On the BoS forums, Jason of Rof seems to be implying that the next BoS map/theater after Stalingrad might be the Channel:
Producer
Posts: 439
Location:Redlands, CA
Posted 22 January 2014 - 03:06
We've already stated that we will be releasing expansions that are a "new theatre" which will include both maps and planes. And we have stated many times that the business model will be different than ROF's. Nothing we have done is a mistake in regards to what we have sold because it brought in the necessary revenue and continues to do so. The channel map cost us a lot of money to develop and we had to recoup the cost to stay in business. We'll try something different with the new company and new product.
Jason
Meng notes: so just adding a map isn't the plan -- they would add a "Theater" (map+ time frame+ planes etc.) and charge a lot more than 20 Euros for it. Which is fine with me. I like the idea of a complete leap to a new time and place and I'm willing to pay your basic game price (60 Euros) for it.
Early days so this is pure speculation but if they do go with the "pay for everything" model, I suspect they'll fracture the community before it even has a chance to really coalesce. When IL-2: Forgotten Battles came out it quickly developed a very strong online community. Once the Aces and the Pacific Fighters expansions came out, the community fractured a bit and some of the smaller servers died off. Once the Pe-2 and the IL-10 DD only expansions came out, traffic on all but a few servers dwindled down to nothing. It wasn't until they put out IL-2:1946 with everything rolled into one bundle that things rebounded.
I think one of the reason that RoF never really developed the same following as IL2 online was due to the pay model. It wasn't much fun hopping on a server and being told you'd have to sit out a round because you hadn't purchased the requisite planes. It got worse with the map packs.
Hope the same thing doesn't happen with BoS. Then again, the rumblings coming from the MP beta testing makes it sound like only purists are going to play as the LaGGs get eaten alive by the Bf 109s.
Here are some videos from one of the play sessions. They're in Russian but you can clearly see the difference in the performance between the planes.
The first video is from a LaGG perspective. Skip to about the 14 minute mark (allies are blue, enemies red.)
The second is from a Bf-109's perspective. You can see just how easily the 109 out climbs, out turns, and out runs the LaGG. Skip to the 90 second mark.
Quote from: MengJiao on February 10, 2014, 03:31:05 PM
On the BoS forums, Jason of Rof seems to be implying that the next BoS map/theater after Stalingrad might be the Channel:
Producer
Posts: 439
Location:Redlands, CA
Posted 22 January 2014 - 03:06
We've already stated that we will be releasing expansions that are a "new theatre" which will include both maps and planes. And we have stated many times that the business model will be different than ROF's. Nothing we have done is a mistake in regards to what we have sold because it brought in the necessary revenue and continues to do so. The channel map cost us a lot of money to develop and we had to recoup the cost to stay in business. We'll try something different with the new company and new product.
Jason
Meng notes: so just adding a map isn't the plan -- they would add a "Theater" (map+ time frame+ planes etc.) and charge a lot more than 20 Euros for it. Which is fine with me. I like the idea of a complete leap to a new time and place and I'm willing to pay your basic game price (60 Euros) for it.
Much as I'd love for the Channel to be the next map - I don't get from that quote any intimation that that will be the case. My take is that Jason is justifying the fact that users had to buy the map - rather than get it as a free update - in RoF, nothing to do with BoS.
At the time I was against the idea, for the reasons that SDR points out. However, I don't think that the lack of a large MP in RoF has to do with the business model. I think it boils down to the fact that it is effing difficult and only a few have the requisite skill and patience to persevere. Also, lots of forumites clamour for authenticity, but that does not always make for great MP if the planes are authentically mis-matched. If you fly historical planesets in WW1, then one side or the other will have better planes. This is great for authenticity, but for game-play it gets boring pretty quickly.
And, yes SDR, it is a worry for BoS, with its limited planesets.
Quote from: MengJiao on February 10, 2014, 03:31:05 PM
On the BoS forums, Jason of Rof seems to be implying that the next BoS map/theater after Stalingrad might be the Channel:
Producer
Posts: 439
Location:Redlands, CA
Posted 22 January 2014 - 03:06
We've already stated that we will be releasing expansions that are a "new theatre" which will include both maps and planes. And we have stated many times that the business model will be different than ROF's. Nothing we have done is a mistake in regards to what we have sold because it brought in the necessary revenue and continues to do so. The channel map cost us a lot of money to develop and we had to recoup the cost to stay in business. We'll try something different with the new company and new product.
Jason
Meng notes: so just adding a map isn't the plan -- they would add a "Theater" (map+ time frame+ planes etc.) and charge a lot more than 20 Euros for it. Which is fine with me. I like the idea of a complete leap to a new time and place and I'm willing to pay your basic game price (60 Euros) for it.
I don't believe the mention of this channel map has anything to do with BoS.
For RoF they have created a channel map as an expansion. Seeing as he talks about 'the channel map' and 'cost us a lot of resources' in the past tense, I believe he is just mentioning the RoF channel map as an example to illustrate his point.
Quote from: Silent Disapproval Robot on February 10, 2014, 03:50:41 PM
Early days so this is pure speculation but if they do go with the "pay for everything" model, I suspect they'll fracture the community before it even has a chance to really coalesce. When IL-2: Forgotten Battles came out it quickly developed a very strong online community. Once the Aces and the Pacific Fighters expansions came out, the community fractured a bit and some of the smaller servers died off. Once the Pe-2 and the IL-10 DD only expansions came out, traffic on all but a few servers dwindled down to nothing. It wasn't until they put out IL-2:1946 with everything rolled into one bundle that things rebounded.
On the other hand the "buy the whole theater" model means a big chunk of cash for the developers AND that anyone who has the theater has everything they need to play MP in that theater. Could be a win-win.
I'm not so sure the superiority of the 109 in late 1942, early 1943 is necessarily bad for the MP game. I happily flew the Hawk 75 against everything in WWII Online for years. I got so horribly good, that as soon as I got into a Hurricane with 20mm guns, all those stall-and-turn 109s were dead...dead...dead...dead...dead. Plus the Hawk 75 was perfect against Stukas down low.
Anyway, I think all the Russian planes have better guns than the Hawk 75 -- which is all I ask for, a nice bigger than 30 caliber Browning, gun.
Moreover -- in the same time frame the Russians could achieve local air supremacy (apparently they did over the Operation Spark area in Jan 1943), so with enough LAGG-3s, the German Bombers aren't getting through and even the 109s would have trouble against a layered Russian force. Plus the Russians are getting other planes and ground attack is a part of the game.
Quote from: Father Ted on February 10, 2014, 04:56:32 PM
I think it boils down to the fact that it is effing difficult and only a few have the requisite skill and patience to persevere. Also, lots of forumites clamour for authenticity, but that does not always make for great MP if the planes are authentically mis-matched. If you fly historical planesets in WW1, then one side or the other will have better planes. This is great for authenticity, but for game-play it gets boring pretty quickly.
I agree 100%. WWI is much more single-player friendly exactly for this reason. On the other hand, multiplayer WWI can still be fun if you like a challenge. Instead of flying a seal-clubbing Fokker DVII, a person could try his or her luck with an Albatros D.Va.
I'm not really sure why, but my preferred way to play WWI flight sims is a single-player campaign, trying to survive during the incredibly tough times when the other side has the best planes, and then finally getting the next great ride in which you can put the hurting on the enemy.
Quote from: Father Ted on February 10, 2014, 04:56:32 PM
However, I don't think that the lack of a large MP in RoF has to do with the business model. I think it boils down to the fact that it is effing difficult and only a few have the requisite skill and patience to persevere.
I would guess that this is doubly true for Cliffs of Dover. Probably nothing can overcome the infamy of CloD's buggy release and internal developer squabbles, in terms of keeping folks away from MP. But I absolutely find CloD really freaking hard, and this is the reason I"m still too coward to venture online. I constantly get pwnd by AI Hurricanes flying the 109. That shouldn't be, except that I am apparently a really s***ty dogfighter (and not for lack of trying!). I find RoF way more manageable, if only because things don't happen nearly so fast. I can maintain some semblance of situational awareness in RoF, but am completely hopeless in a fighter-on-fighter furball in CloD.
That said, I'm sure MP in RoF with 'full real' settings must be freaking hard too -- not trying to take anything away from that.
Quote from: sandman2575 on February 11, 2014, 01:17:24 PM
Quote from: Father Ted on February 10, 2014, 04:56:32 PM
However, I don't think that the lack of a large MP in RoF has to do with the business model. I think it boils down to the fact that it is effing difficult and only a few have the requisite skill and patience to persevere.
I would guess that this is doubly true for Cliffs of Dover. Probably nothing can overcome the infamy of CloD's buggy release and internal developer squabbles, in terms of keeping folks away from MP. But I absolutely find CloD really freaking hard, and this is the reason I"m still too coward to venture online. I constantly get pwnd by AI Hurricanes flying the 109. That shouldn't be, except that I am apparently a really s***ty dogfighter (and not for lack of trying!). I find RoF way more manageable, if only because things don't happen nearly so fast. I can maintain some semblance of situational awareness in RoF, but am completely hopeless in a fighter-on-fighter furball in CloD.
That said, I'm sure MP in RoF with 'full real' settings must be freaking hard too -- not trying to take anything away from that.
I would rate myself as generally a poor dog fighter, but when I look at the guns on the LaGG-3 series 29, I'm pretty sure I can shoot down a few German planes even in MP from time to time in BoS. The LaGG-3 has 1 cannon (20mm apparently) and 2 12.7mm MGs all shooting through the prop with good rates of fire and nice muzzle velocities. That's far more firepower than I've had in any MP plane since the Beaufighter in Target Tobruk. I'm feeling smugly self-satisfied already.
I've chickened out of most MP lately, but I'm going to try it in BoS, I think.
I'll say what I like already about BoS -- the snowfield backgrounds! Should make spotting a bit easier than CloD or RoF (...I am just terrible at spotting).
Those LaGG cockpits look fantastic, by the way. Of course, last thing I need is to further handicap myself by flying an outclassed plane...
Quote from: MengJiao on February 11, 2014, 02:52:30 PM
Quote from: sandman2575 on February 11, 2014, 01:17:24 PM
Quote from: Father Ted on February 10, 2014, 04:56:32 PM
However, I don't think that the lack of a large MP in RoF has to do with the business model. I think it boils down to the fact that it is effing difficult and only a few have the requisite skill and patience to persevere.
I would guess that this is doubly true for Cliffs of Dover. Probably nothing can overcome the infamy of CloD's buggy release and internal developer squabbles, in terms of keeping folks away from MP. But I absolutely find CloD really freaking hard, and this is the reason I"m still too coward to venture online. I constantly get pwnd by AI Hurricanes flying the 109. That shouldn't be, except that I am apparently a really s***ty dogfighter (and not for lack of trying!). I find RoF way more manageable, if only because things don't happen nearly so fast. I can maintain some semblance of situational awareness in RoF, but am completely hopeless in a fighter-on-fighter furball in CloD.
That said, I'm sure MP in RoF with 'full real' settings must be freaking hard too -- not trying to take anything away from that.
I would rate myself as generally a poor dog fighter, but when I look at the guns on the LaGG-3 series 29, I'm pretty sure I can shoot down a few German planes even in MP from time to time in BoS. The LaGG-3 has 1 cannon (20mm apparently) and 2 12.7mm MGs all shooting through the prop with good rates of fire and nice muzzle velocities. That's far more firepower than I've had in any MP plane since the Beaufighter in Target Tobruk. I'm feeling smugly self-satisfied already.
I've chickened out of most MP lately, but I'm going to try it in BoS, I think.
You can pull out the 20mm nose gun and put in a 37mm if you like. It packs a big punch but the muzzle velocity is low so it lobs like a bowling ball. Of course the Bf-109 can throw on gun pods with MGs or 20mm cannons so it's not like you're gaining any advantage.
I'm sure if you fly in pairs and know what you're doing, you can catch 109s while they're target fixated on your buddy or bleeding energy while defensive but in a one-on-one fight it's really hard to get your nose around on a 109. Best I seem to be able to do is force them into head-on attacks where I hope my aim is true and the fact that the LaGG is more robust than the 109 works in my favour. Hopefully the Yak-1 is a bit more agile.
Quote from: Silent Disapproval Robot on February 11, 2014, 04:00:02 PM
Hopefully the Yak-1 is a bit more agile.
Well, I'm hoping that that the La5 should even things up as well.
In IL2 46 we just have such a variety of planes that you can make up pretty well-matched planesets. What I see in the two modern, "serious" CFSs (BoS and DCS WW2) is, at least initially, a small paneset which doesn't give server-owners a lot of options to keep the sides technologically matched.
I play a lot of Il2 46 MP with squad mates. In my opinion, some of those guys are a lot better than me, some the same, and some not as good yet. Despite the received wisdom of, "it's the man, not the plane", I find that the moderate guys will cream the good guys if they have the better planes ( NB equal planes = good guys always win). My worry is that, the occasional masochist looking for a challenge aside, few people are going to pick the Russian side out of choice.
As the La-5 will be, at least initially, available only to those of us who pre-ordered I expect there'll be a lot of bitching and moaning about "pay-to-win" and premie-cheaters, etc.
Just have to wait and see how it all plays out. I'm flying Soviets regardless.
Quote from: Silent Disapproval Robot on February 11, 2014, 06:40:52 PM
I'm flying Soviets regardless.
Me too. I've seen lots of 109s and whatnot. I haven't flown many Soviet planes. Compared to the Hawk 75 they are relatively
well-armed at least. If people fly 109s like they usually do, they will be so busy booming and zooming that -- from time to time -- I'll get
some hits on them.
I just spent a half hour or so trying out the new IL-2. Love it! It seems much more responsive than the LaGG and those 37mm gun pods pack a punch. The only real draw backs I've found so far are:
1) The armour plating really restricts the cockpit view. I can see making use of the rear gunner option.
2) the rudder seems very coarse. Even the slightest touch seems to throw it 5 degrees or so. Makes lining up shots on ground targets kind of tough.
(Sucks that the latest update wiped control settings and old control config saves won't work. I hate remapping controls. Mostly because I always forget where I had things set before and I invariably map the controls to a different button/slider/knob and then can't remember what's what once I'm airborne.)
Quote from: Silent Disapproval Robot on February 14, 2014, 06:28:56 PM
Sucks that the latest update wiped control settings and old control config saves won't work. I hate remapping controls. Mostly because I always forget where I had things set before and I invariably map the controls to a different button/slider/knob and then can't remember what's what once I'm airborne.
Have to say this is why I haven't fired up the new iteration yet. I give the devs kudos for coming out and warning us about it though.