.

and lastly, thanks for a great game, with the improvements you make, it just keep getting better..

~S~

Thank you

Mysticpuma2003
06-10-2005, 04:39 PM
FILM, PLEASE, PLEASE, fix it so we can advance film, FF, STOP, slow mo.. this would be most helpful


We already can...you just can't rewind!

bn880
06-11-2005, 09:54 AM
Dedicated Coop Campaign Servers

I am straining my system running our DCG coop campaigns while my Server sits idle as there is no coop campaign dedicated server support. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

I'm sure this has been requested before, but what the hey.

Regards

johwah
06-11-2005, 10:10 AM
Originally posted by bn880:
Dedicated Coop Campaign Servers

I am straining my system running our DCG coop campaigns while my Server sits idle as there is no coop campaign dedicated server support. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

I'm sure this has been requested before, but what the hey.

Regards I'll second this and add "Linux support": I'd like to see
* COOP support in dedicated servers
* Linux dedicated server program

MAILMAN------
06-11-2005, 01:27 PM
Originally posted by LeLu_Repo:
For offline
===========
1. Dead is dead campaign option, no ability to refly if you get killed.
2. No need to complete the mission to advance in campaign.
3. Multimedia briefings.
4. Personal logbook for writing.

General
========
1. Ability to test convergence on ground (as they did in real life).
2. Personal notes for aircrafts.

In the game Aces High on the ground you get a visual to set your convergence (seperate convergence for mg (if 6 or 8 two seperate convergence points) and a seperate convergence for cannon. You can test it while flying on or offline by toggling a target on and off.

MAILMAN------
06-11-2005, 01:29 PM
Originally posted by Mysticpuma2003:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">FILM, PLEASE, PLEASE, fix it so we can advance film, FF, STOP, slow mo.. this would be most helpful


We already can...you just can't rewind! </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You also know that you can map a key to start and stop the film in flight instead of bringing up the menu? Later you can edit, somewhat, your film while viewing the film with this feature.

MAILMAN------
06-11-2005, 01:40 PM
Originally posted by LLv34_Stafroty:
id like to see real difference between cannon and machineguns, now both make graphically same kind of damage. Would want cannon hits (especially He) decreace planes maneuverability and slow em down.
overall i want much more complicated damage model with also blast effect modelled.

Well that would depend if it hit a contol surface now wouldn't it to affect the flight. Cannon rounds did damage (sometimes great damage) on contact. It could blow a whole in the aircraft skin and not affect the maneuverability or performance. Heavy MG that used Armour Piercing Incendiary or HE would put whole smaller than a 20MM, but did its damage internally to engines, fuel tanks and control surfaces. Cannon also had a slower firing rate and have seen gun films literally showing Spitfires turning through the gaps (unknowingly of course)untouched by slow firing rate cannon from ME110's. So be careful what you are wishing for because you may see big arcs (drop)due to the heavier round, which was fine for bombers, unless you are point blank.

MAILMAN------
06-11-2005, 02:06 PM
Originally posted by NorrisMcWhirter:
Couple more:

e. For planes with 'trim tabs'; these can only be adjusted while stationary on the ground.

Ta,
Norris

Kinda dumb don't ya think. The whole purpose was to adjust these control to trim at various speeds for cruising, climbing, diving AND while in combat. As aircraft increases speed the nose comes up. You shouldn't have to push the stick forward to the stops to keep the nose down in a dive. That is what the elevator trim is used for to keep the nose pitched down. Many combat pilots speak of constantly trimming the ship while maneuvering in combat, which were finer more subtle adjustments than moving the stick. They did more than move the stick, kick the rudder and move the throttle and mixture settings. Grant you some players will use these exclusively, so what, the tabs don't have the same response time or affect of the stick or pedals, but by the same token the player should black out or red out when the approprieat g force is reached. Me, I use it settig a climb angle after take off or keeping the nose down in a dive or trimming it straight and level when cruising to target the area. Sometimes I need to trim the plane, assuming the trim tab is not shot off, to correct for damage to nurse it home. Get over it and get used to it because the game already delays the affect and trim tabs were used in all phases of combat flight which is what this sim is trying to model. Get a joystick with enough buttons if the problem is you got to find them on the keyboard.

PE_Sraka
06-13-2005, 02:21 AM
!S!

First, I really appreciate what you did to FM. Wish there was more realism added, but this is now way better than it was.

I have two wishes for now:

Aircraft information in online games to be turned on/off by server. That means when you join a coop or dogfight, you don't actualy see the opponents aircraft type (when 'S' is pressed in the game or when choosing the aircraft in COOP) - so you don't know what are you flying against.

Yesterday I set my trimmer to 'nose high' on takeoff. Before I started the engine I could see the elevator being in 'nose high' position. This is not accurate since the trim tab will push the elevator or any surface only when there's airflow.

AN-FIN
06-14-2005, 05:55 AM
It seems most of my ideas are already said and I think most of these too.

1. It would be nice get somehow more "deepness" to campaing, that it wouldn't be just flying a mission and complete it or fail it. For example it would be nive if plane could be customized better like if you fly well you could "buy" better guns or something like that... well anyway... I'm not sure how it is today but last time I played campaing it could fail even if pilot survived. It should be changed. It would be good if maximum plane amount or something like that could be set, because now there sometimes come big battles witch my pc can't run.
2. There should also be more talking with other pilots and AI should be better and more human like. AI shoud use better plane's advantages as their advantage.
3. Roads look stupid in some places. Curves would look better. But it's slow to make?
4. Icon adjusting should be easier. I know that it can be somehow changed already but can't ever remember how.

6. I'm not sure but I think there is not winds in game or at least they are not very effective? And does the temperature affect to planes in any way? Tower could tell wind direction and force etc. before start. And as someone said before enemys position could be better informed. surely someone notes if enemy fighters fly over.
7. This game could be little lighter for computer.. I'm not sure how difficult it is to make
8. In online gaming when press s only 30 first players can be seen. I hope you could change that. And I'd like to see witch side players are on before I choose my side.

And thanks for this new patch, witch hopefully will soon come also as an offical.

speeding_mullet
06-14-2005, 07:00 PM
Suggestions mk-I v0.05m alpha


Pre-flight:

- make flight plans clearer (numbered
waypoints, recon image from target area, etc)

- fuel load setting in minutes instead of %


In air:

- Real tracers are just quick bursts of lights
that quickly fade away. (not like StarWars(tm))
Gun camera films may give a wrong impression due
to their technical limitations.

- Some simple (even 2D is possible) shading,
smoke, motion-blur etc -effects inside the
cockpit would add to the games atmosphere
(with fps in mind, ofcourse)

- a setting for low-end computers to
automatically lower ground detail during
dogfights (=activated when enemies are near)

- Audio channels are cheap, so consider adding
"structural noises" to the aircraft. That way
you could get an advance warning when something
is about to break during intense maneuvering.
Also, the planes would feel more like the
lumbering metal crates they really were.


In general:

- more programming efforts need to be
concentrated on the online code.
Imagine, if the latencies could be
lowered so that a coop-server could
host a 100+ players...

- Hyperlobby could be a part of the package
(more people online = more people hooked)



ps.This game is pure gold. The new fm feels
better than any sim ever. This is the best game
since Tetris.

Reaves_42
06-14-2005, 10:14 PM
I would recommend adding a Dynamic weather system like FS2004 has. This would be great for immersion although I don't think it's needed for online play (Server should control weather.)

One of IL-2 weaknesses would have to be weather IMO. I want to have huge storms that throw my plane around and be able to see the rain hitting the cockpit window.

ParachuteProne
06-16-2005, 04:39 PM
1) Recon flights

2) All maps to be available in Qmb

3) More target options in Qmb

4) A random flight option in QMB

or integrate Uberdemons software into Sim.
( I hate all the Alt tab stuff)

5) Spit mk1 to get me in the mood for BOB

Mark

wifc-sixer
06-17-2005, 09:57 AM
how about fixing the game we got

and makeing it real i do not know what pilots you got testing your game but as a man that flys ww2 planes and a hole bunch of other planes. this game is not even close. i gess the gyes that tested the game only take off do a circle and land. you can not do a controled stall or a real hammer head or ect.. ect... i would go for german us brits and some others that look real and fly real. just fix the game take back the pf
if you have to stop come out whith new stuff till you fix the old stuff that should my saying
but we are stuck whith this one till me or some other real pilot makes one.

badatflyski
06-17-2005, 11:19 AM
hey,
just an idea for the ONLINE flying!
at the begin of the mission, you get de map screen and then you have to choose your plane to get the briefing, BUT... when you choose your plane, you can ALSO see the planes of the otherside, so you can choose a better loadout, more "efficient" against the "ENNEMY"...no surpise effect!
If you put a screen where we HAVE TO choose our side first (blue or red) and then we get the "choose-plane" screen with only OUR SIDE planes WITHOUT seeing the "OTHER SIDE"planes it will make this sim just a little more immersive !!!! i suppose it wouldn't be so hard to implant in the game ...but i'm not a programmer so it's juste an idea!


And now the wheening moment: please put back the R1(fuel tank)config to the 190A8 'cause sinds the 4.01 version, the fock is leaking somewhere...but i can't find this leak! for a plane that could fly more than 1000km on it's internal tanks at 6000m with a speed of 550km/h ...and that could dive faster and accelerate also faster than any spitfire (exept mk14) it's not cool!and i'm not talking about the climbrate of 1000m/min it should havehttp://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/354.gif

anyway, that was the wheenie moment,so please excuse me http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/1072.gif

AusDerReihe
06-17-2005, 10:32 PM
What i'd like to see in the future/BOB

Optional:
1. server controlled joystick settings
2. trim settings linked to joystick settings
3. AI input linked to joystick settings
4. dynamic weather

bigbossmalone
06-19-2005, 06:37 AM
We see plenty rivers running through most maps, how about adding a dam or two on a map, which we could then proceed to blow up and drown nearby villages, maybe in a nice flyable Lancaster bomber...DamBusters, anybody?

Tater-SW-
06-19-2005, 01:47 PM
Smoke view distance hugely increased, smoke columns should be see long before other things like "dots."

Have a waypoint trigger to open small sound files so that you can have radio broadcasts pop into missions other than just flight elements saying things. For example, you could have a flight of 1 plane flying along with you hit a waypoint, say "I'm losing power on number 2 engine" them moments later it might say "I'm going to have to turn back. Goo luck!" then have it do so. Things like that could add loads of immersion.

Make sure there is a new waypoint type for bombrs to drop ord without "AI" interference. Ie: they hit waypoint, and bombs fall, no attempt at changing alt, etc. A "jettison ord" waypoint.

A "one pass" gattack waypoint that would have the plane make a single pass, using all ord carried (ideally on multiple targets in a line), then immediately fly to the next waypoint. AI dwells on gattaks until they are slaughtered too often when in RL, they'd make a pass, then RTB.

tater

Willey
06-19-2005, 07:59 PM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Rubysix
06-20-2005, 01:46 AM
Differential toe brakes, Please!

Ruby

Rubysix
06-20-2005, 01:53 AM
And of course, multiple engine power axis.
Minimum 4 axis for engine management, 2 prop & 2 throttle.

F19_Ob
06-20-2005, 05:50 AM
Hello lads and developers.

I have a small suggestion about arcademode.

Personally I think Trackrecording and arcademode are two of the most interesting features in the sim (any sim) because they have increased and deepened my learning and understanding of tactics and very much deflectionshooting. So I take the opportunity to thank U for these fantastic features (Thank you).
I mainly fly online nowadays but often practise in QMB and in arcademode to learn what damage different weapons do since I fly almost all planes.
----------------------------------------------
My suggestion is to remove the textballoons in arcademode when one achieves a kill or disables the fighter. The textballoons are in the way when one wants to take a closer look on the damage and count the hits.

Ohh! and also the possibility to use arcademode with NTRK's.

Online is where most misunderstandings happen and people often feel they hit a plane and it didn't go down and showed no indication of damage.
Here the arcade mode would be perfect for determining what happened, and one could see what weapon hit and where.

I know U guys are busy with more important and urgent things but if it's easy to fix please consider it.
-------------------------------------

Regards

Brain32
06-20-2005, 12:42 PM
Here's mine:
I think a speedbar upgrade in term of replacing slip(yaw) indicator because of planes that have it way out of sight(p-47,spit) would be nice. I was thinking like "-5" for way left; "0" for centered and "+5" for way right scale

Example:
yaw -2
HDG 0

I really enjoy new fm but it's sometimes too hard to move your hat switch through every position and to keep your situational awareness...

HeinzBar
06-21-2005, 07:48 AM
S!,
Even though BoB is still far into the future for an eventual release, I'd like to plant a seed or two.

I really enjoy building maps and testing them on WarClouds. Nothing pleases me more than getting some positive comments on a good map. On the flip side, I don't mind constructive criticism either. It helps my ability to create better maps..which I'm always trying to do.

Anyhow, some things I'd like to see in the future BoB for map building would be the following:

1. The ability to limit the number of planes more accurately at a base. I know I can limit the planes now w/ the spawning diameter, but it can be a guessing game depending on the size of the airbase. I would like to see a numerical size limit instead.

2. The ability to limit the number of specific plane types in the game or set the number of specific plane type respawns, ie I'd like to limit the number of me262 on the map at any one time to 2 regardless of the number of players. Or, there are only 10 me262 in a given map. Once these planes are destroyed, selecting the me262 will not be an option.

3. Using test strip 4, I'd like the ability to set the starting altitude and speed at these airstart bases.

4. The ability to limit loadouts for individual planes. IE, limit the late model 109g6 to 20mm cannon only.

Now, I know alot of this can be done in COOP missions. However, creating DF maps can be very challenging as there are current limitations on what one can do now.

Is this something that 1C could possibly implement in BoB? Just curious.

Sincerely,
HB


PS, this was originally posted in ORR.

FeiHu
06-21-2005, 01:46 PM
WW1 sim pleeeeese! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

MAILMAN------
06-21-2005, 05:19 PM
Originally posted by AusDerReihe:
What i'd like to see in the future/BOB

Optional:
1. server controlled joystick settings
2. trim settings linked to joystick settings
3. AI input linked to joystick settings
4. dynamic weather
I can see it now. A player with a Microsoft 3D Pro with only a couple of buttons making those sticks with more buttons useless. Or a player without force feedback denying a player with a force feedback stick that option. Lastly, server doesn't have enough available buttons to map trim tab control so nobody can adjust trim with the joystick buttons. What is next, have the server eliminate the ability of players to map certain keys on the keyboard as well as their joystick or throttle?

Tater-SW-
06-22-2005, 09:27 AM
In the future, leverage the objects you already have with some lateral thinking!

For example:

1. Make invisible objects with dmaged states that are existing smoke/fire objects. This allows any object to burn/smoke by superimposing an invisible object on top. (the way people hide fuel trucks inside buildings now, only it would leave a nice smoke cloud).

2. Make the above objects height-adjustable like the smoke effects for more possibilities for designers.

3. Make an invisible "train car" (could be a simple box, 6 polys) with ammo in it. This would allow anything--particularly static ships--to have a huge explosion, only there would be no train car wreckage floating on the surface later.

4. Use the sinking states of ships to make half-sunk static ship objects (indestructable). This allows for placement of wrecks (just eye candy, but the work is already done making the sinking states, why not reuse them!)

5. Make an unflagged version of all the ships so mission builders can substitute ships without having the flags ruin immersion.

6. Many planes have a damaged state where the engine is severed off the aircraft entirely. Make a static version of some planes with an engine off. That would look nice along the tarmac as a plane getting serviced. (a reuse of model work already done)

7. Reuse the little troops who run away from strafed trucks to make a little grouping of static guys. Make a smal group, and a single troop object. This would allow for some improved immersion around fields since you could have guys standing near a few planes, or a jeep near the runway. A little thing, but it adds to immersion, and all the work is already done for the human models.

8. Whatever technology you have for the huge forest areas in game, make an object of it for the FMB that covers a large area.

tater

F19_Olli72
06-22-2005, 09:46 AM
Dont know if its been mentioned;

Forced gammasettings (serverside) in config file for online (like in Return to Castle Wolfenstein for example), nightmissions online is pointless atm as everyone boosts their gamma to daylight brightness.

AusDerReihe
06-22-2005, 02:21 PM
Originally posted by MAILMAN------:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by AusDerReihe:
What i'd like to see in the future/BOB

Optional:
1. server controlled joystick settings
2. trim settings linked to joystick settings
3. AI input linked to joystick settings
4. dynamic weather
I can see it now. A player with a Microsoft 3D Pro with only a couple of buttons making those sticks with more buttons useless. Or a player without force feedback denying a player with a force feedback stick that option. Lastly, server doesn't have enough available buttons to map trim tab control so nobody can adjust trim with the joystick buttons. What is next, have the server eliminate the ability of players to map certain keys on the keyboard as well as their joystick or throttle? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

maybe i should have written 'server controlled joystick input settings'. i'm talking about the sensitivity of the stick. if i fly with Brown's joy settings and someone flies with default, surely i'd be outmanouvered all the time?

MAILMAN------
06-23-2005, 03:12 PM
Well you have to remember everyone has different joysticks and methods of connecting them to the computer. Not everything is USB. My flight rig is a CH Force FX joystick, CH Pro Throttle and CH Pro Pedals. I have to use a gameport on my sound card. The newer sound card game ports are really only midi ports and are very slow so therefore to compensate for dampening and input spikes each joystick has to be set up different. Take the time to adjust your own joystick so you can turn as tight as you want. Don't forget your opponent may be using his rudder to yaw his nose up or down in the turn to help tighten his turn.

AusDerReihe
06-23-2005, 07:43 PM
Originally posted by MAILMAN------:
Well you have to remember everyone has different joysticks and methods of connecting them to the computer. Not everything is USB. My flight rig is a CH Force FX joystick, CH Pro Throttle and CH Pro Pedals. I have to use a gameport on my sound card. The newer sound card game ports are really only midi ports and are very slow so therefore to compensate for dampening and input spikes each joystick has to be set up different. Take the time to adjust your own joystick so you can turn as tight as you want. Don't forget your opponent may be using his rudder to yaw his nose up or down in the turn to help tighten his turn.

either we are talking about different things, or i'm not understanding something. just to be sure we don't, i'll explain more precicely. if what i describe below is what you are thinking of, just reply with something short like "that was it, yes" i'll then accept the difficulties with this issue, and don't need further explanation.

inside the game there is a thing called 'Hardware Setup', from which you can proceede to 'Input Settings'. there you can use sliders (or type a value) for roll, yaw and pitch. i see this as how much stick movement the game will apply when you move the stick, regardless of calibration and such. disregard anything outside the game.

now, these values are stored in the Conf.ini file. i'd like the client players' game to ignore those values in the local Conf.ini file while connected to a host. optionally as stated earlier. that way one can be assured that all players play with the same 'input values'. as soon as a client disconnect from the host, the game uses the local values again.

either this cleared things up, or it is now apparent that i don't understand s**t. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

vonStahlhelm
06-23-2005, 08:13 PM
my biggest wish for a future sim is a WW1 flight simulation based on a modern flight sim engine!!
i love this old planes! the only sim with this scenario is "red baron 3d". but this game is very old, to old to really have fun with it! the only thing i see was an announcement for an game called
"knights over europe" by "aspect simulations" but they dont update their site since spring 2003 and i think this game will never released.
flying in this old ww1 planes is a special thing and i think a good game with this scenario is also a topseller like forgotten battles! maybe this is a good idea for a new game when battle of britain is released! oleg, you and your company have done so much great work for the flight sim scene, a ww1 flight sim from the hand of maddox games can be definitely a topseller, i think! you got a good gameengine, so you must only design a couple of good maps with typically
ww1 scenarios like trenchsystems in the frontlines, masses of infantery for nice strafing runs an a couple of authentic ww1 planes. i know thats much work but i think im not the onlyone who like a ww1 scenario!
think about it, because the fligthsim scene need it! soory for my bad english.
greets, von Stahlhelm

Sturm_Williger
06-24-2005, 07:47 AM
I don't think it would be unreasonable to anticipate that 70-80% of all the people flying on Hyperlobby would purchase a Maddox Games WWI product.

Hell, I'd buy 2 if it would get it made.

I know, I know, it'll be at least 2010 before it could happen, but we all dream...

jwecross
06-24-2005, 09:04 AM
This is both a question and a new feature request. How well is wind direction modelled? Will (does??) wind have different direction and velocity in different locations on a map?

Regardless, if wind direction and velocity are modelled, it would be very nice to have a few windsocks placed around each airbase. That way, I could guage my wind direction and actually take off into the wind by design instead of by accident, thus eliminating that **(*&^%^&^%$#!!! 60 knot crosswind that keeps blowing my sail-like HE111 off the runway...

Just a Thought!

TerminalVelocity

nickdanger3
06-24-2005, 08:38 PM
I was thinking it might be nice to have the option/ability to "fill" a dogfight server with variable number of AI planes if you wanted to. As new real pilots enter the server, AI that land or crash wouldn't respawn to keep overhead at a level that the host wants.

Since some online dogfights can occaisionally be sparsely attended, or vary in attendance, this might appeal to some hosts.

Also, while it is sorta in the eye candy department, and pardon me if it's too CFS3, but I think it would be fun if when you spawn, you "leave the briefing", opening a door and running out of the HQ to your plane.

As you get close to your plane out on the tarmac, the prep crew scatters, pulls out the chocks and fuel lines, gives you a salute, helps you up, etc.

You climb up and in and slide the canopy shut - yeah it's cartoony, but WAY immersive. It's really not unlike the "bail out" sequence we have now.....

Could be really fun when your base is being vulched.

TacticalYak3
06-28-2005, 02:00 PM
Sorry if this has already been mentioned but would like to see:

(a) External view allowed only on pilot's death/bail;

(b) A central stats tracker program built into the game itself that keeps a record of all your activities on/offline; and

(c) Ability to easily switch between customized control setups while in game so that you can jump into a fighter than a bomber using preferred key settings.

Regards,
TacticalS!

Yank_Air_Pirate
06-28-2005, 02:25 PM
I don't know if this has been mentioned but:

I would love to see a Korean War (1950s) flight Sim. F86's, MiG-15's,F9F's, IL-10's, Bridges of Toko-ri style missions and all that would be interesting.
A way to model early radars so that one could use night fighters and night missions more effectively and even be able to use it in anti-shipping missions with certain aircraft.
Training missions where you actually get to fly and can pratice with instead of just sitting back watching like a movie. Don't make it needed to fly to advance in the storyline but rather missions that are flown against milk-run style targets so that people can pratice.

Better direction from ground controllers about which targets to attack. Also markers from forward air controls on where the targets are when you get into range.

Tater-SW-
07-01-2005, 11:51 AM
Fix the no3 and no4 runways objects so that planes can actually taxi on and off of them without blowing up.

Add a no5 runway that looks like dirt, and a no6 that looks like coral, also flat for taxi on/off.

Then, make some blank maps by taking existing maps (NG and Singapore leap to mind) and simply removing most airfields on them, or changing all fields to grass strips with no structures at all.

These "blank" versions should be trivial to make, and would be very useful.

tater

RxMan
07-01-2005, 02:47 PM
I would really like the ability to save a custom JoyS/RuddP sensitivity settup in each plane's skin folder, or somewhere else handy. This would load up automatically when a plane is selected when joining or reflying in a game. If no file is present for that plane it would load your default one as it does now.

The handling characteristics are different enough for each plane that this would be a good addition IMO.

Pursuivant
07-01-2005, 06:07 PM
You asked for it:

Background: I only play FB/AEP and I spend a lot of time in QC because I have an older computer which chokes when I try to play in campaign more. Here are my suggestions.

1) Better AI.
a) Many fighters still always don't use "boom and zoom" tactics when appropriate. (E.g., set up an all AI QC between a bunch of Bf109Es and I-16 - the Germans mix it up in a dogfight and get massacred.)
b) Average or better pilots should should "fly strategically"; rather than just flying at the enemy when disadvantaged they should try to extend, gain altitude and position and then engage.
c) AI should also try to run away if outnumbered by superior planes - unless the mission requires it. They should also attack more aggressively if they have superior numbers, quality and/or are over friendly territory.
d) AI should use team tactics, if appropriate, to "box" isolated enemy planes and/or split defensive fire.
e) Enemy bomber formations seem to scatter too easily in QC. Unless there's a good reason for them to do so, they should stick together to maximize defensive firepower.
f) If appropriate, AI pilots should panic (trying to flee or bailing out) or "kamikaze" (ramming enemy AC or diving into ground targets). The former case was not uncommon for green German pilots over home territory towards the end of the war - U.S. fighter pilots occasionally reported enemy pilots bailing out of a perfectly good airplane when they were in an extremely bad tactical situation.
g) Option for bombers all drop bombs on command of lead bomber - so taking out leader actually has a real game effect.

2) Improve Quick Combat
a) An option to set up an encounter with "random fighters", "random bombers", "axis bombers", etc. in addition to the current options. The MS CFS series has this, and it's a fun, simple option.
b) An option to set up multiple waves of aircraft which respawn after a particular formation is eliminated or gets out of range. This isn't particularly historical, unless you're flying a German night fighter vs. the British bomber stream, but it's also lots of fun.
c) An option for random altitude, weather, map, advantage, enemy payloads, etc.
d) Heck, what about a "random" button on the main QC menu which gives you a completely random QC scenario? You never know which plane you'll be flying and what opposition you'll be facing until you're "in the cockpit."
e) An option for random (or different) vector between friendly AC and enemy AC. As it stands, your opponents always appear at 1,12 or 11 o'clock.
f) The ability to quickly restrict the listing of aircraft based on nationality, allegience and year. As it stands, you have to scroll through a list of 75+ planes for every formation on your side, then every formation on the enemy's side. This is a hassle if, say, you want to create a quick fight set in in 1942 between Romanian and Soviet aircraft.
g) The ability to choose the pilot skill level of each aircraft within a particular formation.
h) The ability to base pilot skill based on nationality of opponents and year. For example, late war German and Japanese pilots would mostly be Novice, but with a smattering of Ace pilots.

3) Add some roleplaying aspects: Currently IL2 does an excellent job of modeling the airplanes of WW2, but it doesn't do such a hot job modeling the men who flew them.
a) It would be cool if pilots had actual personalities and some "roleplaying" traits, rather than just generic piloting skill. There should also be some provision for pilot health, morale and fatigue to reflect bad conditions or physical impairment. Stress, illness and fatigue contributed to the grounding or death of huge number of aircrew in WWI.
b) It would be fun if your squadron-mates had personalities as well as names and faces. For example, its much more interesting (I hesitate to say fun) if you knew that your wingman Sergei was a cautious and prone to drink too much (and even fly while drunk)? On the other hand, you might cut him more slack if you knew he possessed great eyesight, was loyal and unlikely to panic.
c) In campaign mode, once you have enough rank to control a section or squadron of planes, you can try to improve your mates' abilities, get rid of their vices, weed out problem pilots and acquire talented pilots. If you're not careful pilots who are sick, stressed out or badly motivated might aquire vices or lose acquired talents.
d) Risk of death in campaign if you bail out over hazardous territory (i.e., artic wilderness, cannibal-infested jungle, shark-infested or freezing ocean). "Follow up" for captured pilots (i.e., killed on the ground, died resisting capture, captured and survived, died in captivity, etc.) Posthumous or post-war medals for killed or captured pilots.
e) You should be able to shift crew (or crew tasks) around in a multi-crew plane. The old game "B-17" did a nice job of this, allowing crew to perform repairs, fight fires, reload guns or render first aid to injured crew.
f) Ability for crew of multi-crew planes to communicate between stations and coordinate defensive fire.
f) Different experience levels for different crew of multi-crew AC. (E.g., ace pilot but rookie gunner.)
g) Medals, promotions, etc. for aircrew other than pilot.
h) Ability to direct wingmen/subordinates in combat and also before takeoff. Possibly by drawing "arrows" on the tactical map.
i) Ability to alter landing order and/or override control tower (if you have the rank to do it). This lets you land AC with injured crew/damage/low fuel first or last.

4) Improve the User Interface: It's not bad, but a few things annoy me:
a) Ditch the little, tiny radio buttons. They're cool, but unless you have a huge monitor and great manual dexterity, it makes harder it quickly to open and close windows. For things like the Quit button, just use MS-standard rectangular buttons.
b) Why is it that the information about the objects in the game is buried in a menu which is completely inaccessible from the QC screen and hard to access from the full MB screen? Why not have a more "web page"-like UI where all the options from the main menu appear at the top or side of any submenu screen? For that matter, why not have information about the game available as a MS-standard "Help" file available from any screen. That way, you can look up info from the manual or the object info submenu from any screen.
c) It's too hard to quit the game. Say you want to quit a mission and exit the program. Assuming that you don't want to just exit to desktop and use MS task manager to kill the program, you must: Hit ESC to get out of the mission. Hit Done to cancel the mission. Hit Main Menu to get out of the QC, Campaign or Mission Builder menu. Hit Quit from the main menu. Confirm that you actually want to quit the program. That's 7 steps. It should be 2 steps: 1 to shut down, the other to confirm the shutdown.
d) The options (at least in FB/AEP) are "Soviet" and "German". This made sense for IL2, but it doesn't make sense for FB. much less PF. Instead, the options should be "Axis" and "Allies".
e) Related to the above, victory markings should be appropriate for the planes you're fighting and your nationality. Red stars are alright for Soviet pilots, but pilots of other nationalities should use historically appropriate victim markings (e.g., Japanese flags or iron crosses for U.S. and British pilots, red aircraft silhouettes for Japanese, etc.) Likewise, ditch the score system -it's never explained in the manual, and I find it confusing and frustrating.
f) You should be able to freely choose the nationality of the planes you fly and the planes you fly against. This is appropriate for nations which switched allegiences during the war - like all the minor Axis nations. It also lets you fly "what if" scenarios, like a U.S. - Soviet clash in 1946 (like General Patton wanted).
i) Historically correct AC formations based on type and nationality automatically present in both QC and the full mission builder. You should have the option to create your own AC formations.

5) Minor bug stomping (at least in FB/AEP):
a) Can't pause game while the map window is open.
b) No option to have aircraft indicator arrows present when in cockpit mode. (If this were possible, I'd fly in full cockpit mode more often.)
c) It seems that the YP-80 has no power.
d) Occasionally, it seems that damage markings don't appear on an aircraft's skin (I've noticed this with the 1938 Hurricane and the CR42) when seen from external view.
e) Game occasionally shifts from Autopilot on to Autopilot off when you switch from one view to the next.
f) Crew bailout animations are screwed up. Often the crew will fall "through" parts of the aircraft, without suffering any harm. Even when crew land in water, bail out of a ditched AC or AC on the ground, they use the same "canopy blows off, crewman jumps out of the cockpit like a kangaroo, thows himself flat, then picks himself up and runs." Why can crew who bail out of relatively stationary AC just push the cockpit canopy open and climb out? Why can't crew who land in water inflate life vests and life-rafts and tread water? More important, if a crewman hits part of the plane on bailout, he should be injured or killed. If he tries to escape from a sunken aircraft, there should be a good chance he'll drown.
g) Kill counting is screwed up. You don't get a kill for an AC until it blows up or hits some damage threshold. This means that planes falling out of control, with crewmen bailing out don't always count as kills until they crash. Furthermore, crash-landed or ditched aircraft, if intact, don't count as kills. AC which crash or collide while maneuvering to avoid your fire don't count as kills unless you've previously registered hits on them.
h) No option to toggle ID, range and vector indicators for ground or sea objects.
i) Alter default paint schemes for AC based on the year of introduction, rather than the year of the scenario. Frex, the P51B always appears in OD, even though some were stripped to bare aluminum in early 1944.
j) Ground vehicles in column on a road still do the "bump into contact with the disabled vehicle ahead of them, back up, turn 30 degrees R/L and move ahead" routine, rather than just swerving to avoid the crippled vehicle without bumping into it.
k) Need to tweak the damage model for pilots. Severely wounded pilots shouldn't be able to fly indefinitely. Also, using the "pincushion" bullet vector tracking option with IL2 Manager, I notice that bullets go "through" pilot and crew models without always injuring the crewman.
l) Dead or injured crew don't always slump back or forward, so it's hard to tell if they're dead.
m) Buildings in cities rendered as single buildings, rather than city blocks, even when not necessarily correct to do so.
n) Destroyed buildings are reduced to empty shells, rather than collapsing into heaps of rubble and/or burning. Fires from burning ground objects go out way too soon. Burning fuel tanks don't produce sufficient smoke and flames.

6) Things which are present in other flight/combat sims which I wish were present in the IL2 series:
a) An ammunition counter option. (Not historically correct, but I find such things useful. Should have the ability to go to negative numbers if you choose unlimited ammo - this would give you an indication of just how much ammo you've used beyond the historical loads). For historical modes, you could have tracers of a different color when you get low on ammo.
b) A really good gunnery training mode which shows you exactly where you need to aim to hit a given target. For example, an aiming point marker shows you where you need to aim. Also, a program with gives you percentage of hits - average percent and percent vs. each target.
c) Ability to get reloads of ammo or fuel at friendly airports. This would be nice for extended missions.
d) Ability to "warp" to the next waypoint of a long mission. Time compression is useful, but even with x8 compression, on long missions it still takes 10+ minutes to get from your airfield to the action. Again, this isn't "historic" by any means, but then again, neither are some of the other options included with the game. If you don't like "warping" don't use it.
e) Infantry, infantry objects (e.g., MG nests, mortar emplacements, trenches, foxholes, wire entanglements), cavalry, tank and gun crews to shoot up. FB/AEP already has a "T" rating for violence and you can already shoot parachutists. The ability to strafe infantrymen isn't going to change anything.
f) It should be possible to fly every plane in the game, even if they don't have virtual cockpits. If they're not completely flyable, just restrict them from games which require full virtual cockpits and/or ability to switch crew stations.
g) Ability to design your own loadouts for AC based on historically available weapons and hardpoints. Instead of just having a list of every possible combination of ordinance for an AC, have a point and click interface where you select a particular hardpoint on the AC and then select ordinance available for it - as long as the hardpoint has the strength and space to accomodate the weapon. This is a much better way of modeling the huge variety of loadouts available for general purpose AC like the B25 or Ju88.
h) Ability to select air temperature, cloud layers, wind direction and speed.
i) Dynamic weather.
j) Either terrain for the entire world or ability for players to create their own maps. (And come on, guys, part of the reason I'm holding back on buying PF is because it adds so few maps - why is is so difficult to model the entire Pacific Ocean? It's only 99% water? The MS FS series does a pretty darned good job of modeling the planet. Admittedly, the MS maps aren't as detailed as IL2, but in CFS2, you could, theoretically, fly a shuttle mission from Foggia, Italy to Poltava, USSR.)
k) More civilian objects (e.g., tractors, cars, trolley cars, farm wagons, refugees.) Not only were these things impressed into military use, but terror attacks on refugees were part a Luftwaffe blitzkreig tactic.
l) Identification flags, flares, smoke markers and marker panels placed by ground units to identify targets and friendly troops. (For that matter, why don't ground units have prominently placed air-identification flags - like national flags on German units, "cross of Michael" markings on Romanian units and white ID stripes for Soviet tanks?)

7) Things which I wish were present in IL2, which would make it even more powerful and realistic.
a) Accurate modeling of ground friction and viscosity (e.g., mud, sand, swamp) so you can't just land anyplace, and so ground vehicles can't just drive anyplace.
b) Weather which affects ground friction and viscosity (e.g., cold weather snow makes the ground hard and turns lakes to ice, rain or melting snow turn roads and dirt airstrips to mud.)
c) A game engine which alters terrain, or ground viscosity, on the fly - producing true bomb or crash craters as well as torn up ground behind a crash-landed AC. As it stands, you can land on a bomb-cratered runway with no ill effects.
d) Ability to manipulate and adjust historical sights. They're beautifully modeled in IL2. I just wish that I could twist those dials.
e) Accurate oxygen management, with effects on crew health and alertness.
f) Accurate modeling of effects of wind (e.g., wake turbulence behind large AC, wind shear, updrafts).
g) Accurate modeling of the effects of cold on AC and crew (e.g., icing, hypothermia, frostbite, heating systems and pressurized cabins for AC).
h) Accurate radio reliability and range. (e.g. Japanese radios were largely junk so many pilots ditched them, but this had severe problems on their ability to navigate, coordinate attacks, or vector towards enemy AC using ground-based observers).
i) Accurate radar (both air- and ground-based). Vital for an accurate BoB simulation.
j) Communication with ground units. Vectoring towards targets based on information from other units. Also vital for an accurate BoB simulation.
k) Aircraft system which have inherent unreliability, and where the reliability degrades if the system is damaged. For example, there should be a chance that you have to scrub a mission due to engine/radio/oxygen problems. The chance of failure should also be increased if you're flying an old or badly-maintained AC, or flying from a primitive airstrip. Furthermore, if you pull extreme G-loads with a damaged AC, there should be a chance that it breaks up due to the stress based on existing damage. Finally, pulling heavy G loads should damage systems on its own. (Admittedly, this wasn't too common an occurance for WW2 fighters, but it was an occasional problem for WW2 bombers and trainers and it was one of the defining features of WW1 AC.)
l) Simulation of logistics and maintenance. Under bad conditions, or in a campaign which is going badly, players don't get full loads of gas or ammo, have less reliable AC, and less access to replacement AC. If hooked into pilot fatigue and morale, being cut off from supplies and/or having your home airbase shot up is a catastrophe.
m) Accurate representation of battle damage based on the location of bullet strikes. The AEP "pincushion" model tracks the vector of a bullet through the AC, so instead of just having one graphic for light damage, another for heavy damage, etc., why not "draw" a hole for each bullet strike and exit, along with the appropriate sparks/puff of smoke, etc. That way you'd could see bulets "stitching" across the surface of the AC and blowing out the other side.
n) Realistic modeling of pilot injury (i.e., hits to certain body parts limit your ability to use certain AC controls, shock and injury increases susceptibility to from hypoxia and hypothermia, increases reaction times, severe bleeding means that you black out and die after a short period of time). Likewise, ability to perform first aid to reduce severity of bleeding and stabilize shock.
o) A "G-meter" which tells you just how many G's you're pulling and in which direction - useful for avoiding stalls. Likewise, indicators of cockpit temperature, cockpit pressure, and pilot condition. (Not historical, but then again, so is flying an airplane without no sense of touch or balance. If indicator labels and arrows corrects for the limitations of a computer screen on human vision, then a meter subs for the lack of sense of balance and touch.)
p) Submarines which surface and dive realistically, and which can be seen and attacked with depth charges while submerged. If damaged while submerged, they can be brought to the surface to fight it out.
q) Ships with subsystems which can be damaged independently of the ship (so strafing takes out AA guns, etc. Capital ships which burn and sink realistically (i.e., over a period of hours). Men in rafts, lifeboats, in the water, etc. to rescue or kill. Realistic crew "bailouts" from sinking ships.
r) Huge flame and smoke effects for massive firebombs or hits on incendiary targets (i.e., oil refineries at Ploestic, the cities of Tokyo, Osaka, Dresden, Coventry, etc.). Turbulence from massive fires.
s) Large dust clouds for vehicles in the desert/dry conditions. Sandstorm effects for desert. Whiteout conditions in the Arctic.
t) Ability to choose your load of ball, tracer, etc. Differing ballistics between ball and tracer. Differing characteristics between AP, API, ball, etc. Ability to choose different colors of tracers, altered frequency of tracer graphics based on percentage of tracers.
u) Ability to drop or fire flares from AC. Good for signaling, and they're model in some cockpits.
v) Early guided missiles and guided anti-ship bombs. Parafrag bombing. Parachute mines. Depth charges. Leaflet dropping. "Window" anti-radar chaff dropping.
w) Appropriate response of airfield units to AC crashes, burning planes or planes with injured crew (e.g., ambulances and/or fire trucks).
x) When appropriate, piles of wrecked or scrap AC around airfields. Wrecks of sunken ships in shallow water. Wrecks of burnt-out vehicles on the ground.

8) My wish list for AC (ignoring those already in the pipeline that I know of):
a) More training, recce, light transport and liason AC, even as static targets.
b) My top 3 U.S. wishes: A-20 Havoc (used by U.S., British and Soviets, the only missing lend-lease AC in FB), B-26 Marauder, B-24 Liberator.
c) Top 3 British: De Havilland Mosquito, Bristol Beaufighter, Gloster Meteor.
d) Top 3 German: Fw-57 (unfortunately for Germans and IL2, canceled), Ar-234 Blitz, Me-410 Hornisse.
f) Other countries: Arsenal VG33, Dewoitine D520, Fokker DXXIII, Martin Maryland (also used by Brits), Martin Baltimore, Piaggio P108, PZL P23 Karas, PZL P24, PZL P37 Los, PZL P38 Wilk, Reggiane R2001, Romano Ro58, Savoia-Marchetti SM79

Pursuivant
07-01-2005, 06:27 PM
Additions to the above:

1) Bug-stomping.
a) Get rid of those weird "disappearing rivers" on the Smolensk map, unless that part of Russia really have lots of river backwaters and oxbow lakes).
b) Reduce "lag time" in transmissions and segments of transmission compared to the action of the AC in question. I've noticed often times you get the message "Number X reporting . . .[lag, lag, lag] . . . good kill/help me/bailing out/whatever." This gives odd results, such as friendlies reporting that they're bailing out after they've bailed out.

2) Cool ideas:
a) Have rivers enlarge or shrink depending on season and weather conditions.
b) Have wave conditions, water color and texture alter based on wind speed, wind direction, light and cloud cover.

Pursuivant
07-01-2005, 06:31 PM
Originally posted by Gigglefits:
Parachutes that you can actually guide.

That would be fun, but I believe that parafoil type parachutes are a post-WW2 invention. The round style of parachute used in WW2 allowed you to spill air but didn't let you glide that much.

Pursuivant
07-01-2005, 06:40 PM
Another idea:

Realistic and partial kill claims:

If you hit an AC (or think you hit it), you can claim a "damaged" result, if you smoke it but don't see it crash, you can claim a "probable". If you see it fall apart/pilot bail/catch fire/crash you can claim at "kill."

If multiple friendly AC score hits on a plane, they can share credit.

At the end of a mission, you can make "claims" for anything you want, but the program can "disallow" claims unless one or more of your wingmen, a ground unit, or your gun camera, confirms it. This allows for historical rates of overclaiming kills, creates "fog of war" for campaigns, and creates the realistic, but frustrating, situation where you know you got the bandit, but you can't prove it.

This option would also get rid of the annoying situation where you pump lots of lead into an E/AC, see it start to smoke and burn, turn away and then one of your wingmen comes in, finishes it off and grabs credit for the kill. Likewise, it gives you incentive to work with your wingies since you split credit for a kill.

The exception, of course, would be the Japanese who can claim whatever the hell they want. (Of course, historically, they only got awards and promotions posthumously, so it doesn't matter that much for campaign purposes.)

Pursuivant
07-01-2005, 06:47 PM
Originally posted by MAILMAN------:
Well that would depend if it hit a contol surface now wouldn't it to affect the flight. Cannon rounds did damage (sometimes great damage) on contact. It could blow a whole in the aircraft skin and not affect the maneuverability or performance.


Cannon also had a slower firing rate

I think that IL2, et al, models rate of fire pretty well. Take up a Me262U4 against some fighters and you'll see what a ***** it is to hit a small, maneuverable target with a slow-firing weapon.

Mind you, I'm not disagreeing here. I think that the different effects of different ammo (AP vs. HE) is valid and would improve the whole IL2 experience.

Pursuivant
07-01-2005, 06:59 PM
Firing range for ships.

For that matter, firing ranges for anything that can shoot, E/AC, friendly AC, ground units, etc.

The AAA ZIS truck should also be there as artillery, not only as immobile or moving object. (For dogfight maps.)


Damage model: Hit ammo storage.

I could be wrong here, but my impression is that the filler for bullets/cannon shells was pretty inert unless you hit it just right. While I think that ammo storage hits are a valid idea, it would probably just jam the gun and/or reduce total number of shots rather than creating a big, gratifying explosion.


Option to turn off the arrows that appear with icons/no cockpit settings.

For that matter, ability to keep arrows on when you're in cockpit setting. IMO, those arrows represent peripheral vision and "Situational Awareness" which a fighter pilot would have and use poor flight simmers don't while peering into our computer monitors. Likewise, the identification and range icons represent the abilities of a keen-eyed, well-trained fighter pilot and overcome the resolution limitations of a mere computer monitor.

Personally, I use the "no cockpit view" and icons on the map precisely because it gives me "peripheral vision" and "SA". I'd be much more willing to use the cockpit view if I had those ****ed arrows.


Padlock/blackout settings also for external views.

?? If you're got an external view then it doesn't make a whole lot of sense to apply padlock/blackout settings to it. Not that I'm saying you shouldn't have the option . . .

Pursuivant
07-01-2005, 07:03 PM
Originally posted by corsairf4u:
it would be good too if you shoot at rear gunners you kill them instead of them continually shooting at you ?

You can actually do this, but it's fairly hard. Take up a plane with a lot of fast-firing weapons (e.g., P47 or Hurricane MkI) against a flight of hapless rookie planes (e.g., SU2 or Ju87), tuck in really close and let loose on the rear gunner. If you're accurate and lucky, the rear gunner will slump over when you kill him.

Pursuivant
07-01-2005, 07:23 PM
Originally posted by Buzzsaw-:
1) Detailed and extensive Single Player Campaigns, for all the various nationalities involved in significant numbers in the battle. Ie. German, Italian, British RAF, Czech RAF, Canadian RCAF/RAF, Polish RAF, French RAF, Australian RAF, etc.

That would be fun, but I think that it's more important to give campaigns by Air Force (e.g., RAF, Luftwaffe, Regia Aeronautic) than nationality. Anyhow, campaigns are relatively easy 3rd party add-ons.


2) Detailed AI modelling, which takes into account aircraft performance characteristics. Ie. different behaviour from the AI depending on whether they are up against a) better maneuvering but slower aircraft, b) Faster but poorer maneuvering aircraft. As it is in FB/PF, the AI seems to react similarly to whatever they are up against.

Yep. I think that each AC ought to have a simple "maneuver rating", firepower rating", "speed rating", "damage rating" and "quality rating". If, say, the maneuver rating of one AC is lower than that of another, but it's speed rating is higher, it will go to "boom and zoom" tactics. If it's "quality rating" is better than the opposing AC, it will be more likely to fight if outnumbered. If it's "damage rating" is high, it will be more likely to engage units with a high "firepower rating" in head-on attacks (or heavily armed bomber formations in rear attacks), and so forth. You could also assign each AC a value based on its performance at a particular "altitude band" and have each AC try to "drag" a fight to that particular level.


3) Ground enviroments which are 'alive', ie. with humans and other objects present in numbers. This does not have to be done so much in other areas, but airfields should really have a sense of a working enviroment with vehicles moving, people present etc.

Yep. You ought to be able to see and shoot people and animals. Hell, you can already shoot parachutists, why not poor, hapless mechanics or teams of horses?


4) The non-flying aspect of the game, ie. the GUI screens and rooms need to create more of a sense of the time.[QUOTE]

Seconded, there are so many public domain images, sounds, etc. out there that this isn't a problem at all. In any case, historians and researchers work cheaper than programmers. Send some people to the U.S. National Archives, the Imperial War Museum, etc. and let them go crazy.

[QUOTE]5) 6 degrees of freedom for views, ie. ability to lean left or right, as well as rotating in place and tilting head.

Lord, yes. I get so frustrated that I can't turn my virtual "head" or do quick "shoulder checks" to my 5 and 7 o'clock, or do a quick check to my 1-11 o'clock high. For that matter, I wish there was some way I could keep "peripheral vision" in the game. As it is, staring at a computer monitor is more like looking through the hatch of a tank than sitting in the cockpit of an plane.


6) Real Ground control, with radar intercept, etc. and controllers being able to vector players onto opponents.

Yeah. I don't know how Oleg hopes to do a decent BoB sim without it.


7) A real Nightfighter Campaign for BoB would be nice, with airborne radar, etc. However, this should only be included if the day Campaign is completed and with nothing missing. Otherwise, better to leave the NF to an Addon.

AFAIK, there is no flight sim which has ever focused on night fighters. The closest thing to it that I heard of was "Target for Tonight" which get belly-up.

Pursuivant
07-01-2005, 07:28 PM
Originally posted by NorrisMcWhirter:
c. Pilot fatigue modelled where function of g force and exertion from moving flight controls reduces performance temporarily (extension to idea possibly prolonged high altitude flying reducing pilot performance, also due to cold etc).

Clever, I like it.


d. Arrows on external view completely decoupled from dot ranges.

Decent idea.


f. Smoke in cockpit when engine hit blocking view.

More to the point, smoke in the cockpit when an engine directly in front of the pilot is smoking badly or on fire.



h. AI can't see through clouds.

I think that this is sort of in place. In any case, the better the pilot/crew the better the chance of spotting AC. I'd love to be able to stalk an E/AC through broken clouds with some chance of him not being able to see me.

Pursuivant
07-01-2005, 07:47 PM
1. An option to REMOVE the cockpit joystick so those of us who want to use the cockpit dials can (often the Navigation, etc readings are obscured).

Ability to have a "cockpit view - high" which allows you to see just the top of your control panel, all of your windscreen, plus part of 1-11 o'clock high. "Cockpit view -low" - focus on cockpit gauges with just a part of your windscreen at 1-11 o'clock level. "Cockpit view - very low" - lets you look at your rudder pedals.

Ability to manipulate various levers, handles and gauges in cockpit view. If you bail out, you see a hand going towards the canopy/door release/ ejection seat handle.


5. Allow AI fighters to sometimes waggle wings (to indicate enemies) and to even make a victory roll after a fighting sortie.

Non-verbal AI communications in general - shooting flares, waggling wings, etc.


6. Practise gunnery boards, that actually allow us to set our convergence on the ground until we felt we had it right (set in the hanger or outside?)

Realistic, but given the ability to work out convergence in QC, I'm not sure it's necessary.


7. Malfunctioning radios in the I16 (not just the early japanese planes).

Malfunctioning radios, period. WW2-era radios weren't the greatest, and vacuum tubes were prone to failure, even ignoring battle damage. The Soviets, Japanese and Italians all had crappy/limited radios, although the Japanese radios seemed to be the worst.


8. More Pacific based speech, ie
"Our carriers been hit!"

Or just more American slang and/or regional accents. For that matter, although it will probably be lost on us poor, dumb Americans, different regional accents for other languages - if they aren't already there.

On a related note, more variety for German and Russian voices. As it stands, all the Germans sound like utter a**holes, especially the control tower voice.


8. a Seagulls/ birds. Yep, after playing SHIII, Seagulls are on my mind!

Bird strikes . . .

Pursuivant
07-01-2005, 07:52 PM
1. Online it is bad to have flak that 'steals' our kills

IIRC, fighter pilots claims tended to be preferred to claims by flak batteries. Either that or flak and fighters tended to claim kills independent of each other - another source of overclaiming.


3. In campaign mode (career) there should be strict rules about claiming victories over enemy aircraft. AFAIK, I can hit enemy aircraft which eventually fall down from sky 100km inside his territory (I can be as well 100km away from him and no other friendly unit near him -- no witnesses), and I would still be awarded a victory ("enemy aircraft destroyed"). That did not happen often in WW2 (unless the other side provide info about event http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif).


Yeah. I like the "damaged, probable, kill, confirmed kill, shared kill" idea myself. Even to this day, pilots are getting "probable" claims upgraded to "confirmed kills" as wrecks of crashed AC are dug out of European fields.

Pursuivant
07-01-2005, 07:54 PM
Originally posted by idonno:
I could sure use some indication of trim tab settings so I can trim my plane the same way every time.

For example, proper trim for the F4U for take-off was 6 degrees nose right, 6 degrees right wing down, and 1 degree nose up.

Pursuivant
07-01-2005, 07:55 PM
Originally posted by idonno:
I could sure use some indication of trim tab settings so I can trim my plane the same way every time.

Option to have trim tabs set to counter torque, etc. automatically.

Pursuivant
07-01-2005, 08:09 PM
Originally posted by KOM.Nausicaa:
2.try to find a playable solution for forests looking more realistic (no "look through") when being on ground level)

Personally, I don't find the simplified forests to be that obnoxious. They're easy on frame rates and the only time you look "through" them is when you're "dead". For all we know, maybe ghosts can see through tree trunks . . . :}



3.AI squadrons should sometimes disengage.

Sometimes they do. If you get far enough ahead/above them they break off pursuit. In such cases, the only unrealistic thing is that they don't come back towards you if you turn back and attack them.

For that matter, another unrealistic thing is that average or better pilots will sometimes reverse the direction of a turn when you're on their tail, even when they have airspeed and altitude to spare. That's a serious no-no of fighter combat.


4.AI pilots should not pursue you forever.

Yep. There ought to be a default or quick method of setting a "FLOT" (forward line - our troops) in both QC and FMB modes.



2.a new object: lit streetlamps (also very nice for airfields)

Also hedges, stone walls, brick walls, telegraph poles, electrical lines/pylons, flak emplacements and various flak towers - all of these things made ground attack in Western Europe different from that on the Eastern Front.

Heck, for that matter, ground radar installations and AA control objects (sound ranging, searchlights, searchlight generators, etc.).

Pursuivant
07-01-2005, 08:16 PM
1) Possibility of jamming weapons even if not hit by the enemy.

I think this is already modeled. I've seen it several times when flying the various Hurricane variants.

Pursuivant
07-01-2005, 08:20 PM
Originally posted by csThor:
This thread has developed exactly into what I feared it would. Some folks should take out a glossary and look up "self-delusion".

Understood, but the original idea was possible improvements. I'm assuming that some of those improvements will run a bit ahead of Moore's law and others will run afoul of "feature-creep".

That said, if any of the suggestions results in a better sim, I'm all for it.

Pursuivant
07-01-2005, 08:44 PM
Originally posted by DDastardlySID:
3. An instantaneous "warp to action" button and a save game facility so that you could save a mission eg just prior to the action kicking off and replay it from that point rather than having to endure a tedious half hour flight in a straight line each time you play. I've spent hours of my life looking at that depressing black time skip screen and frankly I resent the loss.

God yes! I abso-f&&king-lutely hate having to spend 10+ minutes to get into the fight. On some of the original IL2 missions, I set the mission on x8 speed, got up, went to the bathroom, made a sandwich, and still got back to the computer before my virtual IL2 got close to the Nazis.

For that matter, why not have missions start "in medio res" - i.e., in the air or where you're just about take off. Looking at the **s end of my wingie's plane on the runway for 5 minutes while my 8-12 plane squadron takes off is not my idea of a thrilling time.

Also, have a "save mission now" option so you don't have to waste several hours of virtual game time because the phone rings at a bad moment.


6. Include optional voice packs in English for each country (but with appropriate accents). You could argue that it's more realistic having each country's pilots speaking their own language but irl pilots didn't have to read subtitles to understand what their wingmen were saying.

Different strokes . . .I remember that option from CFS I and I remember not liking it. I prefer the foreign language with supertitles in English to the "burlesque hall" accented English.


10. The option to have much more detailed debriefings, telling you exactly what types of planes and ground targets were destroyed, what damage you received (and when) and even the type of damage you inflicted on others eg "12:36 You killed the rear gunner in an HE-111. 12:37 You downed the HE-111 by blowing off its left wing with cannon fire" etc.

CFS2 has the cool option in the MB of letting you see your exact track over the map, as well as indicating the points where you hit/got hit by other AC. I thought that was cool.

Pursuivant
07-01-2005, 09:02 PM
1) AI bombers that ditch their bombs abort their mission and immediately head for home. Currently they have a tendency to mosey on over their target area despite having lost all offensive capability, seemingly for the pure joy of getting shot to bits by flak.

Like he said. . .


2) AI pilots more inclined to bail once their aircraft is torched.

I think that this is a sign of a dead pilot. If you have IL2 Manager, you can set "bubbles and arrows" to "on". When you shoot up an E/AC and you get the message "headshot" - that means a pilot kill, although the program doesn't register a kill until the E/AC hits the ground.

Alternately, if you have one of those bad days where the screen goes black, go to external view and watch your own AC's behavior.

Pursuivant
07-01-2005, 09:25 PM
1) Paratroopers who look like paratroopers, rather than just aircrew. Bonus if they've got historically correct uniforms and equipment. Extra bonus if they've actually got static lines (if appropriate).

2) Goggles and oxygen masks on pilot models.

3) Pilots who maneuver a crippled AC in a certain way to improve bailout chances for crew - i.e., fighters which roll over onto their backs before the pilot bails, bomber pilots who hold off on bailing out to try to keep a bomber out of a spin (a number of VC and MoH went to pilots who sacrificed themselves doing just this sort of thing).

4) Extra damage to severely wounded pilots who bail out, possibly resulting in a kill/mortal wound. The shock of the parachute opening could do some damage to people already in severe pain/shock.

5) Risk of hypoxia/death if you open your parachute at too high an altitude. Again, another risk for badly wounded crew.

FritzGryphon
07-02-2005, 11:34 AM
This thing.

http://www.oldgloryprints.com/Hey%20It%20Works.htm

KOM.Nausicaa
07-02-2005, 01:58 PM
This was posted by me in another thread, but it's real place is here I guess. So hope you don't mind I copy/pasted it to here.
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif



My hope is that in the frame of the new game engine, the general Map Layout and Design gets revised. The "octagonal" style in the IL2 series so far was nice, but it would be great if some more realism could be a goal in the upcoming BoB. Maybe that is possible, and the use of one big map instead of smaller bits can make it possible to achieve a design with unique landmarks. This should cover more realistic evelations (coast of england) and varied textures instead of the dominating "standard green" in the IL2 series so far.

England really had a quite unique look from the air, because of the hedges and field-layout for example:

http://46th.net/gallery/data/media/3/AW6463.jpg

I also hope to see the lighting improved (although it's quite good already!) to someting
like this:

http://46th.net/gallery/data/media/3/UK_aerials_floods12.jpg

Another thing that should improve with the new gaming engine of BoB are the clouds. They are nice, and it's great to have them all in 3D (compared to CFS series and FS2004!) but they have a little "cotton-wool" look to them. Lets hope for more variations in the future, something like this:

http://image.com.com/gamespot/images/2005/079/925173_20050321_screen006.jpg

and this:

http://www.shockwaveproductions.com/bob/temp/forumpict/sky_1.jpg

http://www.shockwaveproductions.com/bob/temp/forumpict/sky_4.jpg

The above clouds are all from Shockwaves upcoming Battle of Britain II....if others can do THIS kind of stuff, we should as well http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif


Cheers,
Nausicaa

LeVola
07-04-2005, 02:56 AM
Posted Fri July 01 2005 14:19
Hi!

I was just thinking that it would be nice to have trim available when controls are damaged.

Woud be nice to try to land with only elevator trim working when elevator control is u/s.

Because in most planes trim and control cabels are different systems.
But if there is no control surface left even trim wont help.(maybe 262 and 109 where your trim is moving tailplane surface if I remember it right)

LeV

csThor
07-04-2005, 05:24 AM
Originally posted by CVK_Monkey:
That means that players from offline group will move to online group.

Offline part of game shouldn't be anymore main goal of developement team.

Quite frankly that's a shot had has gone wide off the mark. You're making assumptions which do not have any other base than your feelings and ideas.

a) Maddox Games and Ubisoft estimate that only 5-10% of the customers of the Il-2 series play Online. We can debate as much as we like whether these figures are too low or even too high, but I don't think the developer/publisher are making up things in that respect. So you still have at least 9 out of 10 customers who don't play online for various reasons.
I am one of them, but I have switched back from Online Flying to Offline only as I did not find Online what I'm looking for. Human nature -as you called it - has simply taken over any attempt at historical correctness. Try to make a COOP mission of DF Server that doesn't feature the latest œber-Fighters but concentrates on Stukas, early Il-2s, Cr.42 or other "**** planes" - a few fans of said planes will jump in and have fun, but the majority would moan and ***** "Where's my *insert late-war monster AC here*??". That's not my idea of fun - fighter vs fighter combat was only a part of what happened in WW2 but here it has taken over completely.

b) The Internet may be on the rise across the world, but in many many areas the best connection you can get is ISDN or even a Modem. Today as a modem user you're disadvantaged anyway and since the netload has increased since the initial release of Il-2 you'll probably need broadband for BoB anyway. Try to get broadband in some god-forsaken one-horse town in Eastern Europe, Russia or the MidWest of the USA - good luck!

c) A decent offline campaign is still the predominant reason for buying a game for most players (see relation Online <-> Offline according to Maddox/Ubi). IMO Offline should have a far higher priority than it had in Il-2/FB/PF - most "improvements" were more useful for the Online crowd than they were to us Offliners. A load of planes means more choice in a DF, but it doesn't mean the problems of Offline play are gonna be solved.

Mysticpuma2003
07-05-2005, 06:24 AM
Just building a mission earlier today and came across something that I can't have but would love to see.

100 B-17's taking off in bright weather at home airbase, heading over see towards in-land areas. I'd like to have the bombers abort because of poor weather of the target area.

Unfortunately the weather, cloud cover and height all stay the same no-matter what I do.

I'd like to see a dynamic weather generator so that as I move in-land the cloud cover gets higher and more opaque meaning that I have to decide whether toi continue the bomb run or abort.

The new cloud cover works very well b ut it's all or nothing, so please work on a weather sytem that generates random weather conditions during flight.

And here's one out in the wild, maybe a link to a weather database over europe realtime that updates while the mission fly's so that I can fly in the weather that is occuring today.

I know, but we're sounding out ideas here.

Gnasha
07-05-2005, 03:08 PM
Apart from a Tempest, Typhoon, & Mossie! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

I'd like to see non hero AI pilots that are worried about their own skins & get the heck out of dodge back to their base when they are a) damaged, b)badly outnumbered, & c) at a serious tactical disadvantage.

Gnasha
07-05-2005, 03:10 PM
Oh I forgot to metion Ground Controller & individual squadron Callsigns

masaker2005
07-06-2005, 12:52 AM
What abaout this:
When landing boats ( LCVP,Daihatsu) arive to the shore they should open the doors and infatry would came out.
Like this:
http://hksw.org/images/Normandy/boat_landing.jpg

GSHastings
07-07-2005, 06:32 PM
Two major problems with padlock.

GSHastings
07-07-2005, 06:41 PM
Two major problems with padlocking need to be fixed.

1)The padlock is forever twisting your head around in the wrong direction. Example: You are turning hard right. You pan your point of view hard right and spot your enemy. You press padlock. And the system then twists your head (point of view) around to the left, over the top, and back to the target that you were just looking directly at.

Second example: You are turning hard right and can see your enemy behind and to your right. You press look forward to avoid hitting the terrain. You release look forward, and the padlock twist your head in a very disorienting gyration in the wrong direction before you are once again looking at the target.

Something is SIGNIFICANTLY misprogrammed in this behaviour of the padlock function.

2) Padlock breaks at the drop of a hat. The target might be behind a windshield frame, a cloud, some piece of your plane, and the padlock breaks. And you may or may not even know that it has happened.

All too often, the padlock breaks when you are looking directly at the target, and are well within range. The commonly happens when the target is within your normal forward field of view. For instance, you are on the six of a target, or you are closing head on. Often the padlock will drop for no reason whatsoever.

I suggest that you never have the padlock break uncommanded. Why should it. The padlock is there as an artificial crutch to make up for the fact that in real life you can see orders of magnitude more area, easily and quickly, and you don't have to let your fingers do it for you on a little monitor. So why should the padlock ever break uncommanded?

Thanks.