homepage Forums Air Combat & Civil Aviation IL-2: Great Battles Dev Update 79

Of course, zero allowances are made for the fact that Russian is their native language and maybe they're not coming across saying what they exactly mean to say.

I defy someone to criticize this without using the word "unlock", "grind", or "XP".
Every single post uses them again and again like a mantra as if it's self-evident.
"I've used these words, therefore it's bad, you can't disagree!"

No clarity is needed. It's very plain.
There are things called synonyms. To someone who is not a native English speaker, the difference between a thief and a burglar may not be obvious like it is to one who was born speaking it. But if you listen to the context in which they use it, you can determine whether they meant to say thief when they said burglar.
Likewise, listening to the ideas behind their decisions and how it will work, instead of laser-focusing on a couple of words and shouting "DURR!! UNLOCK!!! XP!!! DUR!!!" would show that there is almost NO DIFFERENCE between this and how a historical campaign would work.

Try replacing "XP" with "rank"--does that work better now? Replace "unlock" with "allowed access."

The sentences "by flying missions you gain XP that will allow you to unlock different skins and loadouts" and "by flying missions you gain rank that will allow you the right to paint your plane differently and get alternative weapons loads for your plane" are EXACTLY THE SAME. Because a rookie pilot wouldn't be allowed to have his plane repainted, or pick non-standard loadouts!!

Insisting that they are different merely because a different term is used does not make it so when the user of the term is Russian.




The Jedi Master

How would a 'rookie' be defined? Based on his kills or time flown? I wonder

How about "O-1 with no combat time"?



The Jedi Master

What you say make sense, but if you look at project mannager posts in Russiam Forum, you see that his vision is game oriented*, for their target public "XP" meam Experience Points and not "Rank", is not mather of language issues.

"Hard core simmers" is the "enemy", picture used there - by staff member - for joke abouth what they think of this kind of player:



* Simple, he are tunned with today game market.

These, "making noise" in this forum or in ohers, are many?
This same pool have only 111 votes until now.

In game forum, a related pool have received only ~300 votes.

Since I need - as "silver" - "unlock" the rear gunner for il-2, hope it's be fun.

Sokol1

This just keeps getting better

So they're taking our money in early access while laughing at us behind our backs...sweet!

Of course not, they are doing it publicly.

Come on, guys. Let's try to the discussion civil, grown up and objective.

The personal element that's creeping into the thread is unnecessary and unhelpful.

Grown up and objective would be fantastic.

I guess I would be the cat, as I'm happy with many things, but not everything about BoS.

And then there's the dog. Ever loyal, always happy even if his owner is neglecting him.

But I must protest...I DO NOT wear a propeller beanie when playing combat flight sims!

I wear an aluminum foil hat to protect my brain from space rays!

Which one are you?

Thanks, thats really good news, being able to have two types of SP campaign engine is a big plus.


Good luck with the project!

And with that they have lost a customer. I was waiting to purchase the game based on the single player game, and low and behold, it's what I thought it would be. I don't know why it is so hard to actually use the old IL-2 dynamic campaign as a template. I want to feel "connected" to my squadron. I want to "level up" from fresh pilot to commander through attrition and campaign heroics. I want to see who in my squadron died. I want to see how many missions everyone has done. I want the units on the map to be persistent and dynamic.

Disappointing and one less customer. I got burned on Cliffs of Dover. I won't be burned on this.

Well I sure am confused about now.

I paid around 90 bucks each for COD and BOS. I certainly haven't been "Burned" by COD thanks to TF.
Even at this Early stage of BOS,my 90 bucks has been well spent. Even if BOS doesn't go "Exactly" how I want,I am sure I can enjoy it.
Another thing. You haven't even purchased BOS. Do you go into Restaurants and tell them "I am not eating here ! I "Heard" the food is crap"?

Well I got burned by CoD....then Team Fusion kissed the boo boo and made it all better. I agree CoD with TF is well worth the price.

BoS on the other hand might be worth the price if you are looking for online air-quake. And some people are, which is fine.

On the other hand if you are looking for a good SP combat sim, I would not recommend BoS, especially before release. For $50+ in early access you get a quick mission builder with a 16 plane dogfight, or you can go bomb a target 2 mins away. After a while that can get dull. I wont go into the things that make BoS more arcade than sim, its already been discussed.

Maybe after release if people can enjoy a non-historic random mission generator with no accurate squads to chase XP points, then good on you. But some folks are looking for more out of a sim.

I still think it's not really accurate to say the campaign is 'non-historic', I mentioned this in another thread but I think Semi-historic is more accurate - there are front lines that move with phases of the battle (based on history), and the airfields are positioned historically as well.

And the plane set is historic, okay you can argue semi-historic I suppose with the FW-190, but it's not like there are Corsairs and Mustangs flying around.

Can't really speak to the 'online air-quake', as I'm a single player guy, but if you went on to one of the 'expert' servers, wouldn't it be a little more than air-quake if everyone was locked into those difficulty settings? You wouldn't have unlimited ammo or easy engine management, so you'd have to at least fly a little tactically, right? Or maybe you mean no online co-op missions, in which case I would imagine that would be very disappointing for online people.

All that being said, however, I do think if you were a strictly single player person and you haven't bought the sim yet it might pay to wait a bit and see what happens after release, as far as single player goes. I'm sure the majority of people that were interested have already picked it up though and are just hoping that some good single player options will be on the horizon.

I can. It's nothing like that on the expert servers with the full Stalingrad map.

No squad markings, no squad based airfields, and unlocks to continue. I guess you can call that semi-historic. Pretty far from it IMO.

Air-quake has nothing to do with CEM or difficulty settings. IT has to do with jump in, fly for 10mns, shoot people down or get shot down then respawn right away and do it again, over and over. Now and the you will catch a Stuka trying to bomb an airfield, but most just low level pow pow. Just like the threads about all the FF going on. Oh, and rack up that k/d ratio. That's exactly how Quake s played.

I am sure as hell hoping something can come in the form of go SP action. But like most sims it seems, it will be up to modders and how restrictive the ME is. Even if it is great, it wont be until into next year to see gold.

The situation that lokitexas is describing as "air quake" is definitely not what I'm seeing on the Eagles Nest or Syndicate servers, and I have spent a lot of time in those servers.

Well I definitely agree with the sentiment that it won't be at least until into next year till we see single player gold, but hopefully the basis for creating it will be in there.

Seeing what came out of Rise of Flight was some good single player stuff, I'm not too worried.

And while it's not ideal, I'd be okay for a while with checking out whatever comes at launch campaign wise. If I have to just fly from the same airfield and only pick fighter missions to sort of fudge being in a squadron that's not too bad, at least for a little while.

Having to unlock airfields, "win" missions by shooting down x number of planes, and not being able to choose what difficulty settings I want in the campaign are the things I'm personally most displeased about, makes me feel a bit alienated from the game.

A lot of people feel that way. Its an odd decision that makes people wonder how/why they came up with that. Heinkill 's theory of a money making setup seems pretty close to the reason I believe.

As far as "fudging" the campaign goes, that's about the only option. Not having squadrons for that area/era is still another head scratcher to me though. A bit of research, and having the right emblems, and airfields would have helped quite a bit.

While you are optimistic about what came from RoF, I am pessimistic. The single player stuff was sub par imo. Yes, even Pat Wilsons campaign generator. It was not the fault of the creators, but the restrictions of 777. With 777/1C don't expect great mods like ARMA, DCS, or old IL2. The freedom is not there.