PDA

View Full Version : A n00b's changing perspective on IL-2



arrowtalon
03-28-2007, 12:30 PM
So after playing online and off for, well, more time than I should have spent, I've realized this game needs a few last tweaks to make it essentially perfect. With BoB coming out, it doen't look like this will happen, but BoB is going to require more GPU power than most of us can afford, so I'll cross my fingers.

Here is my list of GENERAL things that need last-second changes. Experts, weigh in if you want.

1) A few missing aircraft. I won't list them, but there are some glaring omissions in the flyable aircraft when they're already releasing things like the 1946 addon. Most of the omits are in the game already, but unflyable.

2) Fuel-tank selection. On some fighters, this makes a big difference in performance (Mustang, 190).

3) The enemy indicator arrows in non-cockpit view should also be able to be turned on in full cockpit view. For those of us without TrackIR, we're at a huge disadvantage in full-real modes, but it would be nice to still pay homage to the visibility differences in aircraft. I think it would be a good compromise.

4) AI speed and acceleration needs an overhaul. I don't mind the UFO maneuvers they'll do in-game, but when the AI in slower, better-turning fighters can outrun boom and zoom fighters controlled by players, it makes the game very 1-dimensional, and renders many of the fighters inadequate offline.

5) The preflight interface. It's pretty bad. It works, but it's bad. The original CFS had a better selection menu. The music is awful as well. Does anyone not turn it off?

There are other things as well, but those above seem like they might be easy to implement, and I know many of you don't want Oleg to "waste his time" on IL-2 anymore. let me know what you think.

PBNA-Boosher
03-28-2007, 12:40 PM
1. Not going to happen.

2. There was a topic on this a while back. As I remember, Oleg stated it would not be included

3. I don't see how you're disadvantaged without T-IR so much. All I have's a HAT-switch and I don't manage too poorly. Also, those arrows, I believe, can be activated through padlock view.

4. Not going to happen, most likely. This is the way that the game works. If you want it to be a bit more realistic, try to have it so that the flights are set up with very different difficulties within the flight. This can be done in the FMB and most player-made campaigns take advantage of this.

5. It shall not change. The music, however, you can change. Go to Airwarfare of Mission4Today to find out how, they've got good explanations.

FritzGryphon
03-28-2007, 12:42 PM
On 3, I don't consider myself disadvantaged at all. Besides, TIR users would see the arrows, too.

1, I agree totally. The D.470 and P.6F should have been included for sure. I am outraged and it has probably shortened my life by 10 years, and I will certainly sue MG for this. When I fly the other 200 planes it is bitter in my mouth like ashes. I will hunt down the ones responsible, you'll see.... I wrap the night around me like a cloak, unseeable and unstoppable.

2, would be nice, but not possible in IL-2. All the more reason to look forward to BoB, to remove such limitations.

4 Would be nice if it was better. But then, playing against AI has always sucked in any game, flight sim or otherwise. Nothing new here.

5, I like the interface. Everything works and it is simple. Music rocks too.

arrowtalon
03-28-2007, 12:55 PM
On 3, I don't consider myself disadvantaged at all. Besides, TIR users would see the arrows, too.


Good point, Fritz...

I tried using a TrackIR a while ago (my friend's). It didn't affect the outcome of the battles, but it saved my right thumb a lot of hat pushing, and did allow me to see that awkward straight-up-and-to-the-side direction more easily. In full-real mode, you otherwise have to be constantly shoving the hat around...

arrowtalon
03-28-2007, 01:02 PM
3. I don't see how you're disadvantaged without T-IR so much. All I have's a HAT-switch and I don't manage too poorly. Also, those arrows, I believe, can be activated through padlock view.

I don't mess around with padlock view much--find it more disorienting than the normal hat-pshing. Could you elaborate on this a bit?


4. Not going to happen, most likely. This is the way that the game works. If you want it to be a bit more realistic, try to have it so that the flights are set up with very different difficulties within the flight. This can be done in the FMB and most player-made campaigns take advantage of this.

I've made several missions with FMB, but don't notice a difference in the speeds between skill levels of AI pilots... Am I missing the point?


4 Would be nice if it was better. But then, playing against AI has always sucked in any game, flight sim or otherwise. Nothing new here.

Indeed, though I will say the AI in IL-2 is a step in the right direction--just a few adjustments to be made... Maybe if they fix it for BoB it will filter into IL-2, given they supposedly have similar flight models (IL-2 is actually beta-testing for BoB)...

FritzGryphon
03-28-2007, 01:05 PM
It's weird, that the AI wasn't always super-speedy.

It used to be quite slow compared to the player, you could beat it easily. I remember doing 8v1 same plane fights in original IL-2 with no problem. They would just putter around at 100% power, and drain energy like a sieve in turns.

Then in some version of FB or PF, it got all fast. Must have kicked it up to the unlimited WEP that the AI now enjoys. I wanted the AI to be harder, but not like this.

p-11.cAce
03-28-2007, 01:24 PM
Play any of Flatspinman's wonderful careers and see just how proper set up of the AI can be done. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

arrowtalon
03-28-2007, 01:31 PM
It's weird, that the AI wasn't always super-speedy.

It used to be quite slow compared to the player, you could beat it easily. I remember doing 8v1 same plane fights in original IL-2 with no problem. They would just putter around at 100% power, and drain energy like a sieve in turns.

Then in some version of FB or PF, it got all fast. Must have kicked it up to the unlimited WEP that the AI now enjoys. I wanted the AI to be harder, but not like this.


Finally someone that doesn't think I'm a nutcase. I used to do 8-12 ace 109's vs me in a spit to relax. When PF came out, that changed. The Ace's got obscenely accurate, gained the ability to piruette on their tail, and are now faster.

In IL-2's defense, the AI did also get smarter. 190's won't readily engage a spit on the deck (as it was historically), and the AI uses better team tactics as well.

Someone said the speed issue is a question of variables and difficulty setting. The AI does obey the same FM, but the AI isn't affected by all difficulty settings in the same way, apparently.

The AI pilots start with a 0% fuel level, but have a timer to designate their burn rate (speeds up with a leak). This gives them a significant hand in the weight ratio department, which explains why they can climb so well. (I don't know how he knew this, so take it with a grain of salt). The AI also does not overheat--which is testable, put your plane in autopilot in a dogfight and watch the throttle and temp guage.

He recommended putting on infinite fuel, setting the fuel level to 25% and turning off engine overheat when playing offline. I tried that and it did even the score a bit.

VMF-214_HaVoK
03-28-2007, 05:23 PM
For those of us without TrackIR, we're at a huge disadvantage in full-real modes

Umm this is a myth. I only got TIR a few months ago. I have flown with the hat switch and a small utility call FB view plus (it allows smooth panning) for over 5 years. TIR makes the sim more immersive but does not offer an advantage like so many say, unless of course you have no thumb. 95% of the time the ones who make such claims are the ones that never tried TIR.

Like Ive stated, I have used a hat switch for over 5 years and if there was a real advantage for the TIR users I certainly would have noticed. A person use to their hat switch is on the same playing field as someone use to their TIR. I have killed plenty of TIR users to prove that one. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

For all you hat switch users I highly recommend you use the utility FB View Plus. This will allow you to pan smoothly much like using your mouse. The speed is adjustable and its very accurate for all those angles you now find hard to pinpoint. You will be able to look where you want when you want and also have a center view key. This program is a must in my opinion if you do not use TIR. Trust me on this one.

VW-IceFire
03-28-2007, 05:44 PM
RE: Option number 2. In Storm of War this would be a great feature, however, it has less of an effect than you'd think at present. Right now the center of gravity does not change based on fuel tanks being full or not. The overall weight is reduced as fuel is consumed but the CoG does not shift. Or so we're told. I can't find any evidence for it shifting. So this is both good and bad.

arrowtalon
03-28-2007, 06:00 PM
RE: Option number 2. In Storm of War this would be a great feature, however, it has less of an effect than you'd think at present. Right now the center of gravity does not change based on fuel tanks being full or not. The overall weight is reduced as fuel is consumed but the CoG does not shift. Or so we're told. I can't find any evidence for it shifting. So this is both good and bad.

I heard the opposite but it sounds like your source is better. I also thought I noticed a difference when flying the Mustang and turning at slow speed. maybe I was noticing the benefit of lower overall weight.

That is odd though that they didn't model that. It was modelled in CFS2, I know.

arrowtalon
03-28-2007, 06:03 PM
Like Ive stated, I have used a hat switch for over 5 years and if there was a real advantage for the TIR users I certainly would have noticed. A person use to their hat switch is on the same playing field as someone use to their TIR. I have killed plenty of TIR users to prove that one. Wink

I should have been clearer in my comment. I also didn't think it was much help in a fight, but I thought it made a big difference in giving you one less thing to worry about while trying to spot the enemy at distance without icons switched on. I'll have to try FB View Plus, though.

Bearcat99
03-28-2007, 10:43 PM
1. Would be nice.... doubtfull if it will ever happen.... but you can dream.
2. Would be nice..... not going to happen.
3. Not going to happen (THANK GOODNESS).... one word... PADLOCK.
4. Agreed.... the AI runs perfect CEM. Dont know what can be done though. This AI though dumb as a post sometimes shows flashes of brilliance on occasion.
5. Not gonna happen. The muxsic you can make what you want.. so that fact alone renders that whole issue moot.

M_Gunz
03-28-2007, 11:17 PM
ArrowTalon, a lot of changes came in with 4.0x that make cleaner flying essential to speed.
Before 4.0x things like rudder use did not matter so much but then stall behaviour was also
pointed out as flawed by many professional and non-professional pilots and pilot instructors.

The AI gets them all right which leaves many players relatively screwed. However there are
those players that either were or have gotten over the curve and do report no real problems
in keeping up.

Perhaps in future sims like SOW series the fly-by-numbers AI will have for lower level AI
perhaps a round-down function on controls so the lesser AI will control less than perfect
rather than only being limited as to maneuvers. I know that would reduce their gun accuracy!

As to the gunnery of AI... it is high, like the best marksman Aces.
And the code is not sufficient to have their view blocked by clouds or darkness.

However they are all very poor planners. Once you get efficient at flying you will begin to
pick up on just how predictable they are. In my own poor efforts I have found they are too
slow to react to a proper BnZ where I start shooting from 300+ meters out. Given that my
closing speed is high, I only have a few seconds to correct aim and still turn enough for an
exit at good angle (unless I over-wait and then I am lucky to avoid collision) as per Erich
Hartmann who wrote about the importance of exiting off angle and behind the target (as opposed
to many players lack of strategy, exiting within 30 degrees of the target flight path and
expecting a hard climb executed 200-300 meters out in front to not leave them vulnerable!).

How is your use of trim coming?
Are you keeping the ball centered? In the case of Spitfires, the 'ball' is the Slip needle.
Do you spend time working only on better flying without attention distracted by combat?

Klemm.co
03-29-2007, 01:33 AM
The one thing that really bugs me is, that the AI doesn't has to deal with torque, wind, g-forces, dive limits, stalls, complex motor management... I could just go on and list nearly all the difficulty settings available only to the player. I really went off yesterday when I saw an AI Hurricane do something that only planes like the P-38 and Me-262 can do, ie. planes without torque effecting the airplane.
It tried to outclimb me, but i had far more energy than him. So he just climbed on, and on and on... and then, without stalling, tipped over his nose into a dive... he just ran out of energy and so had to fall down. It just reminded me of the time when I had 46 fresh installed and didn't check the difficulty settings. Just wondered why I didn't stall even though I tried hard http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif
Sooo... the AI is bound to do such unrealistic things when it has really no limitaions to speak of. How am I supposed to simulate aircombat with this? Its just like an arcade game, just with much more features and better graphics.

arrowtalon
03-29-2007, 07:48 AM
Thank you everyone for the posts. Keep 'em coming!

I do want to mention something about forums in general. I've noticed on technical forums across the web (this one is no different), people will often give you one-line answers like this:


1. Would be nice.... doubtfull if it will ever happen.... but you can dream.
2. Would be nice..... not going to happen.
3. Not going to happen (THANK GOODNESS).... one word... PADLOCK.

These posts are neither informative, good at arousing discussion, or polite. Usually when people leave comments like this, they haven't read the above posts. So in the interest of keeping the forum helpful, please read everything and only respond if you have something helpful to say. Okay, got that out of the way...


The AI gets them all right which leaves many players relatively screwed. However there are
those players that either were or have gotten over the curve and do report no real problems
in keeping up.

I should have been clearer earlier... It's not that the AI is too hard. Even on Ace, you can still easily take on a 1 v 3, 1 v 4 and survive. If anything, that means they're still too easy. The annoying thing is that they're inherently better in ways humans have no control. I can keep up with their maneuvers, but I can't keep up with their enhanced rate of climb (due to the variable factors listed above). This almost always leads to me shooting them down fast, or chasing them for several minutes (when I should be able to catch up quickly) until they make an arbitrary turn and I get them.

So to summarize, 4) isn't a question of difficulty, it's a question of annoyance. The speed gap makes fighters that depend on their speed, (Mustang, Thunderbolt, etc), pretty obsolete offline. It makes the game more of a "turn 'n burn" fight which many players on here loath.

Jaws2002
03-29-2007, 07:52 AM
Originally posted by arrowtalon:
3) The enemy indicator arrows in non-cockpit view should also be able to be turned on in full cockpit view. For those of us without TrackIR, we're at a huge disadvantage in full-real modes, but it would be nice to still pay homage to the visibility differences in aircraft. I think it would be a good compromise.




Bwahaha http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

over 80% of all fighters shot down during ww2 <span class="ev_code_YELLOW">NEVER KNEW WHAT HIT THEM</span>.

So start looking around more.

arrowtalon
03-29-2007, 07:56 AM
Bwahaha Too Happy Too Happy Too Happy Too Happy

over 80% of all fighters shot down during ww2 NEVER KNEW WHAT HIT THEM.

So start looking around more.

Exactly, which I do, much to my thumb's disgust. TrackIR people don't have to. BUT! as pointed out above, TrackIR people would also have the arrows, so my proposal isn't a good solution.

Bearcat99
03-29-2007, 08:32 AM
Originally posted by arrowtalon:
I do want to mention something about forums in general. I've noticed on technical forums across the web (this one is no different), people will often give you one-line answers like this:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">1. Would be nice.... doubtfull if it will ever happen.... but you can dream.
2. Would be nice..... not going to happen.
3. Not going to happen (THANK GOODNESS).... one word... PADLOCK.
These posts are neither informative, good at arousing discussion, or polite. Usually when people leave comments like this, they haven't read the above posts. So in the interest of keeping the forum helpful, please read everything and only respond if you have something helpful to say. Okay, got that out of the way...
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif Im not going to debate with you about the veracity of my posts.... I will post when and where I want and as long as I am not inflamatory, insulting or disruptive you are entitled to your opinions as am I.

Now the fuel thing.. if I am not mistaken it is just the overall weight that is modelled. Intrestingly enough though if you fuel up in say a Mustang... at all the prescribed fuel settings and look at your gauges you will see it is distributed differently for each setting. On the Ponies at least I have noticed a marked difference in handling when going from 25 to 75%.... and it would be nice if cockpits could be added to all the non-flyables at least. We might get some more 3rd party planes after the release of BoB but I doubt it....
As for the AI it is funny with the AI. I have called for help and had my wingman fly the wing of the badit blasting me to pieces... I have also had my wingman come to my aid PDQ and actually nail the bugger.... it is strange... I have managed to loose AI in clouds..... down low in the fog..... and then you have the ones that will just dog you.. I mean DOG you all the way home. It is strange.... and I have no idea what decides which AI you get.... one thing that really annoys me though is.. I can be pursuing a bandit... and I will black out.... but the AI keeps right on chugging along..... I think it is still the best AI around though. I have even seen them panic and bail.... I have seen the stallout and auger in.... I guess considering the age of the engine it has more than likely been stretched to the limits of what it can be programmed to do. Hopefully the nextgen AI will e more complex.

arrowtalon
03-29-2007, 08:43 AM
Im not going to debate with you about the veracity of my posts.... I will post when and where I want and as long as I am not inflamatory, insulting or disruptive you are entitled to your opinions as am I.

Now the fuel thing.. if I am not mistaken it is just the overall weight that is modelled. Intrestingly enough though if you fuel up in say a Mustang... at all the prescribed fuel settings and look at your gauges you will see it is distributed differently for each setting. On the Ponies at least I have noticed a marked difference in handling when going from 25 to 75%.... and it would be nice if cockpits could be added to all the non-flyables at least. We might get some more 3rd party planes after the release of BoB but I doubt it....
As for the AI it is funny with the AI. I have called for help and had my wingman fly the wing of the badit blasting me to pieces... I have also had my wingman come to my aid PDQ and actually nail the bugger.... it is strange... I have managed to loose AI in clouds..... down low in the fog..... and then you have the ones that will just dog you.. I mean DOG you all the way home. It is strange.... and I have no idea what decides which AI you get.... one thing that really annoys me though is.. I can be pursuing a bandit... and I will black out.... but the AI keeps right on chugging along..... I thionk it is still the best AI artound though.


Thank you for the post. That's interesting about the fuel distribution.... If they didn't model CoG effects, why would they waste time on distributing the fuel? Odd.

Didn't mean to cut down your post specifically before... Also noticed you're probably pretty busy moderating--just get tired of forums with lots of posts and no info.

arrowtalon
03-29-2007, 08:47 AM
one thing that really annoys me though is.. I can be pursuing a bandit... and I will black out.... but the AI keeps right on chugging along..... I thionk it is still the best AI artound though.

AND! I've had times where I outturn a 190, say, and the AI pilot drives his plane right into the turf as if he did black out. But as you said, this is inconsistent.... Maybe it has something to do with the fact that AI often pancake turn when we cannot, allowing them to remain conscious?

BaronUnderpants
03-29-2007, 03:48 PM
Originally posted by VMF-214_HaVoK:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">For those of us without TrackIR, we're at a huge disadvantage in full-real modes

Umm this is a myth. I only got TIR a few months ago. I have flown with the hat switch and a small utility call FB view plus (it allows smooth panning) for over 5 years. TIR makes the sim more immersive but does not offer an advantage like so many say, unless of course you have no thumb. 95% of the time the ones who make such claims are the ones that never tried TIR.

Like Ive stated, I have used a hat switch for over 5 years and if there was a real advantage for the TIR users I certainly would have noticed. A person use to their hat switch is on the same playing field as someone use to their TIR. I have killed plenty of TIR users to prove that one. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

For all you hat switch users I highly recommend you use the utility FB View Plus. This will allow you to pan smoothly much like using your mouse. The speed is adjustable and its very accurate for all those angles you now find hard to pinpoint. You will be able to look where you want when you want and also have a center view key. This program is a must in my opinion if you do not use TIR. Trust me on this one. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


A link would be much appreciated, looked arround in Sturmovik Essentials but couldnt find it and the search function is down.

WWSpinDry
03-29-2007, 03:55 PM
Try Google; it's your friend.

http://www.airwarfare.com/Sims/FB/fb_viewplus.htm

carguy_
03-29-2007, 05:20 PM
This dude is weird.Kinda like a IL2 incarnation of raaaid. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

M_Gunz
03-30-2007, 03:37 AM
Originally posted by arrowtalon:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">one thing that really annoys me though is.. I can be pursuing a bandit... and I will black out.... but the AI keeps right on chugging along..... I thionk it is still the best AI artound though.

AND! I've had times where I outturn a 190, say, and the AI pilot drives his plane right into the turf as if he did black out. But as you said, this is inconsistent.... Maybe it has something to do with the fact that AI often pancake turn when we cannot, allowing them to remain conscious? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If you don't follow the same path as the other plane at the same speed then you probably won't
get the same G's. In a close follow hard chase this means flying lag pursuit well off his tail! Any time you fly pure pursuit (your nose stays on the target) or lead pursuit (your
nose ahead of the target) and he is turning then if you are the same speed or more, you will
be pulling more G's unless maybe you have gravity assisting you (you coming from above while
he is not falling with the same drop rate as you... see the trick you can pull?).

The smart thing is to fly a lower G path which being generally shorter than a swerving target
allows you to fly a bit slower and keep up or even gain. If you can push him to always turn
harder then only if your speed is greater will you pull more G's.