Completely innocent request about TF 5.0

[Kestrel]

Hi.






I sincerely appreciate all the hard work TF and the community has done to make this game better. The community has provided scores of excellent guides and troubleshooting webpages for new players. This sim is now the most true to life I've ever used, and I would know having played more than 12 major sim titles ever since I was little. None of the problems introduced in the original game are TF's fault and I don't blame them for anything. I have only enthusiasm and appreciation for them and their work.

I'm not whining or trying to push anyone to complete anything before the proper time, I'm simply curious what the estimated timeline is for completing 5.0. 2 weeks, 2 months, 2 years, 2 decades, we'd just like a clue. The last definitive info on 5.0 was posted quite awhile ago unless I've missed something, and I don't think any previously estimated times are as relevant as they were whenever the last update was given.

I am hoping that some of the current issues/annoyances in CloD can be fixed in a future patch so that the game will be more interesting to potential players (and by extension, me). There are PLENTY of players who are sick of arcade-ish physics and bias found in almost all other "flight sims". Even in 1946 and BOX forums, there are simmers just waiting for someone to say the issues are fixed so they can get CloD. I don't mean to make anyone annoyed, but there still are quite a few things that are more intuitive in Il-2 1946 than in CloD, hence one of the reasons a game from the original Il-2 series is still played today. If CloD as a whole is made more intuitive to the average person, the players (and game sales) will start coming back. Maybe some of us don't like the average casual player, but this group of people makes up the majority of your potential player base. I speak for a lot of potential players/former players when I say that CloD in its current state is too cumbersome for the average new player to even want to attempt the learning curve. I'm not suggesting compromises in realism, only improvements to the game and fixes to the existing problems. 4.5 was a great addition to the game, and it caused me to come back. Just making the UI more user friendly or fixing some more long-suffered issues could encourage players to join CloD possibly just as much as adding a new theatre (as planned in 5.0) would. My humble opinion, take it or leave it.


Thanks,
Kestrel

[♣_Spiritus_♣]

A revamp of the UI is in our plans, but isn't as high a priority as game fixes. Once our coders have free time, perhaps they can look at the UI. It is planned, but available time is the issue.

We have a date within TFS that is our goal and are committed to, but we will continue with our policy of not committing publicly to release dates, like it or not. We all have actual day time jobs, some of us multiple ones to make ends meet. Until one of us wins the powerball and shares the fortune with the rest of TFS so we can all quit our jobs, then we have to be careful with dates.

I will be posting an update on the 23rd about patches, 5.0, and will start showcasing the aircraft and cockpit work. I hope to continue having Friday updates weekly or bi-weekly for a month or two.

[Kestrel]

A revamp of the UI is in our plans, but isn't as high a priority as game fixes. Once our coders have free time, perhaps they can look at the UI. It is planned, but available time is the issue.

We have a date within TFS that is our goal and are committed to, but we will continue with our policy of not committing publicly to release dates, like it or not. We all have actual day time jobs, some of us multiple ones to make ends meet. Until one of us wins the powerball and shares the fortune with the rest of TFS so we can all quit our jobs, then we have to be careful with dates.

I will be posting an update on the 23rd about patches, 5.0, and will start showcasing the aircraft and cockpit work. I hope to continue having Friday updates weekly or bi-weekly for a month or two.

Thanks, I appreciate your response! We all understand the situation and are happy to wait as long as necessary for TF to complete their work. Updates will be a great way to keep us going though.

Salute

Kestrel


EDIT: There are currently more visitors than members reading this thread, so they are apparently also interested in updates.

[Blitzen]

i'm sure I speak for many others who will be looking forward to the update later this month!

[Robo]

Hi.






I sincerely appreciate all the hard work TF and the community has done to make this game better. The community has provided scores of excellent guides and troubleshooting webpages for new players. This sim is now the most true to life I've ever used, and I would know having played more than 12 major sim titles ever since I was little. None of the problems introduced in the original game are TF's fault and I don't blame them for anything. I have only enthusiasm and appreciation for them and their work.

I'm not whining or trying to push anyone to complete anything before the proper time, I'm simply curious what the estimated timeline is for completing 5.0. 2 weeks, 2 months, 2 years, 2 decades, we'd just like a clue. The last definitive info on 5.0 was posted quite awhile ago unless I've missed something, and I don't think any previously estimated times are as relevant as they were whenever the last update was given.

I am hoping that some of the current issues/annoyances in CloD can be fixed in a future patch so that the game will be more interesting to potential players (and by extension, me). There are PLENTY of players who are sick of arcade-ish physics and bias found in almost all other "flight sims". Even in 1946 and BOX forums, there are simmers just waiting for someone to say the issues are fixed so they can get CloD. I don't mean to make anyone annoyed, but there still are quite a few things that are more intuitive in Il-2 1946 than in CloD, hence one of the reasons a game from the original Il-2 series is still played today. If CloD as a whole is made more intuitive to the average person, the players (and game sales) will start coming back. Maybe some of us don't like the average casual player, but this group of people makes up the majority of your potential player base. I speak for a lot of potential players/former players when I say that CloD in its current state is too cumbersome for the average new player to even want to attempt the learning curve. I'm not suggesting compromises in realism, only improvements to the game and fixes to the existing problems. 4.5 was a great addition to the game, and it caused me to come back. Just making the UI more user friendly or fixing some more long-suffered issues could encourage players to join CloD possibly just as much as adding a new theatre (as planned in 5.0) would. My humble opinion, take it or leave it.


Thanks,
Kestrel

I totally understand the problems faced by TF and really appreciate their work! I also don't really mind if they take a really long time to get 5.0 out as long as they fix all the bugs and make it as nice as we all hope (btw, it is TF's fault for setting our expectations so high with such amazing releases till date )))

But, however, i would like to add a few of my own points to Kestrel's request, if at all they're possible to accomplish:

1: After doing quite a bit of research i realised that the operating procedures for a lot of the aircraft are incomplete.. and not entirely modelled. For example, the startup of the 109, we flip the fuel cock, hit the starter and then zoom away without any sort of warm up either.. when in real life, the procedure was much more complicated. It involved priming the the engine, switching the magnetos, the inertial retarder, and the clutch. I would really appreciate if all these features could be added into the game for every plane, along with all the other small cockpit features which are not modelled like the circuit breakers and the pilot oxygen.

2: Would really really appreciate if the propeller pitch bug in all the german planes, the mode 22 oscillations in the Ju88 and tail gunner effectiveness could be fixed, along with the game crashes.

[9./JG52 Sturm]

I totally understand the problems faced by TF and really appreciate their work! I also don't really mind if they take a really long time to get 5.0 out as long as they fix all the bugs and make it as nice as we all hope (btw, it is TF's fault for setting our expectations so high with such amazing releases till date )))

But, however, i would like to add a few of my own points to Kestrel's request, if at all they're possible to accomplish:

1: After doing quite a bit of research i realised that the operating procedures for a lot of the aircraft are incomplete.. and not entirely modelled. For example, the startup of the 109, we flip the fuel cock, hit the starter and then zoom away without any sort of warm up either.. when in real life, the procedure was much more complicated. It involved priming the the engine, switching the magnetos, the inertial retarder, and the clutch. I would really appreciate if all these features could be added into the game for every plane, along with all the other small cockpit features which are not modelled like the circuit breakers and the pilot oxygen.

2: Would really really appreciate if the propeller pitch bug in all the german planes, the mode 22 oscillations in the Ju88 and tail gunner effectiveness could be fixed, along with the game crashes.

Not entirely convinced of the merits of point 1. There's DCS for that sort of thing... I'll say no more. I just don't think the impact on gameplay/historical accuracy is worth the time needed to code it.
Though Prop pitch and Mode 22 fixes would be most appreciated.

[Ctrl e]

Any chance of an update with pics of incoming aircraft please?

Cheers.

[ATAG_kiwiflieger]

I think Spiritus_Mortem will have an update out within the next day (if I have my date line conversions correct) which sounds to be a good one.

[Robo]

Not entirely convinced of the merits of point 1. There's DCS for that sort of thing... I'll say no more. I just don't think the impact on gameplay/historical accuracy is worth the time needed to code it.
Though Prop pitch and Mode 22 fixes would be most appreciated.

Well, for the merits of part 1, when I try to convince my friends to get the game, I start by saying that is is a simulator and not just any game.. but without the entire aircraft being modelled, it is difficult to justify that.
The extra features don't necessarily need to be simulated, even their presence without the simulation (if at all possible) gives a much better overall feel for the aircraft while playing..
Its even better when you can watch a real 109 startup video and be able to do the exact same in-game, or read one of the real manuals from 1939 and follow the procedures to avail the same results. Instead of watching tutorial videos which are game specific. A good example which has already been implemented would dive bombing or skip bombing. I watched a 1942 USAAF video which was shown to pilots then and did the exact same things in game to get good results. Its really a great feeling when it works!
I feel it makes the game much less arcade like in doing so.

Actually, a few months ago, i tried to get my dad (who is a fighter pilot irl) to play the game by saying that it is a combat sim and he thought the game was silly and that a lot of things were missing. Hence my request

[DerDa]

If you think about CloD as a combat-sim, this might solve the problem.
Here imho CloD shines with the best flight and damage model available (not to speak about the many servers with all their special interpretations of the game).

That said, I personally appreciate the 'pressing as much buttons as possible to make it feel real'-thingy.
The start up procedure, the difference in all the engines and ac and the necessity/possibility to really read the instruments is one of the things that makes me prefer CloD vastly over BoX.

So why don't I use my DCS (apart from the fact that my rig can't handle it anymore)?
Because there is not much more to do, than pressing the buttons, and this gets boring after the first dozen times.

In sum, TFS (and each other developer) has to keep a balance to provide the best possible experience for the 'combat-simmers' who want to get into action quickly and the 'airplane-simmers' who delight in pressing every switch and allthose somewhere in between.
For me, in this respect CloD does by far the best job of all the availabe sims.

(But still I would love to have some more ((optionally?)) pushable buttons, if just to shorten the time until the Beaufighter engines are warmed up )

[Baffin]

I fully appreciate the desire to enable more/all of the system switches and controls in the CLoD airplanes, but I also realize that this should remain a personal preference and is not something to be universally applied. Once TFS gets the current game projects working properly with score keeping, statistical reporting and other inoperative features, they might consider moving into the ultra-realism zone.

In any case, enhanced realism should be enabled as an option for those players not inclined to memorize all flight manual procedures. We must always keep CLoD attractive to the "Video Game" audience which makes up (IMO) more than half of its customers. Those of us who embrace realistic flight simulation may be rewarded somehow if a "Points" score system is ever developed. This could be a motivator for less advanced players to "Upgrade" their status in the game. Bragging rights can be a strong incentive for a lot of players.

For example, someone who enables all the optional controls and switches could be identified as an "Advanced", or "Professional" player. Rewards for this could include advanced armament, improved survivability or maybe even simpler "ego strokes" like custom skins or Teamspeak name suffixes. The possibilities are endless, but remain well down the road in the future.

These are fun things to think about, but TFS seems to have its hands full right now simply getting what already exists to work properly. It's all about priorities.

[ATAG_Dave]

1: After doing quite a bit of research i realised that the operating procedures for a lot of the aircraft are incomplete.. and not entirely modelled. For example, the startup of the 109, we flip the fuel cock, hit the starter and then zoom away without any sort of warm up either.. when in real life, the procedure was much more complicated. It involved priming the the engine, switching the magnetos, the inertial retarder, and the clutch. I would really appreciate if all these features could be added into the game for every plane, along with all the other small cockpit features which are not modelled like the circuit breakers and the pilot oxygen.

I think it depends upon what it is that is being simulated:
- A full how to start up & fly a 109/spit/whatever as you would have to do in real life (a bit like DCS ,often called a study SIM i think??)
- Combat related elements from a given period (currently BoB in clod) - eg when a squadron was scrambled, I believe - & ill soon be corrected if im wrong if i know these forums.. - the pilots ran and jumped into planes whose engines were already running and warm....

Some folks want the former. Some the latter....i guess as Baffin says - it would be nice to have both as options for folks, but I imagine TFS has plenty of more pressing priorities for now.

[1lokos]

1: After doing quite a bit of research i realised that the operating procedures for a lot of the aircraft are incomplete.. and not entirely modelled. For example, the startup of the 109, we flip the fuel cock, hit the starter and then zoom away without any sort of warm up either.. when in real life, the procedure was much more complicated. It involved priming the the engine, switching the magnetos, the inertial retarder, and the clutch.

Yes good point, or make this half barked "complex engine start procedure" decently or remove the "turn fuel cock, press I" and leaving only the "I" (as in other IL-2 games - to be "accessible to new players").
In the way that is don't satisfied "Greeks neither Trojans", the "clickable" cockpits of CloD really suits for people "cheater" reading instruments with digital pop-up by mouse over... very "realistic".

[DerDa]

Yes good point, or make this half barked "complex engine start procedure" decently or remove the "turn fuel cock, press I" and leaving only the "I" (as in other IL-2 games - to be "accessible to new players").
In the way that is don't satisfied "Greeks neither Trojans", the "clickable" cockpits of CloD really suits for people "cheater" reading instruments with digital pop-up by mouse over... very "realistic".

I very deliberately wrote 'necessity/possibility to read the instruments' etc.
I can press the magneto switches in CloD and I do that. I do have to know about overheating temperatures and best cruising/climbing/fighting temperatures in different planes.
So CloD thankfully allows me to add more realism and I appreciate this.

Just pressing 'I' and reading somewhere on the screen that oh-so-much things are happening, or reading 'emergency/combat/continous mode' by moving the throttle on the screen no matter what plane I am, always having the correct heading in a little window etc. is a game stopper for me and will always stay a game stopper.

I guess everybody is different. And fortunately there are different sims out there to suit our preferences.

[Robo]

For example, someone who enables all the optional controls and switches could be identified as an "Advanced", or "Professional" player. Rewards for this could include advanced armament, improved survivability or maybe even simpler "ego strokes" like custom skins or Teamspeak name suffixes. The possibilities are endless, but remain well down the road in the future.

Honestly, i think that would be a really bad idea, because with rewards and ego comes unnecessary (possibly unhealthy) rivalry and might lead to a more unfriendly community. Especially with rewards that only make better players better or removing the ability to freely use your own skins. All players should be equal and only your personal skill and experience should matter. Otherwise It would make CloD like one of those MMOs with people shouting noob all the time.. The thing i appreciate the most about this game, even more than the simulation aspect, is the community. Lot of really nice people! who are fun to talk to and ATAG has done a brilliant job maintaining that.

also, well, we have war thunder and wargaming for that sort of stuff.

And the motivation for me at least comes from my love for aircraft
It shouldn't be forced if it does'nt come from within

[ATAG_Highseas]

Luckily I dont really have much of an EGO

[BOO]

DCS prerssy many buttons make big jet go beep and bing - I like this in a jet - kinda makes me feel involved with a complex machine that is 75% system management anyhow.

Clod - flip switch pressy key - go - I like this also - still feel ive done something. In DCS I find wardbird starting oddly monotonous for some reason.

BOX - pressy one key make everything go - I like this approach too since all the animations are there and its something to take in the ambience of as you lock your gunner positions in MP just in case terry toolhead turns up in them.

I get lokos's point but as it stands I think it should be left alone. As Baffin says it would be great to have a choice (cake and eating it I know) but here I also agree with Robo that such choices shouldn't affect anything or stroke egos.

On the subject of ammo loadouts I love this aspect of clod but I also find it more unrealistic than hitting the fuel cock and setting off. Few pilots would be given personal gun range and spread set ups let alone guicci bespoke belts filled only with the good stuff. I really like to see more historically representive loadouts especially now the DM has improved once again. But that's just me.