Future for Forgotten Battles

[taffy2]

Hi All, Now with Korea justifiably destine to take center spot with it's excellent graphics and effects I do hope that Forgotten Battles does not go the way of the Dodo, because there is so much of especially the second world war still has to offer. Battle of Britain, North Africa/Mediterranean, and the Pacific theatres, Because who knows with a taste of the jet age the next endeavor could be Vietnam.

Cheers

[MDzmitry]

If you read through dev diaries and check the interviews/videos, it's been discussed that 1CGS are highly unlikely to go into Vietnam since that era of jets would require clickable cockpits to provide engaging gameplay.

Thus, IL2S is likely to go back into WW2 after it's done developing Korea as a setting. The first DLC will introduce aircraft carriers, so the likely development for WW2 theatres includes the Pacific as well. The rest is pure speculation and wish fulfillment, I'd personally love to see Italy with some mountainous scenery as it's a lot more interesting to fly and fight over.

Edited August 8 by MDzmitry

[BlitzPig_EL]

IMHO, the next iteration of the new game engine after Korea will be WW2 again, and most likely the Pacific Theater.  Were are getting an Essex class carrier after all.

As to Great Battles, well history will repeat itself and it will suffer the same fate as original IL2 when newer sims took it's place.  It will be a fond memory with a small handful of players that refuse to move on to the new thing.

[Kubert]

54 minutes ago, MDzmitry said:

I'd personally love to see Italy with some mountainous scenery

In sake of NPC pilots lives, I hope devs avoid any map with tall hills. 

[Avimimus]

In the AMA/FAQ a couple of months ago the developers confirmed that WWII or WWI will be next and that Vietnam isn't in the plans (IMHO, the Suez Crisis of 1956 would be more feasible, or even the Six Day War... by the Vietnam era, or even post-1955, the complexity of avionics increases massively... which makes it hard to develop a complete high fidelity simulator with multiple flyable aircraft, as opposed to a study-sim focussing on one aircraft).

As mentioned though, most development will eventually shift to the new engine.

[kraut1]

4 hours ago, Avimimus said:

As mentioned though, most development will eventually shift to the new engine.

Yes, for WW2 the new Korea engine should be suitable very well, especially for shortcommings of IL-2 GB  due to the WW1 RoF engine like radio communication with AI planes / ground control (at least I hope, Korea does not work on my computer currently).
For WW1 I don't know if the Korea engine has benifits. I have noticed very late for example, that the great battles engine seems to be very good in respect of VR performance for WW1 on old computer systems...

[GiftGruen]

I am sure that WW1 would benefit a lot.

Landscape beauty, ground unit details, damage model, the motivating career mode - that‘s only some of the good stuff.

 

[Aapje]

It's utterly predictable that the Pacific will be next given the ability to reuse assets from Korea, combined with all the crumbs that the devs have been leaving.

[GiftGruen]

Probably: yes

And -  hey - what a wonderful choice that would be! 

Edited August 9 by GiftGruen

[FuriousMeow]

WW1 would also benefit from the more advanced physics calculations, the higher poly terrain mesh, and the non-flat/level runways.

One of the aerodromes for the Lafayette Escadrille was basically a hill side and had quite a few accidents because of that. In FC its perfectly flat and level. 

Would be nice if something like Ugra Media could 3rd party develop like they did for FC to take some load off the core team, but if they stick with the same FM again that would be massively disappointing but I won't go further down that road as all that is only hypothetical currently.

WW2 Pacific seems like the next hop and I'll be very happy with that. Carrier action is nice and all, but involves a lot of water. Some Solomon Islands would be amazing, or just in general the battles around Solomon Sea/Bismarck Sea.

Edited August 9 by FuriousMeow

[Avimimus]

For WWI:

On the one hand, continued development of Flying Circus on the Great Battles engine would allow fixing a few important gaps (A couple of 1916 two-seaters, the Fokker D.II, possibly the Rumpler C.IV for higher altitude work) and could give us a couple really interesting late-war or mid-war fighters as well (Roland D.VIb, Airco D.H.5).

On the other hand, the updated 'Korea' engine could enhance the flight models, significantly enhance the damage models, and add infantry (although I wonder if the new infantry tech could also be added to Great Battles?), as well as benefit from all of the other game-engine upgrades (e.g. AI as it is improved over time).

Either would be great.

[kraut1]

7 hours ago, FuriousMeow said:

WW1 would also benefit from the more advanced physics calculations, the higher poly terrain mesh, and the non-flat/level runways.

One of the aerodromes for the Lafayette Escadrille was basically a hill side and had quite a few accidents because of that. In FC its perfectly flat and level. 

Would be nice if something like Ugra Media could 3rd party develop like they did for FC to take some load off the core team, but if they stick with the same FM again that would be massively disappointing but I won't go further down that road as all that is only hypothetical currently.

 

You can design in Great Battles such airfields without problems:

You just have to search for a terrain that fits to your requirements.

And when you have found one you have to check if the required plane types are able to take off / to land.

If there are problems with accidents you can design with surface manipulation a simple rectangular invisible, smooth surface. 

By using this you have still a non-flat runway but the planes will not flip-over any more.

And some planes like C47, Ju52 are have absolutely no problems with off-road take offs / landings on unprepared terrain.

 

[FuriousMeow]

8 hours ago, kraut1 said:

You can design in Great Battles such airfields without problems:

You just have to search for a terrain that fits to your requirements.

And when you have found one you have to check if the required plane types are able to take off / to land.

If there are problems with accidents you can design with surface manipulation a simple rectangular invisible, smooth surface. 

By using this you have still a non-flat runway but the planes will not flip-over any more.

And some planes like C47, Ju52 are have absolutely no problems with off-road take offs / landings on unprepared terrain.

 

I know, the Camel campaign has the takeoff area moved off to another area, but it would be nice for the actual takeoff/landing area to be the way it should be without site surveying to find a suitable area on some field.

But, the hill is a little steeper that N.124 used for a period of time. Its more like the end of the runway at Kangwon in Korea but longer, no level area and there's a ditch at the end. 

[Enceladus828]

Would be nice if the Tarnopol map from Rise of Flight was brought over to FC along with the Sikorskies and some Austro-Hungarian planes to have the Eastern Front of WW1 properly depicted.

[catch]

I'm not sure one should discount Vietnam as a possibility. It was of course, yet another Great Patriotic Victory, after the Great Patriotic Victories of WWII and Korea against the arrogant western infidels. So .... WWII -> Korea -> Vietnam. Does one not see a trend? A Great Patriotic Victory Trifecta one could say! 😄 However, choppers may be above 1c's paygrade? But I believe Albert was keen on the idea. If he's still around? I dunno? Video game producers are so peripatetic these days.

But forget about that. It's merely speculation on my part and of no great importance. What really is important is returning to the real war. The war that started it all. The war that gave us the magnificent majesty of the early war birds. I speak of WW1 of course. This is the direction 1C must take, no. no, no not on the old GB engine, not even on the Korea engine but a new, new engine designed specifically to do the WW1 air war the justice it truly deserves. And all theatres too! 

But alas, I'll be dead by the time this happens. C’est la vie. But I do it for the youngsters, for they are the future. Viva la WW1.

[Aapje]

The issue with Vietnam is that it introduces a lot more complexity and technology. 

[Avimimus]

21 hours ago, Catch said:

I'm not sure one should discount Vietnam as a possibility.

They've officially discounted it in the Q&A. They didn't say 'never' - but they made it pretty clear that they had no plans, whereas a return to WWII and even WWI was being considered.

21 hours ago, Catch said:

But alas, I'll be dead by the time this happens. C’est la vie. But I do it for the youngsters, for they are the future. Viva la WW1.

We may never see the trees ourselves, but we can still plan for a future.

Planting the seeds that will someday blossom into Star-Strutters for our grand-children...

...and then promptly crash (they are Hansa-Brandenburg D.I's after all :D)

But our grandchildren will bear witness.

[J18]

It would be great to see WW1 really well done in the Korea module. Perhaps even working ground crew to spin the props and pull the chocks away. If it ever happens I doubt I'll be around to see it. The extra details and better graphics would look wonderful.

[catch]

11 hours ago, J18 said:

It would be great to see WW1 really well done in the Korea module.

Well of course we all want that. There are many here extolling the virtues of Korea but secretly pine for WW1. 

Imagine being the CO of a struggling WW1 squadron with obsolete kites sending out under-trained rose-cheeked young men (boys really) to almost certain death against insurmountable odds. Always low on supplies and equipment. A one in four survival rate. Compassioned pleas to brass hats that go nowhere. He is alone and unloved seething with emasculated anger and hitting the bottle, tears of despair sliding down his pasty cheeks and into a chipped whisky tumbler as he finally collapses onto the table, purloined from a French chateau, shoulders heaving with muffled sobs of grief.

It would be fantastic!

[GiftGruen]

Well. The good thing is that AI devs in some years will just copy it over.

The bad thing is, that AI devs then will play the game themselves..

[T24_Martin]

I once wrote in the old forum, I would pay for an upgrade of IL-2 GB. And I still would do it. 

All the research is basically done and the plane set and theatres are just to good to let go. So a transformation into the new engine is not without a lot of work, but in my opinion it would make sense. You do not have to do all the 3d work, physics, etc. from scratch. It just has to be modified updated and maybe sometimes redone 

 

[LukeFF]

10 hours ago, T24_Martin said:

You do not have to do all the 3d work, physics, etc. from scratch. It just has to be modified updated and maybe sometimes redone

Sorry, but that's just not how it works. 🙂 Everything for Korea has been rebuilt from scratch. 

Whenever WWII is added to the new engine, it will have entirely new assets and functionality. 

[GiftGruen]

2 hours ago, LukeFF said:

Whenever WWII is added to the new engine …

Be careful, Luke, ‚whenever’ will be read as ‚as soon‘ and this changes quickly to ‚next‘ and ‚near‘ and then you‘re trapped 😉

[Aapje]

4 hours ago, GiftGruen said:

Be careful, Luke, ‚whenever’ will be read as ‚as soon‘ and this changes quickly to ‚next‘ and ‚near‘ and then you‘re trapped 😉

Wait, did someone say that it will be done tomorrow? 😛

[T24_Martin]

On 8/20/2026 at 5:44 PM, LukeFF said:

Sorry, but that's just not how it works. 🙂 Everything for Korea has been rebuilt from scratch. 

Whenever WWII is added to the new engine, it will have entirely new assets and functionality. 

Thanks Luke! 

Sure I have no idea of how it is done. I was just assuming, you have done all the research like flight characteristics etc. and the basic 3d geometry of planes and cockpits.

Anyway, I don't care if planes or settings will be doubled with GB. Both are great games!