Got a couple of ideas:

- A new difficulty setting: Blackouts/Redouts while on external views
- Use CTRL-F1 (No cockpit view toggle key/button) as a modifier for other external view modes. For example in chase mode (f8), currently it's only fixed to the plane z-axis/heading. It would be nice if pressing a key (say CTRL-F1) the camera would get fixed to the plane's local axis (the 3 of them) so it follows all it's movements and rotations.

Would it be possible in the near future to add points system for the human pilots to recon target areas, this will add more FMB options for mission builders.
Or something along the lines of the idea below.
IE:

Target>Recon>Landing>Points>User input value or>100/75/50/25/0

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v1...econpoints.jpg

Also could you make it possible that the Target parameters can be set for Red and Blue on the same map, as it is you can only set conditions for one side or the other and not mixed.

Thanks.

Fix the overheat-model of the '45 D9.
It takes less than 20 sec to overheat it, and even at 500kmph it takes forever to cool it.

Your ideas refer to external flyers, like "birds of prey". :(

These are legitimate concerns but I think what has been suggested is something that would be great to have some control over.

There ARE groups that fly online with an eye to maximum historical authenticity and that includes equipment failures and degraded infield performance.

As far as controlling the performance degradation, that wouldn't be any different than offering up a different aircraft. We already kind of do this when choosing between the three La-5 models, or between the dozen or so Spitfire/Bf109/Fw190 models (which are present partially or completely for the same reason). This would add an extra layer representing field conditions which in some historical contexts would be potentially useful to simulate.

For a quick action dogfight server, all of the performance sliders should probably be at 100% and the random engine failures off.

That's not the spirit of the suggestions.

I fly on Skies of Valor (close cockpit, externals on), and I fly using a mouse (via ppjoy+ ppmouse) and keyboard due to many reasons, improved air to ground gunnery being one of the most important.

For these reasons, I rely on externals and padlocking to tracking enemy planes (mostly attackers since I fly low and slow over enemy ground units).
Not having the blackout effect when on externals is a double edged sword, on the plus side it allows for harder evasive maneuvering. On the minus side, there's more chance of going into a complete blackout without noticing.
I think such an option would make it more fair for those who fly full real in these kind of servers.

The second suggestion was made thinking on movie making, there used to be a mod from a polish acrobatic team (IIRC) that did this and more, and allowed for some very nice takes when used correctly.

Internals look like Call of Duty. I just played it and UO add-on for laughs. Pretty sure scenes were from the original game.

I'm pretty sure some of the external P-47 fly-by sounds are from Janes WWII Fighters.

I think better than this .. and easier in the long run for everyone would be if TD made the file where this info is kept editable in the stock sim.

As it is now in HSFX at least you can access the hudlog.ru file which is where these lines are kept and edit them. In mine the path is: C:\Games\Ubisoft\IL-2 46 HSFX 6.0\Files\i18n\ hudlog.ru

The file looks something like this:

MissionComplete MISSION COMPLETE
MissionFailed MISSION OVER
BlueWon BLUE WON !
RedWon RED WON !

EnemyAircraftDestroyed Enemy Aircraft: Destroyed
EnemyAircraftKillAssisted Enemy Aircraft: Destroyed (shared kill)
EnemyStaticAircraftDestroyed Enemy Aircraft: Destroyed

Mine is something like this:

MissionComplete MISSION COMPLETE
MissionFailed FAIL!
BlueWon BLUE WON !
RedWon RED WON !

EnemyAircraftDestroyed Scratch1!
EnemyAircraftKillAssisted (shared kill)
EnemyStaticAircraftDestroyed AC G+

If that file could be made available to us in the stock sim we could edit it as we pleased and that might be easier for TD to do than setting up switches and all that. That way they could concentrate on other stuff. You can look at that file yourself but everything is in there from the throttle settings to the bomb sight info.

The game's Call of Duty United Offensive. For sure.

Fw-190 ground handling
 

it always seems to me that the fw series ground handling acts as if its stuck in the mud on any airfield with any load. Steering is difficult and torque heavy to the left on takeoff. I tried same field with bf series or other plane from pick a country and all taxi and move more easily. is this a bug/feature or am i whining??

Request for dogfight servers...

Two items actually:

1) We could definitely use some more small scale dogfight maps with otherwise realistic terrain. I mean more like the Dogfight1Summer and Dogfight2Winter maps than anything symmetrical.

2) It would be nice if the NW Germany map, which makes a great dogfight map, could make made more online friendly. As it is, the map has quite a few objects which causes performance issues for large numbers of players. We've tried to use it in the past but it's too problematic. A version of the map with all towns and cities intact but the random buildings spread in the countryside removed to shore up performance a bit.

Thanks TD for what have you done and keep up the good work. However in past several patches you have poured new planes and maps in the game, (which is, dont get me wrong, great,) but now( in my opinion) is time to make use out of them. Please give us a chance to play single-player dinamic camaigns with those planes.

Not possible. Simply put the DGen software is an external development which was never directly under Maddox Games' control - which is also why TD never got anything on it. There is a new DGen developed but I haven't heard anything for a while now. As it is this new DGen and DCG are 3rd Party developments and therefor you'll have to ask them about new campaign possibilities.

I have not found an entry about this whish so I just add it, even I know its to late for 4.12.
Its about carrier wissions with improved wheather since 4.10:
Say, the carrier is heading course 30° and you set a wind with 15m/s from 270° it is nearly impossible to land or take of. Mission goal is to find your target out in the nowhere calculating wind drift and so on, destroy it and come back to the carrier.

Point 1 is easy: For takeoff, the carriers first two wayponts head towards 270° and after launch, the carriere heads towards 30°.
Point 2 a little bit trickier, but also easy to accomplish when you prepare well.
Point 3 is easy by morse code, but
Point 4 is impossible, if you dont set the carriers waypoint back to course 270°.
Now, if I have several flights out there, and they are returning at different times due to their mission goal, you have to entirely test out the mission, if it is possible to board the carrier again.
A hard task for the mission Bilder on long missions on large maps of about an hour or more.
Now my request would be, that if you come home again, request for landing permission, the carrier heads his nose towards the wind direction as long as ac are circling, or in one or two a/c increments, when close to the coast.
to complicated or not possible with that engine?

Yeah and another Idea for 4.13 or 4.14: Read out the mission briefing via USB conection to something like an iPad or similiar. The Pilots had their maps also with them. It would be cool to have that on your lap and zoom in and out on the map with the actual mission data. I usually have my second monitor and do a desktop snapshot, then load it full screen in irfanview as a jpeg, but on larger maps and long missions it really lacks on details to compare actual view with the map.

main changes was only weapon (this written in final description of types), so, in fact, yes, especially if in game problem with old single missions (heard something like this) and if game can change performance if you selected other weapon for type 24, for example (like yak-9m with/without ns-37)...

and need reworking of FM of i-16, i think, now in game not so obviously what aircraft was not very stable in flight, this can effect when pilot shoots at long distance...

ofcourse, it's only my opinion, maybe in something wrongly...

these old planes sometimes are really needed, for example, soviet spit-5, hurri, i-16 in 44, repaired FW-190А-2,3 from 15(sp)./JG51 in 43 etc etc etc, we all - i mean we players, DT etc - have info mainly not very accurate, of course, so, need lot of researches for all sides and, of course, at first we need correct normal planes...

about quality, i can say about soviet planes, we have some info and correct approach to these problems can give more historically correct performance (i try explain this in one topic here, how can, maybe DT reading this)...

anyway, at first, i repeat, need normal all main planes with performance within 2-3 % tolerance and all this it's lot of work...

here i agree with you, it's a very old game (at this moment personally i can't have fun only if done something in this game, we need new sim and these features mainly for him), we must have choice, plus, all these various failures, defects of bombs etc require lot of complex researches what i think not deal even for big experienced team...

hmm, maybe, it's not SO wrongly, when i read about p-51, remembered, what la-7 have similar oil system, so, slightly larger area of ​​damage...

not sure if i ever mentioned this, but could we get some sort of button to scroll through various weapon selector options like in actual planes?

i know some planes had a few buttons that would actually select the weapons that were active on the trigger

the one plane that is driving me nuts is the fw190 which i cannot select mg17s only without wasting cannon if i want to do some spamming or get someone to maneuver...

its just i main the fw190 and could really use an option to either unlink the mg17s from teh cannons (wing root fire at teh same time) or have it set as is with the toggle gunpods enabling or disabling the mg151/20s (would be easy to do as its already a key in gam ebut dont do anything in the fw190 anyways)

while were at it itd be nice to see an option for weapon selection toggle while in flight for any planes that supported this functionality. if not possible at least give us the option to fire cannons and mgs separately on avery plane that had such loadouts (fw190 the one that comes to mind)

(also i have read somewhere about a pilot account of the zero having this option. i forget where i read this but it was about a zero ace who was attacking a f4f and then was confident enough todrop it with just mgs so he switched off cannons, this mean that the zero actually had one trigger and not two like in game but was selecatable on off cannons)

Would it be possible to add HVAR rockets to the loadout for the FM-2 Wildcat? Thanks for all of your hard work!

Checkout

http://www.lowengrin.com/news.php

+1 on that. It'd be a great addition to that Wildcat version.

And also for the P-51D-20, please. The Mustang units in the PTO used the HVAR rocket, especially the units based on Iwo Jima.

Or a P-51K

Can something be done to the AI carrier landing routine? Currently it takes them ages to land on the carrier. Maybe cutting the distance at which they start the final approach to half what we currently have or re-doing it completely...


Thanks

There is an option for landing pattern in FMB. Try with Short Left/Short Right.
I can't remember if it works for carriers or not. :???:

it's p-51d with another prop and a little bit worse speed? and how much worse this version? i think, even if - 10 kph, it's reason for...

plus, p-51d now 25 lbs, if I'm not mistaken, so need and 18 lbs performance...

and mustang III in game have realistic performance? apparently, it's 25 lbs, but with >605 kph at sl...

i agree with you, 20mm gun, but not mg151/20 it's good for balance, historically correct and, maybe, DT can do this version without correct ammo counter? if i'm not mistaken, yak-9k - "На приборной доске в кабине летчика был установлен счетчик оставшихся снарядов пушки." - but, and nothing...

although, it's not serious changes and we can wait, and when plane are correct it's good... but and variant when f-1 included and finished off later, i think, not so unacceptable...

next, if we talking about Fs, what about f-2 with and f-4 without armor glass (it's protection, of course, and + - 10 kph?, i seen and read something like this, so, why not if this historically correct and can changed performance of aircraft)…

and generally speaking, maybe, for all aircrafts need some new mechanism or new option like choice of loadouts, skins, etc, for different equipment, although, sometimes more optimal it’s "different" planes of one type how now...

Yep...not sure why we'd want a P-51K. Produced in a different factory with a different but similar propeller, a slightly differently shaped canopy, and I think one of the vents uses a different design but aside from that it's a carbon copy of the P-51D and in no way a benefit for us to have it. I would like to see an additional P-51D model with the higher boost and HVAR rocket attachments for Pacific operations. If memory serves, by the time Mustangs were in the Pacific they were cleared for higher boost than the ones in Europe were typically.

The Mustang Mark III currently represents a V-1 chaser and is supposed to have +25lb boost (it may also represent the highly polished wings and exceptional care that was taken by the ground crews to ensure the aircraft was in tip top shape). It was very fast IRL and in-game but I'm not sure if the performance is accurate to the exact numbers or not.

A F-1 with a MG-FF hub cannon would be potentially useful, definitely. The armoured windscreen thing I can see being less useful versus time it would take to set it up.

I don't read Russian... so what about the Yak-9K?

in total agree, but if DT wanted rework p-51s, do K maybe it's not so hard especially if he more slowly (it's main reason)...

well, it's all mainly something like "perfection", of course...

if need to select, more D-xx with new weapon for all theaters (what really need, agree with many opinions here), or K, my choice D and hvar etc too...

oh, exactly, "polished" etc... forgot about this... and i asked because wanted to say, if mustang III have correct performance, maybe need mustang IV who intercepted V-1 too (how i read)...

maybe, you not flying much times against pe-2 ?:) shkas very dangerous for pilot of E/F, especially without armor glass - more than UBT, i think, because many times was "killed" or had damaged oil cooler, sometimes, even oil cooler+lost ailerons at >500 m - and if you climbing behind fast "peshka" (main attack position in online wars)... plus, glass reduce speed... well, 2 reasons, why not...

of course, it's only my opinion and i'm writing too many little things...

if author of book, Степанец, right, yak-9k had ammo counter, only for ns-45, and we not have this in game...

Tried short left and instant (the last one available) - no improvement.

I see what you mean about the armored windscreens. I tend to end up flying the Pe-2 rather than the 109 so I hadn't considered this an issue previously :)

I didn't know that the Yak-9K had an ammo counter. Interesting!

If I were going to add an additional Mustang model to the game, it would be the P-51H.


The option of having an ammo counter in "no cockpit" mode or as a HUD display would be a nice touch.

Alternately, just list how many rounds of ammo a plane has expended. Often I practice my gunnery using unlimited ammo and it would be helpful to get a sense of how much ammo I've spent to take out a particular target.

[QUOTE=Pursuivant;487773]If I were going to add an additional Mustang model to the game, it would be the P-51H.

A P-51 H would be sweet :)

:)

and i remembered third reason, without armor better view forward, personally for me much better... 3 reasons...

and, maybe, if really need new option, for example, this can looks like difficulty settings...

you know, maybe, it's correct only for prototype, maybe not, but all this is not so important how fix performances of T/K and, if i'm not mistaken, view forward in cockpit of all 9s...

if talk in total, agree with you, but if talk sensibly, in 45 was built only 555 H and they even not fought against japan and in korea, right? so, mustangs with allison have much more chances and reasons...

interesting, DT has plans about this?

if i'm understood you correctly, this is can be good idea, especially, if plane had ammo counter, but no photos with him...


and again about i-16, old planes and field mods... i'm not specialist, but even 10 mins of research gives lot of variants (attached), of all years, and theoretically this easy to do... for example, third photo, type 24 with 2 rs-82, and some changes (here, maybe, due to dirt) in 1943... i think, he can be slowly at 50 kph...

and you can see what in game wrong 3d model of shvak for i-16...

Although a P-51H would be interesting... it would be purely theoretical as the type never saw combat. It was introduced just after the war was over and it saw a couple of years of service before being retired.

The Mustangs that saw service in Korea were the F-51D (P-51D) and F-82 Twin Mustang.

If it was a choice of Mustangs, I'd rather have the very interesting A-36 Apache with dive brakes, and P-51A Mustang variants. I'd even be interested in seeing the Mustang Mark I and the limited production variant with 4x20mm Hispano cannons in the wings.

http://imageshack.us/a/img526/1581/tom4.jpg

I vote for the Allison models as well...

Thumbs up for the P-51A, immortalized by the Air Commandos, and the A-36 would come in handy for the forthcoming Tunisia map, me thinks.

Allison Mustangs for the win...

Man, to me those are the sweetest 'stangs :cool:

I do enjoy the P-51A we have in game. Only P-51 worth looking at.
Wish the wings would get fixed from the D version but hey, small potatoes.

Since CoD is no longer supported. Is it somehow possible to improve the old Il-2 engine?

i feel self how soviet pilots who complained of weapon of spitfire 5:), but especially good what these mustangs, exept p-51a, with 2 synchronized .50, and 6 in total for a-36a, it's much balanced and powerful weapon, than for p-51a/b/c...

for me too, and don't know why...

if i'm not mistaken, this mustang much needful in game, than mustang I/IA or p-51a, but i hope differences not so big and if DT will do mustangs with allison, they will do all versions...


and not to be offtopic, wish - soviet experimental load outs for p-47 (22-RE/27-RE) like 2 fab-250, 3 fab-250 and 2 fab-500, which was tested, but not used? in combats...

MDS features
 

The only real thing i miss in all those official patches is a full-blown MDS set of features, like those seen in UP3. Maybe this next patch could include all, or at least some more features of MDS 1.2 by Zuti.

That would be great ;)

Beg you pardon, but what is MDS?

Some wishes:

1. Bugfixes. E.g., anyone have problems changing gunsight view/regular view watching several .ntrks and fiddling with accelerated time?
2. Ingame rewind option for tracks. Would be useful for loooong tracks.
3. Rename Spitfire MkIX into Spitfairy MkIX
4. My name in the credits
5. Ingame option to partially disable markings (national, number, bars, arrows)
6. It's been already said, but the option to lock loadout separately from fuel level.
7. AI tweaks - remove unrealistic acceleration, climb and dive abilities

MDS stands for Moving Dogfight server. It was created by Zuti and initially incorporated into the UltraPack Mod, but recently (not sure which version) it has, at least partially, been also included in the oficial versions of the game. For more information on what exactly the MDS does visit the following link:

http://ultrapack.il2war.com/index.php/topic,4451.0.html

Hope that helps

Best regards ;)

I wish the following bugs disappear:

Hs 129 B2 - Logic operation of the bomb panel lights does not seem correct anymore as in 4.10.

Ju-88's - oil temperature data is on the left-hand gage (hydraulic pressure) instead of being on the right-hand gage.
On A-17, the coolant temperature gage for right engine is "coupled" to the left engine.

F6F - the old "fuel gage" became the cylinder head temperature (correct) but there is not a fuel gage anymore. The triple engine gage should become a fuel gage.

Bf 109 Z & Go 229 - the homing indicator does not work.

La-7R - the rocket temperature gage does not work any more.

Best regards.

Yessir! :-)

Having the abililty to choose aircraft formations would be a bonus in FMB too, just built a mission with DB-3F bombers attacking a bridge, they spawn in Echelon right which is no good for bombing bridges.

+1


btw is this possible:

i know not so much about these things, and it's not really important, but someday need include in game other planes with skis, like yaks, laggs and il-2s for winter 1941-1942...

for example, attached from here, lagg-3 around 8-1x series with skis, rockets and racks for fuel tanks/bombs...

even don't know, how much worse these planes, apparently, fights with lw was mainly excluded...

this may sound strange, but i'm (and think lot of russian players) want revised FM of yaks, because so long time we fly on really yaks:), although in RL it were very simple planes, mainly, without any problems for pilots, if i'm not mistaken...

So were Hurricanes and warhawks, doesn't mean they didn't get slaughtered.
What specifically do you want?

I would love for ground based field guns (howitzers, etc.) to be able to apply indirect fire to targets within their range, or assigned target areas set in the FMB, and not just direct fire at targets in front of them. Ship's guns can fire at targets indirectly, but not field guns.

What's wrong with the Yaks? I'm a pretty prolific flyer of them these days and over the last 5-6 years of flying IL-2 I've become a huge fan of them. They fly so well... turn, roll rate, climb, speed, all excellent depending on the model and the opposition. The wing loading is a wee bit high in the Yak-3 (as it actually was) which makes manoeuvring interesting but it's such a sweet fighter.

His post was a bit vague, but he hyperlinked "Yaks" to a page about the animal version of yak and not the Yakovlev aircraft, so it may have been an attempt at humor. He might have been trying to say in jest that the Yakovlev fighters should handle more like the yak animal - sluggishly, since they share the same name.

I dunno. Hard to read, but his English is better than my Russian!

so hard to explain, even on my language and for russians, and here i can't recommended for you read kilometers of many russian forums...

well, you just can say what yak in game very simple plane, like was in real life? i can't, even in compare with other planes with "realistic" FM...

in RL la-5 was not easy, lagg-3, mig-3, i-16, bf 109g, but not yaks, most mass soviet fighter and one of most mass fighters in ww2, even new re.2000 and spits not so strange, how yaks, iars and tempest...

in this situation how we can normal play in online wars? if main soviet fighter like wild bison and all want la-5, and in total we have, mainly, war of primitive etalons like «la-5 vs g-2 and fw 190»...

etc etc etc...

i not want arcade, but situation totally strange, and sometimes think what better see yaks with more simple FM and other planes with FM like for yaks now...

they fly not like in arcades, agree, it's very good, but strange in total... it's FM...

about performances, for example, in game yak-7b with m-105pa, in fact, have speed (and, maybe, all performance) of first yak-7 and first series of yak-7a, although in RL had 490-500 kph at sl...

after may 1942 rockets had only some fighters, but in game even yak-1b have this, although - what much more important and really my dream - beginning from early 43 late series had 140 shells for shvak and 240 rounds for ubs + sometimes different bombs...

etc...

ie performances, weapons, etc of yaks in game, mainly, wrong (all this i try explain in other topic, but apparently this is not helps for some users like gaunt1 and Z1024:), or someone too lazy), like many other planes, things etc and in this case, for example, 2 b-20 for yak-3 with m-107a it's only what DT can do for him, my opinion...

well, and yak-3... i'm not big specialist, i'm just not specialist:), just know what it's was "dream fighter", after reading of many things why so, including opinions of pilots, memoirs, interviews etc, and if most important source tells what best yak-3 had 17-18 sec (21 sec, it's turn time of some first serial yaks with 540-550 kph at sl) of turn time, we just can't debate with this...

well, i think, maybe, AFM or time machine, someday, say who was really right...

i flew on yaks lot of time too, after our good flights on ukd2;) in online wars especially, so, you saying like about me...:) and this is first reason why i talking here about yaks and laggs, about this very wrong situation, because i repeat, too much errors and in RL la-5 was strict plane, for example, but not yaks...

well, i hope, someday FM can be revised, especially because i absolutely don't hope, in total, on a "battle of stalingrad" after reading forums about this strange thing, where can be interesting in fact only AFM and some little details...

and all this only my opinion...

i mean, now planes "yak" for pilot like real WILD yaks (bulls, or bisons, etc) for rider, but this not really normal, because if i'm not mistaken this is was simple plane...

i know language, but not so good, and it's not easy to write on another language, so, in the end, here lot of help of 2 types of translator...:) sorry, if not all clear...

I'd like to see some kind of indicator for chat lines depending on whether they are sent to ALL or MY_ARMY. This would help in preventing people accidentally revealing tactical information to opponents, for example.

Found this P47 Video on Youtube:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqgP26cyorQ
at 6:03 you see an airfield with a parking lot similliar to them in front of a shopping mall.
Wolud be cool for US airfieilds in time of their winning leg.
al litte later you see a flight landing pattern, that would be great for AI behaviour too.

This would be welcome, not only on its own merits, but also because it would create a whole new class of Aerial Artillery Observation or FAC missions.

There are modded versions of the Fi-156 Storch and a modded F3 Stinson Reliant which are flyable and allow you to perform FO missions, but their "forward observation" is actually just a delayed action, invisible cannon.

Related to this would be all sorts of forward air observer missions where ground attack planes are directed to their target by a ground-based air controller. That sort of "cab rank" mission was the dominant activity for British and U.S. fighter bombers from 1944 on.

I would love if the AI could cope better with occasions where they find themselves ahead of their formation and on a similar heading. At the moment they must loop right around to the back of the formation or do some wacky vertical manoeuvres in order to get back into formation. If they could simply recognise that they are on the correct heading already and throttle back, they might behave a bit more sanely.

It might just be me but at the moment, using the Pairs or Line takeoff waypoint options looks and works great, except where the leader ends up behind the rest of the formation after takeoff, or even where an element leader ends up behind his wingman, as the wingman then performs violent (and often fatal) manoeuvres in order to correct his position as soon as the first normal waypoint is called out - usually a nose-dive straight into the ground.

Something similar is/was in development, there is an old video on youtube.
It would be great to do this with flyable Po-2 and Fw-189!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F5eos6vnDkw

Whoa!
What about the 109 flight landing pattern?
how did this work?
Or weren't they AI?

+1
I prefer to set a start delay and put spawn planes for my AI flight on the runway.
My spawn plane is somewhere at the Airfield.
If I do it correctly, I can start and line in before they start. What bugs me about this is the delayed engine start and the immediate takeoff run of the commrades with cold engines.
If I manage to line in before they start, I can try to start with my wingman, who happens to accelerate faster on the first half of his takoff run, then suddenly falls back.
Sometimes I take off as second or last and AI shows this stupid circling behaviour.
Now my trick is to let an enemy spotter fly low in a not to far distance and order my flight TAB-1-2 and TAB-2-2 to attack evrything. As soon as Im airborn, I hook rectangular and order Tab-1-1 and Tab-2-1 to cover, followed by Tab-2-8-3 or Tab-2-5-4 for close or 4 finger formation.
Then they immediately aligne to formation without wasting time by circling around.
Its a little noisance, but it works for me.

I was wondering how hard it would be to do some more of these...

http://i1121.photobucket.com/albums/...ps4163c8c2.jpg

For other nations of course. They make nice props I find.

I think it's been suggested before that flags would ideally be skinable in the same way aircraft are.
From a bandwidth perspective(sited as the main reason images cannot be used in mission briefings) flags would be much smaller, and have less impact.

Regardless of such an implementation, more flags for the main countries would help with set dressing in missions.

There's probably a legal issue as with swasticas, with respect to the Nazi flag at least.

That flag could strategically be hanging rather than being straight out like the others. I've seen it done elsewhere...

Just as a bit of trivia, the flag depicted is a 50 star U.S. flag. During WW2 Alaska and Hawaii were still territories, so the U.S. flag for all of WW2 was the 48 star version.

And, yes, there are plenty of workarounds for the dreaded swastika flag, ranging from having the flag folded to just turning the swastika into a cross or leaving the central white roundel of the the Nazi flag blank.

I hadn't thought of that... interesting! Yes many flags have changed so historically accurate would be key IMHO. I was just looking up what the Canadian flag looked like at the time. Very different than the maple leaf that we have now.

Another wish urges up for later ....
To have a switch to FMB button out of the Single missions Mode to change settings and a text editor window editing mis file from the inside (pushing waypoints out of the borders or so)

WW2-era RCAF flag. 1st use of the "maple leaf roundel" that I know of:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ro...41-1968%29.svg

WW2-era Canadian Flag:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...a_1921.svg.png

Changing from this flag to the Maple Leaf caused a big stink at the time, if you can believe it. (IMO, the new flag is much more distinctive and attractive.)

Those are both interesting from a history point of view but thank goodness for the new one :)

Rabaul map and Lancaster Bombers.

Hi SPAD, thanks for reminding me to fiddle with radio commands! That works great for the player, but the problem still exists with all-AI flights unfortunately. :(

"light" bombs, like ao-25 and similar, for la-5/7...

only some examples are attached (last photo, if i'm not mistaken, czech la-5fn)...

it's not whim:), it's for tactical freedom when you need attack weapon, but not big bombs, well, something like "free hunt" for fighters and fighter-bombers and when you can fight even with bombs under wing and later do your AG mission...

well, this is what all times was need personally for me in online (wars, simple missions etc) and, think, for many pilots too...

and, in fact, this need do for some yaks and p-39 etc too, just here we really see and know from sources what these bombs were used on las for attack missions, especially, in 44-45...

and confirmation of real pilot -

Are there currently G limits or speed limits on maneuvering with ordinance or dropping stores?

Could these limits be incorporated into the game?

It's always seemed to me that excessive G forces or speed might make stores rip away on their own, and it seems I'm right.

I was reading a WW2-era pilot manual (for the Hawker Typhoon) the other day and it had specific limits on the speed at which the plane could safely drop its drop tanks and the sort of maneuvers you could perform while carrying rockets or bombs.

In particular, it seems that sudden lateral movements make ordinance fall off the plane.

Commands alteration
 

Jeah, especially when you're not the leader of the entider pack.
Otherwise I give them the Tab-flight-1 command to assist me, when I start and repeat this command after a minute or so. but it might distract them from their mission.

What I woluld like to ask for in this kontext is:
No matter what flight you are in command, it should allways be the Tab-2- command for your flight. only the commander of the squad should have the choice of whom he commands.

Is readme finished?
thanks in advance.

No, not yet. It will certainly be posted as soon as it is ready.

this already have in game...

i not flew very much, especially, in 4.11, but remember something like this...

and this is one of reasons why i want - that historically justified and correctly - only 50 kg of bombs, in total, for jabo as "hunters", 2 fab-100=200 kg and this is really weight and bigger air resistance, and with only 50 kgs you can try to fight and, for example, real la-7 in good condition with this ammo load had around 590-600 kph at sl (forsazh) what similar or better than any mass serial german fighter'45 with piston engine, if i'm not mistaken...

other reason, ao-25 it's авиационная осколочная bomb, so, i think this bomb better than fab-100 against crews, cars, planes etc (look on attached photo from summer'41 or it's like effect of mortar bomb against infantry, what, sometimes, better than even 105mm), which are, i think, main target for "light" fighters without rockets or really big bombs, but with ao-25, some types of fab-50 etc...


and by the way, if we about all these things, maybe, DT wants do in future something like crews and suppression of crew of AA guns, what, i think, after reading of many books, sometimes main effect after attacks on AA machineguns and guns...

and maybe, it's fisrt step to infantry in game... or to cartage... i mean horses and cart, of course, without any animation of murder and blood... or to, as targets, machine gun nests, position of observers at front line, mortar battery etc etc etc, all these real examples from real sources (if i'm not mistaken, something have in game now)... to soviet analogs of german sd-2/sb-xxx... etc...

well, attached some pics after simple search (sorry for last photo), and my theory, il-2 and even il-10 were armed with shkas+cannons and not 4 x shvak, etc, partly because main targets of attack plane it's "soft" targets and suppression = 2 shkas with 1500 bullets and high rate of fire, and powerful vya-23 for cars etc...

just maybe not all here know what - "те кто хочет переключать тумблеры или расстреливать пехоту не наша аудитория." (c) loft - so, if not DT and in this game, we will wait real war VERY long time...


and my other wish - in addition to infantry, suppression of crew etc - more AA guns in game, especially, light german 7.92 mm and 13.2 mm aa machine guns (i read lot of references about firing of mashine guns, when il-2 attacked german airfields in 43, here)...

for example, now we have 12.7 mm DSHK and m-4 (USSR), m-2 (US), something more?, lot of variuos 20-25-37-40 mm aa guns, even mobile, but i can't remember any german machine guns, only funny sd kfz 251...


it's have in fw 190a-8 manual too, for example, well, and what DT did, apparently, in 4.10 for many or all planes...

Can't wait to read it. 4.12 patch is going to be awesome :D

Thanks a lot for your answer.
A last question...are there any surprises in the patch or is the full content the one in the developmet update post???

Don't expect surprises, but they've happened before. ;)

forgot about this... well... ie... at least, like there... what, apparently, it's not difficult and not really long...

First of all, thanks for great work of Team Daidalos with IL-2.
I’ve been flying this great flight simulator since Forgotten Battles and it’s getting better all the time. I have watched the TD’s YouTube videos and I have to say that 4.12 is worth waiting.

I read all these pages full of wishes and there are good suggestions here for the future versions but I didn’t notice that anyone had mentioned one thing that I’m not very happy with. Although AI’s new behaviour and shooting skills in 4.11 is a big improvement for me and other experienced flyers, are the AI rookies too demanding for a human rookie who has just started flying and practicing to fight? There still are new pilots who’d like to enjoy this game, but are depressed of the too skillful opponents when flying off line. At least I know some.

We have four AI skill levels in this game, so would it harm anybody if we had less skillful AI rookies again in the next version. So I’d like to see rookie AIs with 4.11 flying skills but 4.10 shooting skills. Averages, veterans and aces are ok as they are at the moment.

Besides, based on the many books I’ve read (pilot memoirs and biographies), most of the real rookie fighter pilots were not so good as they are in 4.11.

So would it make sense to give a chance also to human rookies to develop their skills off line without despair and frustration and to gain good feelings and success in flying and fighting.

I agree with Jami.
We should always keep in mind offline rookies, even if they seldom post here.

So what will we call the lowest skilled AI Level?
Dog Food on High Octane is my suggestion

Idea: It would be nice to have skill levels by slider. One for flying skills and one for aerial gunnery and maybe too for obeying orders and panicking. The first two I find the most important though.

This is a very good idea. I Think maybe very dificult to include in the sim, but still an excelent idea.

Actually, pilots do have some hidden properties like flying ability and gunnery (since 4.11?).
Only it is hidden from players and mission builders. Those skills are assigned 'randomly' based on the overall skill specified in the mission.

Yes, I know that feature very well and have faced it in many missions - and I like it. But still, could all the rookies be a bit less skilled...

I'd love to see something like this, and have asked for it before.

Flying ability, gunnery skills, tactical expertise/situational awareness are all different skills, although obviously successful fighter pilots are selected for all three traits.

While it tips towards the much maligned MS CFS 3, I'd like to see slightly more "roleplaying" elements, for pilots: eyesight, G tolerance/endurance/strength, calmness/courage, aggressiveness and situational awareness.

If mission builders could control these aspects, you could simulate anything from a sleepy pilot, a plane with dirt on the windshield or a pilot nearly dead from dysentery or crazy from combat stress.

AI skill level settings
 

I enjoy to never know the FOE's skill level that I meet in mission.

Actually, each time you run a mission you meet different AI pilots due to random features of their skill parameters. And it's great.

Noobs can fly with a lot of unrealistic settings... Unlimited ammo, no fuel and noob unarmmed FOEs. I forgot no cockpit and icons... I think that it is good enough.

Hi,

when the patch will be released?

thx

+1, when we can take it?

I sense a huge change being undergone for the game. Maybe we will get some groundbreaking improvement for this old game.

It is absolutely necessary if 1C wants to keep his customers from leaving, which has been going on ever since the mods (hence the online hacks) came out.

I gave War Thunder a try this week. And it is fantastic graphics wise. Actually it's far better than Clod if you turn off vignette effect. Currently, I'm still testing the FM. It seems that Luftwaffe is still being nerfed badly. But I haven't tried FRB yet. I will fly more in FRB when It enables me to choose sides.

BTW, every history battle or full real battle in WT is a COOP. Both sides can respawn only once. And there is also dynamic campaign. With controllable ground troops and ships to be added, it is foreseeable that it will become the most popular WWII sim we have ever had.

I guess when it's ready.

It would be nice to have some news from the dev team though, even if it's to state that it will take a long time.

I was put off as soon as I tried to get an aircraft to stall. Emphasis on "tried".

Just saw yoour new video and wow, you answer one time that 3D water can't be make in DirectX mode, but I just want to know if it's possible for Direct X mode to add :

- New water texture (more real) --> I want something that look realistic from the air, but 2D from the ground.
- Reflection of vehicles, planes, ships and mountains instead of just trees.

thx

A request for 4.13,

Would it be possible to change the map border, or have just inside the map border to be a square (in this case rectangular) protractor?

cheers fruitbat.

Do you mean the map that shows up when we press M (by default)? +1
i think it definitly could have a thinner frame. A so small map with that amount of frame looks like a painting from the XVIII century! (what i mean is we could have more map in the same occupied space, or less space used).

yep, thats the one.