Il2 Battle of Stalingrad on Steam

[Silent Disapproval Robot]

There was a comment on my IL-2 screenshots in the photo thread that noted there was a lack of ground crew.  Looks like they're being added (at least partially) in today's update.  From what I read on the game forum, it seems that it's only for trains and vehicle convoys for now but perhaps gun crews will be added as well.

[MengJiao]

There was a comment on my IL-2 screenshots in the photo thread that noted there was a lack of ground crew.  Looks like they're being added (at least partially) in today's update.  From what I read on the game forum, it seems that it's only for trains and vehicle convoys for now but perhaps gun crews will be added as well.

  Wow.  That was all very neato!

[Silent Disapproval Robot]

Fiddled with it a bit.  Static AA Guns still aren't manned but those on trains and halftracks are.  The infantry are invulnerable to fire.  They just bail from soft vehicles and train cars, sprint off to the side, dive for cover and then disappear after about 5 seconds.

[Silent Disapproval Robot]

They did add two versions of one new single player mission called Ghosts in the Snow.  It's mainly an exercise in navigation and target ID in poor weather conditions and if you play it in expert mode with no nav aids, it's a pretty cool scenario.  Finding German positions in a snowstorm is a challenge and it's very rewarding to get bombs and rockets on them.  I've played it 3 times and, while I've managed to successfully find and hit the enemy, I've yet to survive the trip home. 

[Silent Disapproval Robot]

Well they finally released detailed information about the single player portion of the game.  I hesitate to even call it a campaign because there's simply no hint of any sort of continuity to the missions at all.

It looks like they've managed to take a step back from the admittedly mediocre campaign found in Rise of Flight.  All the single player game seems to offer is a series of randomly generated quick missions in which the player can select type of aircraft, starting airfield, and mission type (escort, intercept, ground attack, or bombing.)   The victory condition for each of those 4 mission types is exactly the same every time.  There are no historical squadrons nor pilot stats tracking so there's no real penalty  for failing.  Your only goal seems to be to grind enough XP (yes, they're using an XP system.  So much for calling this game a sim) in order to unlock the next plane, plane component, or "campaign" chapter.

Very disappointing.

[Toonces]

I honestly feel like I've lost touch with the flight sim community, so I am probably off base with how this sim will turn out.

On the one hand, things like XP and unlocks will appeal to the Xbox kids.  On the other hand, putting it into a sim with an admittedly groggy appeal like Stalingrad...I smell failure here.  Going hardcore flight models with Xbox mechanics is not a recipe for success...neither audience will be satisfied.

I'm glad I took a pass on this one.  Maybe when it hits the $5 bin like CLoD.   :(

[sandman2575]

No historical squadrons? No stats tracking??   Makes the Rise of Flight career 'beta' seem like WoFF by comparison.

Hugely disappointing.  Should've saved the coin I blew on this and spent it on Elite: Dangerous instead.....

[Jarhead0331]

I think its pretty hilarious, and ballsy, that they are calling the campaign, "AQM" or Advanced Quick Mission.  Historically in the world of gaming, you had quick mission builders as one option and a campaign as another.  Now, like everything else in this industry, terms and features are being melded together, modified and altered to confuse the customer into thinking one thing is something else.

[Silent Disapproval Robot]

What pisses me off even more is that they've taken away the option to use custom game settings for the "campaign".  You must either fly with "normal" difficulty settings which include targeting and nav icons, HUD, and simplified engine management or "expert" with no assists, complex engine management, and cockpit only view. 

Want to play with mostly expert settings but the ability to use external views to check out your plane or see the aftermath of your bomb strike from the target's POV?  Too bad!

Want to play with CEM but don't want to spend 5 minutes going through start up and waiting for the engine to warm up?  Suck it!

Don't want to worry about CEM but don't want to have big red targetting assist icons pointing out enemy planes? Fag!

Seriously, I cannot understand why they'd remove the custom difficulty options selection from the player. It's already there and working now.  How does removing choice from the game and shoehorning everyone into one of two choices make for a better gameplay experience.  What a stupid design decision.

[Jarhead0331]

^That is so absurdly stupid that I would have to imagine its a technical issue? Not sure why it would be, but I don't see anything other than laziness in making it work properly that could be the root cause of this "decision".

[Silent Disapproval Robot]

It's all to do with the arbitrary XP grinding system they've put into place.  In order to access all the aircraft, their skins, and their modifications the player has to grind through campaign missions to earn enough XP to unlock them.  They've decided that those who play "normal" will earn 1x XP and those who play "expert" will earn 2x XP.  They said coming up with a formula to work out what XP multiplier one would get from all the options offered through the custom setup screen was just too arduous so they removed it entirely.  I guess making custom equal 1x XP just like normal was too much of a stretch for them to conceive. 

[Nefaro]

It's all to do with the arbitrary XP grinding system they've put into place.  In order to access all the aircraft, their skins, and their modifications the player has to grind through campaign missions to earn enough XP to unlock them.  They've decided that those who play "normal" will earn 1x XP and those who play "expert" will earn 2x XP.  They said coming up with a formula to work out what XP multiplier one would get from all the options offered through the custom setup screen was just too arduous so they removed it entirely.  I guess making custom equal 1x XP just like normal was too much of a stretch for them to conceive.

Boo!

This isn't an MMO!  It's a damn Sim. 

Sounds like they have an identity crisis.

[Silent Disapproval Robot]

That's the majority consensus on the various forums.  It's a joint venture between 1C and 777 Studios.  Speculation is that some middle management ass-hat has seen the success of War Thunder and World of Tanks and is pushing for that model.  Who knows if it's true?  It doesn't really matter what the rationale behind their decision was, it's a stupid idea that's pissing off nearly all of the founders and old-hands (there are always a few true believers who have become personally invested in the game and will defend any and all criticisms, real or imagined) and it doesn't seem to be attracting very many new players.

Even the MP only crowd are pissed because they'll have to grind through the SP missions in order to unlock the planes and weapons they want to use in MP.     

[Father Ted]

I'm not a "true believer", but here goes...

They wanted a SP game mode where you could compare your progress with other players, knowing that everybody was on the same playing-field with regards to difficulty.  In the livestream explaining the "campaign" they often mentioned that they wanted it to be a game rather than "just" a sim.  That, I believe (ahem) is the rationale, misguided or no.  They've also made no secret of the fact that they anticipate that a lot of the heavy lifting for generating missions and "proper" campaigns will be done by the player-base.  It's happening in ArmA, so maybe...

A couple of things I would say before we bin the game completely:

The devs have been receptive to criticism (FW190 cockpit), so they may well back-track on some of these decisions (custom settings and grinding for MP players seems to be the most opposed)

Nearly all our info about the game comes from guys who are speaking/writing English as a second language, so they don't always convey what they really mean.

[Toonces]

I honestly wonder at what the head guy is thinking when he makes these types of design decisions.  I'm not just saying that.  I really really wonder at it.  Like, I'd love to be a fly on the wall during their design meetings when they chart out the features of the game.

Some of these decisions...I'm not kidding, it's almost like they're trying to fail. 

What an extraordinary waste.  I can't believe that we're honestly going to be counting on DCS to pull off the next WW2 flight simulation.