I got no problems. But, see, DT members have told many times here and everywhere, that DT's resources are quite limited and DT is not able to produce many new stuff internally. Actually, the team is already hands full with their current projects.

So, by continuing posting things, like, "hey guys, why didn't you make {place your favorite addition here}", or "how about you make {place your favorite addition here}", or, "you should add...", you either show complete ignorance towards what DT members say, or (if you say, you know, what they are telling) imply, that DT has no own clue about what may/should be added to the game.

Now, if you post something like "Hey Santa, I wish {place your favorite addition here} was in the game by Christmas" - that's fine. But when you say, "hey guys, how about you make, what I want?", the only reply you may hope for is "how about you make it yourself?"

No, there are three replies they can and should give. Either: "Good idea, we will add it to our list for consideration" - "Thanks, it is already part of our list for consideration" or "Sorry, this will not be dealt with by TD."

Simple as that. No need to get nasty on people who react to the very name of this thread.

We can not read the minds of TD members and only know what they are up to when they release a news update.

Lagarto wrote: "How about the following:" ie, a suggestion, and not a demand.

He did not do what many have done here which is "DT, why isn't this plane in the game? It's super important! This is an outrage to my nation and people! How dare you not work faster!"

There are a lot of good ideas in this thread that I'm sure must have inspired someone. DT have a ton of stuff to work on, but they've delivered miracles thus far. Under such circumstances, it's hard to not have a few things on the "wishlist".

Engines repeatedly catching fire:

I always wondered if this is a bug or a feature.
When an engine gets damaged to a certain degree it will catch fire no matter what you do.
If you to cut the fuel(0%throttle) and manage blow the fire out and cool the engine down - how can this thing light up again and again?
I mean, there's neither fuel nor any hot parts like the exhaust. :confused:

From TD side, requests and questions are most welcome. If it's a great idea and not too much work, it might even be in the next patch (not 4.11 any more, but you get the idea), if it is just more contents and requires much work, then the chances for that are much smaller.

But still, it would be great if a larger part of the community would make the 3D models of the items they want in the game, because it is a fact that out of all the desired contents, TD can maybe deliver 1% on their own with each patch. 3D modelling (and other aspects) takes a lot of time, and cloning hasn't been invented, yet.

What about Random skill and number option in QMB
 

Hi Team Daidalos,

What about not knowing the skill, numbers and aircraft of AI enemy we will face (in the QMB): for instance having the possibility to chose random as an option for aircraft and skill.

There could be a "random" option along with the usual rookie/veteran/ace, in the form of a interrogation point (?) in the list of ac and in the number box (1,2,3,4, or ?).

You know this kind of thing could really change the old and dusty habits in the qmb, and really make the surprise rise again!

You already know you rock!;)

I like that idea lots a randomized aircraft selection would be interesting as well if it chose from Allied and Axis aircraft(I mean if it were Axis it would chose only axis aircraft)

want something - it's easy

want something, and be able to do what you want - it's hard to

to do something by the standards of the IL2 - even more difficult

who doubts the fact that it is not easy, try it

DT - a group of enthusiasts ... and they work at their own pleasure, and doing in the first place then that is interesting by itself ...

SaQSoN says a little brutal, but he says is true - if you want to do something qualitatively for the IL2 ... except for yourself, nobody will do it

Has there been any thought of incorporating gun jams? Also, the possibility for structural failures as a result of a prolonged bursts from the Il2-3m's main guns?

Up till now, gun jams, damage and structural failures have been implemented only as a concequence of players mistakes. This is game-design.
However... technical reason for such issues could be implemented, so these things would happen randomly. While this would be part of realism and maybe wanted by a number of players (offline players I suspect), it could exist only as an option.
I am interested in how many players are willing to be forced to end a campaign unsuccessfully, after having done alot of missions, although they did nothing wrong - only because a random happening?
I think before this question isn't fully evaluated, these considerations cannot be go to a high priority status.