In the first two IL-2 Sturmovik previews Len "Viking1" Hjalmarson looked at views and padlock, the cockpit itself, and the raw beauty of this landmark sim. In this third of four preview installments, Len will take you through the COMMS system, discuss aspects of the fighting AI, then look at some images of damage and various aircraft.

------------------
Major Canuck
I/JG52 Gruppe Major Beim Stab

Now I have a question for you, figured that this would be a good time to mention it since you specifically brought up EAW and said that this is finally the "no looking back" sim. Now while that has been said before with CFS2, BoB and B-17 none of them have come even close to that visceral feeling of being there. CFS2 is pretty and all but seemed very disjointed to me, B-17 is nice in it's own way but it isn't what I consider to be a flight sim, more like a systems sim; and BoB I've only played in demo form but it still seemed lacking somehow, and I'm not even sure where the lacking bit was. After all of that, my question is, not how good is Il-2 technically because we pretty much can all see how good it is, but how does it feel? That's what brings me back to EAW even though I have a whole pile of other things I could be spending my time on. It just feels right. Does Il-2 manage to capture that? I sure hope so because as beautiful and technically accomplished as it obviously is, that's what I'm looking for in the very end.

I do have a lot of hope for it, the coms menus are very EAW-like, right down to using the tab key to call them up. That's very reassuring to see. Plus the labels, while I've read they work in a much more realistic manner, are also EAW-esque. I wonder if that is accidental or a purposeful design consideration. If it's an accident it's a happy one; if it's by design then Oleg is definately on the right track if converting the EAW crowd is on flight sim designers' minds.

I guess I'm not asking for a detailed side by side comparison, but more of a,"Will it capture the feel and make me need to climb into that cockpit just one more time before I go to bed?" answer. It's all about feel and immersion to me.

quote:

---

...you specifically brought up EAW and said that this is finally the "no looking back" sim. After all of that, my question is, not how good is Il-2 technically.. but how does it feel? That's what brings me back to EAW.. It just feels right.

---

I can identify with all you've said, which tells me we are coming from very similar places in our love of simulations. Based on that synchronicity, I would say you are going to love the feel of IL-2.

It's always relatively easy to describe specific features and analyze a simulation by FM, DM, SM, graphics and the like. Describing the "feel" is more of an art form, and has much to do with how all these elements work together, as well as some special design magic. I usually try to describe the feel of a sim in various ways, sometimes by simply talking about the immersion, sometimes by telling stories, as you'll notice on the ThrustMaster website.

IL-2 does indeed feel right to me, and up to now only EAW has captured that feeling. Now imagine bringing EAW into the modern world graphically.. you would be close to IL-2. Interesting that EAW has been a favorite of some of the designers of IL-2, though they are obviously very familiar with all other efforts and not just EAW.

The unanswered question, and one I can't really address yet, is the campaign system. But from all I have seen so far, I have great hope that they will indeed capture a good sense of mission flow and the other elements that help create immersion in combat missions.

The FM and damage models are beyond EAW. This means much more challenge in getting a kill. To me, this improves immersion. It was way too easy to get kills in EAW.

As far as the campaign goes I'm really not sure what to expect. I love dynamic campaigns but at the same time they can get a little repetitive if the same sort of sortie keeps coming up over and over again. On the other hand canned linear campaigns can be a definate immersion killer as well. I think I invented new swear words with CFS2 when I'd return to the carrier, land a shot up plane and see that I missed some bizarre arbitrary requirement that I shoot down 4 planes in the mission and that the 3 I felt were a damn fine accomplishment didn't cut it in Captain Spitz's eyes.

There's the conundrum, in an ideal world there would be a mix of dynamically generated missions with maybe a few date variable "historic" missions, like if the war as a whole is "quiet" then missions that would fit the squadron type and campaign flow, but if something along the lines of Kursk is going to happen or the German fleet is going to attempt a breakout and run up the Channel I'd like to see that as a special "alert" sort of thing. But I think we're a ways away from being able to mix the two in the same campaign engine.

From what I've read Il-2 seems to have an almost semi-dynamic campaign which would sort of fit with what I'm talking about here but I won't know till I see it. At least the multiplayer looks like it should good, which is one thing that could have saved CFS2 from sliding off my drive but wound up falling flat instead.

Yeah I'm sort of rambling, but I really want this one to be The One.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Viking1:
btw, a couple more comments.

The FM and damage models are beyond EAW. This means much more challenge in getting a kill. To me, this improves immersion. It was way too easy to get kills in EAW.

Likewise with padlock. No more all knowing padlock, and you can't padlock an enemy more than 3k distant. If he flies into clouds, you lose lock.

---

LOL we were posting at the same time I think. But both of those points get two enthusiastic thumbs up. Not having padlock is unrealistic (to me at least, who's head only has 8 ways it can tilt ya know?) and at the same time an omnipotent one makes it far too easy. I like EAW's padlock except for some of the more Excorcist like head movements but wish it had a range limiter and a line of sight "lock break" both of which Il-2 seems to have.

And as far as harder kills I read that in the article with a lot of interest. Getting kills should be harder than most games make it appear. I think my proudest offline "kill tally" running right now is a whopping 2 MiG-19s in the Falcon 4.0 Vietnam campaign. Air to air was rare in Vietnam and MiGs are hardly ever seen, I have 22 missions in now and have seen a grand total of 10, mostly running north as fast as they can, knocking down 2 of the ones that decided to tangle (and it wasn't in the same sortie either) made me feel like I'd accomplished something.

Sense of accomplishment also comes in the feel department. Since the campaign is pretty much still a work in progress I don't know if you can answer this one, but will how detailed will the logbooks be and will medals and ranks be awarded? And will they come at a historical pace?

These minor considerations aside I can't wait to get my paws on IL-2 this sim will be a benchmark product for years to come.

quote:

---

And as far as harder kills I read that in the article with a lot of interest. Getting kills should be harder than most games make it appear.

---

Absoposlutely. And as you point out, when you have WORK for the kill you really appreciate the ones you get!

quote:

---

Since the campaign is pretty much still a work in progress I don't know if you can answer this one, but will how detailed will the logbooks be and will medals and ranks be awarded? And will they come at a historical pace?

---

I can only quote Oleg on this that yes we will have logbooks and yes we will have medals and ranks. If I remember correctly, he also said they are not easy to get