Can I start off by saying that I'm very impressed with the MDS features included in 4.10 and beyond. Looking on to 4.11, could I make a request of TD:

When a static carrier is sunk, the homebase attached to it is not disabled but rather facilitates airspawning. This is very unrealistic as it suddenly gives the advantage to those who can airstart. Would it be possible to eliminate the spawn options from the carrier HB as soon as that carrier is sunk?

Please let me know if this is already doable and I'm missing something. Thanks in advance,

The most straightforward would be the Blenheim but due to COD that would be a no go. (the mod pit seems rather good but no evidence of gunner or bombardier position) Unless Im wrong there and the Blenheim could be added as a flyable, Also another good addition would be a clear nose mossies with a Norden you have good pathfinder missions. But would love a lanc, Wellington ect

AFA British planes are concerned, I would love even oddities like the Bombay or the Seafox... Being realistic*, I think you're right: a flyable version of the Blenheim (and the Swordfish) and glass-nosed versions of the Mosquito would already be great.

*The unsoluble plane controversy

Being new to this forum, I may be wrong, but I understand so far that:

1) Some planes cannot be expected for legal reasons. Simple.

2) There are as many wishlists as players. I guess they may be aggregated to a certain extend: Polish players would like to see more Polish planes, Italian players more Italian planes, Japanese players more Japanese planes etc. Marketing suggests that the majority has the priority: if the Spit Mk.XIV is the most popular request, it’s legitimate to consider it first.

3) Another marketing aspect, IL-2 is almost dead as a commercial product, as opposed to CoD. I think we already can consider ourself lucky to have a wonderful DT to keep upgrading the official game. But it cannot be infinite. I perfectly understand that priority should be given to new versions of planes already being in the game.

4) New early-war British planes are unlikely to appear (I don’t write “no chance” because the Swordfish unexpectedly shew up) because of the agreement between DT and 1C not to develop elements relating to the BoB. This is worth commenting a bit:

Of course I’d like to see better DM, objects definition etc. in IL-2. We know the price: more CPU ressources. I don’t expect it, and I don’t ask it: IL-2 is a generation, CoD is the next one. The gap is obvious and CoD sells itself just on this - to me at least. But, for this very reason, I doubt BoB elements in IL-2 are that a threat to CoD sales. Of course, CoD focuses on this ground. Given the broadness of 1946, there are enough other fields to explore first and/or deeper. But deciding that a Channel map or a He-115 in IL-2 is a threat to CoD is IMO excessive, as the conclusion of a wrong market analysis.

I also read the Russian front and Pacific theater are exclusive axes of further developments. This would be a step back. The game started on Russian and German planes (Russian front), evolved with American and Japanese ones (Pacific), OK. But were added British, Polish, Italian planes, opening opportunies (Mediterranean theater, campaign of Poland, Western front…) - and gaining new players, like me. Strengthening all aspects of the game and extending them (night fighting, maritime operations - more seaplanes?) is legitimate in respect of the variety of players, IMHO.

---

Don’t take this too seriously. I’m just paving the way to my own wishlist… ;)

Always someone wants more aircraft.

I remember it from MSFT CFS1,CFS2,CFS3,IL2 1.0 up todate.

It doesn't matter we have a huge number of aircraft in IL2 and it's never going to finish.

I spent over 3 years with IL2 building missions and flying the year 1941-1942 on the Kuban map right after Barbarossa. I had all I could do with the aircraft that were available and the one map. The terrain was mixed and the aircraft were fast enough and hard hitting enough to enjoy.

The IL2 is a huge application with enormous object library.

Naw... I really should keep shut, because I know it's just the nature of the beast. Everyone wants some new aircraft, object or map thing we don't have. LOL

I want to see viable improvements within the core programming, the fmb and the things that really make the sim experience more exciting like the recent release of navigation.

Agree. 6DOF, better AI etc. before any new crate.

I have been doing a little more research and apparently the Fiat CR.42 could benefit from this as well.

Cheers,

Fafnir_6

The Ki-27 also had a couple wheel-spat configurations.

Of course we do. And thinking deeply about it why not? Variety is the spice of life and having so many types of aircraft available to us means that the variety is extremely good here. We can realistically and accurately simulate so many areas of the war now. There are still some holes and missing types that I'd love to see filled in... realistically not every gap will be filled in (that'd be just too much) but I do love getting new aircraft to fly. It makes my experiences enjoyable and opens up new options for mission building for both online and offline.

Adding more of the same doesnt equal better gameplay in my oppinion.
Its fun for missionbuilders yes, but why do we need more airplanes if most arent even used by the majority.

I gave up flying iL2 because ive mastered my favored aircaft, and i dont want to invest time in mastering another 1000 other aircraft.

Unless there will be really new stuff like multicrew, and new maps, i think most people will move on to something else.

In your opinion of course.

Personally new aircraft have been one of the hooks that have kept myself and most of the guys I fly with in the sim for 9 or 10 years.

New aircraft have the opportunity of opening new areas of operation, or making some of the ones we have actually useable.

For instance just a couple more Imperial Japanese aircraft could finally make the CBI/Asia/Pacific theater a really doable thing. The new soon to be flyable Hawk 75 opens the door to operations in the Netherlands East Indies, even without a proper map of Java or Borneo. Not to mention more varied choices for the Winter and Continuation Wars, and the Battle of France.

Even with all the planes we have there are several gaping holes in the plane set that if filled could insure a few more years of viability for the orignal IL2 franchise.

Not all of us care about late war operations over Europe you know.