|
Quote:
|
Please TD, im from the German forum, which is 'dead' since the new design has been activated...:(
I love your patches, great work! Now my questions.. ;) Will there be any new Japanese planes? (maybe flyable) Will there be a new German or American (B-24) bomber? ... ... Lot's of thanks, and greetings from Germany! Wiesel |
What about having better debris? and Random AI !
What about having better debris textures? It would be much appreciated especially when firing only machine guns equipped aircraft... Just something looking more like small irregular metal parts would do the trick, what do you think, is it possible to do?
What about having (along with rookie, average, vet, ace) another option like random, so we cannot know what to expect. Could also be nice to set a QMB fight with random aircraft types, just for the pleasure of the surprise and to work identification skills. Anyway TD, you guys rock! |
Battle of El Alamein
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6tmAX3Hfb8 |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
I simply asked, i hoped perhaps you would say something someone;) |
Dewoitine D.520, Nakajima Ki-34, Nakajima Ki-44, Nakajima Ki-49, Nakajima J1N, Nakajima J5N, Nakajima C6N, Nakajima Ki-115, Nakajima Kikka, Yokosuka D4Y, Aichi D3A2
|
This, wishlist, what
|
Quote:
|
It's about a dozen years worth of work, just so you know what you're asking for.
|
Widescreen support... omg i would love you guys long tiem...
|
"runway lights off" command
|
Quote:
|
Does TD have any plans to improve the map textures? The textures from the Slovakia map and some of the other new maps are good, but the old eastern Europe and Pacific maps really need an update.
|
Quote:
Yes we have, but its out of timeline scope. Means: we don't know, when. |
Talking about map textures - is there a way to make roads run in a more natural way, not zigzag the way they do now, or is it something the game's engine can't handle?
|
I got a good one on the wish list, how about a Ar-196 as a flyable
|
Quote:
I built several missions, whee I have to fly a Rufe instead of a Ar196. And as mentioned before, let us please be shot of cats. I once tried a workaround where I used a static ship and a rufe which first waypoint was clealx set on the cat with good beginning speed in accurate height, but clearly, I crashed evry time. |
Ok. That´s my wish list for 4.12:
-New cockpits for P-47´s. -Repaint cockpit for p.11 - IL-2´s - Lagg´s - La´s - Mig´s - Yak´s - Bf-109´s - G.50 -TB-3 -IL-2 Field Mod 1941 with Playable Gunner Position. -P-38 Lightning with a Gyro-Sight. http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v4...-38withK14.jpg -Flyables: M.S.406/410 Mörkö-Morane Fiat G-55 Re.2002 Ki-21 -New planes or versions of planes: P-38 early versions. P-47C/B versions. http://www.warbirdsresourcegroup.org...ges/p38-32.jpg Fiat G.50bis (bomber rack) http://italianaircraftofwwii.devhub..../sggrsrrgf.jpg Fiat G.42bis/ter/cn http://www.ww2incolor.com/d/659651-2/CR42CN-2 http://www.ww2incolor.com/d/659654-2/CR42CN http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...t_C.R.42CN.jpg http://hyperscale.com/2007/galleries...rtworklb_1.jpg http://www.ww2aircraft.net/forum/att...cn-cr.4222.jpg Ki-44 "Tojo". Gloster meteor Nakajima Kikka One Britsh heavy bomber (Lancaster or Halifax) could be AI Ba.65/Ba-65bis (we have some Italian´s fighters and bombers but not one Ground attack)aircraft) Some more french aircrafts. - Please add new countries in game. Sorry for this big list, please is possible add this mod: - Avia BK-534 (by Stoupa)- plane and cockpit done and this autor is the same of B-534: http://i988.photobucket.com/albums/a...34defaulty.jpg Tank´s DT. |
Quote:
There weren't any CR.42bis and ter, CR.42CN needs also underwing lights but it was a very unsuccessful aircraft, no Breda 65bis also, only Serie I/Isotta Fraschini K.14 engined and Serie II/Fiat A.80 engined, anyway they were used only during June 1940 - January 1941. G.50bis or an anyway more detailed Italian one could have that ClOD issue. What do you mean with "new countries"? AFAIK all major Countries, for the existing maps, are included in game. |
Quote:
Like, Pigs vs Rabbbits or so ;-) |
Has any consideration been given to increasing the size of the pixel (if that's the right word) for distant aircraft? I know a lot of guys (including me) fly online in 1024x768 res so that we an spot distant aircraft (bogeys) and position to advantage - even if we're not sure if they are friend or foe.
The sad thing is that once your used to getting the best from graphics in 1680x1050 res or higher, 1024x768 is just awful! |
Just wondering how much work is involved in adding widescreen support and higher resolutions? I tried tinkering with the config files and it kinda works, but all the visual clues in open pit (plane pointers/arrows/labels etc) are off. Maybe there are other issues but I haven't noticed.
My point is that most (if not all) modern Dispays are widescreen so it would make sense to update the game to support these resolutions - at least the 16:9 ratio. For instance 1920x1080 since it's probably the most common one. |
-C-47 default skins pre-1944 still show with the invasion stripes.
-SBD-3 default skin pre-1943 show as stars and bars instead of the older star roundels (no bars) Strangely, on the early Guadalcanal map, I have seen it sometime revert to an older roundel skin in the 'type' tab (only). -F4F-4 pre-1943 default skin defaults to the older 'Wake' Island scheme (front nose cowl is partly white) but again, I have seen a real nice older roundel default skin (no white cowl, different tone blue) in the 'type' tab (only) which when I tab on the specific planes, makes both go to the older 'Wake' Island scheme. -Japanese dual and triple 25mm AA guns seems too lethal. |
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ksntjC47858&feature=plcp
You can see new craters model at 7:25 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9ghH...re=context-chv At 4:48 new smoke effect for crashed planes |
Quote:
http://italie1935-45.forumactif.org/...iat-cr42-falco http://i66.servimg.com/u/f66/14/36/08/34/fiat-c39.jpg http://i66.servimg.com/u/f66/14/36/08/34/fiat_c19.jpg Fiat CR42 AS Some curiosities: http://i66.servimg.com/u/f66/14/36/08/34/proto_10.jpg http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/4716/cr42dbf1zv6.jpg Fiat CR42 DB http://i66.servimg.com/u/f66/14/36/08/34/fiat-c44.jpg ICR 42 Some impotant nations are forgotton, the most important is China and maybe some others could be add: Belgium Bulgaria Czechoslovakia Denmark Greece Sorry for this others questions but, is any chance this be include in game: Letov S-328 cockpit (pilot all most done by stoupa, need gunner and bombardier positions) and Avia BK-534 (by Stoupa to, and the plane is done and imported in game was a mod)? Tank´s for your reply. |
Quote:
------------------------- Could we get all the questions answered in a very brief manner? I.e. Can't/won't do it;Maybe in 4.13or later;Maybe in 4.12 or later;Very likely in 4.12;Yes, in 4.12;Request not understood, please clarify. |
Hi,
In relation to this request: http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpos...1&postcount=13 Would it alternatively be possible, that ships can no longer collide with already sunken ships? I know its not very realistic, but would greatly help when creating scripted evasive maneuvering for Task Forces and ship convoys! Thanks! |
Quote:
Do you mean ships that are in the process of sinking but still not fully underwater? If so, I would not want that kind of 'feature'. I don't want to see one ship sailing 'through' another ship....sinking or not. Better to ask for possible evasive maneuvers by the AI, IMO. Aviar |
Quote:
As I said, as an alternative, if the requested ship AI should not be added! Ships can already sail through landscapes and vehicles can drive through each other, which helps a lot in certain situations during campaigns, like narrow waterways or bridges! |
Hello!
4.10.1 was a big step for quality of offline flying ( new AI ). 4.11.1 is a big step for more real on-line playing ( engine managment ). What is now needed ??? I m flying il2 few years, stock, mod versions, dgf, coop, virt fronts, campaigns, duels, etc. everything... 4.10 brings different damage model ( from +/-G) but didnt changed behave of a pilot. Its now most biggest bug!!! Some planes like Tempest, FW, P51 etc. can be easily destroyed by too much G without ANY warning from grey out or black out effecting on a pilot. What I want to say is that in real pilot feels on himself when he pull too much, when he needs to stop use more G and in game is like. +1,+2,+3,+4,+5 ---> nothing happen etc,etc+ crash!!! Plane damaged or even without wing ;/. Its stupid, unrealistic. Pilot should feel G on himself from about 5-6 G to know he pull too much. 6-7 little grey out on corners and 8-10 G few seconds ok and more and more grey screen. Now you can pull hard on FW and destroy wings WITHOUT any grey out even ;/, leave your wings on Tempest with only few neg G ;(. So: - more realistic G which have more effect on pilot, now il2 pilot is like a terminator with G-suit ( if its possible to add, slower 6DOF working with lots of G, its f*king hard to track your target when you are in hard turn with 4-6 G!!!, With 5-7 g its hard to move your arms, so imagine how hard to use your neck!!!) (* adding fatigue factor to il2 pilot behave ---> more hard G, less strengh for flying, for example 5 min of 5-6, 7-8 G fight ==> total exhausted organism, not enough strengh to pull more like with soft bleeding or pilot hit ) I know that game have its limits. I dont expect miracles. I just wanted to show where you can look in future. Its my feelings based on real flying vs il2. I dont want to talk about my life on forum, but if crew daidalos is interested about opinion I can share my experience on pm. |
Good post Blakhart. In addition to visual cues, what do you think about some additional aural cues?
We already have some structural stress cues in the form of airframe 'creaking', but maybe this can be further tweaked. I mean, if we are going to 'bend the airframe' as the 4.10 Guide states, then maybe a little more warning could be helpful. In the 4.10 Guide it states that if '...you have exceeded the “in service” limit (G's), you will hear a damage sound cue and suffer a slight aerodynamic penalty.' Well, by that time it's too late. wouldn't some additional 'stress' warnings BEFORE actual damage be helpful here? Also, how about some cues from our virtual pilot? I've played some flight sims where the pilot will give the player cues in the form of heavy breathing/groaning as the G's become more intense. This 'breathing/groaning' can possibly warn us BEFORE we damage the airframe. Aviar |
The pilot starts to suffer from g's at about 4g. Typical fighter air frames can take 8g without problem. However, humans can take very high g loads without problem if they occur over a short time, while the airframe can't. It's the same in game. If you're in a sustained manoeuvre you won't damage the airframe, the pilot will grey out, black out or red out long before damage occurs, however, if you throw the plane into a sudden manoeuvre, it may break before you get the visual clues. This is right because the body won't show a reaction within a split second.
|
JtD, to be honest you start to have problems with moving your head with 3G.
With 4 G its hard. With 5 G it becomes frustrating and after 5 min hard turn to turn manouvering you become tired. Add battle stres and G effecting on a body, heart beat, etc. With training you can improve your toughness but you still have some limits. "However, humans can take very high g loads without problem if they occur over a short time, while the airframe can't. It's the same in game. If you're in a sustained manoeuvre you won't damage the airframe, the pilot will grey out, black out or red out long before damage occurs, however, if you throw the plane into a sudden manoeuvre, it may break before you get the visual clues. This is right because the body won't show a reaction within a split second." Not true... And its not something I read in books. You feel high G instantly. Even it is few seconds manouver your body, organism gonna feel growing up G at about 5-6. It wont made you grey out, etc. but you gonna feel it. And definitly you gonna feel when G starts to be about 7-8 G. Aviar would be best to talk about it on TS. What you think about it ? I think some red aura without decrasing player screen when G have about 5-7 would be good. |
You're talking about a few seconds, I'm talking about a split second. Try to maintain 5-6g for a few seconds in game, your pilot will grey out, and the plane will stay intact.
Outside of some simple force feedback there's no "feel" output on most computers. That's a shortcoming software alone can't fix. |
Concur with both BlakHart and Aviar.
Unless that little 'G' letter is neon and or larger, I ain't gonna know until it's too late and the structural damage occurs. Just yesterday, I was battling vs a FW-190 (breather) in a tight maneuver, my vision was focused on the FW and had not noticed that flashing 'G' until I heard the groan-snap and it had happened. Placing that little 'G' anywhere else may loose the immersion of the moment. Earlier frame sounds and/or pilot breathing is probably best solution. |
Quote:
Your last sentence sounds like a person who has given up. Personally, I don't feel like that. I think more can be done to help give the player just a little more of that 'feeling' of being a real-life pilot. I know I'm just a person sitting in front of a monitor, playing a game. However, sometimes....just sometimes, there are those magical moments when reality slips away and you are really there.....cruising over the Solomons, 1944....landing on a forgotten runway in the Crimea on a cold winter morning. What we are talking about here are possibilities that can create more of those magical moments. What we need are people who still believe in those possibilities. Aviar |
Quote:
That said, agree with your statements. We recognize those limitations, and we do our best within the bounds we have to make the best possible approximation of reality. I think the other major aspect of immersion is what you said, which I would phrase as a "willingness" to allow oneself to be in a certain mindset. I've gotten mildly airsick a few rare times when going nuts during dogfights. I've experienced vertigo, and find myself tilting my head in turns. I've jumped half out of my chair a few times when I suddenly get peppered with bullets and I wasn't expecting anything at all. All in all it's a two way street. |
I certainly haven't "given up". I haven't overstressed an airframe for ages. And I don't want a heavy breather on my PC speakers. And you'd still rip off your wings before a breathing sample is played.
You're trying to solve a problem I don't perceive as a problem any more, and I don't like the suggested solutions. So what you are suggesting would make it in fact worse for me. I've been thinking about this a lot with 4.10, I and the most desirable solution was to adjust my flying style. |
I often thought about a additional device to handle G-forces for the player.
Something like an addductor training device which is posed between your knees and has to be pressed to keep grey or black out away. It stresses the whole lower belly and inner shank muscles and it would induce battle fatigue on a very natural way and gives advantage to the user with much experiance because of the training effect that comes along with excessive use ;-) The design should enable pedal use and can be adjusted to personal preferences. For those online players who dont use that device blackout occurs at an average level and those who use it can experience faster blackout or if trained way delayed effects. |
I certainly haven't "given up". I haven't overstressed an airframe for ages. And I don't want a heavy breather on my PC speakers. And you'd still rip off your wings before a breathing sample is played.
You're trying to solve a problem I don't perceive as a problem any more, and I don't like the suggested solutions. So what you are suggesting would make it in fact worse for me. I've been thinking about this a lot with 4.10, I and the most desirable solution was to adjust my flying style. Egoistic, ignorant opinion, BTW do you fly on-line sometimes ??? Im practic not theoric and in practic there is a big need of such solution. And what is more important, did you ever felt G in manouver combat m8 ?? Its not an offence. In real flight you would feel G before damaging airframe, this is fact thats all. There is no discusion about it. And Its not based on "my friends" opinion. Its based on my real experience as a real pilot and to be honest I drived in my life sth more than small Cessna. Nowadays in il2 airframe is damaged to quick before ANY warning on some planes and its un-real bug which should be fixed if possible. 1 option add warning - breathing, red aura, etc 2 option fix airframe damage in Tempest, Spiti, FW, P51 because now its more funny than even arcade ;] Cheers. |
The Human Body consists widely of fluids in Narrow containments.
It takes a small ammount of time to allow the blood widen the vessels and follow inertia. Therefore it is possible for martial arts fighters to break concrete slabs wthout beeing hurt and this is also the reason why red bull air racers are restricted to 10 or 11g reached at the top of the turn loop because the aircraft could break, while the pilots withstand this forces induced for a very short time with ease. Exeeding 11g leads to disqualification. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Now, according to the literature, the human body does not "react" to the impact of G's in the first split second if its application. What I mean by this is are symptoms: G-lock, blackout, etc. The pilot can still feel the weight change, but whether or not he saves the wings of his plane depends on how quickly he can react and reverse the maneuver. Again, this all happens in a split second. I think anyone could make the mistake of continuing the pull. So, in the case of the Mustang which as a very light elevator that does not stiffen at high speeds, the pilot can easily reach max-G of the airframe and shed the wings before his own body has reacted - loss of blood to the head, blackout, etc. The pilot will feel the weight, but it's hard to quantify G's just by feel (that's why they put gauges in the planes) so he may not change his flight path accordingly or quickly enough. Therefore, I feel, that in the visual sense, Il-2 models this very well, and nothing needs to change in that regard. The option could be enabled for an extra G-meter parameter: green "G" is 1-4 G; yellow is 4-6; red means airframe is in danger of permanent stress damage; flashing red red indicates risk of catastrophic failure. But again, it needs to be an option. I certainly don't want any text indications on the screen that I don't need. But also, it's a case of flying dicta: If shedding wings is still a problem, then don't make those hard pulls! Use gentle, smooth control inputs, and try to outsmart rather than try to out-turn your enemy. In the case of the Mustang, pilots had to push forward on the stick to reduce the rate of turn to avoid G-stress...in Il-2 it is the same. Oh, and Blackhart, I'm curious - just what exactly did you fly? Were you PIC? |
Ambient sounds like Rain and Thunders cannot be heard from inside the aircraft (at least with Bf109F)
The "Return to Base imediately" message should be delayed, to first check if the aircraft wasn't completely destroyed, as it's pointless to ask a dead guy to return to base. |
Apologies if this has already been requested but would it be possible to prevent AI Spifires deploying flaps on take off?
|
I wish the AI's behavior when landing were changed to something more realistic and aggressive. Once they enter their landing pattern, they don't react to being attacked. Shouldn't they break off and engage?
|
In coops, the objectives are shown always independently from the side you choose. That means that I'm seeing a "Destroy ground" set for the Red side even if I have selected a Blue plane (for this side it should read "Defend ground").
In some online servers I've seen this kind of target reporting, but I think it was some modded one. If the feature could be implemented, it would be great for FoF flyers. |
Quote:
Totally agree. Modders have already fixed this long ago. If Red sees 'Destroy Ground' on their map, Blue SHOULD see 'Defend Ground'. Aviar |
Hey TD .. How about adding that waving flag mod to the stock sim.. It is a great touch and uses very little resources.. Are you familiar with it?
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Hello Team Daedalos,
Is it doable to make the dedicated server run COOPs? Or make a seperate dedicated COOP server? It would be a great expansion for the COOP based campaigning community. |
Quote:
We are not deaf! |
As I dug up some old missions with carriers I saw, that the new nights are really dark and it was impossible to land on deck or even close up to hit the ramp... no carrier to be seen.
How were night operations be done back then (I saw a docu about the raid on Truk and night ops were mentioned) Colud this feature be implemented? |
As far as I'm aware, lights were used. I've seen map-makers add lights to stationary carriers, but it's impossible for moving ones. I've noticed a diamond-shaped structure on Japanese carriers under the main deck with 5 light sources. Maybe this was used to transmit info to the pilot (ie, too fast, too low, etc.)
Also, in the right conditions the wake might churn up some phosphorescent algae, leaving a long trail, lighting the way to the stern of the ship :) |
Quick request:
Can we lose the regiment badges that appear on RAF aircraft? Few - if any - squadrons during wartime actually carried them, the only exceptions I know being the Polish squadrons, some Candian units (limited to a maple leaf, or, in the rare case of 403 squadron, a wolfs head on the left cowling below the ejector exhausts) and one or two of the heavy bomber units, and with the exception of the poles most of these appeared only alte in the war. Very few examples carried full versions of the squadron crest. They're big, do little for the looks of the aircraft and in some cases aren't even in colour! Similarly for some of the USAAF fighter units. Cheers |
More Realistic Damaged Flight Characteristics
Hi TD. Thank you for your many efforts and I am amazed, happy and thrilled to have the game just as it is today. You owe us nothing at all.
But if you computer geniuses are looking for some extra challenge then here is an idea. I know I am not the first one to request this but how about more realistic behavior from damaged aircraft? I know that some damage effects have already been modeled, of course. examples: If the motor is damaged - the planes go slower. AI especially. Non-inline twins yaw and drop a wing upon loss of engine. You must respond to this emergency immediately or make a hole in the ground. Landings are not a piece of cake. Here's another idea - model loss of motor on takeoff perhaps due to previous damage or poor maintenence; happened historically and often with horrendous consequences. Model failure of nosewheel on some tricycle gear planes like p-38 and b-24. Flap failures, perhaps even just on one side? Howling wind sound when canopy shatters from gunfire? You are forced to slow down? Shot up radio - communication failures? Nav system failure? Flat tires on landing? Propeller mechanism failure - not a rare occurance. Runaway prop catastrophe? Anyway, thanks for all your fabulous efforts that have brought us all so much fun!! |
The last one is possible for some planes (Hurricane comes to mind, but I'm not sure if other types have this DM). If the prop governor is shot up, it becomes very easy to over-rev the engine and you have to carefully manage the prop-pitch.
A random failure should also be possible, like you mention. |
Could you change the 'prop pitch' controls to 'manage rpm' controls as it is what they already do and it would be less confusing?
|
I'm impressed
That's beautiful what you guys at TD are doing with this old sim!
PS Compressibility? Would it possible to model compressibility in IL2? Just asking, not even daring to request it... |
Any of the following Japanese bombers:
Ki-30 Ann Ki-48 Lily G3M Nell P1Y1 Frances Ki-49 Helen Ki-51 Sonia Ki-67 Peggy Especially the Nell, such a graceful-looking aircraft. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I'd like to see in the next release windscreen gasoline washers in FW-190s and working emergency landing mechanism of Stuka.
|
Please TD. Since we have the Slot map, a G model P-38 wolud be fine. is it possible to extend the Slot until Rabaul and Sta Cruz isles?
What problems arise with large maps? I see my computer CDT when flying a self built Operation Vengeance after about 2 hrs of flight, just when Yamamoto is expected to appear.... |
1) Please fix "brainless" orders of DGen. It hurts especially for Stuka campaign, when staffel flying Kanonenvogels gets suicide order to attack airfield or sent for overkill shooting of trucks instead of attacking tanks.
Flying Stuka campaign Kursk part on Kanonenvogel, I got more orders of destroying cars than tanks. 2) Ability to rescue (pick up) friendly crews behind enemy lines by picking them up in limited time would have been very bright feature. 3) Also, behavior of AI should be changed for fighter-bombers in situation of raid on heavily-defended airfield. I presume the most reasonable behavior should be "bomb and run" instead of circling around being shoot by artillery of all calibers. 4) All Bf-109 (E-K) leave shadows at the ground in a single shape of Bf-109E. Will the Team Daidalos ever fix this annoying bug? |
Oh, please: For AI Bombers and Dive Bombers:
If intentional Target allready destroyed, put the next available enemy Object. Half of my Bombers allways come home with their Loadout. Also when you create just one set of waypoints for the first flight and attach the other flights to this first set of Waypoints. |
It would be nice if possible that when you set a specific skin in the FMB that skin is applied by default even for the player's plane (today you have to select it manually, and if you forget to do it you can end up flying a desert camo in a winter map for example).
Of course you can change it afterwards, but for squadron coops it would be awesome that not everyone has to remember to change the skin. I know there are a lot more important things to fix first, this is just an idea. |
My request is simple.
Any car and tanks not have speed configuration. Ships have the speed changer, my request is only to apply this to cars and tanks. Its possible? Thanks and sorry my bad english. |
thats a good idea, make it much easier to make columns of vehicles in mission building if you could set the speed.
|
When starting a mission with complex engine management, magnetos should be off. Just for Immersion.
|
Quote:
|
Wwi
How about some world war I aircraft and maps added to Il-2 Sturmovik 1946 so we wouldn't need mods to make WWI missions
|
Hi all, I have a few suggestions to add to this wish list:
1- A Mediterranean/North African map, so the Spanish civil war and North African campaigns could be made realistically. 2-Inclusion of Italy and if possible Spain. 1946 includes many nations involved in that war except for Italy!! Thus a major player is missing here. P.S Italy, like Spain (the blue division), participated on the Eastern front as well. 3- Would be nice to have the (player) flyable B5N Kate, a major player in pacific theater, which has been, strangely, missing/neglected from the Pacific fighters till now while planes of lesser impact/importance during the WWII like the B-534 or CW-21 (which I'm grateful to have them) were added in the recent patches i.e made from scratch. And yet adding a cockpit to the already existing AI Kate hasn't been considered. 4- Originally the Bf-109Z canopy was that of the F series but, what we currently have there is the K series canopy. P.S In the original IL-2 release the Bf-109Z cockpit looked like the K series from outside and the F series from the inside but now it's K series look from inside and outside. Cheers.:grin: |
More stock maps. Nothing specific, even larger versions of the generic summer and winter online maps would be good.
Cheers |
TY for answering
Quote:
|
Another question: about wing flash
Would it be possible to model a lighting effect such as wingflash (light reflected on he surface of the wings creating a flash of light? )
|
I've got another one!
Non Stationary aircraft with waypoints like vehicles or something like an invisible vehicle with spawns on any stationary aircraft. Just for mission building immersion when starting a mission.... |
the idea with the magnetos to be set off with complex Motormanagement would be great!
Its more than klick one button to start the engine :cool: |
Quote:
A visible runway on that map would also be nice. Right now landing is guesstimating using the cloth markers at both ends, but it's very east to go off the runway on roll out. Taxiing is pretty much impossible if you're not following AI. |
Quote:
MTO is insufficient? |
IL2 Server Commander.
Please, we need a soft (GUI) allowing:
- An easy management of the IL2 1946 Dedicated Server. - Some script (IL2 DCG) to run. - The display of statistics online. IL2 SC 2.02 is able to all above but since the MDS features introduced with 4.10 version (AI planes and moving columns) it is impossible to have stats online. IL2 FBDj manage MDS features but dont allows IL2 DCG to run. Thx for your great work. |
Quote:
|
Something like this and we can stop almost every request about the desert:
http://www.sas1946.com/main/index.ph...c,16159.0.html Massive map, but very light to run, and a lot of fun and possibilities in it. |
TD check your PM folder
A few months ago I posted an idea for alternate kill markings. Someone from TD sent me a PM suggesting that if I were to make the correct markings to TD standards, they might be able to incorporate them into the game.
The work is done, but I'd prefer not to show it publicly until TD says its O.K. to do so. Could the TD team please check their PM folder and give me an email address to send my files to? The actual "mod" I've created changes the default Soviet red star or Luftwaffe "hash mark" kill markings with kill markings used by other nationalities. Finland: Simple white hash marks. Note: The Finns also used aircraft silhouettes, but the markings have be generic. U.S./Commonwealth: Iron crosses for German planes, Italian fasces roundels for Italian planes, Japanese flag or naval ensign for Japanese planes. Note: Again, there were several variants, but the markings I chose are politically inoffensive and have different shapes for each type of kill. Japan: Yellow chrysanthemums. Note: The mum was chosen from a number of different kill markings because of it distinctive shape and color, because it was the most common kill marking variant, and because it was used throughout the Pacific war. Other Nationalities: Other air forces don't appear to have recorded kill markings on their planes. For these nations, I've provided Roman numerals. For nations where that's not appropriate, the white Finnish hash marks can substitute. If people have good documentary evidence of kill markings used by nationalities in the game which aren't listed above (e.g., France, Italy), please tell me! |
Would be nice, to have some other Tracers like at 2:23 or 3:48 (nice 50cal with smoke) in this video.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IYgIE9TqOOo Sorry, but the Russian 7,62mm have green tracers.. Would it be difficult, to change tracers? |
Quote:
Yeah Russians did and I think still do use green tracer rounds. And yes they look somewhat odd by modern sensibilities (EDIT: And by that I mean... StarWars of course). |
Light bombers like SBDs, D3A1's and Ju 87s suffer irrationally high losses from AA because after delivering bombs they attempt to strafe their targets, which for example in case of tanks in senseless. Hopefully this suicidal habit of theirs can be changed.
|
Perhaps a "one pass, haul a**" command for mission builders?
|
Me210 and ME210 zestroyer flyables with cockpits. Gunners would be lovely but i could live without them.
Bf110-C4 and Bf110-C4b (just reuse the bf110G2 pit as its virtually the same thing for all versions. Gunners shouldn't be to hard to make, just use the G2's gun with a mg17 and open canopy. Any and i mean any late war german bomber so we can actually give a fighter a hard time online. Gunner for il2 field mod. Any american heavy bomber (although i hear the b24 will most likely make it in) British bombers such as wellington or lancaster (the wellington would add a huge deal to african theatre and the lancaster for nigght missions) Really any new heavy fighters ground attaxck planes or bombers. Not that i dont appreciate or love all the fighters in the game but honestly i think there are so many to choose from that more are really not that important, and there just seems to be a lack of bombers especially heavy bombers (ofc i love the pe-8, but its not exactly much of a fight for any half decent fighter). Bombing has always been more fun for me, and although i main the bf110 as it is multirole, has plenty of loadout options, bombs, guns, rockets, and isnt completely screwed against fighters, but still id love the me210 as it was more of a match for later planes and the bf110 early versions for early war campaigns i am working on making. but if anything id have to say the me210 as its a upgraded bf110, my favorite plane to fly, as its so adaptable to every role from heavy fighter, to fast bomber. as a second up id have to say early bf110s and some more heavy bombers.... |
- French squads for BoF;
- I think we already have the most important planes and plane types of all major countries, with the exception of -a British medium or heavy bomber (preferably the Wellington); -the Sea Gladiator and/or Sea Hurricane (for early-war carrier ops); -the Do-17 (for early-war German campaigns); - more maps; Thanks TD for your excellent work! |
Guys, TD can't integrate the Wellington, Do-17 or another British Bomber, because Ubisoft forbids it (They reserve it for future Updates in Il2 CoD).
B5N B-24 B-25 (another version) (B-26) Ju-88 C some other planes, maybe another Bf-110 version, or some other types of existing planes. ;) |
G'day All
First up I'd like to express my ongoing gratitude to all those DT members who continue to poor so much love into Il2 46. I have an old request (with a twist) of mine that I’d like to dredge up here. In regards to strafing damage, for sake of immersion it would be nice to see that static objects (especially aircraft) emit either smoke of flame after they have been say 40-50% damaged, as this would be very handy if you’re lucky enough to make a second pass on the same object, further and this is only a thought, in light of the upcoming shared kills, it would also be kind of nice to see a damaged/probable record for static , but especially AI targets. And a new idea / request, in QMB could we have the choice of the starting point, in regards to airborne or not, a bit like the scramble option but allowing for the rest of the QMB scenario like target airfield to be incorporated into the mission, as I have lots of landings to my credit but very few take offs. Finally on returning to base it would be nice if you happen prang for a meat wagon to race out to you, If you don't prang and can taxi to the hardstand, then after engine shut-down if a fuel bowser or truck or jeep could come along that kind of immersion element would just finalise the mission for me. Spud |
Quote:
+1 for 210/410, even without playable gunner position. Late war german bombers would be nice too. I can understand that flyable Do-217 or Ju-188 isnt possible due to lack of time, but at least we should get a He-111 H16 and a Ju-88 A14. |
actually the do217 was done by modders and im not sure what ever happened to the ju188 as i know they made a 3d model, but it was never actually released.
the Do127 pit/gunners are not as great as they could be but i personally believe that even if the cockpits are not up to tip top standards they should be added in as just temporary cockpits. I dont know how you guys here feel but id much rather have a crappy cockpit then not be able to fly the plane. I know TD has quality standards but quite a few of the pits down at SAS are actually quite good and i wouldn't mind using them in the default version. Its just kindof bad that we cant really fly so many planes without mods and the server i frequent and have started making maps for just doesn't allow mods. I know many people are against releasing temporary or not entirely finished cockpits but i really would love to just get something in the game to be able to just plain and simply fly the plane. I realy love the new cockpits with alll the super detailed parts but id still much rather live with temporary pits or not 100% perfection then no plane at all.... thats my 2 cents.. most of the planes people reallyy want are already done on many mod sites, so i fail to see a reason TD cant use them ofc after geting permission, all they'd have to do is code some class files and nothing else. And i am all for late war ju88 and he111, id like to get the H20 as it was fully armed with 13mm mgs and could actually do some dmg before being torn apart by spits. i dont know tyo much about late war ju88s but im guessing they to were upgunned to the 13mms, as the mg81 is just measly. The mg81 should at the least get a bit more range/dmg. Its impossible to take down any competent fighter let alone a noob, and you really need to be lucky to drop anything...and im pertty sure it wasn't that bad armorpiercing wise. Ohh and would it be to much to ask for two top guners on the ju88? It would be great to get both especially on the A17 as it doesnt have a bottom gunner so im guessing the crew would be reused for other duties as theres also no bombsighter. We need 2 top gunners on all ju88s as they dont stand a chance as is. Even if some crewes removed one of the gunners its still historcially accurate that many crews used both top gunners as well as the others. i fail to see how it makes sense to remove a gunner, the 88 needs some more firepower... The ju8 was designed to house a 5 man crew and now its more like a 4 man crew which isnt really that good. Not that many planes removed crew members. |
Did I mention my hopes for the p-47 cockpit to get it's make-over...please? !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! ;) :rolleyes:
|
1. Ground aircraft observers and GCI mechanics in scenarios. E.g., the player could receive a radio message when an enemy aircraft formation is spotted by an observer/radar, which is associated with his mission, and the message would include info about the location, estimated altitude, bearing and speed of the formation. And then the player could initiate such a message in response to Tab-8-whatever to get updated info. It's OK if the messages won't have any VA.
2. Improved bullet/round ballistics, including the effects of non-zero angle of attack of a bullet/round. 3. Engine "overcooling". 4. Improve old aircraft models to the level of more recent ones, as much as you can... 5. Ricochet from the ground/water. 6. Since some static planes can now suddenly become flying ones, I think it is reasonable to consider improving the DM of static aircrafts, at least those of them, which can be used for spawning. 7. Improve AI so it might disengage/retreat from a dogfight or not engage in the first place if the fight is not worth it, even if they didn't get damaged and don't have to RTB. E.g., if the enemy has clear advantage and it's not an AI's objective to hold them. Or, when their mission is to escort and they see their escorted planes being attacked, get out of a fight they are in, if they are in one and if they can get out of it, to protect the escorted planes. 8. Key binding profiles. 9. Filter for AI chatter, so you could select what kinds of messages would be printed on the screen or played as a sound. |
Quote:
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT. The time now is 04:32 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.