symb Posted May 27 Posted May 27 I’ve spent days trying to set up a simple co-op session with a friend, and all we get is error 10019 over and over again. I configured port forwarding correctly, only to find out both of us are behind CGNAT — which is extremely common in 2026. So we tried Radmin VPN instead. Except IL-2 still doesn’t even have a proper direct-connect system. The only option is to expose the server publicly and hope the networking works. Even after binding the server to the Radmin IP, we still get the exact same connection error. Meanwhile, I can launch basically any modern multiplayer game on Steam and instantly play with friends without: forwarding ports, disabling firewalls, resetting Winsock, changing adapter priorities, fighting virtual network adapters, or debugging networking like it’s 2004. IL-2’s multiplayer infrastructure feels completely outdated and poorly suited for modern internet setups. And yet new DLCs keep releasing for 80 euros while basic co-op connectivity remains a nightmare. Please stop stacking premium-priced content on top of broken multiplayer infrastructure and finally implement: proper Steam relay networking, NAT traversal, modern peer-to-peer connectivity, or literally any reliable co-op solution that works on normal home networks. Players should not need enterprise-level networking knowledge just to fly with one friend. I own every WW2 DLC for this game — several hundred euros worth of content that I can barely use in co-op with another paying customer. I even bought some DLCs twice: almost every Steam DLC except Odessa, plus nearly a dozen products directly from the official store. At this point, it honestly feels like either complete incompetence or complete disregard for customers. Modern networking solutions already exist: Steam Datagram Relay, Steam Networking Sockets, NAT traversal libraries, relay networking, modern P2P protocols. Even tiny indie games let players simply invite a friend and play without dealing with VPNs, CGNAT, routers, port forwarding, or virtual adapters. Instead, customers are told to “wait for the next project” while more premium DLC keeps getting released for the current one. Excellent product. And honestly, this kind of attitude toward existing customers does not exactly inspire confidence in buying the new Korea project. Please implement the necessary networking improvements so there is actually a reason to keep investing in new content. Whether Korea will succeed or not is still unknown. But right now you already have a loyal fanbase here — one that has supported this game for years and shouldn’t be treated with this level of neglect! 1
symb Posted June 1 Author Posted June 1 (edited) Guys, don't think you can just ignore or ban me. You continue to sell expensive content for an old game, completely ignoring the problem of multiplayer not working for a large number of players, while encouraging people to buy the new one. You've heard what the community can do with game launches... when some developers stubbornly refuse to listen to the community's requests and don't even bother to respond... You're going to sell IL-2 Korea at the insane price of a AAAA Ubisoft game (by the way, I bought the last AAAA Ubisoft game with a 97% discount for 3 euros because no one wanted it... just something to think about) and at the same time completely ignore the fact that co-op doesn't work properly on the regular IL-2. And maybe the community should learn and consider how you treat current players and whether they should buy the new product?! I mean on Steam/Reddit, etc.? If you don't want to hear it, maybe others would be interested in listening... Edited June 1 by symb
Aapje Posted June 1 Posted June 1 (edited) IL-2 supports both co-op and PvP servers, so you are being misleading when you act like co-op is the only multiplayer experience there is. You also claim that 'multiplayer [is] not working for a large number of players,' yet this seems to be nothing more than speculation on your part. I definitely don't see a lot of complaints about this. CGNAT has become way more popular in recent times, while IL-2 is a 2013 game at the core, and also end of life. They are releasing some new content (which you are free to buy or to ignore), but the game engine has not been seeing any significant changes for a while, also because part of the game is built on obsolete middleware that is no longer getting updates. A big reason for creating the new Korea engine is that they could not replace the old code without redoing most of the content that has been released for the GB engine. They are simply not going to replace the entire networking stack in the GB engine, no matter how much you threaten them. CGNAT is also inherently a technology that blocks hosting, and IL-2 co-op is designed around one person hosting a server. Have you tried contacting your ISP to see if they can disable CGNAT either free or for a fee? I got it disabled for free. Quote If you don't want to hear it... I don't actually get the impression that you want to be listened to, but obeyed. Or even that you are hoping to get banned so you can use that as ammunition for a bad review spree. I don't understand why you expect to achieve anything if you demand the impossible, demand that the developers do what you ask, make grandiose claims to speak for 'the community,' and even make threats. This is not the basis for a fruitful discussion. Edited June 1 by Aapje 3
symb Posted June 1 Author Posted June 1 26 minutes ago, Aapje said: IL-2 supports both co-op and PvP servers, so you are being misleading when you act like co-op is the only multiplayer experience there is. You also claim that 'multiplayer [is] not working for a large number of players,' yet this seems to be nothing more than speculation on your part. I definitely don't see a lot of complaints about this. CGNAT has become way more popular in recent times, while IL-2 is a 2013 game at the core, and also end of life. They are releasing some new content (which you are free to buy or to ignore), but the game engine has not been seeing any significant changes for a while, also because part of the game is built on obsolete middleware that is no longer getting updates. A big reason for creating the new Korea engine is that they could not replace the old code without redoing most of the content that has been released for the GB engine. They are simply not going to replace the entire networking stack in the GB engine, no matter how much you threaten them. CGNAT is also inherently a technology that blocks hosting, and IL-2 co-op is designed around one person hosting a server. Have you tried contacting your ISP to see if they can disable CGNAT either free or for a fee? I got it disabled for free. I don't actually get the impression that you want to be listened to, but obeyed. Or even that you are hoping to get banned so you can use that as ammunition for a bad review spree. I don't understand why you expect to achieve anything if you demand the impossible, demand that the developers do what you ask, make grandiose claims to speak for 'the community,' and even make threats. This is not the basis for a fruitful discussion. I don't want to get into conflict with the developers and create a scandal using the ban as a red rag, but... I'm irritated by their stance of completely ignoring my questions here and on Steam. Meanwhile, they continue to push their new product or DLC for 80 euros for an old game and don't want to invest 1,000 euros in a developer who could fix the co-op network issues in a day or two. Indie games can make a decent online game for 5 euros in 2026, but a developer charging 80 euros for a DLC can't!
Dora Posted June 1 Posted June 1 5 minutes ago, symb said: I'm irritated by their stance of completely ignoring my questions here and on Steam. There is nothing left to say, LukeFF already answered you on the Steam forums. https://steamcommunity.com/app/307960/discussions/0/838377222874083640/
symb Posted June 1 Author Posted June 1 (edited) 10 minutes ago, Dora said: There is nothing left to say, LukeFF already answered you on the Steam forums. https://steamcommunity.com/app/307960/discussions/0/838377222874083640/ One could agree, arguing that there's no point in trying to modify an old game they've already partially abandoned... But then they release a new DLC for 80 euros, containing multiplayer/co-op content, new paid campaigns for 15 euros, and I'm sure more to come. And yet they don't want to improve the user experience in any way. Isn't there a contradiction in that? So, you can buy the new DLC + campaign for 100 euros if you want, and co-op might not work for you. Yet indie developers charging 5 euros per game somehow manage to implement the necessary network protocols! Doesn't this seem like a disregard for the consumer? Edited June 1 by symb
Aapje Posted June 1 Posted June 1 @symb Apparently it is not actually true that they ignored your questions, but you just didn't like their answer. Keep in mind that they are releasing their completely overhauled game later this month, so they are almost certainly completely overloaded with work. Quote and don't want to invest 1,000 euros in a developer who could fix the co-op network issues in a day or two. I consider it extremely unlikely that an entire networking stack could be replaced in a day or two. Again you speak for others, in this case for the developers, by telling them how much time it would cost them to do this. Even though I don't see how you could have this information. Quote Indie games can make a decent online game for 5 euros in 2026, but a developer charging 80 euros for a DLC can't! Yet you are not playing that 5 euro game... Every game has strengths and weaknesses. As a consumer, you get to decide whether what is offered is worth the money. You can also try to influence the developers to do things your way, but at the end of the day, they have to make hard choices that will disappoint people, one way or the other. At the end of the day, it is a fact that you got a downgraded connection from an ISP and are now demanding that 1CGS fix that problem for you. It is also a fact that the game engine is over 10 years old. It is not reasonable to demand new features for very old games.
symb Posted June 1 Author Posted June 1 (edited) 15 minutes ago, Aapje said: @symb Apparently it is not actually true that they ignored your questions, but you just didn't like their answer. Keep in mind that they are releasing their completely overhauled game later this month, so they are almost certainly completely overloaded with work. I consider it extremely unlikely that an entire networking stack could be replaced in a day or two. Again you speak for others, in this case for the developers, by telling them how much time it would cost them to do this. Even though I don't see how you could have this information. Yet you are not playing that 5 euro game... Every game has strengths and weaknesses. As a consumer, you get to decide whether what is offered is worth the money. You can also try to influence the developers to do things your way, but at the end of the day, they have to make hard choices that will disappoint people, one way or the other. At the end of the day, it is a fact that you got a downgraded connection from an ISP and are now demanding that 1CGS fix that problem for you. It is also a fact that the game engine is over 10 years old. It is not reasonable to demand new features for very old games. Don't lecture me like a child. I work part-time in various development projects, including web design and more. I'm well aware that there are game/software/web plugin developers—who, while earning reasonable money, can provide excellent support for their product for years, constantly improving it and adding new content. Examples - Deep Rock Galactics, No Man's Sky, and Mycopunk... And then there are developers who simply want to rake in the cash by constantly pumping out new content and selling a bunch of buggy, stinking garbage... Examples - Star Citizen and, apparently, IL-2 too... As for the response "I didn't like", it's just that after the first basic answer— "We don't have time, we want to sell you new content"—they completely ignore the detailed question about why they're selling expensive DLCs for an old game with basic mp problems. Edited June 1 by symb
Aapje Posted June 1 Posted June 1 1 minute ago, symb said: I work part-time in various development projects, including web design and more. But did you work on a game with the specific middleware and other solutions that 1CGS used back in 2013? You need to keep in mind that the entire flight sim genre suffered from a huge decline in popularity and only a few game developer stuck it out. I doubt that they were raking in the cash during that time. Comparing this game to No Man's Sky, which has 100 times the player base on Steam, and thus probably way more sales and thus income, is not very reasonable. Quote Don't lecture me like a child. If you think that working in 'various development projects' that are in no way similar to this game, makes you knowledgeable about the specifics of this game engine, then you are simply wrong. If you cannot accept being told that you are wrong, then perhaps I 'lecture' in a way that is totally appropriate for your behavior. Quote why they're selling expensive DLCs for an old game with basic mp problems. You have not in any way shown that a significant number of people suffer from these problems and that it is thus an important problem to solve.
symb Posted June 1 Author Posted June 1 (edited) 1 hour ago, Aapje said: If you think that working in 'various development projects' that are in no way similar to this game, makes you knowledgeable about the specifics of this game engine, then you are simply wrong. If you cannot accept being told that you are wrong, then perhaps I 'lecture' in a way that is totally appropriate for your behavior. This doesn't give me "super knowledge," but I have to interact with a wide range of developers, including fixing major bugs in plugins, for example. And this allows me to see the different approaches different developers take to clients. So, based on this experience, I see that the IL-2 developers aren't the nicest people who respect the customers who pour hundreds of euros into their products! But there are also arrogant fanboys, who don't understand a thing and love to draw "smart" conclusions. And by the way, maybe that's why No Man's Sky has a hundred times larger customer base, because the developers respect their customers. Their sales launch was terrible. There are two types of developers - The first type tells you, "We're not guaranteeing anything, but we'll see what we can do..." The second type says, "We won't do anything. If you don't like it, buy our Buggy Mess 2 priced more than a AAA game, and while you wait, buy the new DLC for Buggy Mess 1...also priced more than a AAA game (which, by the way, usually has working co-op)." So, if you like developer type number 2 and suppoting that attitude, then you deserve such a product! Edited June 1 by symb
Aapje Posted June 1 Posted June 1 They have made a large number of changes over the years, including based on the request of people in the community. Ultimately, all I see you doing is spouting a mix of speculation and falsehoods, apparently rationalizing your complaint of being hard done by, for the developers not fixing a problem that your ISP created and by extension you, for choosing that ISP and/or not getting a non-CGNAT service and/or fixed IP. At no point have you shown any willingness to admit that you do not in fact know the financials of 1CGS, how much effort it really is to replace the networking stack in the GB engine or the many other things that you claim to know, but don't actually know. Nor have you taken back the lies you have told, despite being called out. You throw around buzzwords like Steam Datagram Relay, without at any point recognizing the downsides, like tying their game to Steam (which means an immediate 30% pay cut for all the copies that will no longer be sold through their own site), or the extra latency that a relay server creates. Latency issues are very important for flight sims. So I care very little about your opinion of the devs, because you've shown what kind of customer you are. Entitled and unreasonable, and unable to be reasoned with. You can take what I've said and again start crying how badly you are being treated, or you can for once take responsibility for your own actions and recognize that your behavior is utterly unproductive. You do not ask for help, despite many in this community being willing to help each other. You at no point seem willing to try to understand why the devs told you no (which doesn't mean that you have to agree). All you want is to boss them around. 1 1
symb Posted June 1 Author Posted June 1 (edited) 46 minutes ago, Aapje said: Ultimately, all I see you doing is spouting a mix of speculation and falsehoods But if you pull your head out of the sand of your exclusivity and Google it... Year after year, people have been asking for help with a co-op fix for the same problem, and the developers have NEVER HELPED. Some of them resolved it by a NAT fix after contacting their provider, but that's NOT a NORMAL solution for online play! And some were never able to fix the co-op game! And the developers simply kept silent! They didn't even try to offer any kind of peer-to-peer tool or anything to allow two or more players to play co-op properly in two clicks. Because of greed and fear of being hacked. Edited June 1 by symb
1C Game Studios LukeFF Posted June 1 1C Game Studios Posted June 1 Alright, this thread is going nowhere. 1
Recommended Posts