Requests for the next game (assuming its the pacific)

[winny]

The ability to name lobbies.. "Axis vs Allies Historic" would save a lot of confusion.

It seems it's not just me who's slightly unhappy about it being Pacific based..

I dunno why but all those Radial engines make all the PTO planes look like they are overweight. It's all a bit tubby. I exclude the corsair from this coz I like it (it's skinny tho)

I know it's probably welcomed by our American contingent but Spitfires, 109s, Hurris, P51s, 190s etc over Paris is far more interesting than rotund American planes and 'one round and you're dead' Japanese stuff over (yet more) water..

(Tounge firmly in cheek and with quite a bit of sarcasm. before you start)

[Shadowcorp]

perhaps my initial post came off a little harshly for this you all have my apologies.
But please il2 birds of prey was a great game with few a flaws; but missing a pacific campaign was not one of the flaws in my opinion.
In my professional opinion flaws were: Not including iconic aircraft such as the lancaster and mosquito, a poor representation of French, Italian and American aircraft, unkillable gun positions on all rear gunner and bomber aircraft, lack of clear definition in setting up game lobbies e.g. allies verses axis, single seat fighters only etc was a flaw. random deployment in team battles (makes absolutely no sense), no wave re-spawn in strike CTA and team battle.
These are the critical issues i would like to see fixed before adding a pacific campaign or preferably a north African campaign
I do know a lot of American and Japanese players would really like a pacific campaign. I would hope they focus on fixing flaws within the multiplayer modes, rather than simply adding a or devoting the game pacific campaign and marketing it as a new game. You can finish the single player within two days, it's the multi-player that keeps interest in the game.

[dkwookie]

I agree with the suggestions so far. Some other things i would stick in if we we posting wishes:

Co-Op Campaign for 4 players
Multi players in single aircraft
Transport planes for paratroop drop missions.
Bombs eye view cam option
Heavy anti air damage from strike targets
Private lobbies
Multi player levelling up with shot down totals on your plane
Editable plane skins
Ability to knock out individual engines on multi engine bombers
Destructible houses and buildings
Grand slam bomb unlock for the lanc

[Burtonboy05]

Originally Posted by Shadowcorp

perhaps my initial post came off a little harshly for this you all have my apologies.
But please il2 birds of prey was a great game with few a flaws; but missing a pacific campaign was not one of the flaws in my opinion.
In my professional opinion flaws were: Not including iconic aircraft such as the lancaster and mosquito, a poor representation of French, Italian and American aircraft, unkillable gun positions on all rear gunner and bomber aircraft, lack of clear definition in setting up game lobbies e.g. allies verses axis, single seat fighters only etc was a flaw. random deployment in team battles (makes absolutely no sense), no wave re-spawn in strike CTA and team battle.
These are the critical issues i would like to see fixed before adding a pacific campaign or preferably a north African campaign
I do know a lot of American and Japanese players would really like a pacific campaign. I would hope they focus on fixing flaws within the multiplayer modes, rather than simply adding a or devoting the game pacific campaign and marketing it as a new game. You can finish the single player within two days, it's the multi-player that keeps interest in the game.

I don't think it was harsh shadow - I think it was a valid point. I wan't to see a pacific section for sure but I don't want the game based on the pacific alone, that said I'll still buy it lol. There are so many other battles from across Europe and Nth Africa which should also be included just like the original it can cover a number of theatres of war.

One addition I'd like to see is more destruction of ground targets on trains, cars, trucks etc from cannon and mg fire off the plane, and I'd also like to see the AA from the ground be a little more dangerous like the PC version. I don't think I once took damage from ground fire on sim throughout the whole game.

As long as it's as good as the first I'll be happy.

[Gilly]

Flak was originally part of the PS3 version in strikes but for some reason vanished with the update. Was especially impressive above the Italian cruisers off the coast. Hope that should a sequel appear this is reinstated.

[guiltyspark]

I dont see where the pacific hate is coming from , the pacific campaign was a far more interesting air conflict.

You had alot more going on in the pacific then you did anywhere else in the war. First you had the life and death struggle of the carrier fleets , the sub hunters , the island based defence forces , the long range bombing missions on cities , and the epic island invasions with tons of air support (iwo jima for example).

North africa would be easily the most boring campaign i can think of , BOB was already done to death in the first game and done rather well.

The only thing really missing was D-day missions of a massive scale and missions during kursk.

[Burtonboy05]

Originally Posted by guiltyspark

I dont see where the pacific hate is coming from , the pacific campaign was a far more interesting air conflict.

You had alot more going on in the pacific then you did anywhere else in the war. First you had the life and death struggle of the carrier fleets , the sub hunters , the island based defence forces , the long range bombing missions on cities , and the epic island invasions with tons of air support (iwo jima for example).

North africa would be easily the most boring campaign i can think of , BOB was already done to death in the first game and done rather well.

The only thing really missing was D-day missions of a massive scale and missions during kursk.

No hate here for the pacific I want to see it for the P-38 alone, but I'd also like to see additional missions over Europe, Russia, Africa, and maybe even the flying tigers in China agains the japs would be great too.

The game has so much potential, I just hope it is going to actually touch down and if so then please make it soon.

[winny]

My Anti-Pacific comment was simply aesthetic. Just a comment on the fact that I prefer the ETO aircraft to the PTO aircraft, looks wise. I will miss my Spitfire.

I'm hoping that in MP we can have 4 people or more taking off from 1 carrier. Queing up to land back on a carrier would be good too.

I'm really looking forward to it anyway because it'll be new and hopefully busy online.

In reality my only request to the devs is, please, please, please, make sure the MP is intuitive, stable and user freindly, has better spawning and a better leaderboard/ranking system. Thanks.

[Gilly]

Originally Posted by guiltyspark

I dont see where the pacific hate is coming from , the pacific campaign was a far more interesting air conflict.

You had alot more going on in the pacific then you did anywhere else in the war. First you had the life and death struggle of the carrier fleets , the sub hunters , the island based defence forces , the long range bombing missions on cities , and the epic island invasions with tons of air support (iwo jima for example).

North africa would be easily the most boring campaign i can think of , BOB was already done to death in the first game and done rather well.

The only thing really missing was D-day missions of a massive scale and missions during kursk.

Agree with the other guys here. There's no hate for it just people pointing out that there are other areas of the game that could do with working on rather than dedicating it all to a pacific campaign.
As for your 'a lot more going on' comment. The war was already 2 years old when Pearl Harbour occured. There were already sub hunters out in the north Atlantic trying to prevent wolf packs from destroying britains supply lines. And as for saying North Africa would be boring I think is just ignorance. I'm sorry but to also say that 'the only things missing are d-day and kursk' again shows the same. There were many long range bomber attacks in Europe on a larger if not more 'exciting' than the ones in the pacific.
I'm all for a sequel which I think is the most important fact in all of this and truth be known we won't know what theatre it's likely to be until its actually announced. Anton only alluded to it including the pacific as well as the sequel itself so all of this is just speculative anyway.

[scottyvt4]

Originally Posted by Gilly

Agree with the other guys here. There's no hate for it just people pointing out that there are other areas of the game that could do with working on rather than dedicating it all to a pacific campaign.
As for your 'a lot more going on' comment. The war was already 2 years old when Pearl Harbour occured. There were already sub hunters out in the north Atlantic trying to prevent wolf packs from destroying britains supply lines. And as for saying North Africa would be boring I think is just ignorance. I'm sorry but to also say that 'the only things missing are d-day and kursk' again shows the same. There were many long range bomber attacks in Europe on a larger if not more 'exciting' than the ones in the pacific.
I'm all for a sequel which I think is the most important fact in all of this and truth be known we won't know what theatre it's likely to be until its actually announced. Anton only alluded to it including the pacific as well as the sequel itself so all of this is just speculative anyway.

gotta agree with Gilly, the energies would be better served in a sequel rather than a new theater where you could have the same flaws as the current format.