• July 16, 2019, 05:33:39 AM
• Welcome, Guest

Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Down

### AuthorTopic: IL-2 Great Battles Sales  (Read 3776 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

#### SAS~Storebror

• Editor
• member
• Offline
• Posts: 17308
• Ask me if I care.
##### IL-2 Great Battles Sales
« on: February 16, 2018, 02:42:05 AM »

Hi folks,

It's sales season again at https://il2sturmovik.com/

50% off on Battle of Stalingrad
50% off on Battle of Moscow
$10 off on: • Battle of Kuban Early Access • Battle of Bodenplatte Pre-Order • Ju 52/?m • Fw 190 A-3 • La-5 (series$8 off on:
• Yak-1b
• P-40E-1
• MC.202 Series VIII

$6.24 off on Cliffs of Dover BLITZ$5 off on:
• La-5FN series 2 Pre-Order
• Bf 109 G-6 Pre-Order
• Ten Days of Autumn Campaign

\$3.30 off on Blazing Steppe Campaign

Grab it while it's hot. Direct store links behind screenshots:

Cheers!
Mike
Logged
Learn. Challenge. Improve. In loving memory of the times when I cared...

#### Captain Dawson

• member
• Offline
• Posts: 511
##### Re: IL-2 Great Battles Sales
« Reply #1 on: February 16, 2018, 03:48:26 PM »

Thanks! Tips like this are nice for giving a little push to those standing on the edge as I was last sale.

I got Moscow and Yak-1b with the last sale, this time around I've picked up Kuban before the release.

I'll preorder Bodenplatte when someone can confirm the P-51 is not nerfed.   It's not a lend-lease plane, so I'm hoping there won't be as much motive to downplay its undeniably important role in the war. I've hoping that in this newest addition we will at least have closer matched aircraft in terms of speed and climb rate.
Logged
"It's totally foolproof, until you mess something up." -Captain Dawson My OP rig: CybertronPC Palladium custom desktop computer, GPU: NVidia GeForce GTX 1060 6GB GDDR5, CPU: Intel Core i5-6600K 3.5 GHz 6M Cache Skylake Quad-Core, RAM: 8.00 GB, Motherboard: Intel H110 Chipset, SSD: 240GB, HDD: 1TB, OS: Windows 10

#### Gaston

• Modder
• member
• Online
• Posts: 2546
##### Re: IL-2 Great Battles Sales
« Reply #2 on: February 16, 2018, 04:24:26 PM »

Looks interesting... as I have none of these new games, which one should I choose to begin with ? what is your advice ? are they better optimized for offline or for online play (I am offliner) ?

Is the gama available only on download, or do they send me a DVD ? And how works the download ? what is STEAM ?
Logged

#### Captain Dawson

• member
• Offline
• Posts: 511
##### Re: IL-2 Great Battles Sales
« Reply #3 on: February 16, 2018, 10:58:12 PM »

Looks interesting... as I have none of these new games, which one should I choose to begin with ? what is your advice ? are they better optimized for offline or for online play (I am offliner) ?

Is the game available only on download, or do they send me a DVD ? And how works the download ? what is STEAM ?

BOX (BOS BOM BOK) is the new generation of IL-2, but honestly it doesn't replace 1946. While it has far better graphics, effects, and realism, the fact that BOX is so limited in scope (compared to 1946) is a big detraction from this.

I would start with whichever battle and planeset is most interesting to you, and while it is on sale! Stalingrad has the best big city and steppe terrain, Moscow has the best fields/farmland/Moscow-that-you-cant-fly-over , and Kuban has yuge mountains + the Black Sea coast + anti-ship operations. Kuban is certainly the most interesting map, but cities are pretty sparse. I am really looking forwards to the A-20 and P-39 coming in a few weeks with Kuban.

If you are an offline player, there are a few things you should know. The game is definitely more oriented to multiplayer than 1946, and you can connect to servers in-game. Offline is unfortunately very limited, you have only a ROF style Quick Mission Builder, several nice single missions, and a few campaigns you can buy for more money. The full Mission Editor has incredible features, but it's really just useless unless you have a huge amount of time on your hands to learn it. Coming from the 1946 FMB, the Mission Editor is incredibly over-complicated and time consuming. These 100 plane missions I've made in a couple hours in the FMB could take me weeks on end in the ME. There is an infinite amount or errors you can get in scripting missions, and you may have to load/run the mission many times just to resolve one issue. Put simply, if you are an offline pilot, you will most likely find yourself eventually returning to 1946 now and then as many of us do.

All this aside, no one can argue with the graphics. This is why I bought BOX.

Hope this helps
Logged
"It's totally foolproof, until you mess something up." -Captain Dawson My OP rig: CybertronPC Palladium custom desktop computer, GPU: NVidia GeForce GTX 1060 6GB GDDR5, CPU: Intel Core i5-6600K 3.5 GHz 6M Cache Skylake Quad-Core, RAM: 8.00 GB, Motherboard: Intel H110 Chipset, SSD: 240GB, HDD: 1TB, OS: Windows 10

#### [FAC]Ghost129er

• Oh look, a BSoD!
• Modder
• member
• Offline
• Posts: 1040
• SAS Certified Nuisance
##### Re: IL-2 Great Battles Sales
« Reply #4 on: February 17, 2018, 03:06:00 AM »

Time to grab BoS Standard at least for a start.
Logged
Clowns to the left of me, Jokers to the right, here I am, stuck in the middle with you.

#### Gaston

• Modder
• member
• Online
• Posts: 2546
##### Re: IL-2 Great Battles Sales
« Reply #5 on: February 17, 2018, 04:14:44 AM »

Thanks for the infos, Captain Dawson !

With all the limitations it has, sure I will keep my money for something else !

But allow me a last question, for the moment : these games need the player to be always connected to the Internet, right ? if not connected, not possible to use the game ?
Logged

#### Captain Dawson

• member
• Offline
• Posts: 511
##### Re: IL-2 Great Battles Sales
« Reply #6 on: February 17, 2018, 02:42:34 PM »

Thanks for the infos, Captain Dawson !

With all the limitations it has, sure I will keep my money for something else !

But allow me a last question, for the moment : these games need the player to be always connected to the Internet, right ? if not connected, not possible to use the game ?

Thankfully, the game can work without internet in the offline mode. However, updates only work with internet of course, and because of this, the launcher will often block you from starting the game. You simply need to start the game from the .exe in the game folder. You still need to sign in to your account regardless of the internet.
Logged
"It's totally foolproof, until you mess something up." -Captain Dawson My OP rig: CybertronPC Palladium custom desktop computer, GPU: NVidia GeForce GTX 1060 6GB GDDR5, CPU: Intel Core i5-6600K 3.5 GHz 6M Cache Skylake Quad-Core, RAM: 8.00 GB, Motherboard: Intel H110 Chipset, SSD: 240GB, HDD: 1TB, OS: Windows 10

#### SAS~Storebror

• Editor
• member
• Offline
• Posts: 17308
• Ask me if I care.
##### Re: IL-2 Great Battles Sales
« Reply #7 on: February 18, 2018, 01:15:51 AM »

As much as I appreciate Captain Dawson's effort in summarizing the current status of IL-2 Great Battles, as much I am afraid that I have to put back a few things into dimension.

BOX is so limited in scope (compared to 1946)
The comparison is slightly invalid.
IL-2 1946 didn't start with the wide scope we use to enjoy these days either, and an unmodded 1946 is still very limited in it's scope compared to what we enjoy here in terms of e.g. BAT.
IL-2 Great Battles is growing, as was 1946 when it was still actively developed by it's creators.
If you want to compare the two, compare and unmodded IL-2 Ace Expansions Pack to the current IL-2 Great Battles and you'll see that the scope difference isn't all that big anymore.

Moscow-that-you-cant-fly-over
Explanation has been given when I've complained about the same thing over at il2sturmovik.com forums:
Currently the city is populated with stand-in buildings. While this looks great from the distance, it looks rather odd when you get closer.
Having cities that just-dont-look-right is something we're used to in 1946, but the IL-2 Great Battles Developers have higher standards so they keep Moscow as a distant thing to look at until the buildings are there and the game engine can handle them.

Kuban is certainly the most interesting map, but cities are pretty sparse.
The latter is what it is in that area, the first is correct but dangerous for less powerful game rigs: Mind you that Kuban is the most demanding map existing in IL-2 Great Battles at the moment.
Currently (IL-2 Great Battles version 2.012) you can expect a 20% FPS penalty over populated areas on the Kuban map at least, compared to similar areas on other (Moscow/Stalingrad) maps.
Nobody knows what the new version 3.001 will bring, but we know that the development team has been working on the viewing distance so I take it that the rendering engine got some updates too.

The game is definitely more oriented to multiplayer than 1946, and you can connect to servers in-game. Offline is unfortunately very limited, you have only a ROF style Quick Mission Builder, several nice single missions, and a few campaigns you can buy for more money.
Eh... no sir.
IL-2 Great Battles online functionality is much more user friendly than 1946 ever was, that much you're right.
The quick mission builder has a couple of differences from the 1946 one. In some regards it falls behind (big quick battles with lots of different planes), in others it's much better (guidance, training use, repeated fights etc.). It just doesn't really compare, that's it.
Battle of Stalingrad ships with two campaigns built in, Battle of Moscow with one. Each of them is much more intense, much more lengthy, much more historically correct and many other things more than anything we used to know from Stock IL-2 1946 campaigns.
Furthermore, you can currently purchase two additional commercial campaigns, where each of them is mind blowing, and there's a couple of user made "free to grab" campaigns available on the forums. This is quite like 1946.

The full Mission Editor has incredible features, but it's really just useless unless you have a huge amount of time on your hands to learn it.
And that's exactly like the 1946 FMD - lots of time necessary to learn it.
The main difference is that the IL-2 Great Battles Mission Editor is much more powerful, and these additional features need some additional learning steps.
Endless guides are available on Youtube, the assistance IMHO is much better than it ever was in 1946 where using the FMB was more like dark arts.

Coming from the 1946 FMB, the Mission Editor is incredibly over-complicated and time consuming.
The starting point is wrong already.
You cannot say "I'm the master of checkers, but learning chess is incredibly over-complicated and time consuming" either.
It's two different things.
Being a pro in one doesn't give you any better starting point in the other.
And it works vice versa as well: Someone being user to the IL-2 Great Battles Mission Editor could say just this: "Coming from IL-2 GB ME, 1946's FMB is incredibly over-complicated and time consuming - and lame".
Would just be as invalid as your statement is.

These 100 plane missions I've made in a couple hours in the FMB could take me weeks on end in the ME.
Looks like you have barely scratched ME's edge at best, otherwise you would know that the IL-2 Great Battles game engine isn't made for such 100 plane missions at all.

There is an infinite amount or errors you can get in scripting missions, and you may have to load/run the mission many times just to resolve one issue.
Just like 1946.

if you are an offline pilot, you will most likely find yourself eventually returning to 1946 now and then as many of us do
I don't think such generalization really has a point.
I for one play both IL-2 Great Battles and 1946 simply because the first is still "work in progress", while the latter is full-featured and matured already.
Yet the Great Battles part is growing, because that's the future of the genre.
The reasons why people still stick to 1946 in parallel to Great Battles are as many as there are users of both.
Blaming it on lack of offline capabilities falls short.

Multiplayer is great fun, but it's hardcore. If you don't have head tracking, you have a pretty substantial disadvantage to be honest.
Just like 1946.
If you play "closed cockpit" servers in 1946, you are in the very same situation.
And vice versa, if you play "normal" difficulty servers in IL-2 Great Battles, you don't need no head tracking at all.
It's plain simply, exactly just the same thing.

snap rolling, which is very deadly in dogfights here
Yes because the simulation depth of IL-2 Great Battles goes way beyond what we used to - or ever will - have in 1946.
And that's great.
You just have to learn it and get used to it.
If you jump into the Great Battles game, thinking "hey I'm the CFS pro, I will rule this game" and are unwilling to relearn your basics, then you will not get happy with it.
But in that case, you won't get happy with any other title of the CFS genre ever.

With the addition of the 109G6 and La5FN, you're mostly going to get seal-clubbed unless you buy the same aircraft
Sorry to say, but that's complete nonsense.

Buy the Yak1b or La-5FN collector's plane if you're going to do multiplayer; with an altitude advantage, BF109 and FW190 don't stand a chance against you.
Complete nonsense again.
I smell a certain degree of Luftwhining here.
The Bf 109 F-4 is the most competitive plane of the current set, hands down.
The Yak-1b, if at all, is the only one which, when being in it's own regime (turnfights at low to medium altitudes) can stand a chance in a 1-on-1 dogfight against a 109 F-4 with pilots of the same skill.
Nobody flew a La-5FN in IL-2 Great Battles yet, so what you claim here simply lacks any substance.
The Yak-1b, that much is for sure, can easily be countered by Bf 109 and Fw 190 pilots, if only they remember where the strengths of their planes are.

Don't buy it only for the P-40 or Spitfire, they are pretty heavily outclassed and quite underpowered in this sim.
Not correct.
They're just much more difficult to fly than most other fighters.
And that's historically correct.
The key to success is to read the plane's specs, checklists etc. and fly them for purpose.
The P-40 was a lame duck in reality, it's just overdone in 1946, so what you feel here is a comparative feeling coming from an incorrectly uber-capable P-40 in 1946.
The Spitfire is a great kite in IL-2 Great Battles, it's just that people don't bother to adhere to it's specs, instead they run the plane like they did in 1946, full power all the time, and then wonder when they have a charbroiled engine when the fight starts.

MiG-3 and I-16 are rockets compared to P-40
Simply not correct.
Try again and next time read the P-40 checklist before you jump the pilot seat.

A lot of people think it is not accurately modeled in comparison to the Russian/German planes. P-40 is almost useless in multiplayer, you may as well be going against Me-262s, speed difference is so much.
A lot of flies think that shit is tasty. Doesn't make me believe they're right.
There are people flying the P-40 quite successfully on multiplayer servers.
The difference to the vast majority who can barely get off the ground with it is: They did read the checklists.

Even with Russian planes, unless you can draw a 109 or 190 into a close in dogfight, you aren't going to catch them unless they throw away their advantages.
Didn't you just say that a 109 and 190 stand no chance against a Yak-1b before?
Sorry but... that's somewhat contradictory.

AI is pretty disappointing compared to 1946.
Currently: Yes.
But here again you have to compare it with 1946's AI of the "Ace Expansion Pack"'s time.
And then it's rather on the same level.
IL-2 Great Battles Developers said that they will focus on offline capabilities a lot more, and this naturally includes AI behaviour.
I guess there's much more to come in this regard.

especially vehicle AI are superb. Vehicles can hide in trees/buildings and avoid your attacks. If you are interested in lifelike graphics and realism, this game is sure to please.
That's correct. 1946 vehicles probably will never have the capability to act as natural as IL-2 Great Battles ones do already.

Don't buy it from Steam, buy it from the IL-2 Sturmovik site. 2 benefits to this: 1. You are supporting the IL-2 developers instead of Steam, and 2. You don't have to deal with Steam's ridiculous program, accounts, and ads. (If you buy from Steam, you also have to buy content in a certain order due to their whole "DLC" thing.) CloD requires Steam, BOX fortunately doesn't.
Even if you buy IL-2 Great Battles from Steam, you don't have to start up Steam a single time after purchase.
And you don't need to buy content in any specific order either.
That's simply nonsense.

Bottom line is: IL-2 Great Battles is the future of the WW2 Combat Flight Simulation genre, if it has any that is.
It's not matured yet like 1946, but nobody can expect it to be right now.
It's being actively developed by the original creators, there's no end in sight, and new stuff is coming continuously.
You can decide to give it a try, or just stick to 1946 and watch a dying game - sorry to say but that's what it is.

Cheers!
Mike
Logged
Learn. Challenge. Improve. In loving memory of the times when I cared...

#### Mick

• Modder
• member
• Online
• Posts: 3972
##### Re: IL-2 Great Battles Sales
« Reply #8 on: February 18, 2018, 01:51:15 AM »

Bottom line is: IL-2 Great Battles is the future of the WW2 Combat Flight Simulation genre, if it has any that is.
It's not matured yet like 1946, but nobody can expect it to be right now.
It's being actively developed by the original creators, there's no end in sight, and new stuff is coming continuously.
You can decide to give it a try, or just stick to 1946 and watch a dying game - sorry to say but that's what it is.

THX, Mike, you're, alas, probably right about 1946 fate, but as far as I am concerned there's still no theater of ops that teases me in BoX, since I have never liked flying in the east or even the PTO ...

I have just bought a new (second hand) rig (GTX970, Intel 4790K etc...) specifically just in case I switch to BoX or CoD and its upcoming MTO (but you wrote somewhere that CoD was even more demanding hardware wise than BoX ...  )

I appreciate BoX opening a west front, but why so late, I mean end of war, 1st jan 1945 ...?

There's a huge chronological gap between the Eastern front and the Western one then ...
Logged

#### Captain Dawson

• member
• Offline
• Posts: 511
##### Re: IL-2 Great Battles Sales
« Reply #9 on: February 18, 2018, 03:37:04 PM »

As much as I appreciate Captain Dawson's effort in summarizing the current status of IL-2 Great Battles, as much I am afraid that I have to put back a few things into dimension.

ok

The comparison is slightly invalid.
IL-2 1946 didn't start with the wide scope we use to enjoy these days either, and an unmodded 1946 is still very limited in it's scope compared to what we enjoy here in terms of e.g. BAT.
IL-2 Great Battles is growing, as was 1946 when it was still actively developed by it's creators.
If you want to compare the two, compare and unmodded IL-2 Ace Expansions Pack to the current IL-2 Great Battles and you'll see that the scope difference isn't all that big anymore.

Ok, I agree with you. My point of reference was only the current 1946 to BOX, since that's what we have now. BOX hypothetically has just as much potential, but at the moment, 1946 is the one that has all the mods, and that's what I compare it to.

Moscow-that-you-cant-fly-over
Explanation has been given when I've complained about the same thing over at il2sturmovik.com forums:
Currently the city is populated with stand-in buildings. While this looks great from the distance, it looks rather odd when you get closer.
Having cities that just-dont-look-right is something we're used to in 1946, but the IL-2 Great Battles Developers have higher standards so they keep Moscow as a distant thing to look at until the buildings are there and the game engine can handle them .

It's not really Moscow that bothers me. It's the way they force your autopilot on that is mildly annoying! If you happen to be in a dogfight near the boundaries (not too uncommon when you have to maximize you speed and fly straight for a long period of time), you get the controls taken from you. True there is warning, but when you are running from an enemy, I feel 1946's implementation of boundary-less maps are definitely more realistic.

The game is definitely more oriented to multiplayer than 1946, and you can connect to servers in-game. Offline is unfortunately very limited, you have only a ROF style Quick Mission Builder, several nice single missions, and a few campaigns you can buy for more money.
Eh... no sir.
IL-2 Great Battles online functionality is much more user friendly than 1946 ever was, that much you're right.
The quick mission builder has a couple of differences from the 1946 one. In some regards it falls behind (big quick battles with lots of different planes), in others it's much better (guidance, training use, repeated fights etc.). It just doesn't really compare, that's it.
Battle of Stalingrad ships with two campaigns built in, Battle of Moscow with one. Each of them is much more intense, much more lengthy, much more historically correct and many other things more than anything we used to know from Stock IL-2 1946 campaigns.
Furthermore, you can currently purchase two additional commercial campaigns, where each of them is mind blowing, and there's a couple of user made "free to grab" campaigns available on the forums. This is quite like 1946.

Haven't tried the campaigns yet, I stand corrected. All I'm saying here is that currently BOX has less available in the way of missions, for the obvious fact that 1946 has had a lot more time to mature. Again, I only compare to what we have now, not the potential. Of course, when Bodenplatte comes out with the addition of American and British aircraft, I think we'll see a whole lot more players who are not interested in the Eastern Front.

The full Mission Editor has incredible features, but it's really just useless unless you have a huge amount of time on your hands to learn it.
And that's exactly like the 1946 FMD - lots of time necessary to learn it.
The main difference is that the IL-2 Great Battles Mission Editor is much more powerful, and these additional features need some additional learning steps.
Endless guides are available on Youtube, the assistance IMHO is much better than it ever was in 1946 where using the FMB was more like dark arts.

Coming from the 1946 FMB, the Mission Editor is incredibly over-complicated and time consuming.

The starting point is wrong already.
You cannot say "I'm the master of checkers, but learning chess is incredibly over-complicated and time consuming" either.
It's two different things.
Being a pro in one doesn't give you any better starting point in the other.
And it works vice versa as well: Someone being user to the IL-2 Great Battles Mission Editor could say just this: "Coming from IL-2 GB ME, 1946's FMB is incredibly over-complicated and time consuming - and lame".
Would just be as invalid as your statement is.

Fair enough that someone could say that, I see what you're saying. But there's no denying that the ME is more complicated. I figured the FMB out mainly by trial and error. The amount of knowledge required for the ME makes that impossible. For starters, you need multiple triggers and links for anything you want to move. There are dozens of options and parameters for each of them you need to know, and that in itself provides a host of potential issues if you get one wrong. Put simply, even following a step-by-step guide for building a mission, I found the ME to be fairly difficult. In the FMB, once I figured out to place objects by holding the CTRL key, I learned almost everything else by myself.

These 100 plane missions I've made in a couple hours in the FMB could take me weeks on end in the ME.
Looks like you have barely scratched ME's edge at best, otherwise you would know that the IL-2 Great Battles game engine isn't made for such 100 plane missions at all.

You've got me there! The reason I don't know this is because the most aircraft I've ever gotten to work in the ME is one. After spending a few hours every now and then in the ME, I realized the amount of time makes it not worth it for me personally. So am I biased, yes. But this is only my opinion.

Multiplayer is great fun, but it's hardcore. If you don't have head tracking, you have a pretty substantial disadvantage to be honest.
Just like 1946.
If you play "closed cockpit" servers in 1946, you are in the very same situation.
And vice versa, if you play "normal" difficulty servers in IL-2 Great Battles, you don't need no head tracking at all.
It's plain simply, exactly just the same thing.

Due to the way BOX handles deflection shooting and distant contact spotting, my opinion is that head tracking is more important here than in 1946. Sure you don't need it, but someone who can watch your movements from the corner of their canopy effortlessly has at least some advantage over someone with a 8 quadrant hat switch snap view.

snap rolling, which is very deadly in dogfights here
Yes because the simulation depth of IL-2 Great Battles goes way beyond what we used to - or ever will - have in 1946.
And that's great.
You just have to learn it and get used to it.
If you jump into the Great Battles game, thinking "hey I'm the CFS pro, I will rule this game" and are unwilling to relearn your basics, then you will not get happy with it.
But in that case, you won't get happy with any other title of the CFS genre ever.

Ok, agreed. You have to be willing to learn the new aspects and relearn some, not arguing with that.

With the addition of the 109G6 and La5FN, you're mostly going to get seal-clubbed unless you buy the same aircraft
Sorry to say, but that's complete nonsense.

How do I explain this...
Due to the small numbers of planes I usually see online, BnZ is the primary mode of getting kills. There are good players, yes, but a lot of players can't seem to broaden their horizons beyond BnZ. G6 and FN have a speed/climb rate advantage over something a non-premium user might have, like Yak1 or Bf109 F4. In a realistic scenario with swirling dogfights, my statement is nonsense. But when the only thing that matters is speed, (and that's often what it comes to regardless of skill,) performance is what often makes you win or lose. Skill can't always save you when you have a speed/climb disadvantage, every time you dodge, the faster plane has the prerogative to re-initiate the attack and not you. All I'm saying is, to the 1946 user who has all aircraft for an equal price it can seem a bit unfair, that's all.

Buy the Yak1b or La-5FN collector's plane if you're going to do multiplayer; with an altitude advantage, BF109 and FW190 don't stand a chance against you.
Complete nonsense again.
The Bf 109 F-4 is the most competitive plane of the current set, hands down.
The Yak-1b, if at all, is the only one which, when being in it's own regime (turnfights at low to medium altitudes) can stand a chance in a 1-on-1 dogfight against a 109 F-4 with pilots of the same skill.
Nobody flew a La-5FN in IL-2 Great Battles yet, so what you claim here simply lacks any substance.
The Yak-1b, that much is for sure, can easily be countered by Bf 109 and Fw 190 pilots, if only they remember where the strengths of their planes are.

That is absolutely correct. But when players are tired of getting seal-clubbed, they just climb to ridiculous altitudes and BnZ. Since most players aren't coordinated with their team, this is what many end up doing, again, only from my experiences. Unlike real-world, players are not bound to complete a mission or protect each other. The majority just all want kills. The vast majority of the kills I've seen in BOX were either from BnZ, or planes that wasted all their altitude doing this getting killed. Yak1b has a not insignificant advantage in this tactic against a 109 or 190, because they cannot outmaneuver him. Done right, it really can't be countered forever. Don't have head tracking, you most likely won't be looking over your shoulder ever few seconds. I would know! Even if he jinks, I just pull up early and set up another attack whenever he levels off. Haven't flown the FN, but I suspect if it matches the real-world performance, it will have at least some advantage over the 109F4. Again, this is only from my limited experience. I know the devs need to make money too, but you can see how some could consider additional paid aircraft to be unfair.

Even with Russian planes, unless you can draw a 109 or 190 into a close in dogfight, you aren't going to catch them unless they throw away their advantages.
Didn't you just say that a 109 and 190 stand no chance against a Yak-1b before?
Sorry but... that's somewhat contradictory.

In a BnZ attack. Same level, you can't catch them. BnZ, Yak can be very spammy. Unfortunately, most battles are by yourself, (or friendlies refuse to help) so for players flying the Russian planes, this is sometimes the best option. In a realistic scenario where it's not every-man-for-himself, the balance shifts the other way.

I smell a certain degree of Luftwhining here.
LOL this word needs to be added to the dictionary    I do fly the German planes sometimes, they just don't fit my flying style.

Don't buy it only for the P-40 or Spitfire, they are pretty heavily outclassed and quite underpowered in this sim.
Not correct.
They're just much more difficult to fly than most other fighters.
And that's historically correct.
The key to success is to read the plane's specs, checklists etc. and fly them for purpose.
The P-40 was a lame duck in reality, it's just overdone in 1946, so what you feel here is a comparative feeling coming from an incorrectly uber-capable P-40 in 1946.
The Spitfire is a great kite in IL-2 Great Battles, it's just that people don't bother to adhere to it's specs, instead they run the plane like they did in 1946, full power all the time, and then wonder when they have a charbroiled engine when the fight starts.

MiG-3 and I-16 are rockets compared to P-40
Simply not correct.
Try again and next time read the P-40 checklist before you jump the pilot seat.

A lot of people think it is not accurately modeled in comparison to the Russian/German planes. P-40 is almost useless in multiplayer, you may as well be going against Me-262s, speed difference is so much.
There are people flying the P-40 quite successfully on multiplayer servers.
The difference to the vast majority who can barely get off the ground with it is: They did read the checklists.

Even using auto mixture and pitch gives you pitiful performance. It gives you the best settings automatically catered to your engine temps, and even prevents you from blowing the engine. And I did read the checklist

Take this all with a grain of salt, this is my opinion. You can always fault the pilot, but if you set everything to AI and the result is the same, this argument loses some steam. True some have success with it, but that is in isolated circumstances where he has the advantage, or if the enemy foolishly wastes his speed advantage. Plane versus plane, the P-40 is overly disadvantaged IMHO. There are plenty of people who think the same on the Il-2 forums. Granted, P-40 is considered to be a mediocre plane, but not quite this mediocre. Don't mean to start an argument, all I'm saying is that it's disappointing for someone who wants to fly the P-40. Put it this way, if in real life it was as bad as it is in this sim, we wouldn't see the kill to death ratio anywhere near what it was in actuality.

AI is pretty disappointing compared to 1946.
Currently: Yes.
But here again you have to compare it with 1946's AI of the "Ace Expansion Pack"'s time.
And then it's rather on the same level.
IL-2 Great Battles Developers said that they will focus on offline capabilities a lot more, and this naturally includes AI behaviour.
I guess there's much more to come in this regard.

Again, I compare to what we have now. I don't know what is coming in the future, but I know that modding in BOX (if any) will never be on the level we have in 1946.

especially vehicle AI are superb. Vehicles can hide in trees/buildings and avoid your attacks. If you are interested in lifelike graphics and realism, this game is sure to please.
That's correct. 1946 vehicles probably will never have the capability to act as natural as IL-2 Great Battles ones do already.

Yes I got something right!

Don't buy it from Steam, buy it from the IL-2 Sturmovik site. 2 benefits to this: 1. You are supporting the IL-2 developers instead of Steam, and 2. You don't have to deal with Steam's ridiculous program, accounts, and ads. (If you buy from Steam, you also have to buy content in a certain order due to their whole "DLC" thing.) CloD requires Steam, BOX fortunately doesn't.
Even if you buy IL-2 Great Battles from Steam, you don't have to start up Steam a single time after purchase.
And you don't need to buy content in any specific order either.
That's simply nonsense.

It is nonsense, but it's true.

Quote
You are also required to buy BOS first on Steam before you can buy anything else (because of the way steam works the other modules must count as DLC, or all of the modules won't be installed in the same directory/booted with each-other)

Quote
Dont get the steam version. The two games are mostly the same and can be played together and etc but... because of the way steam works you 1) have to buy the base game BoS first. 2) you cant preorder anything which means you will pay full price on release instead of the 10 dollar discount and 3) you also cant play with the planes as they are released. You have to wait for the full steam release before you can fly the planes.

If you buy from their webstore you generally can get it a bit cheaper (they run sales more often than steam does) and you dont have to buy the base game. Each of the games is stand alone and can be combined. So if you just wanted Kuban and BP you could skip BoS and BoM. (though I'd get BoS as it has most of the planes that get flown online). Also if there is a preorder (Like with BP) you will be able to fly any of the planes you preordered as soon as they are flyable. The planes normally arrive in game long before the game is released. If you buy the steam version you wont fly them until release. I think the terrain is flyable even on the steam version before release because of the way they do MP means every copy of the game gets all of the terrains.

I see no reason to buy from Steam given this, even if they have fixed it by now. Besides, why would anyone not want to fully support the devs given the choice?

Bottom line is: IL-2 Great Battles is the future of the WW2 Combat Flight Simulation genre, if it has any that is.
It's not matured yet like 1946, but nobody can expect it to be right now.
It's being actively developed by the original creators, there's no end in sight, and new stuff is coming continuously.
You can decide to give it a try, or just stick to 1946 and watch a dying game - sorry to say but that's what it is.

I agree with this completely. Apologies if I mischaracterized some aspects due to my own bias. It is a great game, I only want to make sure that those looking into it are not disappointed in the areas where it is lacking in respect to 1946. Thanks for correcting me on the parts I may have gotten wrong.
Logged
"It's totally foolproof, until you mess something up." -Captain Dawson My OP rig: CybertronPC Palladium custom desktop computer, GPU: NVidia GeForce GTX 1060 6GB GDDR5, CPU: Intel Core i5-6600K 3.5 GHz 6M Cache Skylake Quad-Core, RAM: 8.00 GB, Motherboard: Intel H110 Chipset, SSD: 240GB, HDD: 1TB, OS: Windows 10

#### LuseKofte

• member
• Offline
• Posts: 6751
##### Re: IL-2 Great Battles Sales
« Reply #10 on: February 18, 2018, 03:37:32 PM »

Quote
Bottom line is: IL-2 Great Battles is the future of the WW2 Combat Flight Simulation genre, if it has any that is.

If there is any, Personally I have gone to the top in hardware both rig and stick and everything. I am now betting my money on a offline career mode.
I love the PE 2 and hope to like the A 20 .
Still I wished for a more realistic autopilot and bomb aimer interface. I wish for a higher complexity level. A expert + mode.
I am mostly agreing with your points, FMB in old IL 2 also take time if you want to do a campaign properly, and I bet ME is good for those who got a bit more enthusiasm than me. However I get a bit sad about the future thing, it is not going where I want it to go. I want to feel the real thing, not the counterstrike part of a sim. And for sure , most people want that part, that is why it goes there
Logged

#### SAS~Storebror

• Editor
• member
• Offline
• Posts: 17308
• Ask me if I care.
##### Re: IL-2 Great Battles Sales
« Reply #11 on: February 19, 2018, 12:48:30 AM »

I see that we're nearly on the same page, just looking at the same thing from slightly different perspectives maybe.

Concerning P-40 and Spitfire performance:
Sure, facing an expert 109 human pilot in your P-40, you are in trouble. Other than that, it doesn't perform all too bad if you adopt her flying style, which basically means that you don't enter any furball and instead plan your attacks wisely and always keep two things at hands: Time and an exit strategy. It ends up that you come to pick the lone wolf or, if you're a really brave man, pairs. Never more than two.
That way you can be quite successful, as for instance this sortie of mine shows: http://www.sas1946.rocks:8000/de/sortie/log/175/?tour=1
8 kills in total, Mc.202, 109F-4, 109G-2 each one of them, plus five 110E-2 - and it could have been more, if the last 110's gunner would not have cut off my right wing.
Spitfire is similar in terms of handling to the P-40, but it does everything slightly better, so you have to pay a slightly lower level of attention to the same things. Good thing about the spit is that you can turn with the 109s if need be.

Regarding Steam, all the things reported there appear to have been solved long time since.
You can't buy anything but Battle of Stalingrad and Battle of Moscow from Steam currently anyway, as you can only buy thing from Steam when they have been finished.
Nevertheless, you can always mix any Steam content with any il2sturmovik.com shop content and each of them have their sales, sometimes together, sometimes independently.
This for instance is how I started with IL-2 Great Battles:
I bought Battle of Stalingrad "Deluxe" (Steam didn't/doesn't call it "Premium") Edition from Steam 'cause when I decided to start playing BoS, there was no sales @il2sturmovik.com, but only on Steam.
Later I purchased Battle of Moscow Premium from il2sturmovik.com, and then later again I purchased anything else money can buy from il2sturmovik.com.
It all plays nicely together, and I don't have to start up Steam if I don't want to in order to play IL-2 Great Battles.
Heck, on reinstall I don't even need to install the Steam version of BoS, I can just use the installer from https://il2sturmovik.com/download/ and everything will be back in place (without Steam) once I enter my account credentials.

So Steam really isn't any bad thing about IL-2 Great Battles, it's just another distribution channel which, by the way, also brings money into the developer's pockets.

Cheers!
Mike
Logged
Learn. Challenge. Improve. In loving memory of the times when I cared...
Pages: [1] 2 3   Go Up

Page created in 0.018 seconds with 26 queries.