Make the F-80 free

[Valis]

You want a bigger player base? Learn from drug dealers across the world!

A common complaint at launch, particularly on Steam, was 'too expensive'. Another issue is the refund window being only two hours. As anyone who dabbles with flight sims knows, two hours is nowhere near enough time to set things up and suss things out.

So make the F-80 free - for everyone. It can dance with MiGs and blow stuff up on the ground - a gateway drug to entice interested folk into going all in.

 

[Justicier10-7]

If IL-2 Series went to the same "Free-to-Play" model as the direct competition (the one with the clicky cockpits), then I would argue the F-51 is a better choice as the one free aircraft. This would allow people to make a more-or-less direct comparison to how the '51 flies in IL-2 vs that other sim, would provide good mission variety, while allowing people to fly a classic airframe that many love.

And... it would provide enough of a tease in that people will see all these awesome shiny jets zooming around... while they're "stuck" flying their comparatively slow Mustang... and start looking at the jets thinking "I NEED IT!!!" like spongebob looking at a glass of water.

 

The down-side to this is... it would make multiplayer *worse*. This because if there's only one F2P aircraft on only Blue side in the base game... that will flood the Blue side with players by default, while Red will be just those who have purchased a "bundle" with all the other aircraft. Not great for the MP experience. So... would that mean the Yak-9 would need to be free as well so multiplayer doesn't get completely thrown under the bus? And at that point... the "bundle" with all the other aircraft would be $80 (for two less aircraft since they're F2P) so 1C doesn't potentially take financial losses.

However, I think it's a bit telling that the devs have stayed away from the F2P model after Rise of Flight. I suspect in that case, it wasn't quite as advantageous for bringing in new players as many may think.

[Husar]

I have started F2P ROF and bought other planes separately very quickly 😅

[Leifr]

16 hours ago, Justicier10-7 said:

If IL-2 Series went to the same "Free-to-Play" model as the direct competition (the one with the clicky cockpits), then I would argue the F-51 is a better choice as the one free aircraft. This would allow people to make a more-or-less direct comparison to how the '51 flies in IL-2 vs that other sim, would provide good mission variety, while allowing people to fly a classic airframe that many love.

Hard agree; I think offering the F-51 up as a free-to-play option would be an excellent idea towards getting more feet through the door. It might also help shift some of those begrudgingly stuck in GB still if they can fly a comparable like-for-like and actually see just how improved Korea is over the prior title. It's unfortunate but the online scene is already pretty low, I rarely see Combat Box pushing beyond forty players now - sometimes it can be just a handful even during EU prime hours. Something isn't sitting right for Korea right now in my opinion despite it being a marked improvement in every manner (aside from AI!) over GB.

[Valis]

1 hour ago, Leifr said:

It's unfortunate but the online scene is already pretty low, I rarely see Combat Box pushing beyond forty players now - sometimes it can be just a handful even during EU prime hours.

One issue I'm still seeing online is people in a cycle of getting kicked, trying to rejoin, getting kicked...etc. Even just watching it via chat it's rough - must be 10 times worse for the players just trying to fly and getting constantly bounced out of the servers. Hopefully this month's patch will address it.

Still, I think the main problem for multiplayer is the plane-set. All the toys are on the UN side, and the deck ops DLC will only exacerbate the issue. But how do you solve it? Is the prospect of an La-9, or a vanilla MiG-15, or a Tu-2 really going to bring all the boys to the yard?

As a single-player experience the plane-set is fantastic - no complaints here. But for multiplayer it's harder to make a case.

[Husar]

For healthy multiplayer I believe we need correct to period but not available in Korea planes. I don't like that idea but for multiplayer and dynamic - none historical camping it would work.

[Justicier10-7]

3 hours ago, Leifr said:

Hard agree; I think offering the F-51 up as a free-to-play option would be an excellent idea towards getting more feet through the door. It might also help shift some of those begrudgingly stuck in GB still if they can fly a comparable like-for-like and actually see just how improved Korea is over the prior title. It's unfortunate but the online scene is already pretty low, I rarely see Combat Box pushing beyond forty players now - sometimes it can be just a handful even during EU prime hours. Something isn't sitting right for Korea right now in my opinion despite it being a marked improvement in every manner (aside from AI!) over GB.

I'm hoping the reason for lack of consistent online player counts is merely due to a lot of people (myself included) waiting for a patch first before getting back in the saddle. Right now I can only fly a mission or two before I get the "Not Enough Video Memory" message, and shortly thereafter, my framerate drops below what I'm willing to put up with in MP. When the VRAM overflows, the sim never gives a "release and renew" command to the GPU when in-game... forcing the player to completely exit and restart the game to clear the VRAM. Really not a good circumstance for MP... but tolerable for SP.

11 hours ago, Husar said:

I have started F2P ROF and bought other planes separately very quickly 😅

On my end I just tried it for about an hour to check out the flight modeling, then purchased my first RoF package that opened up early-war options for career. And when it went on sale, bought everything but the Ilya Muromets package.

 

But... you and I are likely biased by our love of flight sims. For the average steam user, I saw a tremendous amount of negativity about RoF... many people complaining that "You couldn't do anything with the free planes" or "Everything cool is locked behind a paywall"... apparently not realizing that the free aircraft were relatively late-war and had to be flown at that time-frame in career. Peak player count for RoF on Steam, two months after United's release, was 236 players in December 2013, and that number dropped to 74 in just one month. Despite it being a F2P model! (I know that's just the Steam version, but still, Steam+F2P=More Exposure)

This is the stigma of the F2P model, the criticisms (or, dare I say, "butthurt") just transform from "The game is too pricey for me" to "I need to pay to do what I want to do."

Now, I do think Korea in a similar F2P model has what it takes to be more successful than RoF F2P... but it is a big risk for the developers, and one that history has likely cautioned them to steer clear of.

Edited September 7 by Justicier10-7

[Limboski]

On 9/7/2026 at 11:53 AM, Justicier10-7 said:

I do think Korea in a similar F2P model has what it takes to be more successful than RoF F2P... but it is a big risk for the developers, and one that history has likely cautioned them to steer clear of.

My main worry about IL--2 Korea is that it will never develop a sufficiently large multiplayer count for several different reasons, and I think that 1C really needs to do something different to get more players hooked on the game, like any good drug dealer would do, as the price of entry is really too high, imo.

I went and looked over the negative reviews for Rise of Flight and I do indeed see that "free to play" pricing model creates negative expectations in a very large portion of the player base who assume that everything should be free which creates the "this game is really pay to win!" type attitude.  However, DCS offers a free plane and map and free two week trials for most maps and aircraft and largely escapes this type of criticism and DCS has a Very Positive Steam score rating.  Most negative reviews of DCS are due to new players not being able to figure out how to set things up and get flying which is also a problem with IL-2--realistic games/sims have a big learning curve.  Still, I think a free plane or a longer trial period needs to be offered.

Another worry I have is that the next planned Korea expansion, Deck Ops, does not include even one Commnist/Red airplane.  How can we have a thriving MP community when there are not a sufficient number of planes to fly for Red?

[Dash,Polder]

That would be a major rewrite and task, since every install connects to the master server and has a known and registered owner, your asking them to introduce anonymity where anyone can have a copy with no controls and no copywrite protections.  Not likely to happen, they'd have to change their entire system or risk losing everything to unrestrained pirated bootlegs.  

[LukeFF]

2 hours ago, Limboski said:

How can we have a thriving MP community when there are not a sufficient number of planes to fly for Red?

The reality is that the IL2 franchise (and most other flight sims, for that matter) have always had a very low percentage of players who play in MP (in the single digits for IL2). 

It's not that we don't care about multiplayer players, but given the sort of people who buy and play our games, the majority of the focus is likely always going to be on the single player experience. 

[AndreiTomescu]

On 9/11/2026 at 10:57 PM, LukeFF said:

the majority of the focus is likely always going to be on the single player experience

This statement from you really gave me the confidence in the future of this sim. Thank you!

Explanation: since this is the way, and you developers are clearly aware of it, it means that true effort will be done in the nearby and distant future to make and keep SP experience better and better. With things like improvement in AI, graphics optimisation and above all, content. 

Thx.

[YoYo]

That’s a good idea—though not the F-80, since we’ve already paid for that one; instead, perhaps a different model released specifically for the free-to-play experience, like a free Po-2. The map issue remains, however: while the Caucasus is just one of many maps in DCS (and a very old one at that), for IL-2 Korea, there is essentially no choice at all. Perhaps a "demo" map could be created—something like the old Lapino map, covering a section of China, for instance. The Po-2 could then serve as a trainer aircraft, acting as an introduction to becoming a frontline pilot. There are plenty of possibilities, but I think this is a direction worth pursuing.

Edited September 15 by YoYo

[Avimimus]

5 hours ago, YoYo said:

The map issue remains, however: while the Caucasus is just one of many maps in DCS (and a very old one at that), for IL-2 Korea, there is essentially no choice at all. Perhaps a "demo" map could be created—something like the old Lapino map, covering a section of China, for instance.

I'm not sure if it is that much of an issue?

One could limit the types of missions available - perhaps limiting the free mode to the Trials/Training missions (i.e. no career mode, dynamic campaign, scripted campaign, or normal single missions) and possibly multiplayer?

Sure you could spend a lot of time touring around the map - but the temptation would remain to get additional aircraft or features. Also - there will be another map probably within two years.

[AEthelraedUnraed]

11 hours ago, Avimimus said:

I'm not sure if it is that much of an issue?

One could limit the types of missions available - perhaps limiting the free mode to the Trials/Training missions (i.e. no career mode, dynamic campaign, scripted campaign, or normal single missions) and possibly multiplayer?

Sure you could spend a lot of time touring around the map - but the temptation would remain to get additional aircraft or features. Also - there will be another map probably within two years.

Agreed. A dedicated Demo with only Trials and perhaps just one or two planes would, IMO, be a much better solution than Pay-To-Win (a.k.a. Free-To-Play). Given the low percentage of Multiplayer players, limiting the missions that can be flown is perhaps more effective than limiting the plane types.

[Gungriffen]

No, I can see why they wouldn't make it free, but a heavy discount for one plane (and the rest of the game) for like $20, $30, $40 with an upgrade option might be a balance.

[Fabry_ASW19]

It would be certainly beneficial to have a some way to test the game before buying it, and the way to do it would be only two free airplanes Po-2 and Stinson L5 🙂 possibly with some FAC capability and full access to everything else including online servers. NO WAY people will resist to buy in after experiencing first hand how good the game is and that the accuracy of models is definitely worth the price.

[Dash,Polder]

Separate demo, small map, no multiply.  Not really worth it since one can go gift them Great Battles on sale for nearly free, and there's the demo and introduction.