Friday 2009-10-30 Screenshots Update discussion thread

[Oleg Maddox]

Discuss when posted please.
I will read all later and will try to answer some qood and right time questions.

[Novotny]

links seem broken :( edit:: working now! thanks!

[ZaltysZ]

Yes, links are broken.

[Oleg Maddox]

Yes, links are broken.

Simply was't working yet... your too early.
Now is OK

[MicroWave]

Will it be possible to place ground objects on top of each other in mission builder?
Something like loading tanks on trains, etc.

[Oleg Maddox]

Something like loading tanks on trains, etc.

Yes. Its why we show it.
But not all objects to any surface. There will be some limits of course.

[HFC_Dolphin]

Can we ride the bicycles? lol

Just a first impression about pilots: I think we could get some better faces. Besides that this pilot is ugly (like most Englishmen :P), he looks too cartoonish.
I may be wrong though (not about Englishmen's looking :D).



Edit: By the way, I do realize that pilot's faces are not of much importance (actually I almost don't care about how they look).

[Sunchaser]

THANK YOU!

We all appreciate these and are looking forward to this sim with great anticipation.

[ZaltysZ]

What can you tell about BF109 prop pitch control? Will it be manual only?

[philip.ed]

Oleg, loving the shots!

I have one gripe though, and maybe it is something we should take to PM's?

I am an avid collector of RAF flying clothing/equipment (especially the Battle of Britain period) and I have noticed some inaccuracies with the pilot you have shown.

Firstly, the irvin didn't have pockets, and for a correct Battle of Britain period portrayal the irvin should hve a 2-panel back. Looking at my irvin, there aren't those big seems on the arms as you have shown. For what, I think, you ca do with the engine: the b-type-flying helmet looks fine. Some colour tuning around the leather-ear-domes may be in need, but otherwise it is fine.
The SD trousers are fine, and so are the 1936 pattern boots. If you need any pictures of kit, let me know. I can give you a complete list of the different types of kit they wore, and I may be able to show you pictures of them wearing it.

Edit: BTW, the colour of the wool on the irvin is wrong as well, it should be a nice tan colour. Again I should point out that whatever model you are working from is sightly inaccurate. I could point out as well that there is a reproduction Irvin Jacket that looks like the one you have modelled here, and it is incorrect. If this is the case, then it is not your fault! :D

Let me know, I hope you read this :D

[Kurfürst]

http://files.games.1c.ru/il2pict/bf1090001.jpg


Why is the Bf 109E model still missing the head armor piece in the cocpit..?

Hopefully it isn't final.. there are plenty of pictures of Bf 109Es that were taken during the Battle, both with and without the back armored headrest.

Those with the headrest also show the curved top armor place (protecting the pilot from deflection attacks from above) present or missing.

One example being Bartlel's Bf 109E-1, WNr. 6296, forced down in air combat on 24 July 1940 - this one has both the armored headpiece, and curved armor piece on the top.

http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e133/Kurfurst/109_stuff/Bertels_E1_3GruppeJG26_Wnr6296_shot.jpg

Obviously there was some irregularity with the fitting of these items, maybe preference of pilot, or unit commander, or delivery of these kits to units..

I am not sure if the engine allows such, but if it allows different 3D models to be loaded individually for each aircraft, it would be best if both options would be present for player choice, ie. player selects wheter he wants armor headrest present or not. Or it is set fixed for some units, based on photographic evidence. For example if player plays with III/JG 26, he has no choice and the headrest will be present.. if plays as pilot of other fighter unit, there will be no headrest. But probably simple player choice is better, simpler solution...

[JVM]

Wasn't the improved head armor only introduced in the E4 version? This one seems a E3 version to me...

[kgwanchos]

Superb stuff Oleg...... Im just so happy that it looks like we really will see this Title at some time in the future. I Dont really mind if the pilots are ugly or the stitching is wrong on the life jacket but Im sure all these details will come together..... great work...

[philip.ed]

Superb stuff Oleg...... Im just so happy that it looks like we really will see this Title at some time in the future. I Dont really mind if the pilots are ugly or the stitching is wrong on the life jacket but Im sure all these details will come together..... great work...

Thanks for reminding me, the life-jacket could use some re-working as well :D ! LOL It is picky of me t say these things, but Oleg seems to be a perfectionist like me, so I gather that if he had the chance to rememdy these features then he would :D

[Darkbluesky]

The shot of the Stuka with the propeller at low rpms makes me drool and wishing it was winter 2010...

Thanks Oleg

It is still WIP, of course, but the lights in the homes at night seems not to project light outside. Will it be like that in final version? Not too important of course, it is only curiosity (will be wonderful flying and to see the lights of villages at night/dawn...)

[Lucas_From_Hell]

I was shocked by that Sky47 image.

One of the best sunsets I've ever saw in a game. Can you guys make one of these without the FXOptions screen? I need this as a wallpaper :-P

Great work (but, after this, I'm sure: I won't be able to put a hole in a Stuka in Storm of War :()

[Oleg Maddox]

Oleg, loving the shots!

I have one gripe though, and maybe it is something we should take to PM's?

I am an avid collector of RAF flying clothing/equipment (especially the Battle of Britain period) and I have noticed some inaccuracies with the pilot you have shown.

Firstly, the irvin didn't have pockets, and for a correct Battle of Britain period portrayal the irvin should hve a 2-panel back. Looking at my irvin, there aren't those big seems on the arms as you have shown. For what, I think, you ca do with the engine: the b-type-flying helmet looks fine. Some colour tuning around the leather-ear-domes may be in need, but otherwise it is fine.
The SD trousers are fine, and so are the 1936 pattern boots. If you need any pictures of kit, let me know. I can give you a complete list of the different types of kit they wore, and I may be able to show you pictures of them wearing it.

Edit: BTW, the colour of the wool on the irvin is wrong as well, it should be a nice tan colour. Again I should point out that whatever model you are working from is sightly inaccurate. I could point out as well that there is a reproduction Irvin Jacket that looks like the one you have modelled here, and it is incorrect. If this is the case, then it is not your fault! :D

Let me know, I hope you read this :D


Yes. I was in hope that someone will say that he has everything we need :) Wen we posted on different forums requests - we wasn't able to get the full info. And in books there is so different info. So probably your good finding here :)
So, I'm going to clear up my PM. Its again 100% full

[Oleg Maddox]

Thanks for reminding me, the life-jacket could use some re-working as well :D ! LOL It is picky of me t say these things, but Oleg seems to be a perfectionist like me, so I gather that if he had the chance to rememdy these features then he would :D

I'm perfecinist till the time when I have a time...

[csThor]

The canopy on the 109 E was interchangable and so a lot of E-1 or E-3 had the "edgy" version introduced with the E-4. However the Luftwaffe's naming conventions also allowed for E-4 with the old round canopy - as long as the wing guns were MG FF/M. So the canopy is by no means an indicator for the version - all three (E-1, E-3 and E-4) could have both canopy types installed.

Regarding the Bf 109. I take the markings are still part of the skin? It looks the same as in the screenshots from ages ago. Ilya said Roman (Deniskin) was very pleased with my instructions regarding the markings on the 109 so I was wondering how far that work is. :)

[Oleg Maddox]

http://files.games.1c.ru/il2pict/bf1090001.jpg


Why is the Bf 109E model still missing the head armor piece in the cocpit..?

Hopefully it isn't final.. there are plenty of pictures of Bf 109Es that were taken during the Battle, both with and without the back armored headrest.

Those with the headrest also show the curved top armor place (protecting the pilot from deflection attacks from above) present or missing.

One example being Bartlel's Bf 109E-1, WNr. 6296, forced down in air combat on 24 July 1940 - this one has both the armored headpiece, and curved armor piece on the top.

http://i38.photobucket.com/albums/e133/Kurfurst/109_stuff/Bertels_E1_3GruppeJG26_Wnr6296_shot.jpg

Obviously there was some irregularity with the fitting of these items, maybe preference of pilot, or unit commander, or delivery of these kits to units..

I am not sure if the engine allows such, but if it allows different 3D models to be loaded individually for each aircraft, it would be best if both options would be present for player choice, ie. player selects wheter he wants armor headrest present or not. Or it is set fixed for some units, based on photographic evidence. For example if player plays with III/JG 26, he has no choice and the headrest will be present.. if plays as pilot of other fighter unit, there will be no headrest. But probably simple player choice is better, simpler solution...

Probably you may see that there simply absent the datails of cockpit yet except gunsight... :)

And... there are many photos both with and without. And we probaly will have the same things in a sim. This things that are important for the gameplay we try to implement in enough amount (versions)

[6S.Manu]

WOW!!

Thanks for the update Oleg!!!!

[Oleg Maddox]

The canopy on the 109 E was interchangable and so a lot of E-1 or E-3 had the "edgy" version introduced with the E-4. However the Luftwaffe's naming conventions also allowed for E-4 with the old round canopy - as long as the wing guns were MG FF/M. So the canopy is by no means an indicator for the version - all three (E-1, E-3 and E-4) could have both canopy types installed.

Regarding the Bf 109. I take the markings are still part of the skin? It looks the same as in the screenshots from ages ago. Ilya said Roman (Deniskin) was very pleased with my instructions regarding the markings on the 109 so I was wondering how far that work is. :)

Yes it is part of skin. It is placeholder. With the changeable marking we will work later.

[csThor]

Okay. :)

And what do I have to send to Moscow to get an E-1 in SoW-BoB? ;)

[Oleg Maddox]

Can we ride the bicycles? lol

Just a first impression about pilots: I think we could get some better faces. Besides that this pilot is ugly (like most Englishmen :P), he looks too cartoonish.
I may be wrong though (not about Englishmen's looking :D).



Edit: By the way, I do realize that pilot's faces are not of much importance (actually I almost don't care about how they look).

The face is optimized for custom faces. However it will be more hard now for user to make own face, comparing to Il-2 pilot faces, because of way more details. So simply placemn of 2D picture now impossible. Maybe someone from third pary witll write utiliy that to map any face to our model well.

[Oleg Maddox]

Okay. :)

And what do I have to send to Moscow to get an E-1 in SoW-BoB? ;)

E-1 currently in development

[Kurfürst]

Thanks Oleg.

A question about Bf 109E versions - which ones you plan to include? Only E-3?

What about E-1, E-4 (ie. same as E-3 but with Mine shell firing MG FF/M. Even 3d model can remain same as most were simply converted from E-3 by repacing cannons)
Maybe E-4/N, E-7?

I am really hoping for E-1, because it was 2nd most important version in Battle, and a very fun airplane with the all-machinegun armament for simple dogfights. :)

Also question about wheater propeller pitch mechanism on Emil will be manual or by manual/Verstellautomatik? Both were present in Battle (similiar question as case of headplate)

[Oleg Maddox]

What can you tell about BF109 prop pitch control? Will it be manual only?

There was both types and we will have both.

[AdMan]

That 109 is beautiful

pitch changes will be visible during rotation
^sweet! I had asked about this in the first questions thread.

The vehicle with the bikes is very curious

man, I'm getting stoked to finally see this :cool:

[Kurfürst]

e-1 currently in development

hurray ! :d

[Oleg Maddox]

Thanks Oleg.

A question about Bf 109E versions - which ones you plan to include? Only E-3?

What about E-1, E-4 (ie. same as E-3 but with Mine shell firing MG FF/M. Even 3d model can remain same as most were simply converted from E-3 by repacing cannons)
Maybe E-4/N, E-7?

I am really hoping for E-1, because it was 2nd most important version in Battle, and a very fun airplane with the all-machinegun armament for simple dogfights. :)

Also question about wheater propeller pitch mechanism on Emil will be manual or by manual/Verstellautomatik? Both were present in Battle (similiar question as case of headplate)

With the reelase we only limited in time. So currently in plan E-1 and two differences for E-3

[Kurfürst]

Thanks again, Oleg! :)

[csThor]

E-1 currently in development

Yessssss! http://www.clicksmilies.com/s1106/party/party-smiley-043.gif

[HFC_Dolphin]

I had asked in the past again, but it was too early, so here I am again:

Will it be possible to add skins in an already exist track, so you can handle it for movies?

[Bearcat]

Can we ride the bicycles? lol
Just a first impression about pilots: I think we could get some better faces.

Edit: By the way, I do realize that pilot's faces are not of much importance (actually I almost don't care about how they look).

Will we will still be able to use pictures of ourselves like in IL2 and will there be a few basic templates for the shape of a pilot's face.. ? I always thought that that was one of the cool things about IL2.. and when I would show people screenshots with my face in the cockpit it was something they always were impressed with.. I can't imagine 1C goung backwards with any of this stuff..

Lighting- Oleg will there be ambient street light as well.. like from street lamps shining on the ground and if so will they automatically go on at dusk... ?

Objects specifically buildings - Will we be able to modify any objects.. like this (Note banner on building) :
http://file.walagata.com/w/bearcat/il2fb_2008-07-05_02-33-32-78.jpg
(I hope that screenshot doesn't offend you.. if it does I apologize and will remove it..)
I remember asking you about this for IL2 a while back in ORR but at the time it was not doable.

The lighting effects are simply stunning. This may have been asked already but will we be able to have reflection maps on metal like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2HNDMOsJcI&feature=player_embedded


All great stuff .. thanks for the updates.. Fridays are getting better and better.. :)

[KOM.Nausicaa]

Hello Oleg,

I am blown away by the screenshots - amazing !!
The pilots are great, can't wait to see the German version. This is without doubt going to be the most amazing WW2 sim ever done - wow!

Now I have a question about radar - since this played a very important role in the outcome of the battle, and you have mentioned several times you would implement it.

I guess when I fly a bomber/fighter mission to Britain the engine will calculate in some way how and if I am detected by radar - and will then decide to scramble intercept flight against me. Does the engine calculate "probabilities" to find me? And can I avoid radar detection, for example by flying very low?

[philip.ed]

Yes. I was in hope that someone will say that he has everything we need :) Wen we posted on different forums requests - we wasn't able to get the full info. And in books there is so different info. So probably your good finding here :)
So, I'm going to clear up my PM. Its again 100% full

Your a popular guy. PM me whenver you want the information. There are books I could recommend, they'd have full lists of the kit worn and used, but they are expensive :D

[Oleg Maddox]

Notice about pilot faces.
It will be customizable. USer will be anle to use own. However it is more complex now to make own face mapped on 3D model, becasue it is more detailed.
There will be probably several face types and user, who want to replace the skin may select the face and put there new skin.
However once more, now it is more complex work of user.

[AdMan]

Superb stuff Oleg...... Im just so happy that it looks like we really will see this Title at some time in the future. I Dont really mind if the pilots are ugly or the stitching is wrong on the life jacket but Im sure all these details will come together..... great work...

Well, not that I swing that way, but I estimated him to be a somewhat handsome chap. XD

[Oleg Maddox]

Your a popular guy. PM me whenver you want the information. There are books I could recommend, they'd have full lists of the kit worn and used, but they are expensive :D

If you'll scan some images for us it will be cool, becasue to find and order these book will take enough time... probably they my arrive when we'll finish work and then changes will be simply impossible.

[Oleg Maddox]

Hello Oleg,


I guess when I fly a bomber/fighter mission to Britain the engine will calculate in some way how and if I am detected by radar - and will then decide to scramble intercept flight against me. Does the engine calculate "probabilities" to find me? And can I avoid radar detection, for example by flying very low?

Yes. random

[Oleg Maddox]

I had asked in the past again, but it was too early, so here I am again:

Will it be possible to add skins in an already exist track, so you can handle it for movies?

Can't say yet.
I don't know if we will keep the old type format of the track even it is still cheat free.
We put the feature to record real HD(full HD) video... but this take a time on PC
We record normal track... then we may convert it in a video probably by any codec installed on your PC.
Such a feature allow us to get best quality directly from the game without any grab programs.
Current;y it has some problems, but I did already spme video using such a method. We need to solve some problematic jumpings of frames - then I will put the first videos... say HD quality.

[Specht]

Well, not that I swing that way, but I estimated him to be a somewhat handsome chap. XD

And you're english, right? xD

@Oleg amazing stuff, everytime I think about suggesting or asking about something, if I wait a bit I eventually end up seeing that you've already done it, so I don't have anything to suggest... for now. :)

[philip.ed]

If you'll scan some images for us it will be cool, becasue to find and order these book will take enough time... probably they my arrive when we'll finish work and then changes will be simply impossible.

OK, no problem ;) (but keep the pictures to yourself. I know the guy who wrote the books, but if they were put on the internet without his permission he probably wouldn't be happy) I'll PM you my e-mail address ;)

[Oleg Maddox]

Will we will still be able to use pictures of ourselves like in IL2 and will there be a few basic templates for the shape of a pilot's face.. ? I always thought that that was one of the cool things about IL2.. and when I would show people screenshots with my face in the cockpit it was something they always were impressed with.. I can't imagine 1C goung backwards with any of this stuff..

Lighting- Oleg will there be ambient street light as well.. like from street lamps shining on the ground and if so will they automatically go on at dusk... ?

Objects specifically buildings - Will we be able to modify any objects.. like this (Note banner on building) :
http://file.walagata.com/w/bearcat/il2fb_2008-07-05_02-33-32-78.jpg
(I hope that screenshot doesn't offend you.. if it does I apologize and will remove it..)
I remember asking you about this for IL2 a while back in ORR but at the time it was not doable.

The lighting effects are simply stunning. This may have been asked already but will we be able to have reflection maps on metal like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_2HNDMOsJcI&feature=player_embedded


All great stuff .. thanks for the updates.. Fridays are getting better and better.. :)

If you mean polished to the mirror brightnes surface, thes, even with reflection of this surface, realistically looking.

But for what? Could you find one war time photo of several aircraft, say mustangs, that will confirm that during the war there were so many, or better to say more than several polished mustangs? Original manufacture alluminium wasn't polished.

[Omphalos]

Mr. Maddox, I've been wondering from the start how are you going to do crashes/explosions in the SOW engine?

If it is too early to say I understand.

Very nice update and its great to see this renewed activity.

-Omphalos.

[Flyby]

Oleg,
What a nice surprise to see new screen shots so quickly after your most recent releases. They look fantastic. "Well done" to you and your team. I've only got one tiny request. Can you lower my city taxes? :D
Flyby out

[GF_Mastiff]

the shots are outstanding Oleg...

Question or 2; The lighting for inside the bar and housing, Does it turn off for realism of black out during raids?

Also computer engine specifications? By the looks of the details and they look great I would guess quad 4 with SLi and or Crossfire to run this?

[Oleg Maddox]

Mr. Maddox, I've been wondering from the start how are you going to do crashes/explosions in the SOW engine?

If it is too early to say I understand.

Very nice update and its great to see this renewed activity.

-Omphalos.

For all things the right time to show.
Untill we'll tune the explosions and other efects I wouldn't like to show anything from this.

[Oleg Maddox]

the shots are outstanding Oleg...

Question or 2; The lighting for inside the bar and housing, Does it turn off for realism of black out during raids?

Also computer engine specifications? By the looks of the details and they look great I would guess quad 4 with SLi and or Crossfire to run this?

In the notices for the sceenshots of night buildings really everything is said :)

Specifications... - wait the final candidate master time that to say real things.
I'm afraid to say incorrect.

[erco]

Beautiful!!! I hope to see the airfields populated with all of the various ground personnel, it adds immeasurably to the immersion. Can you imagine how cool it would be if ground crew would hop onto your wing to guide your taxi, like you see in the old pictures? Or (looking forward to carrier ops) the deck crew waving you into position for launch or the LSO waving you aboard?! And the sky! Oh baby, we're on the verge of something sweet!

Oleg, one idea for a feature- how about a guncamera? On the aircraft with guncams, you would have the option at the end of a mission to save guncamera tracks. These would look like the originals- that is, not terribly high def, black and white or color as the period dictates. I imagine, besides being cool to look at, that such a thing could have some use in 'full real' campaigns.

Thanks again Oleg and Team! Fridays are EVEN BETTER now!

[TheGrunch]

Wow! I'm literally frothing at the mouth about this game now. I've got SoW-rabies! These shots are amazing, especially the sunsets and the propellor pitch adjustment. :grin:
To the guy asking about streetlights, you're aware that Britain was under blackout conditions at night, right? Obviously it would be important to have this feature available in the engine, but it's a bit redundant at the moment, I'd say. The blackout started on the 1st of September '39, was relaxed slightly in September '44 and ended in April '45, so it was a condition that existed for the majority of the war.

[Oleg Maddox]

Wow! I'm literally frothing at the mouth about this game now. I've got SoW-rabies! These shots are amazing, especially the sunsets and the propellor pitch adjustment. :grin:
To the guy asking about streetlights, you're aware that Britain was under blackout conditions at night, right? Obviously it would be important to have this feature available in the engine, but it's a bit redundant at the moment, I'd say. The blackout started on the 1st of September '39, was relaxed slightly in September '44 and ended in April '45, so it was a condition that existed for the majority of the war.

That I would say myself.

[Oleg Maddox]

Beautiful!!! I hope to see the airfields populated with all of the various ground personnel, it adds immeasurably to the immersion. Can you imagine how cool it would be if ground crew would hop onto your wing to guide your taxi, like you see in the old pictures? Or (looking forward to carrier ops) the deck crew waving you into position for launch or the LSO waving you aboard?! And the sky! Oh baby, we're on the verge of something sweet!

Oleg, one idea for a feature- how about a guncamera? On the aircraft with guncams, you would have the option at the end of a mission to save guncamera tracks. These would look like the originals- that is, not terribly high def, black and white or color as the period dictates. I imagine, besides being cool to look at, that such a thing could have some use in 'full real' campaigns.

Thanks again Oleg and Team! Fridays are EVEN BETTER now!

It will be all depens of two guys in our office. One guy is busy with other programming. And one - making 3D humans. First he should finish the crew of planes. Then for AAA, then others... and to make as many as we will be able, if we only will not switch this guy to other maybe more important work that to get all in time.

So the amount if human and its animations depens only of time, and time again

Gun camera should recorded the film by enabling separate switch and then works together with the fire button That would be correct. then you will get several separate films - the same amount like you fired.

[TheGrunch]

That I would say myself.
Including the mouth-frothing SoW rabies? ;) Seriously though, guys, if you need to ask whether the engine can manage dynamic light sources, you're certainly very pessimistic. Whether or not they're included to begin with is fairly irrelevant as long as the engine supports the feature and a third party developer can be bothered to make it.

[Schuetz]

Thank you for this nice update. That the E-1 will be also flyable is great.

[Ironman69]

Oleg, how will SOW handle the condition of a pilot being wounded during flight? Similar to IL2, with limited ability/strength to pull/push the control stick/rudder? What about other controls, like flaps, control valves, oxygen...etc.

[Oleg Maddox]

Oleg, how will SOW handle the condition of a pilot being wounded during flight? Similar to IL2, with limited ability/strength to pull/push the control stick/rudder? What about other controls, like flaps, control valves, oxygen...etc.

Can't say now. To limit is easy.

[Omphalos]

Will you implement an awesome replay feature like IL2? (recording your dogfights etc)

[nearmiss]

You know Oleg, I think you've gone beyond the realm of developing a flight sim game.

The graphics, along with the integration of real world physics is so beyond anything anyone of us could have ever thought. Certainly, we weren't expecting as much.

Basically, I'd say it is just amazing that you would put so much effort into the detail. BOB SOW will be the benchmark air combat flight sim for many years.

It is good you are taking a more active role with updates and such. I don't think it takes alot of effort on your part to keep the interest of this community of users interested.

[MOH_Hirth]

Dear Oleg and Team!

First thank you for everything you have ever done so far, I have absolute certainty that SOW is a new milestone in the history of simulation, you have a large and loyal community that will always be beside you.

"Few" Questions:

What is new in FM system?
Will the sounds be opened like skins?
What you think about a exclusive channel sound for "low pass" or "Fly by view" vision?
Will SOW have new smokes, flash hits, intermitent fire? the gun impact is the important moment for the imersion.

[Aviar]

Oleg,

Will SoW have a proper 'Exit Plane' command? Right now, all we have is the 'bailout' command. If you safely land after a mission and want/need to get out of your plane, your pilot is seen running and diving onto the ground. Also, for certain scoring and gameplay situations, this is seen as a 'bailout'....when in reality it should not be.

I hope you will consider a true 'Exit Plane' command that can only be activated if the plane is on the ground and will not be viewed as a 'bailout' by the game engine.

Aviar

[Oleg Maddox]

You know Oleg, I think you've gone beyond the realm of developing a flight sim game.

The graphics, along with the integration of real world physics is so beyond anything anyone of us could have ever thought. Certainly, we weren't expecting as much.

Basically, I'd say it is just amazing that you would put so much effort into the detail. BOB SOW will be the benchmark air combat flight sim for many years.

It is good you are taking a more active role with updates and such. I don't think it takes alot of effort on your part to keep the interest of this community of users interested.

I will try to keep each week activitiy... by small updates.
If i missed, then I'm working too much.
But anyway will try to do it like in the past.

[Oleg Maddox]

Oleg,

Will SoW have a proper 'Exit Plane' command? Right now, all we have is the 'bailout' command. If you safely land after a mission and want/need to get out of your plane, your pilot is seen running and diving onto the ground. Also, for certain scoring and gameplay situations, this is seen as a 'bailout'....when in reality it should not be.

I hope you will consider a true 'Exit Plane' command that can only be activated if the plane is on the ground and will not be viewed as a 'bailout' by the game engine.

Aviar

I did asnwer already somewhere about animation. We dod so many or nothing... depending of the whole good going or not good going development.
At lease we have some initial sceleton animation engine. How we will use it will be clear more later.

[Oleg Maddox]

Dear Oleg and Team!

First thank you for everything you have ever done so far, I have absolute certainty that SOW is a new milestone in the history of simulation, you have a large and loyal community that will always be beside you.

"Few" Questions:

1. What is new in FM system?
2. Will the sounds be opened like skins?
3. What you think about a exclusive channel sound for "low pass" or "Fly by view" vision?
4. Will SOW have new smokes, flash hits, intermitent fire? the gun impact is the important moment for the imersion.

1. Not so much in feeling, but much in some details of behavior
2. probably
3. Nothing. We have syntezis and don't use complete flyby sound file.
4. everything. probably one smoke you may see on the last screen shot from the last friday.

[Jaws2002]

Absolutely superb work all around.
Only now we start to see what you've been working on so hard, for so many months.
I'm sure this are exciting times for you guys. Getting everything in the engine and seing it interact with other parts of the game.:-P
You can also show some of the things you've been busy working on.

I absolutely love the idea of the user to be able to customize the lighting, colors of the sky. That's excelent. :mrgreen:
I love this shot:
you can see how the cirus clouds interact with the sun and the beautiful sunset.:eek:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v258/<FA>Jaws/sky47.jpg

one question:
Any chance to gve user the ability to customize a bit the color of the ocean water?
The ocean looks so different from place to place.

Thank you for all this updates and can't wait to get my hands on my copy.:mrgreen:

[rakinroll]

Thank you Oleg, these pics are wonderful! ;)

[Robert]

I'm really enjoying these shots Oleg and crew. Again Kudos.

What really has me amped is the lighting and reflections effects, and what I'm looking forward to the most is seeing how this lighting will play out in locating enemy aircraft.

In IL2 I still use minimal icons. Seeing these lighting and texture improvements makes me very hopeful that BoB will significantly add to my enjoyment of a more realistic CFS.


That first screen shot of a squadron of 111s coming across the channel in glorious lighting (with AA/Anistropic) is going to be gob smackingly beautiful. SMACK AWAY Oleg.

[Oleg Maddox]

one question:
Any chance to gve user the ability to customize a bit the color of the ocean water?
The ocean looks so different from place to place.

Thank you for all this updates and can't wait to get my hands on my copy.:mrgreen:

Can't answer this. But with the release of tools some time after the release of the sim there is possibility to make own maps with own textures-colors. This measn on your PC you are probably can change texture of the water for our existed map. Water color we have constant for the region. For other is other. In Il-2 we also have diferent colors of "water" for different regions.

[HFC_Dolphin]

One more critical question, in case you can reply now:

As far as I know, in real Battle of Britain, German fighters could not fight long because of their fuel capacity.
Will this be the same in the game, or do you plan to avoid this problem that might give big advantage to Allies?

In general, how do you plan to show the distance in between the Channel. Will it take long to fly it, or you will make it shorter for the shake of playability?

[Oleg Maddox]

One more critical question, in case you can reply now:

As far as I know, in real Battle of Britain, German fighters could not fight long because of their fuel capacity.
Will this be the same in the game, or do you plan to avoid this problem that might give big advantage to Allies?

In general, how do you plan to show the distance in between the Channel. Will it take long to fly it, or you will make it shorter for the shake of playability?

Will.
Map is real in distances.

[rakinroll]

Will.
Map is real in distances.

Great, i would like to kill one spit then run!!! :cool:

[jocko417]

Hi Oleg,

Beautiful shots! Like Philip, I also collect WWII RAF flying equipment and clothing. If you need any pictures please send me a PM. So much detail has gone into the aircraft it would be a shame if the pilots weren't as accurate, many of us who play flight sims also know a fair bit about the flying kit used as well :) just let us know what you need!

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v621/jocko417/REPRO36a.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v621/jocko417/B.jpg

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v621/jocko417/33Pat.jpg

...etcetera.

[crazyivan1970]

Oleg,
If you don`t put some real humans in those stunning vehicles...expect me in your office in the very angry condition! :D

[ALien_12]

What about AI? Will it be more ,,real pilot" or Il-2 style? Because I hate when I pursuit... let's say... Bf 109E with... maybe F-80A, and then 109 just climbs me away. I really really HATE IT!!!

[akdavis]

Hi Oleg,

The atmosphere is shaping up to be quite stunning and the most real I've seen in any computer game.

I asked this question in the other thread, but I think too late:

I see that right side blue text "messages" are still present (but maybe only for development). If we will still have these messages in game, will they be customizable? I feel that messages like "enemy tank destroyed" are big immersion killers (and sort of pointless), but at the same time messages for certain aspects of engine management are very needed due to lack of direct tactile feedback in a sim.

[AdMan]

Hi Oleg,

The atmosphere is shaping up to be quite stunning and the most real I've seen in any computer game.

I asked this question in the other thread, but I think too late:

I see that right side blue text "messages" are still present (but maybe only for development). If we will still have these messages in game, will they be customizable? I feel that messages like "enemy tank destroyed" are big immersion killers (and sort of pointless), but at the same time messages for certain aspects of engine management are very needed due to lack of direct tactile feedback in a sim.

no way, that's satisfaction to me. Also in online play you need that so you know you got the kill.

[Bloblast]

Hello Oleg,

See pictures for typical cloting for RAF and Luftwaffe during bob.
All pictures come from Osprey books. Typical RAF easy to recognise from the movie BOB.


http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a23/bloblast/img007.jpg
source: Osprey RAF aces of the Battle of Britain

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a23/bloblast/img006.jpg
source: Osprey RAF aces of the Battle of Britain

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a23/bloblast/img008.jpg
source: Osprey Bf 109D/E aces of the blitzkrieg

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a23/bloblast/img009.jpg
source: Osprey Bf 109D/E aces of the blitzkrieg

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a23/bloblast/img010.jpg
source: Uniforms and insignia of the luftwaffe vol. 2: 1940-1945

http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a23/bloblast/img012.jpg
source: Unsere Wehrmacht published 1941

[philip.ed]

NO BOB! The movie BoB is completely inaccurate in every sense. They made up the mask themseves (and included a leter was micrphone with it) the helmet was a naval pattern c-type (the c-type cam into use around 1941) and the goggles were mark 7's. Also, the mae wests used in the films were post war frankenstein ones; so BoB (as far as kit goes) gets most of it wrong ;)

Oleg, I am working on the scans. I had a pc crash and lost most of my research so I'll try and get back to you ;)

[Lucas_From_Hell]

If you want, I have some pictures of the Battle of Britain Room at Duxford.

The glass over the displays didn't really helped. Plus, the camera's flash wasn't working (the camera was bought at 2004), and I suck at taking pictures. But still, might help.

[henriksultan]

Looking great lads! Keep up the great work!

[Bloblast]

NO BOB! The movie BoB is completely inaccurate in every sense. They made up the mask themseves (and included a leter was micrphone with it) the helmet was a naval pattern c-type (the c-type cam into use around 1941) and the goggles were mark 7's. Also, the mae wests used in the films were post war frankenstein ones; so BoB (as far as kit goes) gets most of it wrong ;)

Oleg, I am working on the scans. I had a pc crash and lost most of my research so I'll try and get back to you ;)


I did not look at kind of details in the movie BOB, the white sweater and the blue service dress are typical for RAF fighter pilot during BOB.

[philip.ed]

I did not look at kind of details in the movie BOB, the white sweater and the blue service dress are typical for RAF fighter pilot during BOB.


OK LOL, although the sweater was actually a frock which was roughly knee length. It is a common mistake made in films to make it out to be a sweater when it wasn't. It also, unlike the ones in BoB, wasn't a roll-neck ;)

[tityus]

- I hope the stopped propeller when pause is pressed is configurable. It may not be always wanted when taking screen shots and so.

- Will it have a resource to export aircraft data so we can link with other peripherals and apps (such as devicelink)? Will it work also online?

- Could one watch a recorded track from another pilot PoV (inside his cockpit)?


From the preview image I saw, it will have moving air masses. so...

- Will it have gauges to provide windspeed, temperature and pressure? (high level precision bombing intended)

té mais
tityus

[erco]

It will be all depens of two guys in our office. One guy is busy with other programming. And one - making 3D humans. First he should finish the crew of planes. Then for AAA, then others... and to make as many as we will be able, if we only will not switch this guy to other maybe more important work that to get all in time.

So the amount if human and its animations depens only of time, and time again

Gun camera should recorded the film by enabling separate switch and then works together with the fire button That would be correct. then you will get several separate films - the same amount like you fired.

Thanks Oleg, sounds great!

Maybe it's expecting too much, but this is what I want to do/see in BoB/SOW: I want to be flying along, at low level, in my Spitfire, FAST and come upon a town that I fly over at treetop height. Ahead, there is a large space between houses and as I fly over it and look down I see a pack of boys, distracted from their soccer game, looking and pointing and hollering as I flash overhead- BELOW the forgotten ball which had just been punted. Give me that sim, Oleg and crew, and I will need no other!

[Lucas_From_Hell]

Oleg, about the pilot, I know it's way too soon to ask it but...

Are you guys planning to model a pilot inside the cockpit (I don't know how to describe it, but try thinking about the one in DCS and you will probably understand me)?

[mauld]

BOB Irvin jacket
http://www.eastmanleather.com/RAF40.htm

[Snuff_Pidgeon]

Oleg are we going to have realistic wind gusts at ground level? eg. Heavy cross winds at take off, landing and buffeting of aircraft at taxi and takeoff.

[SlipBall]

Oleg, I looked at the img's you posted and my first thought was...final nail in the IL-2 coffin...Just stunning pic's and incredible possibility's for mission makers :grin:

[mazex]

I just love it. First Oleg gives us an alien-green landscape a week ago to stir up the feelings and then smacks these beatiful images this week. It's like the famous marketing campaign where Coca Cola in the 80:ies (?) said in a press release that they where changing the taste of Coca Cola as it was time to move on, and people all over the world where in a riot. Then some weeks later they said "Ok, due to popular demand - we will not change the original taste everyone obviously love!". A classic example of masters at marketing :) And it's for free ;)

[khatchatour]

A-hem...
Sorry for the stupid question - where are the links that everyone is discussing?

[philip.ed]

BOB Irvin jacket
http://www.eastmanleather.com/RAF40.htm

Yep, theirs are correct to a certain degree and are the best reproductions on the market. However, they are repros and aren't the real deal

Oleg, these pictures are good, and I don't really have much to add with regards to what is available in books. I'd suggest using this as a model. If time permits me tomorrow, I will be able to send you complete pictures of the kit for your use ;)

[II/JG54_Emil]

A-hem...
Sorry for the stupid question - where are the links that everyone is discussing?


http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?p=115983#post115983

[V.4_Maggi]

"I want to ride my bicycle!"

[PeterPanPan]

Hi Oleg

First time poster here. Just want to say a huge thanks for making IL2 and BoB SoW, and finding the time to keep us all updated - brilliant. Your vision and dedication to this genre is without equal and we are all the luckier for it.

Just one question for now if I may. The detail in the pilots is amazing. Given the effort you have put in, can we expect the pilots to be animated during the bale out sequence? Will we see them reach for the canopy handle and parachute rip cord? Will we see them falling in various ways, with arms and legs flailing, before the chute opens ... assuming it does of course?!

Looking forward to 2010 with great excitement.

Cheers

PPanPan

[khatchatour]

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?p=115983#post115983

Emil - Thanks a lot.

[II/JG54_Emil]

Continuing V.4_Maggis´ and PeterPanPans´ initial thoughts, I would love to get a "fight your way back to the friendly lines" feature with a irst person view.

It would be great, in a (online-)campaign with an experienced pilot, to be able to draw your pistol and crawl back over the fronline, at night, pass-by enemy troups and make it back to the base, with the chance of being bombed or strafed away.

I don´t know if any server could handle that but that would be soooo cooool.

[Skoshi Tiger]

Hi and many thanks for the new images.

In the screen shot of the tanks some show the tanks with closed hatches and others with open hatches

http://files.games.1c.ru/il2pict/VVV-SoW_BoB-06_06.jpg

Are these the same model that can be configured to have closed or open hatches or are the seperate models?

If they are the same model is there an animation showing the hatch open or close? (would be useful in making movies!)

Thankyou

[BadAim]

Stunning, simply stunning. Your vehicles are easily of FPS quality. I too would love to be able to be able to find my way back to base after ditching, P-35 in hand (what? I won it off an ss officer in a bet). Be sure to make the clock removable if this scenario is possible.

I know, I know Oleg, we're all crazy......but would you have it an other way?

P.S. I was just staring at the Matilda in the shot above and I noticed something in the background.......the bicycle seats have springs!!!!! You guy's are crazy too!

[Billy885]

no way, that's satisfaction to me. Also in online play you need that so you know you got the kill.

I dont know what game you all are playing but you can turn that off and on with what we have now. Its call "NoHudLog" if I remember right. Just change the 0 (zero) to a 1 (one). No more text one the right of screen.

[Billy885]

no way, that's satisfaction to me. Also in online play you need that so you know you got the kill.

Hi Oleg,

The atmosphere is shaping up to be quite stunning and the most real I've seen in any computer game.

I asked this question in the other thread, but I think too late:

I see that right side blue text "messages" are still present (but maybe only for development). If we will still have these messages in game, will they be customizable? I feel that messages like "enemy tank destroyed" are big immersion killers (and sort of pointless), but at the same time messages for certain aspects of engine management are very needed due to lack of direct tactile feedback in a sim.

I dont know what game you all are playing but you can turn that off and on with what we have now. Its call "NoHudLog" if I remember right. Just change the 0 (zero) to a 1 (one). No more text on the right of screen.

Maybe one day I will figure out this forum.

[ECV56_Guevara]

Thanks a lot Oleg for the feedback
Well now I post in the correct thread:
What kind of interaction betwen ground units/objects could we expect (i.e. will be Driveable vehicles, human AAA, radar station, ground crew...?)?
thanks in advance

[Romanator21]

I dont know what game you all are playing but you can turn that off and on with what we have now. Its call "NoHudLog" if I remember right. Just change the 0 (zero) to a 1 (one). No more text on the right of screen.

Maybe one day I will figure out this forum.

Very witty Billy. Now, try to re-read what AkDavis was saying:

"I see that right side blue text "messages" are still present (but maybe only for development). If we will still have these messages in game, will they be customizable? I feel that messages like "enemy tank destroyed" are big immersion killers (and sort of pointless), but at the same time messages for certain aspects of engine management are very needed due to lack of direct tactile feedback in a sim."

Basically, You can turn off HUD-Log, but it becomes impossible to program a bomber's bomb sight, and difficult to know at what setting your radiator/throttle/P-pitch/mixture is.

Cheers!

[akdavis]

no way, that's satisfaction to me. Also in online play you need that so you know you got the kill.

Read again. Customize. Please explain how the ability to customize those messages denies you satisfaction.

I dont know what game you all are playing but you can turn that off and on with what we have now. Its call "NoHudLog" if I remember right. Just change the 0 (zero) to a 1 (one). No more text one the right of screen.

Yup, and it gets rid of everything, including important engine messages. Either I have to play with arcade kill messages (apparently important for the gratification of people like AdMan) or none at all, unless I play with mods. I would love to play with no messages at all, but I can't (for example) tell the difference between 100% and 101% on my desktop throttle here.

[AdMan]

Geez, you guys are fiesty today.

I dont know what game you all are playing but you can turn that off and on with what we have now. Its call "NoHudLog" if I remember right. Just change the 0 (zero) to a 1 (one). No more text on the right of screen.

Maybe one day I will figure out this forum.

I've never had the desire to turn them off, so this doesn't really apply to me. Also I admit, I don't know every single customization in IL-2. Sorry.

Read again. Customize. Please explain how the ability to customize those messages denies you satisfaction.



Yup, and it gets rid of everything, including important engine messages. Either I have to play with arcade kill messages (apparently important for the gratification of people like AdMan) or none at all, unless I play with mods. I would love to play with no messages at all, but I can't (for example) tell the difference between 100% and 101% on my desktop throttle here.
customized messages would be cool if certain ones bother you. All engine gauges are emulated so you have all the information the actual pilot would have, if your going for complete immersion. Not sure how "tactile feedback" is going to tell you if your engine is at 100% or 101% . But whatever floats your boat. Seems like Oleg is thinking of everything with this bad boy. :grin:

[*Buzzsaw*]

Salute Oleg

Everything is superb. Absolutely wonderful.

Congratulations to you and your team. This game will be a revolution.

One question: Are there any plans for Force Feedback which focuses on the effects of flight?

By that I mean force feedback which is tuned to highlight the Buffeting, turbulence and other effects which can allow a player in front of a computer to get a sense of how well his aircraft is flying. Effects from firing the guns, or from being hit are not as important.

With this very obviously complex flight model, a system of feedback which can allow the player to get a 'seat of the pants' feel for how well he is flying and whether or not he is coming close to his stall point, etc. would be helpful.

I am sure you will make the trim status of an aircraft a real issue in this game.

There are now some mechanical devices which can be bought and which can translate sound into vibration feedback, but when they are sent a sound signal which includes engine noise, and other less important sounds, they are not very useful. Ideally they need to be sent a signal which focuses on the sounds which tell the player how well the aircraft is being flown. If your team can isolate the buffeting, turbulence, and other sounds relating to the aerodynamic status of the aircraft this would be helpful.

Here is one of the companies which manufacture these feedback devices:

http://www.thebuttkicker.com/gaming/index.htm

And of course, there are the normal force feedback joysticks.

Thanks again for your excellent work, everyone who has watched you for the last 12 years knows that you will produce in SOW, a brilliant game which will make even your masterpiece IL-2 take a step back into the shadows.

[VBF-12_Gosling]

Chaps

Excellent screen shots.
I am glad to see the increase in activity now that the Playstation (or whatever - Im not interested in that) IL2:BoP version is on the streets. Let's hope it generates a whole new young fan base that will realise that BoB:SoW is where the future of flight sim action really is...

I have not read all the 11 pages of this or 55+ pages of the previous thread so this may have been mentioned before...

Everything is excellent - and answers have been given for the obvious terrain issues. Weather and terrain are unbelievebly difficult things to get right.

I flew from Woodvale to Yeovilton yesterday - 40knot head wind!!!!:

We had wispy Cu at about 2000ft with a really thick haze below but at 3000ft we were above the inversion where the horizontal vis was near perfect. Looking down we had only about a 4 mile radius slant vis through the haze and aircraft below us further away appreared as clear black/white dots against the uniform grey haze...
High were layers of AltoCu and AltoSt in various grey and blues with some blue sky between and even landing at 1230 I noticed pink and redish tints to this altoCu way off to the south over the channel.... That's real life ..... Model that....

Obviously, I am not expecting this and my opinion is that current IL2 clouds (IL2:4.09 UI1.2 for me) are excellent. Apart from a slight blockiness, flying formation in cloud is exactly as it is for real and (like many others here I'm sure) I know because I have done it.

The point of this post is to congratulate Oleg and his team for their outstanding work and diligence, but to raise one small thing.

In the spit the power supply lead for the gunsight hangs down partially obsuring the attitude indicator!!!! What a pain in the proverbial when it comes to blind flying in IMC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! LOL Can it be moved out of the way please.....?

Gos

So excited about BoB:SoW I built my first computer in anticipation - Intel I7, GTX275, 6GB, 750GB, 850watt - Will that be enough please???????????

[PVT.Roger]

Oleg

Great screen shots. Attention to detail is astonishing.

While I looked at them I wondered how many posts would offer up inaccuracies. Glad to see I wasn't disapointed with that. ;)

Thanks again fr posting the shots.

PR

[ECV56_Lancelot]

Yes. Its why we show it.
But not all objects to any surface. There will be some limits of course.

Wow, this is great, it's the first time, at least that i know of, that we can do something like this.
Will become handy to make vehicle, trains and/or ship convoys with diferent damage model betwenn the cargo and the carrier. Straffin a cargo ship you may destroy trucks over it but not the ship, an so on. :cool:

[mazex]

Stunning, simply stunning. Your vehicles are easily of FPS quality. I too would love to be able to be able to find my way back to base after ditching, P-35 in hand (what? I won it off an ss officer in a bet). Be sure to make the clock removable if this scenario is possible.

I know, I know Oleg, we're all crazy......but would you have it an other way?

P.S. I was just staring at the Matilda in the shot above and I noticed something in the background.......the bicycle seats have springs!!!!! You guy's are crazy too!

Yes, now with all these high poly vehicles etc is the time to finally include that "walk back to base if you like so". Everyone has been talking about it since the first combat simulator was born... How hard could it really be? No need for realistic skeletal animations etc, just let us walk if we want to!

We would probably use it one time and then never more - but it's the added realism of knowing you CAN do it is what making me seriously propose it. As it is now after ditching a plane in a dogfight and watching that pilot jump out, run 50 meters and dive to the ground is frustrating. I would like to run myself and then be able to stand there watching the fight a bit from the ground before hitting refly. Maybe hide behind the wreck if someone tries strafing me afterwards :) Why not add another possibility (yes I know I will get bashed for hollywood stuff like this - but still) - add a feature to do pickup rescues like the one from "Dark Blue World" (the Czech movie). If a pilot is down (ditch or parachute), you can land and pick him up to avoid loosing a pilot on a dogfight map... Maybe not with a spit like in the movie - but a Lysander, or a Do 18 in the water. But heck why not in a Spit like that movie. I remember reading about mechanics going with the pilots in their fighters at emergency evacuations in Russia so it's theoretically possible...

Then we naturally would like to have the ability to walk from the jeep to the plane at the hone base. No need for a fancy animation getting into the plane, it's better with a Battlefield 1942 "pop and your in there" than nothing. Imagine listening to the briefing, then get into a jeep and drive to the plane where the ground crew reports the status and walk up to the plane and press "E" to enter the plane...

A lot of work doing it, but so rewarding for immersion. We have all dreamed of it since playing sims on the C64 - put some cheap hot junior developer that has done FPS programming on it. As I understand that your budget does not allow for non essential features like this, I will happily pay his wages for one day, then I guess we can find about 100 here that does the same to let him work on it for 2-3 months to get it done. Come on - send me an account number! ;)

[ElAurens]

Actually rescue of downed pilots, especially at sea with floatplanes, would make for some interesting mission possibilities.

Setting your Walrus down on the swells of the Channel to pick up a downed pilot, hoping some 110s don't come by to spoil the day. Pretty gripping stuff actually. Then getting him back safely. It would be an interesting mission in an online team play environment where the number of available pilots bears directly on mission success.

Will this be possible Oleg?

[Foo'bar]

AFAIK Oleg mentioned already that rescuing will be possibble in single mission.

Getting home with a abandoned car or by train after beeing shot down is one of my top ten SoW dreams ;)

[hiro]

Ahhhhhh yeah . . . .

That's the good stuff.

Thanks for the update, Oleg.

The sky shots are coming in great. Looks photo quality. And looks the blue text from IL-2 is in (but looks like there's more since there's more detail).

LOL @ the Bicycle Queen Song reference.


And the ME / BF - 109!!!

As soon as I saw the yellow nose and the familiar shape. Yep.

I got a question, they've had tons of debates of ME-109 E (I think the resident 109 expert Kurfürst mentioned there was a possibility of the 109 E-2having nose cannon, but the E-2 information is elusive so its philisophical / academic debate at best) having a nose cannon.

Will there be an E-2 available? If so, will nose cannon / machine gun be an option for the E-2?

Having a 3x20mm and 2x7.92 mm 's would be nice.


Another question is how will aircraft reliability be modelled? I remember reading how Morane-Saulnier fighters used by the Finns had a cannon that "sometimes" worked and at worst, the shell would detonate in the barrel (But the plane was still flyable).

Or I remember someone mentioning LA-7s were made of wood but IL-2 doesn't model the degration after many flying hours that had on the wooden versions.


Will aircraft materials play a role in the game? Such as wooden mosquitos being harder to detect via radar or by shape like the go-229?

Thanks for the update!


Another question, alots of requests for walking / infrantry / person / FPS related movement.

You mentioned before, "No battles with infantry, we are doing flight sim", so just how much first person / 3rd person / pilot walking is planned for the game?

Or is that just an exercise of the game engine that is going to be licensed for use outside of BOB SOW?

Also I notice there are alot of bikes (heck even a trailer to haul bicycles) around, and vehicular action is included so will that go down to bikes?


and final,

Are you guys going to keep the Storm of War as series title?

[AdMan]

surviving behind enemy lines would be something else! But that would basically mean the game would have to turn into a FPS or TPS, probably asking too much.

[Lionman]

Oleg, I am a huge fan of your work and have been since the original IL2 Sturmovik. As a retired city of London marketing manager and head hunter I have also always admired the strategic intelligence of your long term marketing plan, saving the most easily saleable BoB program with the new physics engine until you have built up the market for it with your former air-combat sim product generations. Plus the emminently sensible target of creating a combat air sim sub industry around your apex product just as one arose around the FS series, now conveniently no longer in competition. Finally I admire the obsessive detail, accuracy and realism of your approach which has always made your product line unique and enabled you to defeat the mighty MS CFS series with your very first product.

I used to feel that you paid insufficient attention to the ground detail and realism but that has more than been addressed in BoB SoW from the screenshots I have seen and now you have a real time weather engine too. (Ground texture tiles still appear to produce herringbone patterns from altitude but perhaps that can be randomised?)

I have only one remaining caveat which may well also prove misplaced. In all the screen shots I have seen the incredibly detailed and realistic machines, aircraft, vehicles, buildings, countryside and roadways have remained empty and sans people. Hopefully in the final release the ground environment will be populated with AI soldiers and civilians, all artillery and AA guns will be manned and all aircraft in flight will have populated cockpits and gun positions? I also want to look down and see my own knees and hands on the stick in the cockpit (as in LOMAC). If so this sim is definitely going to be the all-tim bench mark for online air combat and worth every second of the long wait.

Now to the point of my post. The latest rumour in the online air-combat community is that BoB SoW is to finally be published in November 2009 later this month with the first patch to come in 2010.

You are THE MAN Oleg so is it true?
(I have had it on pre-order and pre-paid for for ages.)

I have built my whole new PC system in anticipation of BoB and am anxious to start engines and get airborne.

So will there finally be a Scramble Klaxon in November?

Hell I even have a fan on my desk so that when I srt engines with the cockpit open I will feel the backdraft and yes I am a retired single man whio urgently needs a new girl friend! LOL

Tally Ho!

:grin:

[kendo65]

hi Oleg,

Thanks for the updates. Really enjoying them and becoming more and more impatient to get my hands on the game as a result.

I'd be interested to know if RAF and Luftwaffe will use authentic historical formations as standard in BOB? That is will the RAF be flying in tight VICs with the Germans using 'finger four'. All accounts I've read of the battle emphasise the effect of these tactical formations - it took the Brits quite a while to catch up.

Very frustrating to try to get RAF in VICs in il-2!!

Also, I'm hoping that AI wingmen DON'T abandon formation and charge headlong at the enemy on first sighting (except maybe rookies? or the Polish(!))
Be nice if they could report "aircraft 3 O'clock", etc while maintaining discipline and formation.

[philip.ed]

Oleg, I am a huge fan of your work and have been since the original IL2 Sturmovik. As a retired city of London marketing manager and head hunter I have also always admired the strategic intelligence of your long term marketing plan, saving the most easily saleable BoB program with the new physics engine until you have built up the market for it with your former air-combat sim product generations. Plus the emminently sensible target of creating a combat air sim sub industry around your apex product just as one arose around the FS series, now conveniently no longer in competition. Finally I admire the obsessive detail, accuracy and realism of your approach which has always made your product line unique and enabled you to defeat the mighty MS CFS series with your very first product.

I used to feel that you paid insufficient attention to the ground detail and realism but that has more than been addressed in BoB SoW from the screenshots I have seen and now you have a real time weather engine too. (Ground texture tiles still appear to produce herringbone patterns from altitude but perhaps that can be randomised?)

I have only one remaining caveat which may well also prove misplaced. In all the screen shots I have seen the incredibly detailed and realistic machines, aircraft, vehicles, buildings, countryside and roadways have remained empty and sans people. Hopefully in the final release the ground environment will be populated with AI soldiers and civilians, all artillery and AA guns will be manned and all aircraft in flight will have populated cockpits and gun positions? I also want to look down and see my own knees and hands on the stick in the cockpit (as in LOMAC). If so this sim is definitely going to be the all-tim bench mark for online air combat and worth every second of the long wait.

Now to the point of my post. The latest rumour in the online air-combat community is that BoB SoW is to finally be published in November 2009 later this month with the first patch to come in 2010.

You are THE MAN Oleg so is it true?
(I have had it on pre-order and pre-paid for for ages.)

I have built my whole new PC system in anticipation of BoB and am anxious to start engines and get airborne.

So will there finally be a Scramble Klaxon in November?

Hell I even have a fan on my desk so that when I srt engines with the cockpit open I will feel the backdraft and yes I am a retired single man whio urgently needs a new girl friend! LOL

Tally Ho!

:grin:

Oleg said something we will see system spec in around 6-7 months (or omsething like that) so this november is out of the question. However, he said it would have to be released before the end of next year so....;)

[HFC_Dolphin]

Lionman, 2009 is totallyout of the question :)
Hopefully by Xmas 2010 we'll be able to get it.

[Golden_Eagle_FM]

I think the Oleg I knew from the very first days of Il2 is really back.
You kept your word, and posted new pictures on friday like you said. I must say I was somewhat skeptical. And you answered interactively to the posts again like before.
After so many years that's great to have you back Oleg.

Very nice pictures, and thank you to answer my question about modelling humans.
The level of detail you have is really enough at this point. If you model the soldiers, paratroopers etc. at the same level of detail then nothing more to say.

If you could just give us some elements about the FMB I would be happy. I used the FMB and invested more time probably to build scenarios (NOT multiplayer), than I played missions, so the FMB is a very important feature for me. Here some FMB related questions if it is not too early to ask :

1) Will we have full grasp to position objects, that is to translate and rotate objects on the three spatial axis.
2) Will we have the possibility to group objects into a superobject and clone the superobject.
3) If yes to 2 then will we have full 3D control to position the superobject.
4) Will airplanes be able to taxi, takeoff, land indipendently of the runway. That is near the runway as an example.
5) Will it be possible to ditch a plane. AI controlled plane in FMB.
6) Once a plane appears (at a given clock time) will it be possible to make it disappear also at a certain time.
7) Will it be possible to set multiple airplanes to takeoff at the same time as a group.
8) Will it be possible to add motion to soldiers (or group of soldiers) like it was possible with cars. They walk or run along a trajectory with control points like for cars.
9) Will it be possible to add a script to an object so as to have it animated.
10) Will all the objects when positioned on the ground then be flat on it whatever the slope. And not have objects staying horizontal even if the ground is with a slope.
11) One problem I had with a linear campaign, that was made say with 20 missions linked with a chronological sequence, was that if I decided to scrap (or add) some objects out of the first mission, and for campaign coherence had to have the same operation done in the 19 other missions coming after, I had to painstakingly remove or add them from each mission file. This is a terrible time consuming operation. Will there be the possibility that changes made in a mission file affect other mission files linked to it.
12) Will the ships (are there ships?) have their flag floating in the wind. I hope damage model on ships should be more detailed than in IL2 were it was very basic.
13) Will the objects database of BoB be as rich as the IL2 one has become.

Sorry to bother you with so many questions but the FMB was an important element in the success and longevity of IL2.

Thank's again for your posts Oleg, I will be every friday in front of my screen to watch and read your posts.

Gold

[CRO_Adriatic]

THX for update!
I think for this part of history they will tell: "virtual world started to looks better than real world, so, people stopped completely to watch trough windows..."

[dflion]

Oleg,
Thanks for all your responses to the development jpgs, it has been very good to see you back answering lots of questions like the 'old days'.

My question is regarding aircraft propellor pitch changes, which you mention are visible during rotation.

Can you change the propellor pitch from the cockpit by using the mouse on-screen and perhaps see the words 'fine pitch' or 'course pitch' or 'feathered'?

With IL2 I found changing propellor pitch difficult sometimes, yet very vital for aircraft performance during the mission.

DFLion

[zakkandrachoff]

Hellow Mr Maddox.
I have some nature and phisics questions
1) Will be Birds and docks? i mean is groups, flying in V, and will be a dangerous problem to the moment of landing?
2) In a storm, a lightning bolt will can maybe destroy o damage our plane? and waht about hailstone storm?
3) a little question , o sugestion: when, for example, we are in a He 111 or a bf 110 over England, will be littles interfears on the radio of a FM whit music o something like that?
4) I can´t see any electric post in the pics. will be, at least, in the routs?
5) what will be next to Stor Of War - Battle of Britain? Korea? Battle for France? East front? The Flying thigers?
best reegards.zak. (Sry my english)
PD: Nice windows in houses, its remains me the First Su.27 Flanker;)

[Avimimus]

Are these the same model that can be configured to have closed or open hatches or are the seperate models?

If they are the same model is there an animation showing the hatch open or close? (would be useful in making movies!)

Thankyou

Hello,

If you search through some of Oleg's earlier posts I'm pretty sure you will find him implying that panels/hatches have opening and shutting animations. I believe he's said as much with respect to the BR-20 and a mobile generator. It is a good question though.

[ECV56_Lancelot]

Hellow Mr Maddox.
I have some nature and phisics questions
1) Will be Birds and docks? i mean is groups, flying in V, and will be a dangerous problem to the moment of landing?


Oleg already said that bird will be dangerous if you run on them, so the answe is yes. :grin:

[HB252]

Hi again, :grin:

I have some ideas about the sim ::rolleyes:

1.- Could have light signals (flares in diferent colors) for the pilots? (by example: when a pilot is going to lands whitout gear, the oficcer shots color signal; or emergency take off).

2.-I can read in Rudel books, that the latest Stuka machines had a device in cockpit for throw or launch the gear for emergency belly landing. Do you now if this have the first Stukas (Stukas sim)?


3.- Please take care whit the sounds, they are very, very important for a real sim.(crash, belly landing, radio, wind, enviroment...)

4.-In real planes, small flames and fire could see some times in exhaust. It can see especially in night (nights fighters find his target see it, and they can know by it, what kind of bomber was). Are flames in sim?

THX . King regards :) (srt for my bad english)

[1conu59]

oleg: -I'm a professional photographer as well, so perfect visual presentation is a very important goal for me

I live in north of France in an aera near the channel.During Ww2, there was a complex of bunkers where Hitler planned to build his third secret weapon.In fact, it was a super canon concept with selfpowered rocketshells.This is an underground built fortress with 400 meters long concrete galeries called "the Mimoyecques fortress"(that is the place name).Fortunatelly, the allies, noticelly Captain Kennedy a JFK relative bombed the entire area and destroyed it.Captain Kennedy died during one of the raids toward the fortress. http://www.theotherside.co.uk/tm-heritage/visit/visit-2caps-mimoyec-v3.htm#info
Most of the complex still remain.How would like to make scenarii like one of this including making historical events with some of the originals characters?
I think it would be interesting to confront players with historical characters to reach the goal of fitting both hyper realistic details with more historical accuracy as well. To my opinion, IL2 BOB would be a perfect simulation if it could reach this goal.
Are you interested in pics of the bunkers and the rural surroundings of the northern part of france, near the Channel?

[C6_Krasno]

Le jeu est centré sur la bataille d'angleterre, je doute qu'ils y mettent un scénario de 1944, non ?

[zakkandrachoff]

I live in north of France in an aera near the channel.During Ww2, there was a complex of bunkers where Hitler planned to build his third secret weapon.In fact, it was a super canon concept with selfpowered rocketshells.This is an underground built fortress with 400 meters long concrete galeries called "the Mimoyecques fortress"(that is the place name).Fortunatelly, the allies, noticelly Captain Kennedy a JFK relative bombed the entire area and destroyed it.Captain Kennedy died during one of the raids toward the fortress. http://www.theotherside.co.uk/tm-heritage/visit/visit-2caps-mimoyec-v3.htm#info
Most of the complex still remain.How would like to make scenarii like one of this including making historical events with some of the originals characters?
I think it would be interesting to confront players with historical characters to reach the goal of fitting both hyper realistic details with more historical accuracy as well. To my opinion, IL2 BOB would be a perfect simulation if it could reach this goal.
Are you interested in pics of the bunkers and the rural surroundings of the northern part of france, near the Channel?

Vergeltungswaffen 3
http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/fileadmin/historyLearningSite/v3.jpg
was not in battle of england

[1conu59]

it's just an exemple you can find orders historical characters. I just think it's interesting to confront players with historical characters

[zakkandrachoff]

Really? , look at how the price of 4850/70 has plummeted in the last few months.
If there is one thing you can be sure of its that todays top of the line video card will be 1/2 the price in 12-18 months, and that it will have 1/2 the performance of the top of the line by then.
If I think back to IL2FB, the video card I almost bought (nvidia 5600) would have been useless, luckily I waited and bought a R9800 when the price had dropped.
If your thinking of upgrading for SOW BEFORE SOW comes out, you are crazy.

If you said that prices will plummet, i will wait to January o February to buy a radeon 4890 and then, then when prices "plummet" more (September 2010), I will buy another and do a Crossfire. Buth first i will buy a power OCZ 750W P&cool for support that SLI. I have a Sentey 600w:(
And I thing that I need change my Quad 9400 (2.66):( for a I7, buth in a very distant future...
Very nice News that Storm Of War will work whit 64bits , I have 4GBram, and will puth another 4GBram. For now, the only game i have that recognaice that is Arma2.
and Yes, i am thinking in SOW when i think in actializing my machine... so what?

[AdMan]

If you said that prices will plummet, i will wait to January o February to buy a radeon 4890 and then, then when prices "plummet" more (September 2010), I will buy another and do a Crossfire. Buth first i will buy a power OCZ 750W P&cool for support that SLI. I have a Sentey 600w:(
And I thing that I need change my Quad 9400 (2.66):( for a I7, buth in a very distant future...
Very nice News that Storm Of War will work whit 64bits , I have 4GBram, and will puth another 4GBram. For now, the only game i have that recognaice that is Arma2.
and Yes, i am thinking in SOW when i think in actializing my machine... so what?

Of course were all still waiting on specs, but I'm waiting for PCI-e 3.0 to be released before doing a full upgrade which should be showing up on shelves in 2010. With a Q9400 you should be able to OC to at least 3ghz with a decent board, wouldn't be to concerned there, that's a pretty good processor. I'd wait for pci3.0 mainboards to be released and get one that's a good overclocker. In the meantime maybe get a better Power Supply if you want to run SLI but I see SLI becoming more of a novelty than anything, even now unless your trying to play Crysis on high settings you can get most games to run great with a single card solution and PCI 3.0 will double the bandwidth of PCI 2.0

I'd definitely lose the 64bit OS if at all possible tho.

[brando]

it's just an exemple you can find orders historical characters. I just think it's interesting to confront players with historical characters

What will be interesting to see is whether the pilots (both AI and human) will obey the orders that Dowding and Park were issuing to their 11 Group squadrons, viz. do not engage the escorts unless it becomes necessary, the bombers are the primary target.
Scenarios fall apart when pilots disobey their orders and go dogfight-crazy.

B

[LJ371]

hey oleg,
as a cinematographer and long time il2 fan, I have dreamed of the day when your planes would reach HD quality. Based on the screens I cant help but feel the time is very near. A very pleasing site for us all. So, I was wondering if there would be any way to set the models in an editing mode with a blue/green screen~esque area for composites for film/video. I would love to use and see filmmakers be able to incorporate these new flight models into videos & film formats since they look so real!

[Feuerfalke]

it's just an exemple you can find orders historical characters. I just think it's interesting to confront players with historical characters

In this case it would be much more logical to make a mission with this special target. Maybe somebody will make a modell of this gun and implement it.

But you can't expect every little detail of WW2 implemented, units with exact position and status or soldier with rifle and magazine how it was in the exact moment in WW2. Even modelling every bunker with exact position and equipment would probably postpone SoW by 10 years. But then again, that's why you can add such stuff yourself. Hopefully with thousands of enthousiasts the density of realistic installations will increase drastically, if the engine allows the large number of objects, that is ;)

In the end the old wisdom still has some truth: If you make a 100% realistic simulation, you build the real thing.

Same is true for bailing out behind enemy lines and fighting your way back. That game won't be a shooter. If you use your gun, you won't stand a chance. It's more a tactical game like "Lost Platoon", where you can decide to dig through the minefield or go sneak by the surveillance post. But in neither case you can simulate what it was like to make it back home, so you'd never succeed in recreating that.

[p1xel]

These latest screenshots are looking very good. I almost jumped in with some comments on the last set, but I'm glad I didn't now.

I think a lot of people (including myself) didn't quite appreciate what stage of development they were showing and expected the screenshots to be an indication of "this is the best we can do" rather than "this is where we are at now", even if told otherwise :).

I have one question. In the latest screens (the ones with the planes and various times of day) it looks like there may be some antialiasing - perhaps 2x. Did you find a way to make antialiasing work with HDR, or are the images just scaled down in photoshop?

[proton45]

Continuing V.4_Maggis´ and PeterPanPans´ initial thoughts, I would love to get a "fight your way back to the friendly lines" feature with a irst person view.

It would be great, in a (online-)campaign with an experienced pilot, to be able to draw your pistol and crawl back over the fronline, at night, pass-by enemy troups and make it back to the base, with the chance of being bombed or strafed away.

I don´t know if any server could handle that but that would be soooo cooool.

How long would it take to walk 200 miles? The "SoW" maps are all in real size...it could take days, weeks or months to walk back to base if you where a German shot down over the UK (forget about swimming the channel). That would be one hell-a-va gaming session_lol!!!



We would probably use it one time and then never more - but it's the added realism of knowing you CAN do it is what making me seriously propose it.

I think this is the exact reason Oleg said it wouldn't be done by him...why do all the work needed to walk around in 1st person, if you are only going to use it once?

[robtek]

Well, if one had to walk back after being shot down and also if one had to wait for his virtual burial ceremony
before taking to the skies again it would make him (her) very much more consient for ones mortality and would
hugely improve the realism!!!
No glory hunters with those risks!!!

[Foo'bar]

Well, I doubt Oleg will implement such feature, but there would be various ways to get home after beeing shot down. First, of course, if the distance isn't too far, as a pedestrian. Secondly you could call a transport plane via command or TS e.g. wich could land near your position at night to grab you up. Or you could try to reach the next railroad and hop onto a freight train wich is waiting in front a signal semaphore. Or just steal a car in the next village. There are many ways to get home wich could be made wich small effort in a sim. Don't forget about SAR missions over the channel wich Oleg told about already. I have a vision ;) One day there will be a sim presenting all those features. Will SoW be the first?

[Feuerfalke]

Well, if one had to walk back after being shot down and also if one had to wait for his virtual burial ceremony
before taking to the skies again it would make him (her) very much more consient for ones mortality and would
hugely improve the realism!!!
No glory hunters with those risks!!!

And it would piss off a lot of people.

There weren't many Germans being able to walk home after they were shot down over England. So what? Playing evade and escape for 5 weeks before you can fly again? Sorry, but that does not add to realism at all.

What about this compromise: You vote for serversettings that gets your game-ID banned for 24 hours from online playing, after you've been captured or shot down behind enemy lines. Then you have enough time to play an WW2-Mod ArmA2-Mission until you are able to fly again. Of course, if you die in ArmA2 as well, you'll be banned for another 24 hours.

:-P

[Foo'bar]

Ich glaube, robtek hatte das ironisch gemeint ;)

[Feuerfalke]

robtek was the last one replying to the discussion about these ideas, so I quoted him.

While he in particular may have been sarcastic about what he wrote, others apparently were not. ;)

[Tree_UK]

And it would piss off a lot of people.

There weren't many Germans being able to walk home after they were shot down over England. So what? Playing evade and escape for 5 weeks before you can fly again? Sorry, but that does not add to realism at all.

What about this compromise: You vote for serversettings that gets your game-ID banned for 24 hours from online playing, after you've been captured or shot down behind enemy lines. Then you have enough time to play an WW2-Mod ArmA2-Mission until you are able to fly again. Of course, if you die in ArmA2 as well, you'll be banned for another 24 hours.

:-P

If you happen to get shot down over the UK Feuerfalke just let me know, you can bunk down here for a bit until we can arange some kind of pilot swap. :grin: And can you please stop using the word 'banned' it brings up bad memories.

[Foo'bar]

What about this compromise: You vote for serversettings that gets your game-ID banned for 24 hours from online playing, after you've been captured or shot down behind enemy lines. Then you have enough time to play an WW2-Mod ArmA2-Mission until you are able to fly again. Of course, if you die in ArmA2 as well, you'll be banned for another 24 hours.

:-P

It's a game after all. Banning someone for 24 hours from a server means never to see him again there.

[HFC_Dolphin]

I think that "banning" is not what he meant.
Feuerfalke means that X-pilot won't be able to fly in this server for Y-time.
If this player wants to play in this server, he can always join with another nickname.

I think that such feature might be added in the end, translating how the online world will be (from Oleg's latests posts).
If we see a model like ADW's, with a war going on in a 24-hours operating server, then there should be a way to limit pilots if the "war rules" need this.

[HFC_Dolphin]

By the way, where is Oleg?
We got used of him :D

[Foo'bar]

Today he's out of office AFAIK. Tomorrow he will be back.

[Feuerfalke]

If you happen to get shot down over the UK Feuerfalke just let me know, you can bunk down here for a bit until we can arange some kind of pilot swap. :grin: And can you please stop using the word 'banned' it brings up bad memories.

:grin:

Thanks for the offer!
(Sorry I got to use the b-word in one more post)


@ Foo'bar / banning players:
Banning players is not just a product of my sarcasm. There were several PC-games, that use death-penalty in varous form, even locking a given character of your game for 24 hours. Don't remember the name, but a rpg-shooter from the early 90s used such a feature.
Same is for other simulations, where you simply have to reactivate your character and reset it to continue flying or at least collecting stats if you didn't enable immortality.

Besides that, you probably know the good old WarClouds-Server. They had bans active, varying from just a kick from the server to up to a 15min ban (IIRC), ranging from one death to 3 or 5 deaths. I don't think you can honestly conclude that banning a player means nobody will ever join that server again, as WC is one of the most renown servers for IL2.

It also had definitely a positive effect on teamwork and you saw a lot less hotshots in these times.

[Tree_UK]

:grin:

Thanks for the offer!
(Sorry I got to use the b-word in one more post)


@ Foo'bar / banning players:
Banning players is not just a product of my sarcasm. There were several PC-games, that use death-penalty in varous form, even locking a given character of your game for 24 hours. Don't remember the name, but a rpg-shooter from the early 90s used such a feature.
Same is for other simulations, where you simply have to reactivate your character and reset it to continue flying or at least collecting stats if you didn't enable immortality.

Besides that, you probably know the good old WarClouds-Server. They had bans active, varying from just a kick from the server to up to a 15min ban (IIRC), ranging from one death to 3 or 5 deaths. I don't think you can honestly conclude that banning a player means nobody will ever join that server again, as WC is one of the most renown servers for IL2.

It also had definitely a positive effect on teamwork and you saw a lot less hotshots in these times.

I agree, I personally liked the 'death kick' used on warclouds it did somewhat stop the just 'pile in' pilots and made staying alive to be has equally important has getting a kill.

[Foo'bar]

you probably know the good old WarClouds-Server. They had bans active, varying from just a kick from the server to up to a 15min ban (IIRC), ranging from one death to 3 or 5 deaths. I don't think you can honestly conclude that banning a player means nobody will ever join that server again, as WC is one of the most renown servers for IL2.

It also had definitely a positive effect on teamwork and you saw a lot less hotshots in these times.

Yes I do but never been there. In the olden days I used to play on FBOW server where killed players were banned for about 1 hour AFAIK.

[ElAurens]

The so called "Death kick" option is already used on some IL2 servers. It's not popular at all and usually it never is in place for very long.

This is something we do for fun.

It's not fun when you are told you can't do it by some over zealous server admin who thinks he can actually recreate World War Two, which of course he cannot do, ever.

[Feuerfalke]

The so called "Death kick" option is already used on some IL2 servers. It's not popular at all and usually it never is in place for very long.

This is something we do for fun.

It's not fun when you are told you can't do it by some over zealous server admin who thinks he can actually recreate World War Two, which of course he cannot do, ever.

Trying to walk you way home would be a pitty attempt to recreate WW2. Deathkick is a penalty for hotshots.

[luthier]

Oleg is out today. Hopefully he'll feel better tomorrow and be back to answer questions. For now, I'll just take this one.

I also want to look down and see my own knees and hands on the stick in the cockpit (as in LOMAC).

This just came up today for the umpteenth time. We discussed it at length.

We don't have anywhere near the time needed to animate the pilot model properly. We can put his hands on throttle and stick and feet on pedals, and then in half the cockpits he'll have other levers clipping through his body, stick clipping through his knees, etc. His arms will obscure important gauges on the dashboard.

With our new 6DOF free camera system that allows you to poke your head out the window or "bend" forward and look at the seat back, there's just no way we can animate the body to follow the camera, meaning you'd be able to twist your neck and look back on your own headless contorted body.

So, the answer is no. A poltergeist cockpit is not perfect, but the alternative is even worse.

[SlipBall]

Oleg is out today. Hopefully he'll feel better tomorrow and be back to answer questions. For now, I'll just take this one.



This just came up today for the umpteenth time. We discussed it at length.

We don't have anywhere near the time needed to animate the pilot model properly. We can put his hands on throttle and stick and feet on pedals, and then in half the cockpits he'll have other levers clipping through his body, stick clipping through his knees, etc. His arms will obscure important gauges on the dashboard.

With our new 6DOF free camera system that allows you to poke your head out the window or "bend" forward and look at the seat back, there's just no way we can animate the body to follow the camera, meaning you'd be able to twist your neck and look back on your own headless contorted body.

So, the answer is no. A poltergeist cockpit is not perfect, but the alternative is even worse.





I understand your possition on this matter, and it makes sence to me. Lets just get the game done and get up in the air. I wont have time to be looking at my ugly hairy legs anyway:-P

[Bearcat]

If you mean polished to the mirror brightnes surface, thes, even with reflection of this surface, realistically looking.

But for what? Could you find one war time photo of several aircraft, say mustangs, that will confirm that during the war there were so many, or better to say more than several polished mustangs? Original manufacture alluminium wasn't polished.

Note pilot's refection in photo...

http://file.walagata.com/w/bearcat/99thpolished51_0.jpg

Many of the 332nd AC were like this..

Hope you are feeling better when you read this..

[Skoshi Tiger]

I wont have time to be looking at my ugly hairy legs anyway:-P

At least with the 6DOF we'll be able to put our heads out of the cockpit when using the pilot relief tube when we eventually get planes like the P40!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That's one animation I DON'T want to see ;)

[Bobb4]

And I thought nothing could look as good as Il2 with all the fancy mods and then you produce this masterpiece.
I love the reflextion of the sun on the glass cockpits and this brings me to my question.
Will wing glare and cockpit clare be modeled over distance.
Many times contacts between enemy planes were the result of the flash of sunlight on a plane's cockpit or wings several kilometres away.

[AdMan]

Note pilot's refection in photo...

Many of the 332nd AC were like this..

Hope you are feeling better when you read this..

I'm sure that was a rarity but it would still be a great option to have as a mod.

Who wouldn't want to fly around a buffed-out p-51?

[Urufu_Shinjiro]

Oleg is out today. Hopefully he'll feel better tomorrow and be back to answer questions. For now, I'll just take this one.



This just came up today for the umpteenth time. We discussed it at length.

We don't have anywhere near the time needed to animate the pilot model properly. We can put his hands on throttle and stick and feet on pedals, and then in half the cockpits he'll have other levers clipping through his body, stick clipping through his knees, etc. His arms will obscure important gauges on the dashboard.

With our new 6DOF free camera system that allows you to poke your head out the window or "bend" forward and look at the seat back, there's just no way we can animate the body to follow the camera, meaning you'd be able to twist your neck and look back on your own headless contorted body.

So, the answer is no. A poltergeist cockpit is not perfect, but the alternative is even worse.

I foresee a third party addon for this, lol. I like the way this is being aimed at the FSX third party crowd, those guys can focus development on ONE aspect and do some amazing stuff.

[Insuber]

Hi Oleg,

A big "well done!" for what I've seen. You are a valuable person for the WWII combat flying sim enthusiasts community. I highly appreciate also the time that you and Luthier are now devoting to the forum, and after your honest explanations about the past workforce issues and the recent improvements, I am more optimistic about the release of this new masterpiece.

I have a couple of questions, one which you answered me a long time ago ...

1. what type of training are you setting up in the game, other than what seen in Il2, already quite good indeed ?
2. are you still considering an aerial gunnery training aid for beginners, e.g. a "mobile yellow dot", working as a predictive gunsight to show at any moment where to aim during the lesson ?

I believe that the training sections are key to get new adepts to our game, and the gunnery is by far one of the most difficult skills. Having a "predictive pipper" in a gunnery drill can dramatically improve the learning curve of beginners ... and of others as well... ;-)

Regards,
Insuber

[Mat72]

Hi Oleg & co,

Never posted before so here goes.

Firstly, thank you for Il-2, and now the amazing screenshots.

Just a thought about SoW. Often in Il-2 I will sit in the cockpit by the side of the runway after a mission and watch my squadron mates land. There are certain sounds that are quintessential to an English summer. It would be great to have birdsong in the background or hear the gentle sound of the breeze after a frantic combat whilst just sitting there and unwinding, watching the activity of the airfield.

Thanks again.

Mat. :-)

[Billy885]

Insuber, boy that is what this old man needs also. At one time if I remember right Oleg said it would be included in training...

I hope so for my sake!

[nearmiss]

Oleg is out today. Hopefully he'll feel better tomorrow and be back to answer questions. For now, I'll just take this one.

This just came up today for the umpteenth time. We discussed it at length.

We don't have anywhere near the time needed to animate the pilot model properly. We can put his hands on throttle and stick and feet on pedals, and then in half the cockpits he'll have other levers clipping through his body, stick clipping through his knees, etc. His arms will obscure important gauges on the dashboard.

With our new 6DOF free camera system that allows you to poke your head out the window or "bend" forward and look at the seat back, there's just no way we can animate the body to follow the camera, meaning you'd be able to twist your neck and look back on your own headless contorted body.

So, the answer is no. A poltergeist cockpit is not perfect, but the alternative is even worse.

My gosh, the knees, the knuckes, the stick, the feet are all just obstructions to the instrument panel. Occassionally, I look at the trim switches to make sure they are working and I hate having to pull back on the stick in some aircraft to see the instruments.

Too bad we can't look around the stick, but really who cares. If the stick weren't there you don't need a fix.

Also, I don't know of reading where pilots were sticking their head out of cockpit except when taxi. Otherwise, the wind was too strong at flight speeds.

6DOF with something like a freetrack or trackir would be nice.

I do like to see a pilot in the cockpit outside views, and looking across at my mates or enemies. It does make a lot more sense than viewing an aircraft in flight with an empty cockpit.

[proton45]

Hello Oleg,

I have a question about the damage model and how the damage produced by the various types of ammunition will be calculated. You have already stated that damage will be represented as a "1 shot, 1 hole" feature in the final game. But one of the oldest debates in the history of "IL2 1946" is how the 50cal damage is modeled...I'm wondering if you can share your thinking on how the game will calculate the various kinds of damage that each kind of ammo will produced.

"HE" ammo will produce a different effect then "AP", and "incendiary" ammo will inflict yet another kind of damage on the systems of a machine. What (historical) data source will you use to calculate the force of damage?

Thanks you for reading my question...I hope I have made my (thoughts) questions clear.


P.s. I'm not unhappy with the original 50 cal modeling...but I'm curious about the games future! Thanks! :)

[zxwings]

Hi Oleg,
...

2. are you still considering an aerial gunnery training aid for beginners, e.g. a "mobile yellow dot", working as a predictive gunsight to show at any moment where to aim during the lesson ?

I believe that the training sections are key to get new adepts to our game, and the gunnery is by far one of the most difficult skills. Having a "predictive pipper" in a gunnery drill can dramatically improve the learning curve of beginners ... and of others as well... ;-)

Regards,
Insuber
:!: Such an automatic aiming mechanism may be exploited by hackers and eventually become harmful to the sim. If it exits, some people will think about transplanting it into their own online flight and use it when shooting at others. No one wants to be shot at by a hacker who has an automatic, all precise aiming pipper on his screen.

I hope I have been over-cautious here.

[flyingbullseye]

:!: Such an automatic aiming mechanism may be exploited by hackers and eventually become harmful to the sim. If it exits, some people will think about transplanting it into their own online flight and use it when shooting at others. No one wants to be shot at by a hacker who has an automatic, all precise aiming pipper on his screen.

I hope I have been over-cautious here.

Not really, its a pretty legit concern. The guys back then didn't have that why should we? Its where practice comes in. Its understandable for beginners but instead of having an arrow or sight showing where to aim why not an instructor voice teaching where to shoot?

Flyingbullseye

[zxwings]

The guys back then didn't have that why should we? Its where practice comes in.
Exactly.

[TheGrunch]

Not really, its a pretty legit concern. The guys back then didn't have that why should we? Its where practice comes in. Its understandable for beginners but instead of having an arrow or sight showing where to aim why not an instructor voice teaching where to shoot?

Flyingbullseye
In fairness, how would it be any more difficult (or unfair) than hacking any of the other difficulty settings? I think the idea of it is good for beginners, and the potential for exploitation is no greater than someone for example hacking the flight dynamics or weapon ballistics. I don't see how it makes a difference if it exists as long as the anti-cheat protection in the game is up to the task.

[Blackdog_kt]

Is it just me, or do some some of us expect "weird" things from this sim? I mean, it's a matter of taste obviously and every opinion is welcome, but think about it.
Given the limited development time remaining and the need to get everything right and released within 2010, wouldn't it be more important for a flight sim to have something else modelled in place of an FPS mini-game when you get shot down? There's countless of things that could be done to enhance immersion when you're still in the cockpit, why think about what happens when we leave the cockpit when we're still this early in the sim's life?

For example, if Oleg's team told us they had time for one more cosmetic feature and put up a poll on this forum, i wouldn't vote for "let me kill some women's auxiliary baloon corp members with my luger, before i dive from the cliffs of Dover and swim across the channel back to Abbeville" :grin:
I would vote for things like historical engine start sequences, with an option to have it both ways like FSX and Black Shark. That is, you can click all the switches yourself, or press the ignition button and the AI does it for you, but there's still a check-list to go through and you can't just get it running in seconds. It would make for some interesting scramble missions, don't you think?

Or the ability to be a ground controller in multiplayer, which would only take a screen of a radar scope to implement. Maybe the ability to have animated crewmembers inside a mutli-crewed bomber and give specific orders to them like lowering gear manually, putting out a fire or giving first aid to the tail gunner, like it was in B17 II: the mighty 8th.

If we really want to run wild with ideas, there's a lot of things we haven't yet covered about the experience of flying these aircraft. In a flight sim, i think these are more important than trying to turn the game around from a flight sim to a semi-tactical shooter.

Don't get me wrong, i'd love to see servers someday where we have air, land and sea units all battling it out and it could also be done in 1:1 scale maps. If a unit was too slow (eg, infantry or tanks) or too far away from the target (like a B17 flying a 6 hour raid), we could have certain nodes and tell the AI to drive there, then the players take control. So, a fighter pilot on a CAS sortie would start inside the hangar but the infatryman would respawn at a node much closer to the action, while the heavies would be halfway across the North Sea and nearing Holland before the player jumped in and took over control from the AI. There's a load of things that could be done and a lot of terrific ideas are being proposed, i just think it's a bit early to be focusing on anything else than aircraft and air combat right now.

In any case, i'm mighty impressed during the past couple of weeks. Keep up the good work Oleg and team and as for the rest of us, let's keep the ideas going. ;)

[igitur70]

Oleg is out today. Hopefully he'll feel better tomorrow and be back to answer questions. For now, I'll just take this one.



This just came up today for the umpteenth time. We discussed it at length.

We don't have anywhere near the time needed to animate the pilot model properly. We can put his hands on throttle and stick and feet on pedals, and then in half the cockpits he'll have other levers clipping through his body, stick clipping through his knees, etc. His arms will obscure important gauges on the dashboard.

With our new 6DOF free camera system that allows you to poke your head out the window or "bend" forward and look at the seat back, there's just no way we can animate the body to follow the camera, meaning you'd be able to twist your neck and look back on your own headless contorted body.

So, the answer is no. A poltergeist cockpit is not perfect, but the alternative is even worse.


Bad news. I warmly suggest to insert it as an option and let the player choose whether he likes it or not.

[HFC_Dolphin]

Bad news. I warmly suggest to insert it as an option and let the player choose whether he likes it or not.

Good day,

Didn't you notice this part of the reply:
We don't have anywhere near the time needed to animate the pilot model properly.

Simple as that, they can't do it within the time schedule they have.

[HFC_Dolphin]

Is it just me, or do some some of us expect "weird" things from this sim?

I hope they don't ask for a device link to a vibrator, that will make them...feel the turbulence :D

You are right, though there are things that can be added, with not much cost, in the game and add to it a lot.
It doesn't have to be the...walking from enemy lines to friendly territory (as Feuerfalke said, you can always play some FPS game), but adding some more RPG features (ONLY in stats/missions/other data and NOT in graphics which need a lot of development), this would make the game appealing to a much bigger audience.

Anyway, I'm sure that with every update, we'll see a lot of weird requests, but who knows, there might be some interesing ones as well, and Oleg & Co get inspired to make the game as good as they can.

[Bobb4]

Good day,

Didn't you notice this part of the reply:
We don't have anywhere near the time needed to animate the pilot model properly.

Simple as that, they can't do it within the time schedule they have.

Yes I love hearing that... Time frame means only one thing, release time is getting closer :grin:

[biltongbru]

Hi Oleg and team

1) Will participation be allowed by users to do modifications on objects, landscapes, effects and sounds?

2) Will there be more camera and view options to allow better movie making possibilities?

Thanks!

[Feuerfalke]

Yes I love hearing that... Time frame means only one thing, release time is getting closer :grin:

Hey, somebody else is reading between the lines :grin:


Yeah, getting closer now :cool:

[Feuerfalke]

Hi Oleg and team

1) Will participation be allowed by users to do modifications on objects, landscapes and sounds?

2) Will there be more camera and view options to allow better movie making possibilities?

Thanks!

Sound is probably open for modification in general, landscape can be added for smaller maps, objects and even planes and cockpits seem to be possible to implement by 3rd party

[PeterPanPan]

Well, I don't think is too weird a request, and hope that Oleg & Co see it as a useful one. How's about the ability for the FMB (or whatever it is going to be called) to have the ability to generate realistic looking recon photos that you can easily annotate via a GUI. Then, in the briefing stage of missions, players can actually see this image. Something like ...

http://www.360vision.co.uk/uploads/v1_rocket.jpg

I think this would greatly add to the enjoyment, realism and immersion of the sim.

EDIT ... apologies if this wasn't really the right place the post this.

Cheers

PPanPan

[SlipBall]

Well, I don't think is too weird a request, and hope that Oleg & Co see it as a useful one. How's about the ability for the FMB (or whatever it is going to be called) to have the ability to generate realistic looking recon photos that you can easily annotate via a GUI. Then, in the briefing stage of missions, players can actually see this image. Something like ...

http://www.360vision.co.uk/uploads/v1_rocket.jpg

I think this would greatly add to the enjoyment, realism and immersion of the sim.

EDIT ... apologies if this wasn't really the right place the post this.

Cheers

PPanPan




In full mission builder now you are able to take a "grab" view of the map...could that shot not be edited to produce the image you seek? This is more of a asking question to you, since I have not put much effort into this.

[HFC_Dolphin]

Actually I think PeterPanPan doesn't mean that he needs these pictures to be made through FMB. This is already possible, as you mention SlipBall.

What we expect to see, and Oleg is aware of it, is the possibility of online taking pictures (by some recon planes) and then the possibility of adding these pictures in the mission briefing, along with leader's comments/orders.
That, I guess we should be seeing it.

[PeterPanPan]

Hi Slipball

Yes, you can take a 'grab' of the scene in FMB already. That is how I made this image, just by pressing the 'Print Screen' key. I then used Photoshop and manually added the 'folded paper' effect and all the words and arrows and changed it to black & white. It's all a bit time consuming and fiddly and not easy for those with no or little skills in this area. I was just thinking it would be a whole lot easier if there was an in-game menu driven method of achieving this type of result.

Hi HFC Dolphin

Yes, the ability to shoot in-game recon photos would be great too, and I'm pleased to hear Oleg is aware of this. I have read another post too about the ability to have gun-cams producing those iconic, shaky, black & white, low frame rate clips.

Cheers

PPanPan

[AdMan]

It would be nice to have some of those film effects in-game. Not just for recon and gun cams but for tracks as well. one could just import the vids into a program like adobe after effects and create the camera effects themselves but it would be cool to have them in-game for those who aren't well versed in motion graphics. Especially if the they were emulated after actual cameras that existed and were used at that time.

So often we see history in our minds the way it appears on film, it would give the player a real sense of living history. This is also similar to the intro of the original IL-2, which took game tracks and added film grain and a black and white effect.

[Skoshi Tiger]

I may be mistaken (I often am) but I think I remember something about the mission briefing for SOW being made in some kind of markup language (HTML or XML????) if so you should be able to put in images.

You never know I may have dreamt it...or may have been having flashbacks to an earlier life in a parallel universe where SOW Bob has already been released????

[13th Hsqn Protos]

Oleg,
If you don`t put some real humans in those stunning vehicles...expect me in your office in the very angry condition! :D

Just give him his crewable panzer/tiger tank Oleg so we can move on to other things ..... He was born in angry condition :-P

[luthier]

Well, I don't think is too weird a request, and hope that Oleg & Co see it as a useful one. How's about the ability for the FMB (or whatever it is going to be called) to have the ability to generate realistic looking recon photos that you can easily annotate via a GUI. Then, in the briefing stage of missions, players can actually see this image. Something like ...

I spent a lot of time building single and co-op missions for Il-2, so I had a laundry list of things to be done to briefings.

You're going to loooove the new mission briefings.

[HB252]

Hi Oleg and guys!! :grin:

I found this!!:
And well, i cant explain me?

[Tbag]

I spent a lot of time building single and co-op missions for Il-2, so I had a laundry list of things to be done to briefings.

You're going to loooove the new mission briefings.

That's AWESOME news! Thanks for the info Ilya! It brings me to another idea: Multiplayer mission briefings. Would it be possible to include an interactive mission screen where you can draw on the map and other users can see it? This would be soooo cool for coop missions! But I can see that this is probably asked too much.

[Tbag]

Hi Oleg and guys!! :grin:

I found this!!:
And well, i cant explain me?

The Mig and the Mustang are from the SoW:Korea project wich is currently on hold until SoW:BoB is finished (at least thats what I understood).

[flyingbullseye]

And well, i cant explain me?

Neither can the rest of us!;) lol, jk jk. Welcome to the banana forums HB, its good to see more new people around here.

Flyingbullseye

[philip.ed]

I spent a lot of time building single and co-op missions for Il-2, so I had a laundry list of things to be done to briefings.

You're going to loooove the new mission briefings.

Oooh nice ;) Did you get the PM luthier? ;)

[ECV56_Guevara]

I spent a lot of time building single and co-op missions for Il-2, so I had a laundry list of things to be done to briefings.

You're going to loooove the new mission briefings.

Now I ´m horny.....
Pics pics pics !!! we want pics!!!
(It´s a wonderfull news to me you noticed it, didn´t you?

[mazex]

I spent a lot of time building single and co-op missions for Il-2, so I had a laundry list of things to be done to briefings.

You're going to loooove the new mission briefings.

Bones are thrown high and low lately - me like!

[V.4_Maggi]

The Mig and the Mustang are from the SoW:Korea project wich is currently on hold until SoW:BoB is finished (at least thats what I understood).

Maybe Im mistaken, but it's called Project Galba, in development by RRG Studios. The engine is the same as BoB's, guess they bought it from 1C, under some conditions/restrictions (guess it won't come out before BoB).

There were some photos on their website (If remember correctly when Peshka addon was out) but they disappeared very fast :)

[PeterPanPan]

I spent a lot of time building single and co-op missions for Il-2, so I had a laundry list of things to be done to briefings.

You're going to loooove the new mission briefings.

Great news Luthier - thank you!! :grin:

Cheers

PPanPan

[ECV56_Lancelot]

I spent a lot of time building single and co-op missions for Il-2, so I had a laundry list of things to be done to briefings.

You're going to loooove the new mission briefings.

This for me are the BEST and MORE interesting news about the SoW, even if technically it says nothing, but at the same time says a lot. I always wanted, that when time was right, to have a large discussion and thread talking only about the mission builder. I think that the FMB of IL-2 is one of the best, but it had SO MANY things to improve, being triggers an important but small part of all the improvements it could be made.
The mission builder forum of UBI, when it was created, had a lot of good ideas to help improve the FMB of IL2. Really would like to know in the future how much of it we'll see on SoW.

Thanks a lot Luthier for the bone, hope to see more insight info in the future about this. :)

[zakkandrachoff]

I spent a lot of time building single and co-op missions for Il-2, so I had a laundry list of things to be done to briefings.

You're going to loooove the new mission briefings.

I very hope they puth so many missions, but so many many missions, i dont talking about 30 missiones, i am talking about very much more than 100 missions.
For example, ArmA2 have only 7 missions, and Dragon Rising 11. Very crappy and desolated.
And i remember the first Su27 that have so many missions (I dont remember Il-2), and good missions. hope this will be repeat in SOW

[zakkandrachoff]

from Alex Voicu.this is the same guy taht do the tempest in il2
http://www.alexvoicu.domeniuweb.ro/typhoon44.jpg
i ask my self if that typhoon is for a series of SOW

[AdMan]

is there going to be another update this week?

[Oesau]

Maybe Im mistaken, but it's called Project Galba, in development by RRG Studios. The engine is the same as BoB's, guess they bought it from 1C, under some conditions/restrictions (guess it won't come out before BoB).

There were some photos on their website (If remember correctly when Peshka addon was out) but they disappeared very fast :)

Tbag is correct from what I have read, RRG (was/is luthier's baby) but was put on hold (Oleg mentioned this) was working on the project Galba http://www.rrgstudios.com/EN_01_02_AboutCompany.shtml

[KOM.Nausicaa]

is there going to be another update this week?

Oleg just gave us two updates and a lot of his time on the forums. I think it's understandable if he lets us digest all the new stuff for some weeks.

[nearmiss]

Relax

All the picture updates are not going to make the SOW release any faster.

[imaca]

My question is regarding the single player game.
I know you have stated that this is not so important anymore, but for many of us living in remote areas, or distant countries, ping rate or bandwidth or even time time available for gaming make online gaming difficult or impossible.
Here in New Zealand, for example ping to overseas servers is very bad, and there are few flight sim enthusiasts locally.
I realise that many or perhaps most are interested mainly in online gaming, but I suspect that the online gamers are also far more likely to frequent forums like this and so have their point of view heard more.
For the rest of us, the single player game is everything.
The most important part of this is the AI, so...my questions are:

Does the statement that single player game is less important now mean that less work will now be done on the AI in order to advance the multi-player game?

Will the morale of the AI be modeled (as in for example close combat series) so that AI may run in fear or go crazy with anger etc.?

Will the AI use realistic tactics of the time (for example RAF predominant use of line astern/vic formation)

Are you able to give us some idea of what we can and can't expect from the AI in general?

[nearmiss]

Your apprehensions maybe be misguided.

Oleg has promised alot of new things in SOW, among them is a much improved mission builder. The mission builder is very important for Offline play. Also, Oleg knows as well as most of his users the Online game can get very boring.

Looking for targets, manuevering for the kill, making the kill has rewards. Night after night of that action gets old fast. Coops help of course.

The AI is supposed to be improved a great deal. I would expect that to be a for sure improvement that will be done. Explaining things in AI performance could take hours. I think you'll not get a complete response in that area. I'm not sure if Oleg has ever made a thorough explanation of the IL2 ai performance, it was best explained by doing the sim.

If you have time go back through some of the postings where Oleg has answered questions.

The game will be for worldwide distribution, therefore a lot will be done for non-broadband players to play it.

[Feuerfalke]

My question is regarding the single player game.
I know you have stated that this is not so important anymore

IMHO this is already the mistake.

It was not stated that Single Player is not so important anymore, but that Multiplayer is important for modern games.

Only a linguistic difference?

No, because AI will be a part of MP games as well as decent campaigns will be. You will benefit from both when playing SP-games, but of course you will miss many features that are included to make multiplayer-experience better and easier accessable ;)

[robtek]

@nearmiss
there is much more in online flying than dogfights!!!!!
Your experience seems to be one-sided.
Just remember: Fighter pilots make movies, bomber pilots make history!

[nearmiss]

@nearmiss
there is much more in online flying than dogfights!!!!!
Your experience seems to be one-sided.
Just remember: Fighter pilots make movies, bomber pilots make history!

I did mention Coops, didn't I?

[robtek]

even on a dogfight server is more than dogfight!

[ElAurens]

What robtek said.

[csThor]

Try getting players to fly historical planesets which aren't overloaded with fighters or fighter-bombers in historical settings and ... you'll see them mewing and yammering about fairness and fun and all that mopek. Online is bugged with this and that is why offline is so damned important. Playing against humans is grossly overrated because of human egos that it ain't funny anymore. :roll:

[Feuerfalke]

Try getting players to fly historical planesets which aren't overloaded with fighters or fighter-bombers in historical settings and ... you'll see them mewing and yammering about fairness and fun and all that mopek. Online is bugged with this and that is why offline is so damned important. Playing against humans is grossly overrated because of human egos that it ain't funny anymore. :roll:

IMHO this is the main misconception:

MP is important because you can play WITH other players, not because you can play AGAINST them ;)

[13th Hsqn Protos]

1. Try getting players to fly historical planesets which aren't overloaded with fighters or fighter-bombers in historical settings and ... you'll see them mewing and yammering about fairness and fun and all that mopek.

2. Online is bugged with this and that is why offline is so damned important.

3. Playing against humans is grossly overrated because of human egos that it ain't funny anymore. :roll:

1. Imagine that ..... complaining about fairness and fun .... how ridiculous :rolleyes:\

2. ... Empirical evidence contradicts YOUR analysis completely and utterly.

3. Your last point says more about you and your emotional problems than it does about the multiplayer experience.

* The multiplayer experience is what gaming is all about. 10 times more so for a Flight Sim. Fortunately it seems this has finally been realized.

** As a famous professor once said 'The future is the Net'

[Robert]

1. Imagine that ..... complaining about fairness and fun .... how ridiculous :rolleyes:\

2. ... Empirical evidence contradicts YOUR analysis completely and utterly.

3. Your last point says more about you and your emotional problems than it does about the multiplayer experience.

* The multiplayer experience is what gaming is all about. 10 times more so for a Flight Sim. Fortunately it seems this has finally been realized.

** As a famous professor once said 'The future is the Net'


Well wasn't THAT helpful.

[Coog]

Well wasn't THAT helpful.

Amen brother. Thread about Oleg's lastest Friday posting turns into a chest-beating, ego fest. :confused:

[13th Hsqn Protos]

Well wasn't THAT helpful.

Your post clearly added a lot of value ...... I think you should be made mod, after reading some of the magnificent contributions you have made here in a 172 posts :rolleyes:

[SlipBall]

You guy's, thanks

[Robert]

Your post clearly added a lot of value ...... I think you should be made mod, after reading some of the magnificent contributions you have made here in a 172 posts :rolleyes:

EDITED: I'm not here to start fights. Apologies. Your comment hit me and I reacted. I think it was uncalled for and posted what I did. Fair enough?

[proton45]

Golly...step away for a couple of days and I'm lost. ;)

[13th Hsqn Protos]

Apologies.

Accepted.

[hiro]

Online and offline components are both key to make a flight sim work. A balance is needed.

It's like a peanut butter and jelly sandwich, you need both and once you put them together to remove one would demolish a good PB&J sandwich.

IL-2 series would have not gotten as far if it only catered to just one arena.


Online is here to stay. The popularity of it is that groups can work together and you introduce the social element to games. People give variety . . .
Also human vs human challenge to some is a refreshing experience as AI (currently) is predictable, does super things etc . . .


Also online content of a game has become an industry accepted criteria for judging game quality (like sound and graphics) . . . and a standard, player expected / basic feature of any game released currently.



Online can rub people wrong. And ego has alot to do with it. You have petty / abuse admins of servers, to the morbid fear of losing or self esteem tied to their score so they have to cheat . . .

Also remember that the loudest are those who choose to cry, complain, whine and dine while some others would rather spend their time fixing the problem, go to another server that doesn't have that issue, or are busy figuring a way they can deal / work through it, or are simply having too much fun to let it get in the way.

I see the historical thing . . . complaining about the historical context on the basis it wasn't fair, or historical isn't fun.

The problem is some people can't connect that war isn't fair, rules were made to be broken, and murphy the grunt's word hold more clout than the staff generals . . .

Even though IL-2 is a game and that a certain definition of fun IS how close and accurate to that specific time and place in WW 2 you can get.

Remember that IL-2 is a game and many see it in that regard, a game that is supposed to be fun (and online) and fair, that takes place in a specific genra.




Offline component is very important. It gets the player into the game. For sims immersion is key, and historical accuracy is paramount. The plane and missions make you feel you are a pilot in the VVS or the surprise and wonder of the routing patrol finding a luftwaffe plane they cannot catch even though they had some height advantage at full throttle.

Offline components, missions / levels / world etc are also criteria upon which the game is judged, and makes up most of the game.

Also important is tools to for the user to make their own maps, missions, campaigns and control every detail possible. Quality games released with the intention of longevity always include tools for user made stuff.






To have that you need solid code, a clearly defined set of rules, good judgement, player, developer, and modder relationship that serves for the betterment of the game and enjoyment of players (and strikes a balance). There needs to be open dialog between the community and dev, and a well balanced (in terms of features, fun, historical accuracy, content types etc), well designed, quality game.

So far BOB SOW is turn out good.

[Robert]

Accepted.

Cool

[csThor]

Protos

I stand by my words. I happen to favor a decidedly historical POV on flightsimming, including "reenacting" (not really the right term, but I can't find a better one) historical operations. However you can't expect that players follow historical procedures or fall in line with historical setups - not when you've made the experiences I've made.

Let's imagine a setup of 1942 Eastern Front. The Luftwaffe has the supreme fighter in this setup (in this case the Bf 109 F-4), but the VVS is numerically far superior (which you can't enforce, either). The VVS must support a ground offensive by busting up german artillery positions, tank formations and strongpoints - and the historical aircraft for that work is the Il-2. However it's still the single-seat version so the red fighters need to give them escort.

My experience is simply that such setups are impossible because they always end up being discussed to death and ground to dust in boards with always the same bollocks of "arguments" - fairness, "fun" ... You can make a level field for playing, even with unequal technical and/or numerical setups as in this one. Give the VVS a load of targets they need to destroy so their efforts must be spread out and make things difficult for the Luftwaffe by having so many spots to cover that their own ops (i.e. bomber attacks vs a soviet depot deep behind lines) have trouble getting fighter cover. Set up a lot of light AAA so that the armored Il-2s are the better choice for low-level attacks.
Varying layout and goals is what makes a field level, not having the same or very similar aircraft handy so that the dogfighters can bang it out at 500m between the two closest fields, but players don't want that. I've learned this. They want instant gratification, sportive contest and not a challenge. And I want "wargaming" as opposed to 1-on-1 dogfight contests so I stay offline. The Ai doesn't yammer when it has to fly single-seat Il-2s, Stukas or bombers ... even in the right numbers. ;)

[lep1981]

Originally Posted by csTHor
I stand by my words. I happen to favor a decidedly historical POV on flightsimming, including "reenacting" (not really the right term, but I can't find a better one) historical operations. However you can't expect that players follow historical procedures or fall in line with historical setups - not when you've made the experiences I've made.

Let's imagine a setup of 1942 Eastern Front. The Luftwaffe has the supreme fighter in this setup (in this case the Bf 109 F-4), but the VVS is numerically far superior (which you can't enforce, either). The VVS must support a ground offensive by busting up german artillery positions, tank formations and strongpoints - and the historical aircraft for that work is the Il-2. However it's still the single-seat version so the red fighters need to give them escort.

My experience is simply that such setups are impossible because they always end up being discussed to death and ground to dust in boards with always the same bollocks of "arguments" - fairness, "fun" ... You can make a level field for playing, even with unequal technical and/or numerical setups as in this one. Give the VVS a load of targets they need to destroy so their efforts must be spread out and make things difficult for the Luftwaffe by having so many spots to cover that their own ops (i.e. bomber attacks vs a soviet depot deep behind lines) have trouble getting fighter cover. Set up a lot of light AAA so that the armored Il-2s are the better choice for low-level attacks.
Varying layout and goals is what makes a field level, not having the same or very similar aircraft handy so that the dogfighters can bang it out at 500m between the two closest fields, but players don't want that. I've learned this. They want instant gratification, sportive contest and not a challenge. And I want "wargaming" as opposed to 1-on-1 dogfight contests so I stay offline. The Ai doesn't yammer when it has to fly single-seat Il-2s, Stukas or bombers ... even in the right numbers.


I'd love to fly those setups online as well, but as you say Thor, it's a bit difficult (to put it optimistic). However, I can't deny I enjoy online games nontheless but I'd love to make realistic missions and setups in online games... greetings!

[robtek]

For il2 there is a mod (zuti's MDS) that brings cdThors dreams closer to fulfillment, online!
There one can have flights uf unpopular Aircraft flown by ai, and the player can join them or go glory seeking with a fighter.
So one can use the ai controlled planes to recreate the numerical balance of the past.
And all that on a dogfight server where people come and go as they please.

[imaca]

Your apprehensions maybe be misguided.
.

Thanks for reply, have tried to keep up with posts (not so easy these days). If what your saying is true then you are probably right

[Foo'bar]

Rotating propellers really look very nice!

http://www.sukhoi.ru/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=100727&d=1257256186

[HenFre]

Looks awesome Peter.. The reflection in the cockpit glass is also truely photo realistic looking.. WoW :cool:

[1.JaVA_Toga]

sry one little personal comment. Cant wait and oleg thanks for the pink flower bomber ;-)

[Feuerfalke]

Rotating propellers really look very nice!

THIS is truly amazing! :cool:

[Bobb4]

Protos

I stand by my words. I happen to favor a decidedly historical POV on flightsimming, including "reenacting" (not really the right term, but I can't find a better one) historical operations. However you can't expect that players follow historical procedures or fall in line with historical setups - not when you've made the experiences I've made.

Let's imagine a setup of 1942 Eastern Front. The Luftwaffe has the supreme fighter in this setup (in this case the Bf 109 F-4), but the VVS is numerically far superior (which you can't enforce, either). The VVS must support a ground offensive by busting up german artillery positions, tank formations and strongpoints - and the historical aircraft for that work is the Il-2. However it's still the single-seat version so the red fighters need to give them escort.

My experience is simply that such setups are impossible because they always end up being discussed to death and ground to dust in boards with always the same bollocks of "arguments" - fairness, "fun" ... You can make a level field for playing, even with unequal technical and/or numerical setups as in this one. Give the VVS a load of targets they need to destroy so their efforts must be spread out and make things difficult for the Luftwaffe by having so many spots to cover that their own ops (i.e. bomber attacks vs a soviet depot deep behind lines) have trouble getting fighter cover. Set up a lot of light AAA so that the armored Il-2s are the better choice for low-level attacks.
Varying layout and goals is what makes a field level, not having the same or very similar aircraft handy so that the dogfighters can bang it out at 500m between the two closest fields, but players don't want that. I've learned this. They want instant gratification, sportive contest and not a challenge. And I want "wargaming" as opposed to 1-on-1 dogfight contests so I stay offline. The Ai doesn't yammer when it has to fly single-seat Il-2s, Stukas or bombers ... even in the right numbers. ;)

Give 69.Giap a visit. We fly realistic SEOW campaigns.
Currently fly the battle of Kursk.
No fun in an La5 while the enemy boom and zoom in 109G6's

( http://www.69giap.com/index.html ) There are a lot of squadrons that fly realistic campaigns online.
This includes the battle on the ground, thanks to SEOW.

[mark@1C]

Hi,BOSS
about the houses:
http://files.games.1c.ru/il2pict/windowslights0006.jpg
http://files.games.1c.ru/il2pict/windowslights0007.jpg

if possible,I thinke it's better to do some evolution in house window modeling.Don't only stop at the old standard,which makes the window look like a Flashing Wallpaper(The similar situation can be found in many old and popular games,such as CS).
I mean some Glass feeling Textures and Algorithms would be a great change if being added.