What do we want to see/need in CFS2 in 2020? - Page 3
Contribute Now
Goal amount for this year: 10000 USD, Received: 6,680.00 USD (67%)
Welcome Back, Unregistered     Today's Date:       Current Time: 

Please Support the SOH "2020 Charter Membership Drive"




Accepted Payment Types

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 116

Thread: What do we want to see/need in CFS2 in 2020?

  1. #51
    ...

    Martin 187 Baltimore


    MC-205 Veltro


    Re-2000


    Re-2001



  2. #52

    Icon22 Reply...

    Roxanne-21,

    I am aware those models exist, and I use them, but they are very old and could use an upgrade. I could just as easily make an argument that Brunosl's Spitfire Vbs, Vcs, and clipped wings are also quite sufficient, frame rate friendly, and don't need to be redone. P.H.F. Burnage's Typhoon is also quite serviceable, especially for her age, and has a good VC cockpit that has stood the test of time.
    "Rami"

    "Me? I'm just a Sea of Tranquility in an Ocean of Storms, babe."

    My campaign site: http://www.box.net/shared/0k1e1rz29h
    My missions site: http://www.box.net/shared/ueh4kazk3v
    My scenery site: http://www.box.net/shared/knb1l0ztobhs2esb14rb

  3. #53
    I think most people only remember the Ki-21 Sally by Bruno,there are 2 other Ki-21 models by Payakan

    TheBookie

  4. #54

    Icon5

    This is exactly what I mean....

    How good is good enough, for CFS2? The models we have, most have been built for CFS2, with great FR's, and maybe would only need better texs and bits and pieces done to freshen and improve them? Or is it worth the huge effort for a combat flight sim, just to have better eye-candy?

    Food for thought....

    Cheers

    Shessi

  5. #55
    Quote Originally Posted by Shessi View Post
    Hi Folks,

    I'm only asking as I know you're a broad minded lot, erring mostly on the WWI/WWII/Cold war eras, but a wish/need/want list would be good to get the 'juices' going. Also maybe stimulate others into 'having a go', helping on joint projects etc....

    New aircraft, re-makes of older models, airfields, scenery, vehicles, ships, weapons, repaints etc.........


    So come on then?.....

    Cheers

    Shessi
    Britain
    A Supermarine B.12/36 Mitchell bomber

    France
    Bloch 155 fighter
    Bloch 157 Fighter
    Bloch 162 Bomber
    CAO 700 Bomber

    Germany
    A Heinkel 277
    A Heinkel 274
    A Messerschmitt 261
    A Ju288
    A decent Heinkel 112 and Heinkel 112V11 with DB engine
    A FW161 bomber
    A ju86 high altitude reconnaissance plane
    A Arado 440

    URSS
    Polikarpov 180
    pOLIKARPOV 185

    USA
    A B-28 bomber
    A P-54 Swoose

  6. #56

    Icon22 Reply...

    Mark,

    My general rule of thumb is that if I have to fly it, having at least some eye candy or a decent multi-lod model is more of a priority. If it is just AI, then it is not nearly the same level of priority.
    "Rami"

    "Me? I'm just a Sea of Tranquility in an Ocean of Storms, babe."

    My campaign site: http://www.box.net/shared/0k1e1rz29h
    My missions site: http://www.box.net/shared/ueh4kazk3v
    My scenery site: http://www.box.net/shared/knb1l0ztobhs2esb14rb

  7. #57
    I agree with Rami. It's a combination of well modeled, historically accurate aircraft and combat capability.

    If all you want is a combat sim and don't much care about the models then you are describing what CFS1 and European Air War are. I kind of think we all moved on to CFS2 because were looking for more to see while flying.

    I also sincerely think that the reason CFS2 lives on is the fan base continually improving the visual aspects. Everything from the ground, water, ground object, personnel and most of all, aircraft. We sure haven't been able to upgrade the hard coded aspects of the game - flight models for example.

    Shessi, I think you're playing devil's advocate, you rascal. Given the great, detailed, (and BIG) aircraft you've been giving us, don't you like the eye candy side of things too?
    Cheers,

    Captain Kurt
    ------------------------------------------------------
    "Fly, you fools!" Gandalf the Gray

  8. #58

    Ha ha CK!...wot me??

    In all reality, totally agree with Rami and your sentiments, that IF we can have great looks AND usability in CFS2 than why not. Having said that I really do think that not enough is done for some current, and mentioned models. I know I mentioned UT, but if you look at his texs updates for a lot of ac during 2019, for example Merlin2's Beaufort. Those many tex sets, airfile and ac.cfg brings the original to a new level; skins that allow it's use in every theatre it ever appeared in, with it's performance closer to the real thing. I was thinking of re-doing the old Alphasim Beaufort, but there is absolutely no need now, just an example of thinking laterally, and getting great results.

    I'll carry on doing my thang, and getting better looking stuff in CFS2. I'd just like people to consider options and think about things, that's all.

    Pepe,
    Great list, and yes a few of those are in the pipeline or being considered..so fingers crossed.


    Cheers

    Shessi

  9. #59
    SOH-CM-2020 Ravenna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Newcastle, Australia
    Age
    67
    Posts
    1,944
    Quote Originally Posted by Captain Kurt View Post

    I also sincerely think that the reason CFS2 lives on is the fan base continually improving the visual aspects. Everything from the ground, water, ground object, personnel and most of all, aircraft. We sure haven't been able to upgrade the hard coded aspects of the game - flight models for example.
    The ongoing improvement of those visual aspects are, for me, what makes cfs2 such an immersive experience. I was so impressed by UncleTgt's Beaufort updates, and not just because the redrawn textures were beautifully done. What makes the Mk.8 Beaufort (for example) so appealing is that now we have an aircraft worthy of the important role played by Beauforts in the campaigns from Papua to New Britain and New Ireland. For me John's work on the Beaufort is a partner to his work on the islands, particularly around Rabaul. Unless your experience is constantly above 20,000 feet you need a believable ground environment. I never think of this as "eye candy", just context.
    It would be great if flight models could be upgraded to make missions more predictable, at least when you want them to be predictable. That's WAY outside my area of understanding.

  10. #60
    SOH-CM-2019
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Brisbane . Australia
    Age
    70
    Posts
    108

    What we want or think we need ?

    Hi All,

    I was about to add my 10 cents worth in but Mr Pepe basically said all I was about to suggest.

    We have a couple of MB.152 in play but no MB.155 and no MB.157 and all the other aircraft he mentioned would be fantastic.

    Regards to all,
    Please keep up the good work all of you.
    1150

  11. #61
    Quote Originally Posted by Ravenna View Post
    It would be great if flight models could be upgraded to make missions more predictable, at least when you want them to be predictable. That's WAY outside my area of understanding.
    This is not only about flight models. CFS2's AI engine is not sophisticated enough to use combat tactics that fit the performances of the aircraft AI pilots are flying. So, fast 'energy' fighters will always try to dogfight against slower and more agile fighters, and German fighters will never use frontal attack against allied Bombers but will always attack from behind instead.

  12. #62
    SOH-CM-2020 Ravenna's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Newcastle, Australia
    Age
    67
    Posts
    1,944
    Looking at the Western Front in my WWI install I was reminded of the need for an upgrade to reproduce the ground as it was from 1914 to 1918. Most of what is needed is in place, but the flooding of the Yser river and the narrowing of some roads would enhance the scenery.
    I have been looking at doing a rail network for Belgium but now think that it would be better to have the rail lines and the coastal tram line drawn into the ground textures to avoid flattening most of Belgium. Any takers?

  13. #63
    I'd like to see more USN destroyers.
    "De Oppresso Liber"

  14. #64
    Why pay a lot af attention on aircrafts produced in one or two pieces or even in only prototypes? Better upgrade exscisting ones i.e. the heavies in RAF
    bomber command Stirlig,Halifax, Lancaster,Wellington,Whitley.--New textures, panels and sounds
    Killer Svend

  15. #65
    Most people here are requesting more aircraft (new models or updates of old ones), but after dowloading the new Battle of France packages (thanks again!) I realized that beside BoF and BoB there is no British fighter campaign for ETO!

    I think something like a Spitfire squadron campaign from 1941 to 1945 (and maybe a 1945 Tempest campaign) would be a great addition to our good old CFS2.

  16. #66

    Maybe a Warwick and a Vampire...

    The Warwick was used at large numbers. There'is no native CFS2 Vampire and it will be useful at a RAF46 install!

    Cheers

    Pepe

  17. #67
    Quote Originally Posted by Killer Svend View Post
    Why pay a lot af attention on aircrafts produced in one or two pieces or even in only prototypes?
    Because they are funny!

    Cheers!

  18. #68

    Shadow wolf ............

    ....(NOT SW )...... here is a link to a wilki that lists the classes of the destroyers utilized by the USN in WW2. It also lists the between war classes. You can see that many of the classes have been covered by different people.
    Believe me , as a former flea who rode on a Greyhound (you don't serve on them you ride them! Just ask MR!) I would love to see more but the classes were limited. More pre-war classes than during where there were only three classes of new ones.

  19. #69
    Quote Originally Posted by Fibber View Post
    ....(NOT SW )...... here is a link to a wilki that lists the classes of the destroyers utilized by the USN in WW2. It also lists the between war classes. You can see that many of the classes have been covered by different people.
    Believe me , as a former flea who rode on a Greyhound (you don't serve on them you ride them! Just ask MR!) I would love to see more but the classes were limited. More pre-war classes than during where there were only three classes of new ones.
    Yes sir, you are right. There are a few pre-war classes that served as well as the in-wartime classes. I would like to see updated versions of the ones built 1935-45, especially those that were in numbers in the PTO.
    "De Oppresso Liber"

  20. #70
    Quote Originally Posted by Shadow Wolf 07 View Post
    I'd like to see more USN destroyers.
    High Shadow Wolf
    Do you mean like these?

    Check you PM
    Cheers
    Stuart
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails USN_DD.jpg  

  21. #71

    Stuart\ shadow wolf....

    .. from what I have in my ship folders, you, Collins and Usio (RIP)have covered almost all the DD classes directly or by ship names that are in one of the classes but not named as the class. directly.
    I think what we are referring to here are the between war treaty classes that were still around for World War 2 and its ending. These classes would be the Bagley, Benham, Benson , Greaves and Gridley.
    I can't seem to find any of these .

  22. #72
    Quote Originally Posted by Fibber View Post
    .. from what I have in my ship folders, you, Collins and Usio (RIP)have covered almost all the DD classes directly or by ship names that are in one of the classes but not named as the class. directly.
    I think what we are referring to here are the between war treaty classes that were still around for World War 2 and its ending. These classes would be the Bagley, Benham, Benson , Greaves and Gridley.
    I can't seem to find any of these .

    There are a VN bagley class,VN Benson Class and a VN Gridley Class.

    TheBookie

  23. #73

    Hi "the bookie"...

    .....I have the Vn classes but I think the gist of the original post was for the ships to be of todays standards. I guess for that even the ACM Mahan should be included. That is what I intended when I lumped those ships together as not being represented. Guess I didn't state it properly.

  24. #74
    Stuart277: I got your PM - thank you - and te ships you named are good ones. I may have yo go back into my soon to be released campaign and substitute your versions. You do fine work!
    "De Oppresso Liber"

  25. #75
    SOH-CM-2019 SPman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Expat Kiwi in West Oz
    Age
    71
    Posts
    642
    Quote Originally Posted by Rami View Post
    Shessi,

    Roxanne is right...we could use the generation of French bombers arriving on the scene just as the Germans invaded, including the Amiot 354, Bloch 174, and perhaps a Potez 63.11.
    Yes - some of those weird French bombers that looked like flying gantries mated with a stick insect...

Members who have read this thread: 181

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •