Beyond 414 wish list

[dimlee]

My opinion is always highly subjective due to my personal preferences.
I'm absolutely indifferent to another dozen of Spitfire modifications (blasphemy?) or another variant of Bf 109 armament (ja, ja...).
I love aircraft which are not so "mainstream", for example, Ki 45.
There was good thread here 3 years ago with excellent contribution of major.kudo who made nice "infographics" for the subject.
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=229846
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachm...8&d=1479029560

So, my wish beyond 4.14 would be to bring Ki 45 modifications and their armament and specifications closer to real history.

[shelby]

the ki-45's in the game are historical correct. I hope to see the campaign of the Hero of the Sov. Union, Avdeev Mikhail Vasilyevich in a future patch

[dimlee]

Originally Posted by shelby

the ki-45's in the game are historical correct. I hope to see the campaign of the Hero of the Sov. Union, Avdeev Mikhail Vasilyevich in a future patch

Ki-45 - I would not post my message if I have no doubts about "historical correctness" here. But let me look again into 4.14.1, who knows, may be I miss something.

M.Avdeev campaign could be interesting... And it could be created by any player who has time for that and access to Avdeev's biography (plenty info online). No need to wait for the patch.

[dimlee]

Ki-45 armament.
Yes, there are some discrepancies, yet not many and probably not critical for most players.

Details:
Ko and Otsu in the game have 2xHo-103 slanted as one of variants. This is not "canonical", but could be attributed to field modifications which are mentioned frequently.
Hei - no Ho-5 (in the nose) variant in the game. But if it was in little numbers, not so important.
Tei - same as above. Also no variant without rear gunner in the game... but this is not what I really want in my interception action, so forget I mentioned it !

Bombs in the game are limited to 250kg only. Only Ko and Otsu have them. But hard points were installed on Hei and Tei as well in real life, or am I wrong?

No drop tanks on any model in the game.

I wish we have IL2 Compare beyond 4.11 to see the differences between the Ki-45 versions in flight characteristics and to check them vs real life.
We have all 4 versions in IL2 Compare for BAT but this is "non stock" and I wonder why all of them are identical in graphs, was it really historical.

[taly001]

(Ki45)Ko and Otsu in the game have 2xHo-103 slanted as one of variants. This is not "canonical", but could be attributed to field modifications which are mentioned frequently.

Sometimes the AI planes can pick extra armament options that are not historical, for example Hungarian or Finnish Me109G in 1944 at least will appear sometimes with 210mm WfGr rockets if you don't edit them out. (such as the use of USSR RS-132 rockets is date limited in code). I expect the 2x20mm slant guns on the Ki-45 are also date limited to late 44-45?

I wish we have IL2 Compare beyond 4.11 to s

I'm not sure but il2 compare data must be generated from game code not in game testing, as it would take too long to get all the curves and so smoothly I don't think il2Compare is made by TD though.

[Thaeris]

So, I confess I'm still trapped on 4.12, for better or worse, but I ask this question:

Has the Me-262A-2 been given the ability to carry cluster bombs? This is a historical loadout, and if it's not been implemented in the versions since 4.12, it really ought to be on the roadmap. The Stormbird really is fun to fly, even if the AI is not very intelligent about how to operate it. Also, I'm not sure it couldn't be fitted out with all four cannon if necessary - having the options to carry four guns for defense missions would be nice if historically viable.

Also considering the '262A-2, a U1 would be really cool to have. It's been a while since I've done any research into this matter, but I believe it would have a similar weapons sight as used in the Ju-87 and 88, with a release cue being displayed for the pilot on the gunsight, sort of like a proto-CCIP display.

Hope you fine chaps consider this - regardless, you're still great.

[Pursuivant]

My pet peeve is damage models/damage textures, especially for the planes which have been around ever since the original IL-2. I find it strange that people have been squabbling over FM for the last 15+ years, but nobody seems to give a damn about realistic DM.

There might still a few outright DM errors after all these years, although I haven't had a chance to check out them out in the new 4.14.1 release.

Some of the D2 damage textures are still ugly and unrealistic (Bf-109 series in particular).

On some planes, breaking parts break in the wrong places, especially on the wings. This creates the annoying effect of planes being destroyed by wing damage which appears to be historically survivable.

In particular, tough, high-powered aircraft like the F4U, F6F, TBF, and P-47 should still be able to fly with the outer third of one wing blown away. For the UK, the Wellington airframe should be tough to break, and for the Germans, the Ju-88 series.

Effects of internal and flak explosions need to be modeled a bit better. Currently, they're modeled as blasts that emit a star-shaped pattern of fragments, rather than having concussive power which disperses uniformly as a function of distance with the power to bend or crush vital systems.

Effects of bullets, explosions, and shrapnel vs. humans don't appear to be well modeled. For example, a pilot can take a .50 cal bullet to the arm and keep flying, and a gunner can survive the explosion of a 20mm cannon shell within an enclosed tail turret and keep on shooting. (Realistically, the pilot's arm would be blown off. Assuming the shock didn't kill him, he'd rapidly bleed out and die due to massive blood loss. As for the gunner, even with some of the plexiglass in the turret removed, there'd still be enough energy and shrapnel from the explosion that he'd be stunned if he was very lucky, or shredded if he wasn't.)

Finally, while it would be a massive undertaking, IL-2's damage models ideally need to be improved to modern standards. That means taking into account things like different types of armor, aircraft construction, and self-sealing oil and fuel tanks, as well as allowing for damage to any aircraft system, with realistic malfunction options.