General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: bozon on December 23, 2019, 02:26:50 AM
Title: IL2 Normandy
Post by: bozon on December 23, 2019, 02:26:50 AM
Anyone has any info about that title? It has a Mossie FB.VI on the cover image so it made me poke my ears up. Are the other titles of “great abttles” any good? How does the multiplayer work? I suppose that recently release Bodenplatte is the most similar title, is that one any good? (Can it be without mosquitoes?)
I disliked older IL2 titles. The view system was a no go for me - I am used to keypad views and it is difficult for an old dog to learn new tricks. Maybe it is time I moved on to trackir. Older titles were mostly about the eastern from that has nearly 0 interest for me, offline gameplay was meh, and online was no competition to AH.
DCS player Mosquito and Mirage III after announcements that made me soil my underwear, were sent to the end of the queue, with no release date in the next decade. So I was wondering if this IL2 title could be something to play while I keep dreaming.
Any thoughts? Info?
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: perdue3 on December 23, 2019, 08:55:07 AM
I am not sure what you mean about the view system. You can set your views to be identical to AH pan, snap, or otherwise. IL-2 is phenomenal in most ways. The transition from AH to IL-2 is pretty arduous, but it is only time. There are multiplayer servers, varying in realism settings, that you join. I recommend Wings of Liberty and Berloga Dogfight to get your feet wet.
Usually when a new DLC goes active, there are servers dedicated to that plane set unlike others that keep it balanced with various plane sets. Stalingrad is the vanilla IL-2 and should be on sale now if you want to give it a try.
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: Nefarious on December 23, 2019, 09:29:03 AM
To me, the game looks and feels like the original IL2 games with major improvements graphically and to the interface.
I have BoS, BoM, and BoK, as well as Boddenplatte. Been having fun with former AH squaddies on their server. It launches missions with AI fighters and bombers and ground targets, it's been a lot of fun. I'll probably buy Normandy and maybe the Tank game.
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: bozon on December 23, 2019, 09:29:55 AM
I am not sure what you mean about the view system. You can set your views to be identical to AH pan, snap, or otherwise. ...
The head position was fixed in the cockpit (at least in original IL2 forgotten battles), aka “head on a stick”, unlike AH where you can set the head position for each view direction. Not much good if you look “left” and there is a canopy bar right there to block 80% of your field of view... Also the slow head movement when going from rear-left to rear-right was annoying, but I could live with that.
What are the objectives in the online servers? Just furball arenas? Do they have simultaneous (or periodic) spawns of player, or is it “get shot down roll again” kind of thing?
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: Nefarious on December 23, 2019, 10:13:35 AM
The cooperative missions I have flown, have one dedicated launch and when you die, you can spectate using external views. After everyone is down, or on agreement of everyone, the mission can be ended where they all return to the map screen and prepare for the next mission.
I'm sure that is dependent on the server settings though.
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: perdue3 on December 23, 2019, 10:15:07 AM
The head position was fixed in the cockpit (at least in original IL2 forgotten battles), aka “head on a stick”, unlike AH where you can set the head position for each view direction. Not much good if you look “left” and there is a canopy bar right there to block 80% of your field of view... Also the slow head movement when going from rear-left to rear-right was annoying, but I could live with that.
What are the objectives in the online servers? Just furball arenas? Do they have simultaneous (or periodic) spawns of player, or is it “get shot down roll again” kind of thing?
My views are identical to keypad AH snap views. I can assure you that you will have a view system just like AH. My only gripe with the views is that my pilot looks 7 o'clock and when I want to look 6 from that position I turn my head all the way around. You can move your head position in each angle and save the head position just like AH.
The Dogfight server is just that. You get spawned at about 300m and immediately get caught up in the soup. It is fast paced, intense action. The other war servers, like Wings of Liberty, have a mixed bag. A typical map will have about 6 targets on each side, all varying from tanks to bridges to factories, which are to be destroyed by bombs. The first side to destroy all the targets win that map. It is always Axis vs. Allies in there and naturally, many people gravitate toward the bombers and attack planes. The fighter guys escort/defend the targets and there is always something to do for everyone. The problem is side balancing sometimes dictates which side you fly on. Generally, the KN guys will launch fighters and defend a target or patrol an area. Sometimes we are unlucky and see nothing, but I'd say 4/5 times we get into something.
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: Devil 505 on December 23, 2019, 11:47:24 AM
The head position was fixed in the cockpit (at least in original IL2 forgotten battles), aka “head on a stick”, unlike AH where you can set the head position for each view direction. Not much good if you look “left” and there is a canopy bar right there to block 80% of your field of view... Also the slow head movement when going from rear-left to rear-right was annoying, but I could live with that.
Bozon, I use a hat switch in IL-2 just like AH. Not sure how different using key commands for views, but with the hat switch Il-2 offers more flexibility in views than AH - with one noticeable drawback.
In AH, your view angles are locked into increments of 45 degrees regardless of where you move the head position using the mouse keys.
In Il-2, the Insert, Home, End, Delete, Page Up, and Page Down keys move your head positions and you can move the mouse to adjust the center point of a given view. Also, all views are zoomed in about 50% by default, so zoom out each view to get total coverage.
The snap speed is adjustable in the options menu.
The only drawback to the Il-2 view system is how handles the dead 6 O'clock position. In AH, it is exactly 180 Degrees and it will rotate to that position in the shortest path possible from your current view. In IL-2, dead 6 is either 179 Deg. (over the right shoulder) or 181 Deg. (over the left shoulder). This becomes a problem when tracking an enemy rearward from the side opposite the saved 6 O'clock view. For example, if your dead 6 view is 181 Deg. and your enemy is passing on your right, as your enemy moves from your right-aft view into the dead 6 view and you press the key for dead 6, the view will rotate left from right-aft through the forward position, all the way to 181 Deg. You will lose sight of the enemy every time.
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: CptTrips on December 23, 2019, 12:45:59 PM
Bozon,
I just picked up BoS, BoM, BoK, on sale for $12 each the other day. I've been toying with them.
Like you, I was never that interested in Eastern Front stuff, and I hated the IL2 view system. With VR now, the view system at least is not an issue. I would have loved for them to have added VR support to CloD, but I gave up waiting.
They definitely have a graphics advantage over AH. AH AI is definitely better. The FM feels pretty similar to me. Maybe some subtle differences. Gunnery feel maybe a little harder in IL2. (?)
I haven't bothered with the online servers yet. IF they try and pull all that no icon baloney, then I wouldn't be interested.
While I know everyone around here turns their nose up at the single player campaign feature, I'm pretty sure that is why everyone has heard of IL2 and very few have heard of AH.
All in all, might be interesting to toy with. I'll be interested in reviews of the Normady module. I wish they'd redo the BoB version with full VR support.
:salute
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: Devil 505 on December 23, 2019, 01:00:13 PM
Wow for $12 bucks each I might have to give them a try.
I'd recommend trying Stalingrad or Kuban to have the most available planes in multiplayer arenas. The arenas have planes sets based on the historic battles and planes that balance with them.
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: TheBug on December 23, 2019, 08:08:21 PM
Thanks I'll probably grab all three like Trips at that price.
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: Bruv119 on December 23, 2019, 10:47:30 PM
If you could take the best bits from them all then we would have our flight sim Nirvana.
I can't help feel the IL2 franchise is just a money spinner, release the next battle with a handful of new planes but its just the same game regurgitated with some minor improvements.
A DCS mossie would be epic. But it seems the F4U1D with a WW2 carrier and the P47D will be the next plane modules. However the attention to detail makes them very satisfying to learn and master. They just need a more permanent Multiplayer environment like AH.
VR is the future, learning track IR is not so hard with less people around and dogfights in those games don't tend to get overwhelming.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JY23XJamrfI
a little fight I had with a K4. :airplane:
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: pembquist on December 24, 2019, 02:05:05 AM
I've only flown the IL2COD team fusion mod which is called something else now. I didn't have the patience or maybe it is different in that version but the view system didn't work for me and somebody gave me track IR. Never liked using the track IR in AH but in the IL2 it made it much better. I think right out of the box the AH view system is really easy to set up and use unlike any other flight sim I have tried.
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: bozon on December 24, 2019, 03:23:20 AM
Thanks for the info guys. It is good to hear that the IL2 view system has improved since I tried it some 10 years ago. Seems like Normandy will be worth checking out when it is released. I watched some YT vids of the “flying circus” title and WWI could also be a cool different thing to try.
Bruv, DCS P-47D module is definitely on my list to consider for getting into DCS world. However for DCS VR/trackir is a must. I tried the community A4 Skyhawk and couldn’t play it without - keyboard or POV hat were way too clumsy.
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: fd ski on December 24, 2019, 04:31:06 AM
i tried that recently and can't get into it too much.
Seems that flying with VR i'm at double disadvantage to anyone with TrackIR.
1. Check 6 - to do so in VR means turning your head around almost 180 degrees. I know it is realistic, however everyone with Track IR turns only about 45 degrees to get the same effect ( scaling ). AH solves this problem nicely giving ability to use hat-switch to go to 6 view and then VR works from that point on, however neither DCS nor IL2 allows this. For me, playing in VR this is a dealbreaker.
2. Zooms - for some reason in VR zooms are much shorter then in TrackIR. While in TrackIR people zoom out so far that they can spot bogeys 10 miles out ( DCS, Ralfi's videos ) - in VR you get only a short zoom - you can barely make out the difference between Mig 29 and F18 at couple of miles. Forget the spoting at long ranges. You're virtually blind compared to guy with TrackIR. In my recent adventure with IL2 - similar thing occured - i could not make out countries of planes ( no icon dogfight server ) at all but shortest ranges :(
I'd love to spend more time in DCS/IL2 but i feel i would been to go back to TrackIR to be anything other then cannon fodder. And I'm not going back, ever.
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: bozon on December 24, 2019, 08:13:23 AM
Digging into DCS forums I discovered that Mossie FB.VI is not on hold and is scheduled to release in the next decade, but rumors say Q3 2020! And... it is being made by eagle dynamics, so it is going to get the full treatment :aok My underwear are soiled again. :bolt:
P-47D is rumored to be released Q1 2020, also by ED. My poor Mirage III is on hold by 3rd party developer RAZBAM because they prioritized some insignificant other AC. WHERE IS MY BLOODY MIRAGE RAZBAM?!!! :furious
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: hazmatt on December 24, 2019, 08:36:39 AM
Hey Bruv119. In this video are those planes you are fighting drones or other players? Curious because it doesn't seem that they are using the k4's climb rate as well as they could have.
Hey Bruv119. In this video are those planes you are fighting drones or other players? Curious because it doesn't seem that they are using the k4's climb rate as well as they could have.
It was a human player. Against really good K4 pilots they would normally eat you alive in a P51 however I've had some successes when using some energy retaining turning circles (perverts 190D eagle claw maneuver) and if they pull too hard vertically they can struggle with the immense torque the k4 puts out in the stall. If I was in the Spit I'd have been around on him in a flash but then they will just extend and rightly so. He may have also been a bit concerned with his engine overheating as we fought for longer than usual at lower speeds. I had my rad and oil flaps full open and was very borderline on my temps too. The beauty of it is everything on the instrument panel is clickable/mappable and you need to use all of those instruments and gauges which ups the realism aspect for me.
As for the mirage bozon, they are doing a falklands map and will most likely pair it off against the sea harrier. :airplane: Their release dates and what to do next thought process is all over the place. Dropping the I16 and 190A8 out of nowhere made no sense but the more WW2 stuff the better IMO. The updated Normandy map is also much better than initial release.
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: bozon on December 26, 2019, 02:54:24 AM
Thanks Bruv :aok Indeed it looks like the are pushing WWII harder now. Most of the jet projects have been handed over to 3rd party devs, and ED are releasing the WWII stuff.
I’ll wait for the P47 to enter DCS WWII and use the time till then to get familiarized and set up using the free modules (and ask for trackir as my birthday present:)). Noobdom here I come! I imagine the Jug and Mossie will turn out to be total dogs in that game, but who knows, maybe they will be good? The important thing is to go down in style.
... worst case I’ll settle for half a mosquito and fly Spit XI.
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: Nefarious on December 26, 2019, 12:13:52 PM
Had a lot of fun in IL2 combat box server last night. Look for me if you're playing there.
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: Bruv119 on December 31, 2019, 06:28:30 AM
Thanks Bruv :aok Indeed it looks like the are pushing WWII harder now. Most of the jet projects have been handed over to 3rd party devs, and ED are releasing the WWII stuff.
I’ll wait for the P47 to enter DCS WWII and use the time till then to get familiarized and set up using the free modules (and ask for trackir as my birthday present:)). Noobdom here I come! I imagine the Jug and Mossie will turn out to be total dogs in that game, but who knows, maybe they will be good? The important thing is to go down in style.
... worst case I’ll settle for half a mosquito and fly Spit XI.
Just flying and returning these birds in this environment was reward enough for the manual studying (chuck's) and the youtube vids. Fighting with them is just secondary, still alot of fun and using some mossie cannon on them will be extremely satisfying :aok
The even cooler thing with the P47D and Mossie will be that no-one else knows how to fly them either :D so working out whether to push or pull a lever or flick that switch on/off will all be part of it. Like an actual test pilot. As for the dogs statement we will see but the flight model is excellent so they will have a fair shout. The mossies stall recovery will be very interesting as it will be their first twin engined plane.
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: mora on January 02, 2020, 02:39:38 PM
If HT made a new sim from ground up it would be miles ahead. The IL-2 FM is bad. It's the WW1 ROF FM from 2009. It's a complete patchwork, for example the flaps are completely unrealistic turning AC into kites, probably because they are an afterthought. Here's an interesting video: https://youtu.be/NDCkexCZrpA
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: Eagler on January 03, 2020, 02:18:30 PM
VR is much better in AH3 than IL2 IMO
<S>
Eagler
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: pembquist on January 04, 2020, 01:36:56 PM
Just tried the Battle of Stalingrad Etc. and it is interesting because it is different from AH. Frankly I think AH is a much better deal. I don't understand the economics of the servers and it isn't like there are more people playing on them, or can play on them, than AH. Sure you can think "I got this game for 12 bucks on sale" but realistically if you want ALL the aircraft you have to spend away. I do like the maps and the need for pilotage on some of the servers, the absence of icons, the painterly maps made out of real geography;on the other hand, the time to get into action is pretty tedious after a bit. I don't mean the flight to the battle I mean the delay in loading and having to go through the whole slow engine start and taxi thing. It seems to take forever. Compared to IL2 COD the snap views seem better but they aren't as changeable as AH, there is not FOV setting that you can easily change for instance. I found that I had difficulty following cons between some of the view snaps. I don't care for the excessive movement of the pilots head, it doesn't feel real to me, it feels like rubber bands are between me and the simulation.
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: Brooke on January 04, 2020, 02:48:17 PM
IF they try and pull all that no icon baloney, then I wouldn't be interested.
I hate no icon as well. It is not hard to keep track of a real airplane in a real dogfight (my opinion based on when I flew Air Combat USA), but in Bruv's video of his fight, I lost track of the enemy when the field of view swept past some ground features with darker background.
Squinting at the screen or losing sight of a guy you are focused on who is only 300 yards away isn't for me.
I hated how they handled views and icons in the old WWIIOL as well.
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: CptTrips on January 04, 2020, 02:58:15 PM
I hate no icon as well. It is not hard to keep track of a real airplane in a real dogfight (my opinion based on when I flew Air Combat USA), but in Bruv's video of his fight, I lost track of the enemy when the field of view swept past some ground features with darker background.
Squinting at the screen or losing sight of a guy you are focused on who is only 300 yards away isn't for me.
I hated how they handled views and icons in the old WWIIOL as well.
I'll be fine with no icon when display technology has caught up with the resolution, contrast, and dynamic range of real world human visual acuity. Especially that of a 20 year old perfect physical specimen military pilot.
Until then, no icon is less realistic than icon, ironically.
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: Brooke on January 04, 2020, 03:10:30 PM
It just was no problem at all -- not in the slightest -- tracking a real plane during a real flight at prop-plane distances (not talking about jets here). A flight sim with icons is more realistic than one without. Without icons, games make something effortlessly infallible in reality into something that is an error-prone PITA in the game.
In flight sims, you have different sensory modalities compared to real life. A good sim should make a thing similarly easy or similarly hard compared to real life, not to mimic it in a way that makes something that is easy in real life annoyingly harder in the game or vice versa.
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: Devil 505 on January 04, 2020, 04:16:55 PM
Compared to IL2 COD the snap views seem better but they aren't as changeable as AH, there is not FOV setting that you can easily change for instance. I found that I had difficulty following cons between some of the view snaps.
Bozon, I use a hat switch in IL-2 just like AH. Not sure how different using key commands for views, but with the hat switch Il-2 offers more flexibility in views than AH - with one noticeable drawback.
In AH, your view angles are locked into increments of 45 degrees regardless of where you move the head position using the mouse keys.
In Il-2, the Insert, Home, End, Delete, Page Up, and Page Down keys move your head positions and you can move the mouse to adjust the center point of a given view. Also, all views are zoomed in about 50% by default, so zoom out each view to get total coverage.
The snap speed is adjustable in the options menu.
The only drawback to the Il-2 view system is how handles the dead 6 O'clock position. In AH, it is exactly 180 Degrees and it will rotate to that position in the shortest path possible from your current view. In IL-2, dead 6 is either 179 Deg. (over the right shoulder) or 181 Deg. (over the left shoulder). This becomes a problem when tracking an enemy rearward from the side opposite the saved 6 O'clock view. For example, if your dead 6 view is 181 Deg. and your enemy is passing on your right, as your enemy moves from your right-aft view into the dead 6 view and you press the key for dead 6, the view will rotate left from right-aft through the forward position, all the way to 181 Deg. You will lose sight of the enemy every time.
Should cover most of your issues.
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: CptTrips on January 04, 2020, 05:14:03 PM
It just was no problem at all -- not in the slightest -- tracking a real plane during a real flight at prop-plane distances (not talking about jets here). A flight sim with icons is more realistic than one without. Without icons, games make something effortlessly infallible in reality into something that is an error-prone PITA in the game.
Agreed. The game should be combat, not playing "Where's Waldo" as Mr. Magoo.
I hate no icon as well. It is not hard to keep track of a real airplane in a real dogfight (my opinion based on when I flew Air Combat USA), but in Bruv's video of his fight, I lost track of the enemy when the field of view swept past some ground features with darker background.
Squinting at the screen or losing sight of a guy you are focused on who is only 300 yards away isn't for me.
I hated how they handled views and icons in the old WWIIOL as well.
This debate is many years old. I flew Air Combat USA as well, and, as you say, it wasn't hard to keep the other guy in sight (although I do wonder if our AW experience helped out with that). But we knew where the other guy was when the duel began. It is much more difficult to pick out another plane when you don't know where he is, particularly if it's a mile or more away. Real-life pilot accounts agree on this. Just the other night I was reading Johnson's book, Wing Leader, where he gives an account of an entire Spitfire wing (23 + Johnson) who did not spot a single FW190 a few thousand feet below them, flying in the same direction. I have often been surprised - "shocked" is more accurate - to cross over a VOR station and suddenly have another plane appear 200 yards away.
I suspect the debate has been settled for all time in AH, but for a few years we had no-icons in the AvA, and, once you figured it out, it worked very well and prompted you to use real-world tactics, if only because you wouldn't be able to pick out the guy behind and under you by his neon red icon.
I guess no-icons works fine for the people in IL2.
- oldman
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: CptTrips on January 04, 2020, 07:41:20 PM
This debate is many years old. I flew Air Combat USA as well, and, as you say, it wasn't hard to keep the other guy in sight (although I do wonder if our AW experience helped out with that). But we knew where the other guy was when the duel began. It is much more difficult to pick out another plane when you don't know where he is, particularly if it's a mile or more away. Real-life pilot accounts agree on this.
In my very limited real life pilot experience, I had trouble spotting traffic even after being told where it was at by tower. It was a big gray C-130 against the the Allegheny Mountains. My instructor had to point it out to me.
It's my only gripe with IL-2 and it's not even really IL-2, it's just one server. Unfortunately, it's the most populated server every time I log on.
I dunno. Maybe. I hear the online servers are often not populated. Certainly not populated with a large percentage those that own the game.
:headscratch:
When I log on, Combat Box is the most populated server and usually around 50-60 people. It's no icons make it really make it difficult, VR helps with situational awareness, but ID'ing cons is difficult and frustrating when you get killed by friendlies. You almost have to fly a P-38 to not get killed. lol.
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: CptTrips on January 04, 2020, 09:23:08 PM
Right now, I only see 4 arenas with more than 10 people. Combat Box is pegged at 72/72. Can't get in.
To me this is what you pay the $15 for in AH. Imagine AH in a box with a bunch of volunteer servers of varying quality with their own settings and no in game vox, would that be a good deal for over a hundred bucks?
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: Nefarious on January 04, 2020, 11:53:45 PM
To me this is what you pay the $15 for in AH. Imagine AH in a box with a bunch of volunteer servers of varying quality with their own settings and no in game vox, would that be a good deal for over a hundred bucks?
At Midnight Eastern Time, There was less than 100 people online across all servers and Combat Box was down to 30 people.
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: Shuffler on January 05, 2020, 12:19:00 AM
Yall talk about how many box games they sold. Seems hardly no one is actually playing the game though. Looks as if many make that initial investment and then nothing.... just like here. Then there are the ones who make initial investment and then buy more aircraft and addons.... which we actually have from day one because we pay monthly.
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: CptTrips on January 05, 2020, 12:35:14 AM
Yall talk about how many box games they sold. Seems hardly no one is actually playing the game though. Looks as if many make that initial investment and then nothing.... just like here. Then there are the ones who make initial investment and then buy more aircraft and addons.... which we actually have from day one because we pay monthly.
Why do you think people only buy it to play online?
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: Shuffler on January 05, 2020, 12:41:44 AM
Why do you think people only buy it to play online?
... and all this time I thought it was being compared to AH. LOL
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: Nefarious on January 05, 2020, 12:50:03 AM
In my few week soiree into online IL2 play, the numbers are probably comparable to primetime Eastern Aces High. The difference is IL2 is spread out over 3 or 4 servers over 10-15 players. Combat Box alone is usually has 50-60-70 players, One or two other servers have 10-20-30 players. The remaining servers that actually have people in them are under 5 players.
FSO attracts 40-50 more players every Friday night with 110-120 total in SEA1. FSO has sides (Allied and Axis) as big as the largest IL-2 Server most evenings for me personally (10PM-1AM EST)
PS. I have yet to start a pilot career. Have only played quick missions and online.
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: CptTrips on January 05, 2020, 01:20:13 AM
FSO attracts 40-50 more players every Friday night with 110-120 total in SEA1. FSO has sides (Allied and Axis) as big as the largest IL-2 Server most evenings for me personally (10PM-1AM EST)
I doubt it is a structured as FSO is it? Is there any thing like the planning and coordination of the FSO? Or is it more like the AvA, except populated?
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: Bruv119 on January 05, 2020, 01:35:09 AM
In my few week soiree into online IL2 play, the numbers are probably comparable to primetime Eastern Aces High. The difference is IL2 is spread out over 3 or 4 servers over 10-15 players. Combat Box alone is usually has 50-60-70 players, One or two other servers have 10-20-30 players. The remaining servers that actually have people in them are under 5 players.
FSO attracts 40-50 more players every Friday night with 110-120 total in SEA1. FSO has sides (Allied and Axis) as big as the largest IL-2 Server most evenings for me personally (10PM-1AM EST)
PS. I have yet to start a pilot career. Have only played quick missions and online.
Your results agree with my findings. It's like IL2 needs to sort out their netcode and get everyone in the same arena on the same page it works for them though smaller scale fights but with better visuals. IL2 Tobruk will be out soon and the TFS guys pay much more attention to the historical and realism aspects without the need for "battle rounds". Will be cool to finally fly some unique aircraft like the D520 Dewoitine over North Africa. These guys do alot of sales in the Offline market but that is an alien concept to most of us. So doing offline campaigns and having believable AI takes some time.
HT is doing the Multiplayer right IMO.
In the meantime DCS just announced a new WW2 europe map the P47D and a Mossie. Plus a Marianas free map that looks :bolt:
Competition is good. Just sucks for us who need to choose or just have them all. :D
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: Brooke on January 05, 2020, 01:49:31 AM
It is much more difficult to pick out another plane when you don't know where he is, particularly if it's a mile or more away.
I totally agree, but that is icon distance, in my opinion, not no icons. Folks can play with icon distance to replicate what they think is most realistic. But with no icons even at close range, you can lose a plane when you are on it and focusing your attention on it, and that is totally unrealistic.
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: CptTrips on January 05, 2020, 01:49:56 AM
These guys do alot of sales in the Offline market but that is an alien concept to most of us. So doing offline campaigns and having believable AI takes some time.
I really enjoys offline campaigns. I guess all those years playing Red Baron, Falcon 3.0, Aces of the Pacific, Aces over Europe, Red Baron II, etc, etc. Always loved tending my pilot career through the war. Kind of like playing through a novel.
I agree that HT seems to have the better multiplayer experience. Well, certainly the Scenario experience anyway.
I totally agree, but that is icon distance, in my opinion, not no icons. Folks can play with icon distance to replicate what they think is most realistic. But with no icons even at close range, you can lose a plane when you are on it and focusing your attention on it, and that is totally unrealistic.
It's like everything else you adjust, you get better at it. Maybe my video didn't show him as much as I could see him on my screen in game but everything close in can be tracked as you describe. It's when closure rates are high from above or below that things get really difficult and I would imagine it was near impossible for say a P51D pilot to see and react to a ME 262 hedge hopping or coming head on. With Late war rides speeds are way up flying in slow rides would be much easier.
Spotting requires using the zoom alot and you could argue the pilot didn't use a set of binoculars whilst looking about but it makes up for the lack of icons in a gameplay sense.
I do like the aircraft recognition aspect but with only 6 planes it is not a big deal when they add more shapes and sizes it will get worse.
In my 200 hours or so of multiplayer action without icons in DCS I've only blasted 1 plane incorrectly and been fired upon maybe 5 times, most have stopped once realizing their mistake and apologized. Of course this is also an SA fail on my part as I too did not spot them in time to take evasives. You also have to factor in not everyone is an experten and cut them some slack. After all Bader got shot down by one of his own. :D
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: Bruv119 on January 05, 2020, 02:48:47 AM
I really enjoys offline campaigns. I guess all those years playing Red Baron, Falcon 3.0, Aces of the Pacific, Aces over Europe, Red Baron II, etc, etc. Always loved tending my pilot career through the war. Kind of like playing through a novel.
I agree that HT seems to have the better multiplayer experience. Well, certainly the Scenario experience anyway.
I'll keep AH for the Scenarios, and BoX for the offline play. Although, just for scenarios, AH starts to feel a little expensive.
DAMN. Wish Team Fusion guys would add VR to Cliffs of Dover like they said they'd be doing. I could go drop a year on that.
They said it would be their top priority after release. With VR enabled it will pose a problem for some as they flip between the two.
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: CptTrips on January 05, 2020, 02:52:27 AM
They said it would be their top priority after release. With VR enabled it will pose a problem for some as they flip between the two.
Oh man, if they get VR working with CloD, I'll be in hog heaven. It was a beautiful sim, I just can't stomach non-VR again. The TF mission editor is also very impressive. The AI? Well, I hear they are making improvements for Tobruk. ;)
:salute
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: Bruv119 on January 05, 2020, 03:02:10 AM
I think the N.Africa planeset lends itself very well to early-mid war dogfighting.
D520, martlet/F4F, P40, 109f, c202, spit 5, hurri 2ABCD, Beaufighter with torps/bombs, gladiators, cr42s, wellington bomber. Getting the Americans involved may increase it's appeal as CLOD was/is purely a Battle of Britain focused game. Having some 50cals and cannon will be a treat for sure.
Squeezing Malta on the map and adding a British carrier would have been awesome but the scale of the desert map is vast.
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: Bruv119 on January 05, 2020, 03:06:41 AM
Oh man, if they get VR working with CloD, I'll be in hog heaven. It was a beautiful sim, I just can't stomach non-VR again. The TF mission editor is also very impressive. The AI? Well, I hear they are making improvements for Tobruk. ;)
:salute
CLOD was before it's time, it still looks decent, the icons / spotting arrangement the best of all 3. TFS strike me as old men working away tirelessly in their garden sheds and when its done its DONE and we can just say well done old chap and enjoy their labors of love.
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: TheBug on January 05, 2020, 01:08:34 PM
I doubt it is a structured as FSO is it? Is there any thing like the planning and coordination of the FSO? Or is it more like the AvA, except populated?
I haven't seen any planning personally, but there are squads and players cooperating with each other. FSO and Scenarios are much more coordinated from what I can tell.
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: CptTrips on January 05, 2020, 04:41:15 PM
I haven't seen any planning personally, but there are squads and players cooperating with each other. FSO and Scenarios are much more coordinated from what I can tell.
I didn't think so. It must take a ton of work to run those. I really think the curated experience of the Scenarios are Aces High most unique feature. It can't be matched anywhere I know of. If there is another as good I'd be interested in hearing about it.
It's the only reason I pay a subscription.
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: fd ski on January 06, 2020, 02:29:41 AM
I didn't think so. It must take a ton of work to run those. I really think the curated experience of the Scenarios are Aces High most unique feature. It can't be matched anywhere I know of. If there is another as good I'd be interested in hearing about it.
It's the only reason I pay a subscription.
FSO is based on S3s - and those date back to 1990s ;)
http://www.squadselectseries.com/
Not many people there now, but back in the days it would pull 300+ people per event every week. Key is squad organization.
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: Nefarious on January 06, 2020, 08:32:46 AM
Agreed. The game should be combat, not playing "Where's Waldo" as Mr. Magoo.
But the fact is that aerial combat IS a game of Where's Waldo, in that the large majority of fighters that were shot down by other fighters (bomber gunners, ground fire, etc, notwithstanding) were shot down by planes THAT THEY NEVER SAW. Ambush, both in the era of visual engagements and even now in the era of Beyond Visual Range combat, is both the preferred and the most common method of dispatching your enemy.
Also, as someone who has flown several thousand hours, sighting other aircraft in flight is NOT infallible, effortless, or even easy. Canopies get dirty, they get scratched (if they weren't before you got in, they will be by the time you've taken off), and aircraft are really rather small objects, and are very difficult to see at any significant range, especially those that are against a cluttered background (e.g. the ground). I once spent 3 hours orbiting an objective in Afghanistan, with a Predator drone 1000 feet below me in an overlapping orbit. Even having a rough idea of where to look for it (thanks to TCAS), and the fact that it was painted WHITE over a tan and green ground, it was over an hour before either I or the other pilot sighted it, despite coming within less than a mile of it repeatedly.
Mike
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: CptTrips on January 06, 2020, 04:44:03 PM
But the fact is that aerial combat IS a game of Where's Waldo, in that the large majority of fighters that were shot down by other fighters (bomber gunners, ground fire, etc, notwithstanding) were shot down by planes THAT THEY NEVER SAW.
Yeah, I get all that. When display technology matches real-word human vision, I'll gladly accept those occurrences. Hell, I get bounced WITH icons. ;)
But surely you would agree that today's consumer monitor tech doesn't come close to the resolution, contrast, and dynamic range of a young pilots Mk I eyeball at 1,2,5 mile ranges. Put VR gear on and it's 10x worse that that!
I got no problem if there is a IL2 server setup like that and people prefer it. They just won't get me in there until my VR has 4k per eye with HDR. But then I'll be on the porn sites all day and won't have time to fly. ;)
:salute
[edit]
I saw someone suggest somewhere having no icons <400 yd or so, then icons out to what should be visual range. That would be a cool compromise.
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: CptTrips on January 06, 2020, 05:21:35 PM
you're more than welcome to fly with the 412th this month.
Thanks for the kind offer.
Still trying to understand how it works. So if I understand correctly the 412th is a ad hoc squad for the purposes of the FSO, but other squads are their regular squads like in the Melee?
I thought I saw somewhere in the docs that I could pre-arrange to fly with a squad for a series, but eventually I would be expected to join a squad to continue. I like flying with squads. I just don't want to join one permanently. And I may want to arrange to fly with one group one month, and another group another month. But I got the idea that would be wearing out my welcome. I though I saw a comment on one of the pages that after being a guest a couple of times you would expected join a squad, but of course now I can't find that. Maybe I imagined it.
I like Scenarios because I can be part of a "squad" for the duration of the event, but we're not still "married" after it's over. Yeah, I have commitment issues. ;)
[Edit] Ahh here is the wording I was referring to:
Quote
To participate in Squad Operations you must be in a squad that has registered and active in the event. You may fly as a guest in a squad but eventually you would be expected to join that squad in FSO or bring in your own squad.
Still trying to understand how it works. So if I understand correctly the 412th is a ad hoc squad for the purposes of the FSO, but other squads are their regular squads like in the Melee?
The 412th was at one time a Melee squad, but over time became strictly a FSO squad. It is made up of previous FSO squads that disbanded and merged into the 412th.
I thought I saw somewhere in the docs that I could pre-arrange to fly with a squad for a series, but eventually I would be expected to join a squad to continue. I like flying with squads. I just don't want to join one permanently. And I may want to arrange to fly with one group one month, and another group another month. But I got the idea that would be wearing out my welcome. I though I saw a comment on one of the pages that after being a guest a couple of times you would expected join a squad, but of course now I can't find that. Maybe I imagined it.
I like Scenarios because I can be part of a "squad" for the duration of the event, but we're not still "married" after it's over. Yeah, I have commitment issues. ;)
We would love to have people participate every frame, but there are people that "shop around" or only fly when it's their aircraft of choice. I don't worry about it. If someone likes FSO they'll come back, and maybe even start their own squad. I would expect a pilot who doesn't want to commit to at least fly 1 month with a squad or 3 frames, before switching up.
412th is flying Allied this month: https://ahevents.net/index.php/fso-current-next-event
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: turt21 on January 06, 2020, 06:46:19 PM
OK Am I the only one? What is TFS 5.0?
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: CptTrips on January 06, 2020, 06:54:38 PM
Team Fusion Simulations. A group of programming simmers that took over development of IL2: Cliffs of Dover and fixed/added stuff and re-released as IL2: Cliffs of Dover Blitz Edition with all the patches rolled into it.
They are working on a IL2: Cliffs of Dover Tobruk (patch 5.0) mod (my geography is a little shady but not sure how Dover and Tobruk are related ;)) that used the CloD engine. After that, they are supposed to go back and add VR to Blitz so I can save England from those nasty Fritz. :D
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: Devil 505 on January 06, 2020, 07:51:47 PM
They are working on a IL2: Cliffs of Dover Tobruk (patch 5.0) mod (my geography is a little shady but not sure how Dover and Tobruk are related ;)) that used the CloD engine. After that, they are supposed to go back and add VR to Blitz so I can save England from those nasty Fritz. :D
Toburk is a project the Team Fusion guys have been working on for a few years, well before they became the proper development team for Cliffs of Dover.
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: CptTrips on January 06, 2020, 07:59:04 PM
Toburk is a project the Team Fusion guys have been working on for a few years, well before they became the proper development team for Cliffs of Dover.
Interesting. Does it use the CloD engine? And the CloD engine is a different engine than BoX?
[edit] Never mind. I saw this:
Quote
Thrall123RealID 5 months ago IL-2: 1946, IL-2: Cliffs of Dover, and IL-2: Battle of Stalingrad Great Battles series use 3 different game engines. Team Fusion Simulations makes patches for Cliffs of Dover game engine.
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: Brooke on January 06, 2020, 09:55:47 PM
in that the large majority of fighters that were shot down by other fighters (bomber gunners, ground fire, etc, notwithstanding) were shot down by planes THAT THEY NEVER SAW.
Despite icons, that has happened to me many times in Scenarios. All it takes is looking at your map or a printout at the wrong time, or concentrating for a moment on some other guy, or some clouds in unfortunate locations.
Examples of planes I didn't notice until I was taking hits:
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: Drano on January 07, 2020, 11:33:01 AM
Been messing with IL-2. The no icons thing is a challenge. First kill I had online was a friendly. Blew him to hell I did! Didn't notice it was a pony til the parts got closer. Oops! I swear he was shooting at the guy right next to me so I kinda saved a friendly too right? Flew axis and the first actual kill was of a 38. Go figure. But no mistaking that! Poetic justice.
Looks great in VR. Hate not being able to look back much beyond the 3-9 line easily in VR, which is my biggest gripe. The engine crap isn't that much to deal with once you've educated yourself what your settings should be or more importantly, should not be. Either way it's Voice Attack to the rescue there. Otherwise it's a lot of the same stuff only two sides and prettier.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: save on January 08, 2020, 01:05:19 AM
It's like everything else you adjust, you get better at it. Maybe my video didn't show him as much as I could see him on my screen in game but everything close in can be tracked as you describe. It's when closure rates are high from above or below that things get really difficult and I would imagine it was near impossible for say a P51D pilot to see and react to a ME 262 hedge hopping or coming head on. With Late war rides speeds are way up flying in slow rides would be much easier.
Spotting requires using the zoom alot and you could argue the pilot didn't use a set of binoculars whilst looking about but it makes up for the lack of icons in a gameplay sense.
I do like the aircraft recognition aspect but with only 6 planes it is not a big deal when they add more shapes and sizes it will get worse. In my 200 hours or so of multiplayer action without icons in DCS I've only blasted 1 plane incorrectly and been fired upon maybe 5 times, most have stopped once realizing their mistake and apologized. Of course this is also an SA fail on my part as I too did not spot them in time to take evasives. You also have to factor in not everyone is an experten and cut them some slack. After all Bader got shot down by one of his own. :D
I've shot a few Fiat's thinking they were Hurricanes in CLOD in a 109E :D Their wings looks exactly the same.
The StormOfWar scenarios were intense (not active anymore), and if your plane was damaged, it had to be repaired, and if you died, your score was reset.
Title: Re: IL2 Normandy
Post by: Bruv119 on January 09, 2020, 09:31:36 AM
I've shot a few Fiat's thinking they were Hurricanes in CLOD in a 109E :D Their wings looks exactly the same.
The StormOfWar scenarios were intense (not active anymore), and if your plane was damaged, it had to be repaired, and if you died, your score was reset.
storm of war have put up both CLOD and DCS servers recently but you'd have to do some more digging as to when they all decide to login and play :aok