PDA

View Full Version : Future Expansions and Upgrades - What Would You Like To See?



Andolf
02-12-2004, 07:47 AM
I, like many others who fly IL-2 FB am very excited about the announced release of the "Aces" expansion pack. With that said, I find some of the choices for the new flyable planes that are to be included in it a bit strange. Why for example are Japanese planes included? There are no Japanese campaign options at all in the stand alone game!

Instead of Japanese flyables (which are useless in the stand alone game) why are there still no German twin engine fighters (e.g. the Me-110, 210, 410, and Henchels etc. not to mention the Do-17, and JU-88)? The inclusion of such planes would not only better reflect the Luftwaffe's actual OB on the Eastern Front, they would add a much needed improvement in the variety of aircraft flown by the Luftwaffe during the GPW. The focus of IL-2 IS the Eastern Front (Soviets vs. Luftwaffe)is it not? So why is there such a focus on providing flyable aircraft that didn't even participate in that theatre of war?

In my opinion (and it just an opinion so don't flame me for it), there is way too much attention being payed to the "online" flying community's needs as opposed to those who enjoy flying in the offline campaign or single mission modes. It is my understanding that all of the Luftwaffe planes mentioned earlier are already modeled and fly as "non-flyables" and only need cockpits to be made pilotable. Is it too much to ask for them to be made available?

I also noticed that the ME-163 is going to be included in the "Aces" expansion. I am puzzled...what is the purpose of including this plane in the game at all? If I am not mistaken, it never served on the Eastern Front at all, and what is more, it is of little value online due to its extremely poor combat duration (measured in minutes). The 163 would add a bit more variety to the German inventory, but I fail to see its use in a sim such as this. If the focus of IL-2 were the bomber campaign over Europe I would see the point -- but it is not.

Surely these sentiments are not mine alone. Does anyone else out there feel the same way? If you do, lets make our opinions more strongly fealt.

I would also like to ask the readers of this post which Luftwaffe planes they would like to see included in future expansions, patches, and/or upgrades?

Thanks,

Andolf

Andolf
02-12-2004, 07:47 AM
I, like many others who fly IL-2 FB am very excited about the announced release of the "Aces" expansion pack. With that said, I find some of the choices for the new flyable planes that are to be included in it a bit strange. Why for example are Japanese planes included? There are no Japanese campaign options at all in the stand alone game!

Instead of Japanese flyables (which are useless in the stand alone game) why are there still no German twin engine fighters (e.g. the Me-110, 210, 410, and Henchels etc. not to mention the Do-17, and JU-88)? The inclusion of such planes would not only better reflect the Luftwaffe's actual OB on the Eastern Front, they would add a much needed improvement in the variety of aircraft flown by the Luftwaffe during the GPW. The focus of IL-2 IS the Eastern Front (Soviets vs. Luftwaffe)is it not? So why is there such a focus on providing flyable aircraft that didn't even participate in that theatre of war?

In my opinion (and it just an opinion so don't flame me for it), there is way too much attention being payed to the "online" flying community's needs as opposed to those who enjoy flying in the offline campaign or single mission modes. It is my understanding that all of the Luftwaffe planes mentioned earlier are already modeled and fly as "non-flyables" and only need cockpits to be made pilotable. Is it too much to ask for them to be made available?

I also noticed that the ME-163 is going to be included in the "Aces" expansion. I am puzzled...what is the purpose of including this plane in the game at all? If I am not mistaken, it never served on the Eastern Front at all, and what is more, it is of little value online due to its extremely poor combat duration (measured in minutes). The 163 would add a bit more variety to the German inventory, but I fail to see its use in a sim such as this. If the focus of IL-2 were the bomber campaign over Europe I would see the point -- but it is not.

Surely these sentiments are not mine alone. Does anyone else out there feel the same way? If you do, lets make our opinions more strongly fealt.

I would also like to ask the readers of this post which Luftwaffe planes they would like to see included in future expansions, patches, and/or upgrades?

Thanks,

Andolf

BaldieJr
02-12-2004, 07:58 AM
Since you asked...

No, I don't feel the same way you do. I'm actually quite pleased with the idea of getting new planes to play with. Of course, I'm a bit wierd, because I like to fly anything/everything I can get my hands on, and with things like DCG, I can create custom dynamic campaigns to suit my interests.

The ME-163 is a fantastic plane to fly with cockpit turned off. I'm talking 'realism' here.

<pre class="ip-ubbcode-code-pre">
______ _____
(, / ) /) /) , (, /
/---( _ // _(/ _ / __ ,""""]
+----/ ____)(_(_(/_(_(__(__(/____/__/ (__--------,' /---+
| / ( / ,' NR / |
|(_/ ..-""``"'-._ (_/ __,' 42 _/ |
+-.-"" "-..,____________/7,.--"" __]-----+

</pre>

Zen--
02-12-2004, 08:01 AM
Good points certainly


Planes like the Me163 making it in the game even though they don't make a lot of sense to me is sort of like a bonus situation...1C isn't modelling them a 3rd party modeller delivers the completed plane minus the FM to 1C for review. 1C then adds the FM to finish it and the net result is that because 1C didn't have to do all the work (and modelling is very time consuming), it doesn't hurt them to put the plane in the game...it is then a sort of bonus aircraft.

They don't make sense compared to what the sim might stand for right now, but there's also no reason not to add them considering how little time it takes 1C to finish them up. If 1C had to do everything, there might not be even half the planes we have right now as a guess, so it's a good thing it works this way imho.


The problem we have with why this plane or that plane should/shouldn't be added is a problem of perception...the community in general seems to feel that 1C has a master plan and planes are introduced according to their plan, which tends to make people think they might favor some things over others. I don't believe this is the case, I think they have their own plan of what they can work on and then get finished models submitted by people like Gib and others who have spent their own time and effort making them...if the model is good enough 1C slaps it in the game with a finished FM.


So basically I think we'll get whatever we're going to get from 1C themselves and all these other planes that don't make sense are a bonus...I may never fly the ME163 online or offline, but I'm glad it's being included. Just having it there gives potential for neat coops etc.


As for the woeful lack of twin engine bombers, I still think that perhaps 1C didn't anticipate the demand for them and are now shifting focus to try and catch up so to speak. Some planes like the PE8 or PE2 apparently do not have accurate or existing cockpit references to meet the standards of 1C and so they haven't been included. There are many more that are well documented but before we all get outraged about their lack of inclusion, remember I think 1C didn't count on the enthusiasm for those types and are just now working on getting them in the game.


We tend to think of 1C/Maddox as this giant plane designing factory, but thats not the case. I doubt they have a thousand guys sitting there begging Oleg to work on every possible plane and him refusing (http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_wink.gif), it's more like 10 people as a guestimate.


Just my .02 rupies.

-Zen-
Formerly TX-Zen

Zen--
02-12-2004, 08:07 AM
The Luft plane I would most like to see added (since we already have one definate and one possible version of the TA152) is the 190A7 heavy variant used to attack the allied bomber formations, that and more complete ordinance load outs for all Luftwaffe planes.

(and a redesigned AB canister bomblet that actually works)

And believe it or not, the LA9 too http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


-Zen-
Formerly TX-Zen

Dmitri9mm
02-12-2004, 08:19 AM
Like others have allready said I too pray for twin engined fighters and bombers. I think it has been too long allready without a flyable pe 2. Some crew management sorta like in "B-17" would be nice too

Bigger maps, of course everyone wants bigger maps. But when BOB comes out it will be important to have all of Normandy and Southern England included on the same map.

Also I would like to see much larger formations of planes especially bombers, and they should be able to keep those formations even when ander attack. In WWII planes were seldom arranged en groups of 4 but more often 10-16 planes, on larger raids these would fly as a single formation which could then be grouped up to form formations of several hundred aircraft. It was done in EAW then of course it can be done in the best WWII simulation ever.

At last a small plea: Change the way the horizon is shown now. When I fly at 6.000m most of the horizon is white fog even with maximum visible distance. This too was done a lot better in EAW even with its (for that time) extremely high detail on the ground, so don't tell me it can't be done.
Finaly thanks for producing the best game ever seen on a PC.

nellip
02-12-2004, 08:20 AM
You make some good points.

The sim (or game if you want to be controversial) was originally put together as an Eastern front WVS v Luftwaffe affair. The fact that it has evolved and in my opinion improved is down to 2 factors:

1. The outstanding efforts of the many enthusiasts who give of their time to model the aircraft they would like to see in the game. They do it because they love it and model the plane they would like to fly, which may or may not fit the original Eastern Front theme.
2. The commercial reality of where UBI/IC can sell their product. There are people who will but IL2/FB just because of the quality of product it undoubtedly is - I don't say it is perfect but in my view it's the best combat flight sim available at the moment - but there are a lot of other potential buyers out there who will be more casual purchasers, not hard core flight sim enthusiasts. The inclusion of Japanese aircraft, American aircraft, a Spitfire (in the next expansion pleasssssssssse)will increase the commercial draw of the product. If you think about it this is in all our interests - we want 1C/Maddox and UBI to be successful so more developments of the product and evolutions to BoB and whatever comes after can take place. If nobody buys the product, or not enough to make it commercially viable, then we will lose the chance to see this product improve still further.

Sorry for the rant, I'll get back in my box now.

As far as the original question, I love FB both online and off. I would like to see more flyable bombers so how about an expansion just for that - having said that I think most people prefer to fly fighters so it may not sell enough to be worth it.

Scarn3
02-12-2004, 09:23 AM
What I would like to see as an expasion would be the Nomonhan Incident during the Summer 1939.

I-152, I-16 and I-153's versus Type 97 "Claudes" and KI-27 "Nates" would cause some awesome turn and burn fights with semi pre-war aircraft.

This was what I was able to pull off the net on this. This might be from someone who already wanted to see this caimpaign in a flight sim from the way it's set.

If what he /she posted is true, all sorts of missions can be created from this small campaign.

Please forgive the lines not totally "lining up" I'm not too good with the cut and paste.

Nomonhan Incident (Summer 1939)
In the summer of 1939, in Mongolia, Japan and the Soviet Union had a border incident that flared into the largest air battle since World War I ended. Japanese Army Air Force Units, which had missed most of the 1937 combat in China, got to show themselves against the Soviet Union's massive air force. The Soviets also gathered a fairly large force, including veterans back from the Spanish Civil War. (Many of these same experienced leaders were purged between 1939 and 1941, and were not available to face the Luftwaffe during Barbarossa.)

The incident went little noticed in the west, since access was difficult and there were tensions across Europe to gather attention.
Both sides initially expected their air units to support their ground units against little air opposition. Their clashes grew into the largest air battles since World War I. Both sides engaged in what would later become familiar patterns:
1. Attacks on ground troops (escorted and unescorted) by medium and light bombers
2. Defensive and offensive CAP
3. Raids on enemy airbases as air units focused on each other
Actual losses are hard to judge. Both sides claim to have destroyed more aircraft than the other side deployed (and lost only a few aircraft while doing so) - and yet both sides rushed in additional air units as well as more aircraft.
Forces
Both sides poured additional units in after the initial clashes depleted their supply of aircraft. Nomonhan ate up most of Japan's output of Ki.27s for the summer of 1939. After some initial losses of I-15bis, the Russians re-equipped with I-153s, the updated version of the aircraft.
Soviet Air Units
Unit Air Assets
Fighters 19th IAP
22nd IAP (3 sqdn I-16)
23rd IAP
56th IAP (3 sqdn I-15bis)
70th IAP (2 sqdn I-15bis, 1x I-153)
Bombers SB-2s

Elements of 2nd Hikoshidan
Unit Air Assets
scouts 4 sqdns scout planes with army units
9th Hikodan
24 lt bomber 13 hvy bomber 10th Sentai: (1 sqdn lt bomber)
16th Sentai: (3 sqdn lt bomber)
61st Sentai: (1 sqdn hvy bomber)
12th Hikodan
88 Ki.27 1st Sentai
11th Sentai
24th Sentai (reserve 'til Aug)
64th Sentai
Time Line
10-May-39 Initial ground incident.

mid-May 1939 Soviets move 1st Soviet Army and 2 fighter regiments plus 1 recon and 1 bomber squadron to Tamask-Bulak in Mongolia.

20-May-39

22-May-39 Initial brushes of Soviet and Japanese fighters (6-9 aircraft on a side). Japanese come off much better that the Soviets.

28-May-39 First large meeting: 60 Soviet aircraft vs.18 Ki.27s of the 11th Sentai. Japanese claim 42 kills w/ 1 loss. Soviets acknowledge 10 losses. Both sides fly more defensively and call for reinforcements.

22-Jun-39 Major air battle, with 125 Japanese intercepted by 95 Soviet aircraft.
26-Jun-39 22nd IAP attacks a Japanese air field near Uzun-Nur lake, disabling 12 aircraft.
A large Soviet raid of 20 SB-2s escorted by "120" fighters is intercepted, first by 18 Ki.27 of the 11th Sentai.

27-Jun-39 Major Japanese air strike on Soviet air fields with "150 fighters and 50 bombers" (this is more than the available Japanese force). Soviets lose 14 aircraft.

2-5-Jul-39 Several pitched battles as both sides struggle for air supremacy. On 3 July, 1939, the Soviets claim the Japanese lost 32 aircraft in two combats.

7-July-39 After the initial (unsuccessful) flurry of combat, Japanese high command tells JAAF to prepare for a major offensive in August.

2-Aug-39

4-Aug-39 Soviet air raids on Japanese bases, killing two Sentai leaders either on the ground of in combat.

21-Aug-39 The Japanese offensive, Operation S, kicks off vs. Tamsag air field. A period of sharp air battles ensues.

1-Sep-39 Hitler invades Poland, starting the European World War II.

4-Sept-39 The 5(?)th Hikoshidan absorbs the remnants of the 2nd.

15-Sep-39 Ceasefire declared by Japanese. However, on the same day, they launched a large strike against the Soviet units using 212 aircraft.

DuxCorvan
02-12-2004, 09:37 AM
"What Would You Like To See?"

Spanish Civil War.

And naked women. Not in FB. But I'd like. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

georgeo76
02-12-2004, 09:45 AM
I think you've made the common mistake of thinking that the Japanese aircraft were included instead of other aircraft. Not true, they were included as a bonus, and in their absence we'd see fewer AC, not different AC.

http://webpages.charter.net/Stick_Fiend/images/buck2.gif
"I don't think it's quite fair to condemn a whole program because of a single slip-up. "
Fiend's Wings (http://webpages.charter.net/Stick_Fiend)

JorBR
02-12-2004, 09:45 AM
Future Expansions.

My informants told me Oleg is planning a PacificāĀ“s expansion.

Just fine for me.

If I could choose: WWI western front!! Ah... to be able to smell the castor oil from your enemieāĀ“s engine. That would be good.

"Never wrestle with a pig; you both get dirty but the pig enjoys it!"

Scarn3
02-12-2004, 09:47 AM
I wouldn't mind seeing the Spannish civil war as well.

Well that's two expansions right there.

TheGozr
02-12-2004, 10:58 AM
The Vg-33 or 38,39

-GOZR

http://www.french.themotorhead.com/themotorhead_fighters/images/pix/il2fbtmhlogosmall.jpg &lt;-- &lt;--Uncensored version IL2fb here (http://www.french.themotorhead.com/themotorhead_fighters/)

DONB3397
02-12-2004, 11:04 AM
Maybe one of the interesting things about 1C is it's willingness to enter new theaters, and let talented modelers, skinners and mission-makers create additional value as the maps expand. It could be that they've decided to let IL-2 run its course and expand with limited support for this cadre of talented people...while they focus on the next generation's engine(BoB).

In this industry, with new chips on the way, you have to replace yourself...or someone else will.

So what can we hope for? Why not dream big?

Maps -- Global scope, or at least overlapping in such a way that you can fly the longest missions possible in WWII without changing maps.

Planesets -- 1C has a great base lineup now. But to fly in all theaters, they need medium range bombers from the allied side (RAF and USAAF/USN) and two more heavies -- B-24 and Lancaster. And, of course, naval fighters (F4U, F6F, F3F, etc.) for the PTO.

Damage Models -- Current damage models are the best available, I think. But they aren't cumulative. What if we could 'save' the damage from each mission, at least for a specified time period, so campaigns can be completed without restrikes?

Ground battles -- This is a flight sim, not a battlefield game. I wouldn't want that to change. Still, the action on the ground can be more 'interactive,' that is it can change in response to air-to-ground attacks and bombing results. And, again, it would be helpful if we could save the changed situation (advance or retreat) without having to stop to recreate a new ground situation in FMB after each mission.

(Limited) Strategic Impact -- This is tough one, I suspect, because it requires assumptions about available resources to each side. But here's a hypothetical question: If you could concentrate on taking out fuel and ammunition dumps and supply depots, could you influence the outcome of a battle or campaign? Computers can count. They could calculate the impact of such actions on a set of assumptions about available supplies...well, it would be interesting anyway.

Maybe the last capability is over the top. But I'd settle for four of the five.

Winning isn't everything;
It's the only thing!
http://us.f2.yahoofs.com/bc/3fe77b7e_1812a/bc/Images/Sig---1.jpg?BCxIwKABud4gLZQo

crazyivan1970
02-12-2004, 11:05 AM
Oh, new planes are cool, but they are not on my most wanted list, Except for twin engine bombers such as Pe-2, Tu-2, Ju88

What i really want is.. more maps, Couple of Pacific ones, BOB, desert maps, Halkin Gole, Spain.. smaller Normandy map.

Ground objects: trenches and lines of defence.

Ground command units - those who control battle in the air via messages

Things like that http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

V!
Regards,

http://blitzpigs.com/forum/images/smiles/smokin.gif

VFC*Crazyivan aka VFC*HOST

http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/coop-ivan.jpg

Kozhedub: In combat potential, the Yak-3, La-7 and La-9 fighters were indisputably superior to the Bf-109s and Fw-190s. But, as they say, no matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down.

TheGozr
02-12-2004, 11:08 AM
But more differents maps that is a Must..

-GOZR
http://www.french.themotorhead.com/themotorhead_fighters/images/pix/il2fbtmhlogosmall.jpg &lt;--Uncensored version IL2fb here (http://www.french.themotorhead.com/themotorhead_fighters/)

VOL_Mountain
02-12-2004, 11:18 AM
Two things:

Various twin engine bombers.

Some new maps that compliment the original IL-2 theme but don't stray too far; maybe The Med or Spanish Civil War

Mtn.

TgD Thunderbolt56
02-12-2004, 11:38 AM
There's much I'd like to see. There are two aspects of the game I'd like to see enhanced though. One, I'd like to see that entire airwar modeled so we can experience the global aspect in one game. Second, I'd like to see the online code continually improved to 1.) reduce the warping and 2.) allow the use of custom skins.

I'd like to see the heavies (both twin and quad engined) flyable.

I have no real complaints, but after getting a taste of what a good sim is really about it only servers to whet my appetite for more.



http://home.earthlink.net/~aclzkim1/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/il2sig2.jpg

BlindHuck
02-12-2004, 12:47 PM
Spit XIV http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

B-25 Strafer http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

"I race full real exclusively in IL2:The Forgotten Battles." - Mark Donohue

BlindHuck
02-12-2004, 12:49 PM
Did I forget to mention B-25 Strafer ? http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/images/smiley/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

"I race full real exclusively in IL2:The Forgotten Battles." - Mark Donohue