More Adrenaline please!

[YoYo]

I have already flown around 40 missions—or perhaps even 50—in my career as a pilot specializing primarily in ground-attack operations.

Typical mission:

1/ takeoff, flight to the target with an escort,

2/ attack A2G, 50% chance of encountering the enemy during the target destruction phase,

3/ return to base.

Not once during the flight to the target did I encounter an enemy; no one ever attempted to intercept me or my wing (even though part of the mission took place over North Korean territory) - in general, I wasn't disturbed at all. Every mission was a success and looks the same with scenario like up.

It’s incredible—there were so many missions where the enemy would just wait for me to arrive and destroy the targets; only then, sometimes, would MiGs appear.

I’ve never encountered a Yak-9 or La-11 during my career—and I fly the F-51D—so it would be nice to see a reasonably matched opponent in the air as well.

I’m certainly not saying the adversary should try to intercept the flight every single time, but there ought to be a 15-20% chance that the mission might fail for some reason and the enemy reaches the target first or simply wanted to intercept me during the way to target too (after all, both sides had radars). I’d like to drop my weapons or external tanks and rush into a dogfight, but instead, I feel like an uncle at a family gathering.

I know the career mode is still a work in progress, but you really need to inject more adrenaline into it for players (check out what a combat sortie looks like on the Combat Box server). Theoretically, you can just go to sleep and wake up right over the target—with a 100% chance that nothing will happen and you won't run into anyone (not even a passing Li-2 or anything like that). A flight should play out like this: after takeoff and especially over enemy territory I ought to be visually scanning the area around me to avoid running into an adversary; if I do encounter one, I should either engage in combat or try to slip past undetected, hugging the ground. As it stands, however, there is no need to look anywhere, because you won't encounter a thing.

While many mechanics (such as squadron management) are simply excellent in IL-2 Korea, the actual flying feels a bit dull, and the mission pattern is practically the same every time. Pls think about it, thank you.

 

Edited September 25 by YoYo

[Veritasvincitx]

i get what you're saying and I feel your pain on endlessly flying from waypoint to waypoint without ever encountering an enemy aircraft. It gets old. I'm an F-51D career mode guy, too. At this point in the simulator's development stage, the Mustang career is the most historically accurate - just hauling ordinance to the frontline all day long. I'm a stickler for historical accuracy (I'm a historian, go figure, lol). Just to play devil's advocate, and I'm not saying you're wrong or attacking you here, so don't take it that way. After the late summer or early fall of 1950, UN aircraft weren't going to get intercepted flying up to the front lines to do close air support work - or really anything south of Pyongyang. The first incarnation of the KPAF was totally destroyed by FEAF F-51, F-82, and F-80s during the first few months of the war. All the Yak-9, La-7/11, and Il-10 were either shot down or destroyed on the ground by B-29 or B-26 raids. It wouldn't be until November or December of 1950 when Soviet-flown MiG-15  from Antung began intercepting UN aircraft, and they never went near the front for fear of Soviet pilots being captured. Almost all air combat from 1951-1953 happened between the MiGs and UN aircraft up around the Yalu and within that area. 

So, the life of a F-51D or F-80 fighter bomber, mud mover jock was pretty boring unless they were hauling ordinance up to MiG alley. Many hours of boredom with a few moments of sheer terror and excitement. In fact, I'm hoping (personal opinion) that the developers create an option where the situation is reversed where the US aircraft are flying the long distances in careers to hit targets up in MiG Alley and the MiG pilots are just flying local intercept missions within 50 to 100km of Antung or whichever base their career is out of. That would be the historically accurate model. Right now they have MiG careers flying long distance to fly CAP and intercepts over the front lines and that just didn't happen in the Korean War. MiG-15s weren't encountered that far south. I'm being a really, really annoying history snob dweeb now so I'll stop. You get what I'm looking for in the game's development, lol. Cheers, man! 

[YoYo]

The very thing you're describing points to a fundamental historical inaccuracy: when attacking targets—even well south of the Yalu River, there is a 50% chance of encountering a MiG-15 now over your target (even ONZ fronline side!). The scenario I mentioned earlier involved only a 15–20% probability of any encounter at all—and "any encounter" could mean anything from a Li-2 in flight to returning Il-10s, and so on. Unfortunately, we don't see any of that here. I’ve been playing the campaign since the first day of the war, back when the Korean air force was more active yet I never experienced this in my career. Since, as you noted, there are already historical inaccuracies, I certainly wouldn't mind seeing more enemy air activity. It’s worth adding that this applies to the other side as well; you won't encounter any UN aircraft in the air either (like F-80s returning from missions, etc.), with the sole exception of reconnaissance planes during CAS missions. Btw. What you're saying would make sense if everything were 100% historically accurate—but that isn't the case, nor will it be (the campaign will feature dynamic elements, so your actions will actually make sense in terms of altering the course of history).

Edited September 25 by YoYo

[YoYo]

Still nothing in version 1.004. No contacts along the way. Interestingly, in the five missions I’ve flown in 1.004b so far, I haven’t even encountered any enemies over the main ground targets from mission. According to the changelog, piston-engine aircraft were supposed to appear too, but there’s nothing.

When I "send out" an AI wing and read the report during the their mission, I sometimes see that they encountered Yak-9s, La-11s, Li-2s, Il-10s, etc., along the way (spotted). Yet, when the player flies the mission, nothing happens. We'll see how it goes.

Example:

I never encountered anything along the way; no wingman ever reported to me that something was flying towards us while en route to the target or back.

Edited Sunday at 03:54 PM by YoYo

[Avimimus]

Realistically, you shouldn't be encountering enemy aircraft very often. When you do encounter enemy aircraft they should flee, or sometimes ambush you and then flee... depicting this would be the only way to get historically accurate attrition rates.

I'd personally prefer if there was a 'realistic' setting and an 'alternate history' setting...

 

On 9/25/2026 at 3:38 PM, YoYo said:

I’ve been playing the campaign since the first day of the war, back when the Korean air force was more active yet I never experienced this in my career.

I'd check the dates for the start of the campaign and the start of the war. The DPRK airforce initially had superiority, but the intervention of jet fighters essentially led to eat ceasing to exist shortly after. It was then largely rebuilt from scratch after the Soviet (and later Chinese) interventions. It is this later phase that is modelled (1951-1953). Modelling most of the first part of the war in 1950 would require an additional map showing south Korea.

[YoYo]

5 hours ago, Avimimus said:

Realistically, you shouldn't be encountering enemy aircraft very often. When you do encounter enemy aircraft they should flee, or sometimes ambush you and then flee... depicting this would be the only way to get historically accurate attrition rates.

I'd personally prefer if there was a 'realistic' setting and an 'alternate history' setting...

 

I'd check the dates for the start of the campaign and the start of the war. The DPRK airforce initially had superiority, but the intervention of jet fighters essentially led to eat ceasing to exist shortly after. It was then largely rebuilt from scratch after the Soviet (and later Chinese) interventions. It is this later phase that is modelled (1951-1953). Modelling most of the first part of the war in 1950 would require an additional map showing south Korea.

Hi. 

In response:

If you look at it from a "historical" perspective (a notion, held by some, that there was zero contact with the enemy, which is untrue), please explain to me logically why the AI always encounters the enemy, or near always, while my flight never does. Example of the report above.

I was checking the reports today as well, and it turns out that in 1951, the Northern forces still possessed about 60% of the air fleet, though, of course, that figure dwindled over time. But that doesn't mean the number was zero in 1951.

In the game perspective:

It’s also hard to speak of historical accuracy when the AI almost always spots something flying by that I don’t. Let’s not kid ourselves. The Career mode isn’t built around historical accuracy 100%, beyond simply placing the action in the right era with the appropriate aircraft and weaponry. You get historical accuracy in the scripted campaigns. In Career mode, which will eventually gain dynamic features, you could even bring about the total collapse of UN forces if you fail to take the right actions. So, we’re free to let our imaginations run wild. Besides, we aren’t talking about anything extraordinary here.

Since you’ve brought up the historical aspect, I’m currently at October 1951.

History:

I’ve only checked September so far (I’m basing this on the fact that I’ve just finished the month of September in Career mode, so I’m using it as an example):

https://hapenews.mine.nu/library/65010

In short:

In September 1951, contact with the enemy by UN forces was a very frequent occurrence, even if it did not always result in a major battle. How frequently did contact occur? In September 1951, the front spanned approximately 125 miles (about 200 km) and was held by 14 Eighth Army divisions organized into four corps. After September 20, once major offensive operations had concluded, the standing order was effectively to hold positions and conduct intensive patrols forward of the front line.

• Every day, numerous patrol encounters occurred along the entire front;
• some resulted in brief exchanges of fire,
• some escalated into larger skirmishes,
• while some patrols did not encounter the enemy at all.

In September 1951, pilots of the 4th Fighter-Interceptor Wing recorded 1,177 MiG sorties over North Korea. Of these 1,177 instances, 911 resulted in combat with MiGs.
This averages out to approximately 39 observed MiG sorties per day and about 30 engagements per day. 

https://www.koreanwaronline.com/history/PolicyAndDirection/pd-c-23.htm

September 1951 was a notable month.
It was not a quiet month. Major offensive operations were still underway during the first half of September:

- the Battle of Bloody Ridge ended on September 5,
- the Battle of Heartbreak Ridge began on September 13,
- the 1st Marine Division conducted operations in the Punch Bowl area until September 25,
- local attacks and counterattacks continued in other sectors.

For instance, on September 18, the 65th Infantry Regiment made contact with the enemy near Taima-ri, resulting in intense fighting. On September 20, a 2nd Infantry Division patrol encountered Chinese forces near Hill 867. Meanwhile, on September 12, a Canadian patrol conducted a raid on an enemy position. After September 20, the situation increasingly shifted toward positional and patrol warfare. Units were required to actively patrol the area in front of their own positions. Attacks and counter-attacks took place in the air over the areas of these operations. I recorded zero over those places, there was never even an enemy patrol, either.

https://www.dafhistory.af.mil/Portals/16/documents/Studies/101-150/AFD-090529-040.pdf

In September alone, we are talking about 911 aerial fights with enemy (only MiGs!). A single contact could sometimes involve several adversaries simultaneously.

More interesting reports:

https://www.scribd.com/document/981239308/AFD-090529-040

https://media.defense.gov/2010/Sep/28/2001330151/-1/-1/0/MigAlley.pdf

Conclusion:

The operations listed above took place in September (and they are shown in the career mode); I flew through the entire month and every single mission. I didn't encounter the enemy even once, neither over the target nor en route. The reports mentioned above deal primarily with encounters with MiG fighters, whereas I am writing about overflights by the Tu-2, Li-2, Yak-9, La-11, and the like. We have literally nothing on that here. So how on earth can there be talk of a "historical aspect" here, when there was absolutely zero contact across a dozen or more missions? 

Basically, I’m looking for some variety, the occasional surprising turn of events. Perhaps the appearance of a hostile patrol aircraft, witnessing an airborne landing (if we’re talking about operations supporting ground forces), or seeing enemy attack aircraft returning from the front line. Unfortunately, nothing like that happens; every mission is as predictable as the sun rising tomorrow 😉. It feels like a family get-together, zero adrenaline, and everything is going like clockwork.

In the first post, I also mentioned a 15% probability; that is both realistic and possible for those times according me.

Edited Monday at 04:28 PM by YoYo

[Avimimus]

Love the research!

That is indeed a lot of activity. I do wonder if units at other parts of the front were encountering Migs much at all?

I gather that the DPRK/Soviet supplied propeller aircraft would have shifted largely to night operations by 1951? I wonder how many were still in service by that date. I've honestly not done that much reading - my focus has been on the pre-1951 period.

[GiftGruen]

Historical accuracy is anyway something we want to have in a Sim only to a somewhat action-oriented extent.

Imagine IL2 GB late war with historical accuracy in a Me109. You vs 10 Mustangs. Is this what we want to have, because of historical accuracy?

No.

This is a computer game, and while we all want to have the historical background as correct as possible - the balancing and ‚fun‘ aspect may not be forgotten.

Edited Monday at 05:49 PM by GiftGruen

[Juri_JS]

28 minutes ago, Avimimus said:

I gather that the DPRK/Soviet supplied propeller aircraft would have shifted largely to night operations by 1951? I wonder how many were still in service by that date. I've honestly not done that much reading - my focus has been on the pre-1951 period.

The last known Il-10 combat mission was on June 20, 1951.

Daytime missions with the Yak-9P by the 56th Fighter Aviation Regiment continued until late 1951. The last missions in the Pyongyang region were flown in January/February 1951, afterwards Yak-9Ps were only active in the area around Sinuiju and along the west coast.

[Avimimus]

46 minutes ago, GiftGruen said:

Historical accuracy is anyway something we want to have in a Sim only to a somewhat action-oriented extent.

Imagine IL2 GB late war with historical accuracy in a Me109. You vs 10 Mustangs. Is this what we want to have, because of historical accuracy?

No.

This is a computer game, and while we all want to have the historical background as correct as possible - the balancing and ‚fun‘ aspect may not be forgotten.

I'd actually prefer this!

If we're going to have alternate history than give me a BvP 212... If we're going to be historical - than I'd prefer it matched the actual after action reports I've read...

It is the middle ground that I find hard to justify (at least as the only option).

[Mark_Krieger]

I'm into maximum possible historical accuracy too. I understand it can be less exciting if you are flying the blue side far from Mig Alley, but to be honest I dislike it a lot when Mig 15s intercept me so far south when flying the F-51D. And anyway they aren't a menace (but that's a matter of the AI capabilities). I was expecting enemy prop planes sometimes as the patch announced, but at the moment haven't found any (september-october with Daniel James 12th FBS career).

I understand too that this is a sim, but also a game and other players perhaps prefer action over historical accuracy. I think the best solution (wich would represent more work for the developers) would be a difficulty option in the career where you could select "historically accurate" besides enemy superiority/inferiority. It is also true that the scenario is quite limiting because as @Juri_JS says, some red planes that are in the game didn't even have mission or were limited in very specific zones. 

[BRSQD.Pendiuk78]

Hello, fellow pilots! I also think historical accuracy is interesting, but not to the point of frustrating players who are looking for actual combat scenarios—which is exactly what isn't happening. The maps are monotonous, there are very few players, and sightings of enemy piston-engine aircraft are rare... Shouldn't there be AI units when the server has fewer than 10 players? We really need more maps without jets!

[YoYo]

1 hour ago, BRSQD.Pendiuk78 said:

The maps are monotonous, there are very few players ...

You're only writing about multiplayer (right?), but the topic is about the single-player career mode :).