IL2 1946 Boring

[CCIP]

No, the one being made by the same devs as IL-2 is a different game, called Storm of War: Battle of Britain. I'm not sure if there's a site for it yet. The game will not be out until later this year at earliest.

[Konovalov]

Originally Posted by CCIP

No, the one being made by the same devs as IL-2 is a different game, called Storm of War: Battle of Britain. I'm not sure if there's a site for it yet. The game will not be out until later this year at earliest.

Yep. Itching for it. Should bring back memories of EAW years ago except 100 times better.

[AVGWarhawk]

I got 1946. I have to say the new fictional planes are a bore and I do not use them. I do however like the new flight/damage models. Of course there are those that still moan and are knit picking everything about IL2. Perfection ain't going to happen.

[CCIP]

I got it too, but I don't have the time to try it out. We'll see soon; and yea, I'm not really in it for the new planes either.

[desertisland]

Originally Posted by STEED

How can the made up stuff be realistic when it's not real. This series is long over due to move on and I wish it would, yes it is a great series but the 46 add on dose not appeal to me at all. As I said if anyone buys it and enjoys it, well good for you.

"Real" and "realistic" are two different things. 2001: A Space Odyssey and StarWars are both SF, but the story of the former is realistic though not real, the latter is neither realistic nor real. Space crafts don't behave the way in space as they do in StarWars.

I don't like the add-on but I don't think it is unrealistic, just not real. :hmm:

[Frenssen]

As a bomber pilot the Pe2 and new ground objects are worth the price of 1946 alone. With Lowengrins DCG I`m playing a really interesting Pe2 campaign right now. With Lowengrins DCG generator you will get much more enjoyment from the game.

[HunterICX]

I must say the Idea behind the CFS3 campaign , that you get a map and certain targets to pick from on that date is nice.

but I would like to see in IL2 is that you have a similar map and when you press a certain spot as for example a Stuka pilot that it says

Mission: Support
Target : Bridge (incl name of the city, area or village )
Story: the German troops are pinned down, the russians are advancing via the bridge , bomb it to prevent the advance of the russian army.

something like that.

and when ur a heavy bomber, you can get mission like that you have to bomb a city to clear it out as much as posible for the ground troops to conquer it.

[Dowly]

The IL2DGEN does pretty much that, hunter. Tho, you cant click the targets, but the missions are assigned for the different squadrons. You blow up a bridge, the ground war stalls in that are for a few days and the enemy (nor you) can seize the territory.

It´s just very slow. With 3 missions per day, it´ll take days (and tens of missions) to see the effects.

[HunterICX]

Originally Posted by Dowly

The IL2DGEN does pretty much that, hunter. Tho, you cant click the targets, but the missions are assigned for the different squadrons. You blow up a bridge, the ground war stalls in that are for a few days and the enemy (nor you) can seize the territory.

It´s just very slow. With 3 missions per day, it´ll take days (and tens of missions) to see the effects.

And our rate of crashing/screwing up our J8A wasnt very good....we lost a bit too much planes in just 1 mission :rotfl:

[Dowly]

Very true, mate! :rotfl:

[Huxy]

All planes in 1946 is true.

All planes in the game were drawn. Most of them were produced. The Lerche was only drawed but never produced. I am not sure about the made a prototype.

But as Oleg has said, the Lerche model in the game is based upon the drawings. The physics of the Lerche is based upon how the German scientists thought it would work.

And it is no use to fight about if IL2 is good or not...

IL2 is one of the games you either likes OR hates.

-Huxy

[Lionman]

Hey guys, I've only just discovered this thread so am making an ultra-late comment but I had to add my £5 worth!

Personally I don't like to hear sims like CFS3 even mentioned in the same breath as the mighty Oleg's amazing series of air combat sims. As for 1946 - it is a masterpiece in marketing terms alone, as it caused a huge number of aficionados of the IL2 series who had already bought Forgotten Battles, Aces Expansion Pack and Pacific Fighters (that's already over £100!) to go out and buy a combination of them all, all over again, just to get a smaller and totally patched combined installation plus the extra planes! As Maddox Games already had 80% of the content and the remaining 20% on the drawing board this was a masterly stroke. With equally astute marketing cunning Oleg started the whole of his series with IL2 Sturmovik on the Russian Front, a vast theater of war in WW2 which many sim flyers were scarcely aware of before Sturmovik, knowing that he could work his way up to more familiar themes as his sims established his reputation on their combat characteristics alone. With equal cleverness his sims gradually approached the most popular theaters of war whilst improving the game engine, damage and flight models.

But Oleg has saved the Battle of Britain done "properly", which is the subject which most virtual WW2 air combat pilots had wanted from the beginning, until now, having used the years leading up to its launch to build a massive market for his games and defeat the mighty Microsoft. [MS were effectively knocked out of the air combat market by Forgotten Battles against which Combat Flight Simulator 3 looked relatively lame which was published at almost the same time.] I know that there is a huge group of enthusiasts for the CFS3 total WW1 MOD "Over Flanders Fields" and I have to be careful what I say about that here because I made the mistake of stating my honest opinion that OFF was simply an outdated sim re-skinned [on another air combat forum] and was immediately subjected to a mini-flame war by its affronted MOD developers and supporters. Virtual flying is a very subjective thing and I am as entitled to my opinion as they are to theirs. I took it off my PC after a few flights but may re-install it when the new enhanced version 3 of OFF goes Gold soon as in my view any negative option not based on direct experience is bigotry. I'll give it a fair go. But last time it wasn't in the same league as Bed BAron 3 D as regards the quality of game play, combat and flight models IMO. To me the CFS3 game engine always felt "arcadey" and I never felt truly "immersed" in its world, so I soon removed it from my hard disk.

Oleg's totally new game engine, massively increased accuracy in flight and damage models, dynamic weather (like FSX) and hugely increased aircraft detail and realism should ensure that Battle of Britain (the first offering in his new 'third generation' "Storm Of War" series) will instantly become THE benchmark WW2 air combat sim of all time when it finally goes Gold in late 2008 and I think the thing that is going to really grip users is the dynamic weather, which will change everything and make the whole experience far more immersive and real.

The only way he can really fail now is to have waited so long to "get it right" that it seems outdated graphically by the time it arrives, which would be a pity as a truly enormous amount of effort has gone into realism.

I am an old sim pilot (almost 62 now) who has been flying since the days when simulators were white wire frame outlines on a black screen with white wire-frame outline horizon and runway and basic flight controls on a lower screen edge panel. As an aviation buff I have also owned and flown most of the best sims that have been published for WW1 (IMO the best was Red Baron 3D) WW2 (IMO the best is 1946) and jet combat (IMO Falcon F4 was the best technically and Lock-On the best visually) and I am looking forward to Oleg's Battle of Britain along with the whole WW2 virtual air combat pilot community. Having established my "provenance" I will say that IMO 1946 is the best value for money in one package for air combat ever. My sole criticism of what Oleg has done so far are that although he has given us all those exotic jets, experimental designs and many relatively obscure aircraft, he never gave us a flyable, multi-crew Vickers Wellington, Avro Lancaster or B-17 when all three were as key aircraft in their way as the Spitfire and Messerschmidt. I asked him about that once and as I remember it his reply had to do with the complexity of the latter two aircraft at least and the fact that multi-crewed versions would virtually demand a whole new dedicated sim for online play, while his resources were already totally commited to the coming new Storm of War series projects. A pity but understandable in some ways, yet he bothered to create that vast lumering old Russian bomber, the Boston and several relatively obscure heavy bombers. Perhaps however (oh JOY) he is going to include all three in his storm of war series and has been saving them for that precisely because of their complexity? That would indeed make it an amazingly attractive purchase to a whole other makret - our virtual bomber pilots.

If any of you can remember the amazingly detailed and immersive game-play of the single player B-17 The Mighty Eighth you can see what an awesome online WW2 air simulator could be made from that, now that we have both the bandwidth and the market. I would really really love to be in a co-op mission online in a multi-crewed B-17 daylight raid or a Lancaster night mission with 9 other squad buddies in the same crew! I've done that in IL2 FB with an He III and it was amazingly immersive fun. It also gave me a new respect for the courage of the crews of those flimsy flying glasshouses!

The other "great contender" (IF it ever actually gets completed!) is Kights of the Sky or KOTs which I heard gained a financial boost in December 2007 and could go Gold around the same time as Battle of Britain. Knights of the Sky could do for WW1 air combat what Oleg's IL 2 has done for WW2 and it is certainly the one all the old Red Baron flyers await with baited breath. But in the end it may never happen and the virtual sim graveyard is full of equally impressive contenders which in the end proved "vapour ware".

Personally, far from whining about things left out or poorly done, I hugely admire those developers who undetake the vast "labour of love" which producing a really top quality air combat sim actually must be. I admire their skill, patience, dedication and the degree to which they ignore their own financial people, who ALWAYS seek to focus only on fast profit rather than satisfying the users.

My dream has always been air combat sims as immersive, dramatic, realistic and gripping as our beloved Silenthunter III & IV

One day in the not too distant future we will see the dawn of a mighty online combined air, sea & sky virtual battlefield world in which one may take any role from an FPS or stratgeic perspective. Like the FSX realm where for some years now one can fly with real-time LIVE air traffic control provided by remote players taking ATC roles and watching virtual ATC screens, just as the real professionals do. I imagine a future virtual combat war in which the virtual phone will ring in the fighter station hut and when one picks it up the REAL flight controller (playing his role in-game online in virtual London) will scramble the squadron!
. . . . . . and we have scarcely started on WW1 yet!

TALLY HO CHAPS!!!!!!!!

DIVE! DIVE! DIVE!

[XabbaRus]

The on issue I have with BOB:SOW is that Maddox seems to be detailing things like the suspension on a truck and individual blades of grass. So much so you'll need a fast machine to play it on low settings. I saw the model of teh Spitfire and see how they have made a detailed 3d model of the engine. That to me sucks up FPS and would be better spent on the AI. I won't be able to upgrade my machine anytime soon and though it is a 3.2 GHz P4 and I could expand its RAM to 4GB and I have decent GFX I wonder if it will be enough to fly SOW when it comes out.

[Dowly]

Originally Posted by XabbaRus

The on issue I have with BOB:SOW is that Maddox seems to be detailing things like the suspension on a truck and individual blades of grass. So much so you'll need a fast machine to play it on low settings. I saw the model of teh Spitfire and see how they have made a detailed 3d model of the engine. That to me sucks up FPS and would be better spent on the AI. I won't be able to upgrade my machine anytime soon and though it is a 3.2 GHz P4 and I could expand its RAM to 4GB and I have decent GFX I wonder if it will be enough to fly SOW when it comes out.

Very true. And IL2's engine isnt known for it ability to run smoothly when lots of planes are in the air... and the game is almost 10 years old in few years.

[Oberon]

If Oleg can stop his AI cheating, put in some decent sounds and capture the immersiveness of BOBII and not need the specs of a supercomputer, then he's sold me.

Till then... :hmm: