Next patch info

[luthier]

Hi everyone,

We've been hard at work on a whole bunch of stuff here. Quicker fixes are now a thing of the past; we're working on larger more complex stuff and so patches, updates and improvements will be coming at a slower pace.

Our next BETA patch is tentatively scheduled for two weeks from now for Friday the 17th, and the release version of it is scheduled for the Friday after that, June 24th.

The next patch will contain:

* Improved streamlined multiplayer GUI
* Other multiplayer improvements - more stability, all plane settings like convergence and paintscheme working at all times, less rare bugs, etc.
* Various graphical improvements. The distant clouds are finally back - i.e. the flat representations of clouds you saw on beta screenshots with pretty sunlit borders. Finally fixed the landscape stripes bug, etc.
* Improvements to FM and DM and various cockpit systems, as usual - long list there.
* AI improvements, including at least the majority, if not all, of the order system working.
* A new warship!

Other things that are in the pipeline:

* Sound. This is probably the biggest issue we're facing. We're taking a very drastic approach to the issue and pretty much redoing our sound from scratch. This means you won't see the new sound for a few more months.
* FPS. The final remaining performance issues, which fortunately are comparatively minor, lie very deep in the engine, and require us to do a significant amount of work. Probably at least 2 months of it.
* Online stability, more anti-cheating controls, and server and aircraft SDK - also a few months out. Dedicated Server SDK and documentation is probably going to be done the quickest.

NOTE: this isn't an exhaustive list, but rather the main bullet points.

So stay tuned for more patch info next week. I'll try to do more regular weekly Friday updates from now on.

[Lololopoulos]

hahha speaking of the devil!! you know we want to see you luthier!!!
thanks a lot!!!

[5./JG27 Lehmann]

Thanks for the update, sounds good :)

[Razorhead]

Thanks for the update :)

[ATAG_Dutch]

Eureka!

Would love to know which warship.

Scharnhorst/ Gneisenau?

Thanks for the heads up, I can stop moaning now. :)

[roadczar]

Thanks!

[Letum]

Thankyou

[SG1_Lud]

Luthier: when you refer to the sound that needs a few months I understand, but do you have nailed the Sound disappearing problem in multiplayer, and so can we expect a fix sooner, or not?

Thank you.

[FG28_Kodiak]

Thank God its Friday ! :grin:

[Kongo-Otto]

Eureka!

Would love to know which warship.

Scharnhorst/ Gneisenau?

Thanks for the heads up, I can stop moaning now. :)

Well this question is easy to answer, it will be the HMS Stop Whining accompanied by the HMS Next Patch and the Heavy Cruiser HMS Next Pint on me. :cool::-):-P

[BigPickle]

just the man, thanks for the update mate very much appreciated. I wish you all the best with the sound engine I'm sure you'll crack it though.

Any news about full screen, I still have all the flashing between destop and game on loading as we had before plus i can still half control windows in game, hope your guys get chance to sort to take another look at it.

Also the trees still appear to be the biggest problem in relation to performance, if i you look at them they flicker in a way, they grow and shrink. I saw this problem with Arma2 and when they fixed it said it turned out the be the LODs.

Thank you again for taking the time to drop in.

[FlyingShark]

Thanks for the heads up, Luthier.

~S~

[furbs]

Thanks for the update...though you prob should look here...
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=23405

And the MP sound bug needs a very quick hotfix because its killing MP right now.

No word on FSAA?

[baronWastelan]

Thanks for the weakly update.

[BigPickle]

Thanks for the weakly update.

Irony, or is that just spelt wrong :confused:

[satchenko]

Radio Comms? PLEASE fix this!!!!!!!!

[ATAG_Doc]

Everyone has been worried about you man in fact I think there was a search party formed and looking for any sign of you. Rumor was circulating that you went to seek guidance from The Dalai Lama. We are happy you are alive and well!!

http://newsoholics.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/Dalai-Lama.jpg

[SG1_Lud]

Thanks for the weakly update.
:)

[RE77ACTION]

Can't wait... Thank you!!! :grin:

[41Sqn_Stormcrow]

Any chance that the itching bug with the proppitch of the 109 is fixed with (re-)introducing the quicker angle speeds that should be four times faster than what we have right now?

[Krt_Bong]

Thanks for the Update Luthier, we know you are doing your best.

[Kongo-Otto]

Everyone has been worried about you man in fact I think I there was a search party formed and looking for any sign of you. Rumor was circulating that you went to seek guidance from The Dalai Lama. We are happy you are alive and well!!

:cool:
http://www.abload.de/img/cr_senategov_barack_obr7wy.jpg

[Foo'bar]

As long the engine sounds will be fixed I'll agree with everything ;)

Thank you.

[Qpassa]

well two weeks, we'll have to wait a lot . Hope to see not "scratch " in the engine sounds

[smink1701]

Hi everyone,

* Sound. This is probably the biggest issue we're facing. We're taking a very drastic approach to the issue and pretty much redoing our sound from scratch. This means you won't see the new sound for a few more months.
weekly Friday updates from now on.

Thanks Luthier...good to hear from you. Was very please to see you address sound since this is a subject dear to my heart. Do you mean fixing the current sound so it doesn’t cut out during game play or the quality of engine, gun, general plane SFX, wind when opening the canopy, etc. I hope your answer is YES to both.
:):):)

[Gollum]

Hi everyone,


Other things that are in the pipeline:

* Sound. This is probably the biggest issue we're facing. We're taking a very drastic approach to the issue and pretty much redoing our sound from scratch. This means you won't see the new sound for a few more months.
* FPS. The final remaining performance issues, which fortunately are comparatively minor, lie very deep in the engine, and require us to do a significant amount of work. Probably at least 2 months of it.



I'm confused... So all the reports of stutters / broken AA (currently rendering my game useless when prior to last patch, didn't exist) are being ignored / considered "comparatively minor" and won't be fixed for a few months if even considered one of the "final remaining performance issues"?

:confused:

Am I wrong to think that the Dev teams thinks all performance problems are solved except for a few "minor issues"?

Not hating, I just wan't these issues at least looked into and not to be left on the side of the road. If it takes two months then so be it but I just want you to know that these issues exist, are not "minor", and need to be fixed as soon as possible (considering I can't play the game on a top of the line rig).

I hope this gets fixed soon. I was having a great time playing this sim until the last patch and I miss playing it.

-Gollum

[Blackdog_kt]

Hi everyone,

We've been hard at work on a whole bunch of stuff here. Quicker fixes are now a thing of the past; we're working on larger more complex stuff and so patches, updates and improvements will be coming at a slower pace.

Our next BETA patch is tentatively scheduled for two weeks from now for Friday the 17th, and the release version of it is scheduled for the Friday after that, June 24th.

The next patch will contain:

* Improved streamlined multiplayer GUI
* Other multiplayer improvements - more stability, all plane settings like convergence and paintscheme working at all times, less rare bugs, etc.
* Various graphical improvements. The distant clouds are finally back - i.e. the flat representations of clouds you saw on beta screenshots with pretty sunlit borders. Finally fixed the landscape stripes bug, etc.
* Improvements to FM and DM and various cockpit systems, as usual - long list there.
* AI improvements, including at least the majority, if not all, of the order system working.
* A new warship!

Other things that are in the pipeline:

* Sound. This is probably the biggest issue we're facing. We're taking a very drastic approach to the issue and pretty much redoing our sound from scratch. This means you won't see the new sound for a few more months.
* FPS. The final remaining performance issues, which fortunately are comparatively minor, lie very deep in the engine, and require us to do a significant amount of work. Probably at least 2 months of it.
* Online stability, more anti-cheating controls, and server and aircraft SDK - also a few months out. Dedicated Server SDK and documentation is probably going to be done the quickest.

NOTE: this isn't an exhaustive list, but rather the main bullet points.

So stay tuned for more patch info next week. I'll try to do more regular weekly Friday updates from now on.

Very good list of fixes and improvements. My favorite short to medium term upgrades are the bold parts in the above quote. I also like the long-term upgrades like the sound engine and the SDK.

As far as improvements to cockpit systems and controllability goes, my list of personal favorites goes like this:


Ju88 gyrocompass, maybe the automatic gear switch for the supercharger too (heard it mentioned by someone else)
DB601 prop pitch issues (un-reversing it and having it change at the correct degrees per second)
streamlined, consistent control logic for all aircraft so the newcomers to the sim don't get confused:
currently in some aircraft controls are reversed because they were that way in reality
in other aircraft that real controls were also reversed the in-game controls are not, it's only the animation that changes (eg, the Italian aircraft)
Blenheim's props are correctly modeled as two-pitch props but the slider doesn't "snap" to the top and bottom positions like it does in other aircraft with similar props (eg, the DH hurri and the Mk.I Spit)...we can move the slider through its entire range of motion but only the bottom position corresponds to coarse pitch and everything above that corresponds to fine pitch (ie, it has a lot of unnecessary range of motion)
The DH-prop hurricane and the Tiger Moth exhibit strange behaviour with the interlocking throttle and mixture controls, while it works correctly in the Rotol Hurricane
Reversed turret controls in the Br.20 (that was a few patches ago, don't know it has been fixed in the meantime)
Solving the conflict that prevents moving the turret/gun while firing if both actions are mapped to a single controller (eg, mouse)
Improved response in moving the turrets/gun mounts. It's not that they rotate slowly, they just take long to start moving when you press the relevant key. This is not such a big deal in most aircraft, but it's prohibitive in the Blenheim because the mouse is tied to moving the gun (which has a very limited range of horizontal motion in relation to the turret) and the gun mount controls are used for the turret. It's not precise enough currently and it makes it very hard to use the turret.
Some sort of "bombardier guidance mode" for the bombers that don't have an autopilot to fly the aircraft during the bomb run (namely, the Br.20 and Blenheim)


Sorry if i'm sounding like a demanding smartass, it's not my intention at all. I just want to give a friendly reminder of reproducible issues and share what i've managed to collect through testing.

You have a very good list of upcoming fixes there and it shows that community feedback is definitely not ignored even if it's not answered on a daily basis: your list is what seems to be the most important issues to the majority of the community here, so it's a clear sign you guys are listening and prioritising things correctly.

Keep up the good work, we're definitely getting there ;)

[Winger]

i REALLY hopt the fixes include the fix of the 109 pitch changespeed!?

Winger

[Strike]

Thanks for the update! Will be looking forward to friday 17th ;)

[FG28_Kodiak]

:cool:
http://www.abload.de/img/cr_senategov_barack_obr7wy.jpg
No help needed:
http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/1935/usavsrussia.jpg

[Rattlehead]

I'll try to do more regular weekly Friday updates from now on.

May I ask what happened to the community manager?

Thanks for the info regarding the next patch, Luthier. I (we all) feel much better knowing what the basic outline is for the next few weeks/months.

[pupo162]

so... no fixed 109 pitch till the 17th??? bummer.. 2 more weeks of no il2 for me...

[Mysticpuma]

Luthier.....beware, for now you have made the often quoted (but much mis-used)....................... Two-weeks!!!!

That could come back to bite you.... ;)

Thanks for some news, but seriously.....when it was released you thought the sound was okay? Now it's Months to fix...or is it Months to make it how it should have been on release?

MP

[robtek]

I really would like to have, as a quick fix, the sound back prior the last patch so i can play longer missions!
Just to bridge the time until the real patch!

[335th_GRAthos]

Good to hear you are alive and kicking Luthier, but I strongly suggest we receive more regular feedback on what is going on.

We have been the official beta testers of this thing and do not complain about it but this kind of feedback absence of the past weeks really cheesed me off.


~S~

[Bloblast]

[QUOTE=luthier;292905]
Finally fixed the landscape stripes bug, etc.
Improvements to FM and DM and various cockpit systems, as usual - long list there.
AI improvements, including at least the majority, if not all, of the order system working.

AI improvement + major of radio communication, good news!
AI too fast at the moment it should be tuned down. Hope this is worked on.

Thanks Luthier.

[Norseman]

Much appreciated and needed new info !
Many Thanks sir !
-advancing helluvalot faster than good ol`IL2 here.. ;)
~S~:-)

[Doc_uk]

Hi everyone,
Finally fixed the landscape stripes bug, etc.I do hope thats the blue stripes :)

[ATAG_Dutch]

Well this question is easy to answer, it will be the HMS Stop Whining accompanied by the HMS Next Patch and the Heavy Cruiser HMS Next Pint on me. :cool::-):-P

:grin:

Gladly mate. Venue?:rolleyes:;)

[Vengeanze]

* FPS. The final remaining performance issues, which fortunately are comparatively minor, lie very deep in the engine, and require us to do a significant amount of work. Probably at least 2 months of it.
Bugger. Means I'm stuck with these low fps for a while.

[MiGCap]

Good news, but please don't forget the Anti-aliasing issue ...

[Tiger27]

Thanks for the update...though you prob should look here...
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=23405

And the MP sound bug needs a very quick hotfix because its killing MP right now.

No word on FSAA?

Not to mention the 109 prop pitch speed.

[Anvilfolk]

Thanks luthier :)


And Blackdog, thanks to you too. You're an exemplary member of this community - I wish more people acted like you do. Hat off to you, sir.

[FG28_Kodiak]

Not to mention the 109 prop pitch speed.
Isn't the prop pitch part of "Improvements to FM and DM and various cockpit systems, as usual - long list there."
So it will eventually in the next patch.

[Jatta Raso]

at last new clouds... much appreciated!

[JumpingHubert]

why is it so difficult to say a few words about antialiasing? No one word since release and before......

[LcSummers]

now we have a little roadmap. 2 weeks are long but hopefully that big patch will rock forward.

Anyway thanks for that info Luthier.

[Extreme_One]

Hi everyone,

...
Our next BETA patch is tentatively scheduled for two weeks from now...


Two weeks.. be sure. :rolleyes:

Anyway, looking forward to the next patch. Thanks for the info.

[Triggaaar]

Thanks

[Manuc]

Thank you for your hard work to make this great flight sim better and better

[furbs]

I think reading between the lines...FSAA will not be fixed.

[|ZUTI|]

Luthier, what about map SDK. When will we be able to create our own maps?

Thanks.

[Heinz Laube]

Looks like, they rewrite the whole game, so just wait another few years :D

[machoo]

This is good. I thought quick fix patch's were silly. Best to do quality patch's over quantity ones.

[41Sqn_Stormcrow]

No help needed:
http://img215.imageshack.us/img215/1935/usavsrussia.jpg

Hilarious! This is superb!

[Redroach]

Looks like, they rewrite the whole game, so just wait another few years :D

I take objection to the "re-" part in "rewrite". I'm pretty sure that the steps taken towards a working 'order' system will be the very first lines of code written in that department :D

Anyways, for 4 weeks development time, that list doesn't look very exhaustive to me, and the gravest issues like loadout and radio comms are written up in an obscure way. Well, lets see, what the FM/DM improvements will bring.

Since CoD ran okay for me since the start, these would be (big conjecture so far.. :rolleyes: ) the very first real improvements (that is, progress from alpha state to at least all functions working with probably some bugs remaining) for me. And this is 2,5 months after release. I guess the guys who said "wait and see how the game will be polished in 3 month's time" were right, huh? :D

[Tree_UK]

Come on luthier, 2 months ago you were on about implementing DX11, what about some AA, its not rocket science is it?

[Skoshi Tiger]

DB601 prop pitch issues (un-reversing it and having it change at the correct degrees per second)


Does anyone have a reference to how many dgrees/second the actual propellor pitch should change at? It would be sad if they just changed to an inaccurate rate just to meet popular demand.


Come on luthier, 2 months ago you were on about implementing DX11, what about some AA, its not rocket science is it?

Good to see the Old Tree is back again! ;)

[machoo]

As far as I can tell , AA is in it. It looks fine too me. Maybe it's just higher res.

[Voidhunger]

Come on luthier, 2 months ago you were on about implementing DX11, what about some AA, its not rocket science is it?

AA in 1920x1200? uselessness...

[Seeker]

Thanks for the update

[jayrc]

thanks for the update:grin:

[xnomad]

Can't we have a minor release just for the 109 prop pitch? I was playing this game almost daily until the prop pitch was slowed down by the hotfix. You can't dogfight with the 109 in CEM mode. :(
Such an important fix that could be dealt with so quickly.

[adonys]

Thank you, Luthier!

[desastersoft]

Ilya, can it be that you focus only on Online Gameing? This Time CloD is a naked Engine with no Game Content. This is the Statement of close to all Reviews in Game Magazines, Online Reviews and Statements what arrived us.

You have no:

No Promotion System for Campaigns
No System for honering the Player with Medals for Efforts
No clear Killboard
No working Scripts in Single Mission Mode
No Script Documentation for the Users
No correct Manual for the Game
No auto read in for new custom Campaigns but hopeing that users do their own stuff

With other Words: you doing the 3rd Step befor the second.

This things are essential for Gameplay and Success. If you release in US without this, you may kill your Game. In the View of a normal Users you are far away from good and bad.

Here, read the Statements from Amazon Germany.

http://www.amazon.de/IL-2-Sturmovik-Cliffs-of-Dover/dp/B004JM5C6W/ref=sr_1_1?s=videogames&ie=UTF8&qid=1307164394&sr=1-1

Okay: Main Bugs: No Game Content, No Athomsphere for the Virtual Pilot, No Campaign Management = NO GAMEPLAY!

Think it over!

Cheers
Thomas

Oh,forgot my System Specs...

i7 980 Extreme (6x3,3 GHZ), 12 GB DDR 3 Kingston RAM/Tripple Channel, ASUS Revoltuion MoBo, 2x GF 590 GTX with together 6 GB DDR 5 RAM (Quad SLI), Samsung HDD, Samsung 27" 275T TFT, TM Warthog, TIR4, Simped Vario Pro, G19 Keyboard....

[FG28_Kodiak]

No working Scripts in Single Mission Mode

I've no problem getting scripts to work in Single mission mode.

For example i made a little tutorial (for beginners) in german:
http://forum.sturmovik.de/index.php/topic,689.0.html
http://forum.sturmovik.de/index.php/topic,695.0.html
http://forum.sturmovik.de/index.php/topic,699.0.html
http://forum.sturmovik.de/index.php/topic,711.0.html
more to come.
All scripts working in single player (and mission) mode.

[FG28_Kodiak]

I've my missions in these folders:
..\Documents\1C SoftClub\il-2 sturmovik cliffs of dover\missions\Single\Eigene Missionen
..\Documents\1C SoftClub\il-2 sturmovik cliffs of dover\missions\Single\Tests
..\Documents\1C SoftClub\il-2 sturmovik cliffs of dover\missions\Single\Samples

No Problem to get them to work from there.

Edit: Where is the post i answered to?

But i think your problem is that you make your mission from the campaign class. But for single missions you should use AMission Class.
Campaign class works only under ..\SteamApps\common\il-2 sturmovik cliffs of dover\parts\bob\mission\campaign

[desastersoft]

I've my missions in these folders:
..\Documents\1C SoftClub\il-2 sturmovik cliffs of dover\missions\Single\Eigene Missionen
..\Documents\1C SoftClub\il-2 sturmovik cliffs of dover\missions\Single\Tests
..\Documents\1C SoftClub\il-2 sturmovik cliffs of dover\missions\Single\Samples

No Problem to get them to work from there.

Edit: Where is the post i answered to?

But i think your problem is that you make your mission from the campaign class. But for single missions you should use AMission Class.
Campaign class works only under ..\SteamApps\common\il-2 sturmovik cliffs of dover\parts\bob\mission\campaign

But only if you use the Soft Club Path. Not in Steam Folder Path.

[desastersoft]

I've my missions in these folders:
..\Documents\1C SoftClub\il-2 sturmovik cliffs of dover\missions\Single\Eigene Missionen
..\Documents\1C SoftClub\il-2 sturmovik cliffs of dover\missions\Single\Tests
..\Documents\1C SoftClub\il-2 sturmovik cliffs of dover\missions\Single\Samples

No Problem to get them to work from there.

Edit: Where is the post i answered to?

But i think your problem is that you make your mission from the campaign class. But for single missions you should use AMission Class.
Campaign class works only under ..\SteamApps\common\il-2 sturmovik cliffs of dover\parts\bob\mission\campaign

2 Idioten ein Gedanke...

[rakinroll]

Thank you.

[Osprey]

Eureka!

Would love to know which warship.

Scharnhorst/ Gneisenau?

Thanks for the heads up, I can stop moaning now. :)

Yes, that would be best. The largest Navy in the World shouldn't get a warship because it would be better if we had German warships that we could hide in docks and fjords for 5 years instead.

[Tex-Twil]

server and aircraft SDK

Would that include the ability to query the instruments readings via network ?

[Rattlehead]

As far as I can tell , AA is in it. It looks fine too me. Maybe it's just higher res.

Anti-aliasing works to a point. Some edges are smooth, but others are not, which I find very strange.

You also have swimming landcape textures in the cockpit view, clearly not anti-aliased, and the wings of aircraft in flyby view are quite plainly not anti-aliased at all.

[FG28_Kodiak]

Eureka!

Would love to know which warship.

Scharnhorst/ Gneisenau?

Thanks for the heads up, I can stop moaning now. :)

May be a little smaler:
http://i58.photobucket.com/albums/g260/restranger/shot_20100617_164208.jpg?t=1282678676

[Hood]

Yes, that would be best. The largest Navy in the World shouldn't get a warship because it would be better if we had German warships that we could hide in docks and fjords for 5 years instead.

No no no no no. We neeeed the Tirpitz because then we'll know it's there and we'll be scared. I still wish someone had a track of the Tirpitz when it was hacked and used as a plane on one of the IL2 df servers.

[Skoshi Tiger]

Yes, that would be best. The largest Navy in the World shouldn't get a warship because it would be better if we had German warships that we could hide in docks and fjords for 5 years instead.

Brilliant idea Osprey, because the only way I'll ever get a bomb on one of them is if their tied up to a dock! ;)

Cheers!

[Rattlehead]

You have no:

No Promotion System for Campaigns
No System for honering the Player with Medals for Efforts
No clear Killboard
No working Scripts in Single Mission Mode
No Script Documentation for the Users
No correct Manual for the Game
No auto read in for new custom Campaigns but hopeing that users do their own stuff


Okay: Main Bugs: No Game Content, No Athomsphere for the Virtual Pilot, No Campaign Management = NO GAMEPLAY!

Think it over!



I must admit, despite my earlier stance that user-generated content will make up for the rather lacking game content, I have to revise my stance somewhat.
The default campaigns would have benefitted greatly from medals, promotions, pilot rosters and other things. I felt the campaigns were definitely lacking in atmosphere and a feeling of involvement. They also seemed quite short.

I hope that in the future, the developers will make more campaigns available for this sim, ones which include many of the elements that now are absent.

While user content is always appreciated, many people are left in the dark about the basics of scripting and even the basics of the FMB.

There is lots of potentially great content by users going amiss because many of us are scrabbling around in the dark trying to figure out scripting or the FMB, and this is making things much harder than it should be.
As a result, user content regarding missions and campaigns is very slow to come to the surface, and that is hurting the long-term appeal of this sim.

Please take this as constructive criticism. We all want the game to do well, and everyone wants to enjoy the game, not only for a few days, but for years on end.
There is so much that is good about the sim, and it would be a pity if so much of the good stuff is wasted because people are bored of the content.

[DrSanchez]

swimming landcape textures in the cockpit view, clearly not anti-aliased, and the wings of aircraft in flyby view are quite plainly not anti-aliased at all.

swimming textures sounds like an anisotropic filtering problem rather than a anti-aliasing problem.

[Skoshi Tiger]

I must admit, despite my earlier stance that user-generated content will make up for the rather lacking game content, I have to revise my stance somewhat.
The default campaigns would have benefitted greatly from medals, promotions, pilot rosters and other things. I felt the campaigns were definitely lacking in atmosphere and a feeling of involvement. They also seemed quite short.

I hope that in the future, the developers will make more campaigns available for this sim, ones which include many of the elements that now are absent.

While user content is always appreciated, many people are left in the dark about the basics of scripting and even the basics of the FMB.

There is lots of potentially great content by users going amiss because many of us are scrabbling around in the dark trying to figure out scripting or the FMB, and this is making things much harder than it should be.
As a result, user content regarding missions and campaigns is very slow to come to the surface, and that is hurting the long-term appeal of this sim.

Please take this as constructive criticism. We all want the game to do well, and everyone wants to enjoy the game, not only for a few days, but for years on end.
There is so much that is good about the sim, and it would be a pity if so much of the good stuff is wasted because people are bored of the content.

To get more user created content we need more documentation of how to create a mission and create scripts. The learning curve is very steep and even though some community members have done some fantastic work explaining how they've created their scripts something official would be be very good for the sim

I guess one of the problems with having such a sophisticated mission creating and scripting system is that it's hard to work with. Maybe we need a 'Lite' mission scripter for mugs like me?


Cheers!

[Ploughman]

Thanks for the update, good to know a timescale for most issues. I've back burnered CloD for the most part but look forward to coming back to it when I've both more time and more incentive.

Seems 2-3 months, or possibly the US release date, and the lid'll really come off this thing with SDK being released for aircraft. I wonder what sort of marketplace it'll generate for CloD add-ons. It's certainly quite exciting. If the warship's German I'll puke.

[Stealth_Eagle]

May be a little smaler:
http://i58.photobucket.com/albums/g260/restranger/shot_20100617_164208.jpg?t=1282678676

I was right, a British destroyer for escorting convoys.

[Skoshi Tiger]

My vote is for the Tribal class destroyer. That would span the gap from pre-WWII up to the Korean War in Commonwealth service.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/dd/HMCS_Haida_Hamilton_Ontario_1.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribal_class_destroyer_(1936)

[ATAG_Dutch]

Yes, that would be best. The largest Navy in the World shouldn't get a warship because it would be better if we had German warships that we could hide in docks and fjords for 5 years instead.

Huh! I'm talking about something to attack with bombs mate, not something for all the Luftwhiners to attack.:rolleyes:

[skouras]

Good news, but please don't forget the Anti-aliasing issue ...

second to that:grin:

[rpgielow]

Realistic gun sounds please !!!

It's the japanese vervions of our MGs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFDVYv9pQPY&feature=fvwrel

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8eKc18qVLno&feature=fvwrel

[JG53Frankyboy]

I was right, a British destroyer for escorting convoys.

sure, we dont know if THIS ship is Luthier's mentioned.
But can you identify the type ? At least its no Hunt class Escort DD....

[Blackdog_kt]

Does anyone have a reference to how many dgrees/second the actual propellor pitch should change at? It would be sad if they just changed to an inaccurate rate just to meet popular demand.


Lots of credible references were being posted here when the thing got bugged.

The historical rate of pitch change is between 1 and 3 degrees per second, depending on the installation (a document i saw here explained that it worked faster on Fw-190s) and the load on the engine.

According to a link posted by another forum member (http://marseillegruppe.com/foro/viewtopic.php?p=2954&sid=3591268e7829c1e00ff328cb9d3b84f4) the 109 should be able to have about 1.5 degrees per second of pitch change while the pitch control is held.

One degree corresponds to 10 minutes on the little clock-like instrument, so for our 109 the clock hands should rotate 15 minutes for every second the player holds the control deflected. In other words, a full hour (6 degrees of pitch) on the clock in four seconds.

[Tvrdi]

Ok Luthier see you in a year....

[kendo65]

I wonder if the revamped sound will include new British ground controller voices? The current one winds me up something shocking! (Did they really sound like that?!)


Also notice the terrain background in the British ship pic has hedgerows and decent tree placement ;)

[JG52Uther]

Ok Luthier see you in a year....

Bit harsh Tvrdi,I would have said 10-11 months...

[JumpingHubert]

AA in 1920x1200? uselessness...
and 1680x1050? Yes, not everyone have this highres monitor..

[IvanK]

[QUOTE=Skoshi Tiger;293159]Does anyone have a reference to how many dgrees/second the actual propellor pitch should change at? It would be sad if they just changed to an inaccurate rate just to meet popular demand.

Yes it was stated with the references in previous posts on this subject. 1 deg per sec under load i.e. in flight. 1.5 degrees per second when not under load (i.e. ground running). The Devs have these values.

[Varrattu]

Eureka!

Would love to know which warship.
Scharnhorst/ Gneisenau?
Thanks for the heads up, I can stop moaning now. :)

It is the Titanic :grin:

Happy landings

Varrattu

[Vengeanze]

and 1680x1050? Yes, not everyone have this highres monitor..
The effect of turning AA on is dependant on res but also on the size of the monitor.
1920 on a 17 inch monitor = AA is practicaly useless
1920 on a 27 inch monitor = AA will help a bit

[Skoshi Tiger]

What a pathetic fiasco!.....still no proper AA!!!....not even a mention of it!...sound will prob never be fixed by the sound of it!..soz for pun but how the hell was it ever released with such crap sounds in the first place!....unbelievable!.....seriously this game is so unfinished it hardly got started!......it doesn't just need pointless MP fixes..its needs first and foremost a proper believable campaign engine for single players!..i dont play on-line so i dont give a hoot about on-line play!!..sod that..get the game sorted first!..i want proper sounds!...proper AA!.....i want smoother more consistent fps, better terrain graphics!..this game is for all intents and purposes at the moment nothing more than an unfinished useless demo!.....i guess we all wait again for another two weeks...then another 2 wks..then another 2 wks...then another 2 wks....then another 2 wks....and on and on and on!...what a joke!....

10 Points for the dummy spit, I hope it makes you feel a lot better.

Personally I can't remember playing a single campaign from any of the combat flight sims I've played thats been perfect. ALL have had issues, but all the tools have been provided for community generated campaigns. This is where the tallent and enthusiasm of our community members shines. How about showing us how a campaign should be made? I'll play it and provide constructive critisim if you want!

Sound will never be fixed? Didn't you read what Luthier wrote?

You want more detailed terain, anti-aliasing AND smoother more consistent frame rates? I think these things are diametrically opposed. I don't know what system your using to play the game with but even with the most powerful system available you are still going to have to make compromises. Although there is a lot of potential for optimising and increasing frame rates and performance, the devopers still have to work within the capiabilities of the technology. In a couple of years time though!

Waiting for changes can be frustrating at times but as shown with the original IL2 series it can well be worth the wait. From what I've seen of the sim I guess I'll be waiting around for years and even with what we've got so far I'll be enjoying it the whole time.

Cheers!

[ATAG_Dutch]

I wonder if the revamped sound will include new British ground controller voices? The current one winds me up something shocking! (Did they really sound like that?!)


Also notice the terrain background in the British ship pic has hedgerows and decent tree placement ;)

Naaah, they were all Kenneth Williams. 'Ooooh, Matron!':grin:

[ATAG_Dutch]

It is the Titanic :grin:

Happy landings

Varrattu

Eh?

[RocketDog]

Hmmmm... Not sure that better terrain textures would have any impact on frame rates, and a decent set of SP missions/campaign in a BoB sim doesn't sound like an unreasonable request. I wonder if they had anyone working on sounds during development at all?

[ATAG_Dutch]

Hmmmm... Not sure that better terrain textures would have any impact on frame rates, and a decent set of SP missions/campaign in a BoB sim doesn't sound like an unreasonable request. I wonder if they had anyone working on sounds during development at all?

Yes, I have it on good authority that his name was Kevin.

He drinks in my local pub.

He's a bit of a twot.

Sorry, been drinkin a bit.:)

[Skoshi Tiger]

[QUOTE=Skoshi Tiger;293159]Does anyone have a reference to how many dgrees/second the actual propellor pitch should change at? It would be sad if they just changed to an inaccurate rate just to meet popular demand.

Yes it was stated with the references in previous posts on this subject. 1 deg per sec under load i.e. in flight. 1.5 degrees per second when not under load (i.e. ground running). The Devs have these values.

It is going quite slow in the sim. Hope they fix this up for the 109 Jocks.

Cheers!

[RocketDog]

Re: Kevin, I think there are quite a few 1C employees who could usefully be offered the opportunity to seek employment more suited to their abilities. Perhaps in the house-cleaning or catering industries?

[41Sqn_Stormcrow]

Does anyone have a reference to how many dgrees/second the actual propellor pitch should change at? It would be sad if they just changed to an inaccurate rate just to meet popular demand.

Yes it was stated with the references in previous posts on this subject. 1 deg per sec under load i.e. in flight. 1.5 degrees per second when not under load (i.e. ground running). The Devs have these values.

I've read about the 1.5 deg / sec. Where does the 1 deg/sec come from? First time that I read this.

[Tiger27]

What a pathetic fiasco!.....still no proper AA!!!....not even a mention of it!...sound will prob never be fixed by the sound of it!..soz for pun but how the hell was it ever released with such crap sounds in the first place!....unbelievable!.....seriously this game is so unfinished it hardly got started!......it doesn't just need pointless MP fixes..its needs first and foremost a proper believable campaign engine for single players!..i dont play on-line so i dont give a hoot about on-line play!!..sod that..get the game sorted first!..i want proper sounds!...proper AA!.....i want smoother more consistent fps, better terrain graphics!..this game is for all intents and purposes at the moment nothing more than an unfinished useless demo!.....i guess we all wait again for another two weeks...then another 2 wks..then another 2 wks...then another 2 wks....then another 2 wks....and on and on and on!...what a joke!....

Spit the dummy or what, personally, I dont play offline much so Im happy that they are sorting out mp, I doubt you will ever get a great campaign from the devs, if Il2 is an example, but I bet there will be some damn good campaigns made by the community, the Il2 series has always focused on mp, more than single play.

As for it being an unfinished demo, you are probably right, but I have been having quite a good time online, unfortunately you dont give a hoot about on-line play, so you arent going to be trying that side of things.

[ATAG_Dutch]

Re: Kevin, I think there are quite a few 1C employees who could usefully be offered the opportunity to seek employment more suited to their abilities. Perhaps in the house-cleaning or catering industries?

No mate, sorry. Catering is a highly skilled job involving bread, butter and a filling.

Far beyond the capabilities of those you mention.:rolleyes:

[Wolf_Rider]

steady gents :-P

both "on-line" and "off-line" players should have equal standing, as well as graphics/ sound, MP, etc... sorry, but one isn't better than the other or more urgent


It seems all the "bugs" are being chipped away at, slowly but surely

[Skoshi Tiger]

Re: Kevin, I think there are quite a few 1C employees who could usefully be offered the opportunity to seek employment more suited to their abilities. Perhaps in the house-cleaning or catering industries?

No mate, sorry. Catering is a highly skilled job involving bread, butter and a filling.

Far beyond the capabilities of those you mention.:rolleyes:

When it comes down to it, it's very easy to be a critic. But let's face it, neither of you could do a better job. How about giving us a tangible demonstration your creative talents in this area?

I wait in anticipation.

Cheers!

[Redroach]

Re: Kevin, I think there are quite a few 1C employees who could usefully be offered the opportunity to seek employment more suited to their abilities. Perhaps in the house-cleaning or catering industries?

Judging from the 109 Prop pitch 'situation', he is not too far off. Maybe a bit harsh, but still, anybody with a "C++ for Dummies" book could have done it the way it was done.

I, personally, believe that most of the programming talent went off with Oleg.

[Luftrofl]

When it comes down to it, it's very easy to be a critic. But let's face it, neither of you could do a better job. How about giving us a tangible demonstration your creative talents in this area?

I wait in anticipation.

Cheers!

He's not the one selling a game barely finished enough to be considered beta condition as a finished product.:rolleyes:

[Skoshi Tiger]

He's not the one selling a game barely finished enough to be considered beta condition as a finished product.:rolleyes:

Never said they were. What they were doing is whats known as taking a cheap shot. They crossed the line from making vailid critisim of the sim to having a personal attack on the deveopment team.

So the original point remains. They should show us what they can do. Put up or shut up as the old saying goes.

From my point of view the sim as it stands is better and more imersive than any other I've bought, Haven't been able to go back to IL2 since Cods release.


Cheers!

[Romanator21]

I get the impression that people think it's "cool" to bag on the dev team when they have no idea what's going on.

"Hey look at me, I'm being a complete d*ckhead, hur hur. Luthier, go vacuum my carpet, you shouldn't make sims, hur hur. Now I have friends, duhr".

Mob mentality and all...

Anyway, thanks for the update Ilya. Don't get too discouraged, there are still somewhat intelligent people out there.

[Baron]

The really sad thing is, they actually think they have a point when taking cheap shots.

[Insuber]

I believe that the really good news is that the devs do have long term plans.

[robtek]

The really sad thing is, they actually think they have a point when taking cheap shots.

Ooohhh!!! That was a cheap shot :-D :-D :P

[tumu]

Thx Luthier.

[skarden]

So let me double check this just to be sure,they don't give much info for a little bit and some of you lot lose your mind whinging about the injustice of it all and when we do get some good info the same lot lose their mind whinging about the injustice of it all,bloody tools.

Massive cheers for the Update Luthier,it's all coming along very nicely thank you :)

[whatnot]

Thanks for the update! The 109 pitch fix along with more realistic AI & FM are on the top of my list. I don't see those mentioned in particular, but I trust it's part of the:

"Improvements to FM and DM and various cockpit systems, as usual - long list there."

[whatnot]

What a pathetic fiasco!.....still no proper AA!!!....not even a mention of it!...sound will prob never be fixed by the sound of it!..soz for pun but how the hell was it ever released with such crap sounds in the first place!....unbelievable!.....seriously this game is so unfinished it hardly got started!......it doesn't just need pointless MP fixes..its needs first and foremost a proper believable campaign engine for single players!..i dont play on-line so i dont give a hoot about on-line play!!..sod that..get the game sorted first!..i want proper sounds!...proper AA!.....i want smoother more consistent fps, better terrain graphics!..this game is for all intents and purposes at the moment nothing more than an unfinished useless demo!.....i guess we all wait again for another two weeks...then another 2 wks..then another 2 wks...then another 2 wks....then another 2 wks....and on and on and on!...what a joke!....

Here you go, it'll be allright.. after drying your eyes may I offer some reading too: Anger Management - Dealing With Disappointment (http://ezinearticles.com/?The-Path---Anger-Management---Dealing-With-Disappointment&id=2222074) by Chris J. Walker has helped many people in similar situations.


http://pioneerintl.co.in/images/f1.jpg

[41Sqn_Stormcrow]

And some of you still ask why Luthier and others of the dev team rarely come here and communicate with the community? After having to read some of the comments posted here that are well beyond the pale?

[Ibis]

Originally Posted by col123
What a pathetic fiasco!.....blah, blah, blah

--------------------------------------

I see col can count to 3---- surprising really.

cheers,
Ibis.

[Robin2k7]

What a pathetic fiasco!.....still no proper AA!!!....not even a mention of it!...sound will prob never be fixed by the sound of it!..soz for pun but how the hell was it ever released with such crap sounds in the first place!....unbelievable!.....seriously this game is so unfinished it hardly got started!......it doesn't just need pointless MP fixes..its needs first and foremost a proper believable campaign engine for single players!..i dont play on-line so i dont give a hoot about on-line play!!..sod that..get the game sorted first!..i want proper sounds!...proper AA!.....i want smoother more consistent fps, better terrain graphics!..this game is for all intents and purposes at the moment nothing more than an unfinished useless demo!.....i guess we all wait again for another two weeks...then another 2 wks..then another 2 wks...then another 2 wks....then another 2 wks....and on and on and on!...what a joke!....

i can not more than agree with you !! :evil:

[Insuber]

... Good things come to those who wait ...

[Strike]

too bad some people in here seem to have had a long run of not wanting to wait, repetadly causing outbreaks of rage.

Patience is a virtue.

2 weeks, be sure is the new "amen" :p

I'm happy doing other things in my life than F5 the forums, and while I'm doing these other things I like to think that whilst I can run around all day and do whatever I want to do, the game is being developed and improved constantly, even with the absense of myself at the forums :) Luthier and co. on the other hand, have to sacrifice what time they have to meet our demands, and THAT is the reason they cannot stalk the forums constantly.

Some of you guys need to take a walk :p

[seaeye]

I would prefer them to work on the 'sim' side of things and getting them right before thinking of doing anymore with the MP. It works well enough at the moment, better to get the sounds, AA, fullscreen, flight/damage models, performance, GUI... etc up to standard first and then tweak the MP.

Still, it's good something is being done and I'm sure eventually I will again enjoy the IL2 series as I have in the past..

[ATAG_Dutch]

When it comes down to it, it's very easy to be a critic. But let's face it, neither of you could do a better job. How about giving us a tangible demonstration your creative talents in this area?

I wait in anticipation.

Cheers!

Easy Tiger, a bit of levity doesn't do any harm.;)

[bongodriver]

you missed an apostrophe in it's

[Space Communist]

What a pathetic fiasco!.....still no proper AA!!!....not even a mention of it!...sound will prob never be fixed by the sound of it!..soz for pun but how the hell was it ever released with such crap sounds in the first place!....unbelievable!.....seriously this game is so unfinished it hardly got started!......it doesn't just need pointless MP fixes..its needs first and foremost a proper believable campaign engine for single players!..i dont play on-line so i dont give a hoot about on-line play!!..sod that..get the game sorted first!..i want proper sounds!...proper AA!.....i want smoother more consistent fps, better terrain graphics!..this game is for all intents and purposes at the moment nothing more than an unfinished useless demo!.....i guess we all wait again for another two weeks...then another 2 wks..then another 2 wks...then another 2 wks....then another 2 wks....and on and on and on!...what a joke!....

If you can't run the game at decent fps now then why on earth are you clamoring for AA? That would only make the situation worse for you. Also if you want better graphics and smoother gameplay you probably need to upgrade.

Despite the title this game is about 100 times more complex than the old IL series, so if you expect it to run the same as IL2:FB did on your system you can forget it.

[Space Communist]

Maybe you need to learn how to spell before you post!...at least i can spell simple words like ''terrain'' ''capabilities'' ''developers'' ''talent'' ''criticism''
and you have the cheek to say i had had a dummy spit!...maybe its you that's showing your mental age!...my 12 year old son can spell those words! :-P :cool: haha!

I am sure Skoshi can defend himself, but those are clearly typos. Why on Earth would anybody think it was spelled "capiabilities?" Particularly if he can correctly spell "enthusiasm."

If I put "teh" in a post would you assume that I didn't know how to spell "the?"

It's the internet not a dissertation.

[bongodriver]

WOW....col.....chill man!

[Kongo-Otto]

And some of you still ask why Luthier and others of the dev team rarely come here and communicate with the community? After having to read some of the comments posted here that are well beyond the pale?

Well maybe a good portion of that rarely showing up here has to do with "we work on the issues and we will fix it" and the other portion is something like "trapped in the ivory tower".

And for communicating with the community well they did communicate with the community during and before the development from CoD.
And the result was....Cod in its release state.
So much for "communication with the community"
Communication only makes sense when you're able to listen and draw the right conclusions and here we come back to "trapped in the ivory tower"

IMHO there will be Offline Campaigns from Third Party Groups aka the community, but for shure there will nothing come from 1c!

[nearmiss]

Civil and respectful discussions are welcome on this forums. Rants and continual barrage of whines is not acceptable content.:rolleyes:

This thread was started by Luthier in a sharing spirit. No one would dare to stand in his face and make some of the kinds of remarks I've read and deleted from this thread.

Click on the underlined text "WATCH ON YOUTUBE" in the video screen to view it, no embed from youtube allowed.

THe message is a good one for us all.




(http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezZ2ZRfSsLY)

[JumpingHubert]

The effect of turning AA on is dependant on res but also on the size of the monitor.
1920 on a 17 inch monitor = AA is practicaly useless
1920 on a 27 inch monitor = AA will help a bit
and third on the distance you are sitting in front of..i know i know. Please understand: not everyone have a 1920 on a 17inch monitor. Not difficult to understand...

[6BL Bird-Dog]

Well done on the issues that have been adressed but Fps and video problems should be regarded as a prority issue as the smooth runing of CLOD far outweighs any other issue at present .
Sounds ,FMs, DMs & user interfaces can all be bought up to scratch with modification updates at any time as long as the game runs smoothly.Even iL2 when it was first released ran smoother than the first release of CLOD on the specified minamal spec systems .Updates have made big improvements but surelyliquid video output is the escence of having a sound foundation for the game

[GOZR]

That it no more work on SLI crossfire optimation? as you said it was a priority .. keep your word !!!

[Bobb4]

Not sure if I read Luthier's explanation correctly but is he suggesting the ATI stripes and ground/water textures on the shores is an engine problem and not driver related?
Or is he only reffering to the ground/water textures?

@ Luthier - Thanks for the update.

@ mod please delete my thread asking for a update :grin:

[Skoshi Tiger]

That it no more work on SLI crossfire optimation? as you said it was a priority .. keep your word !!!

From the last beta post by Luthier

GRAPHICS
* Added ATI Crossfire support. NVidia SLI support will become available when a profile for the game is added in an upcoming official driver release;


Crossfire seems to be working from recent posts

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=23604

[Tiger27]

From the last beta post by Luthier


Crossfire seems to be working from recent posts

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=23604

There was no profile for Nvidia with the last driver, but I notice they can now add new profiles on the fly, so maybe one will be released soon, but that really is an issue with the graphics card companies, it's not Maddox Games, or 777's (I think ROF has had similar issues) fault that flight sims are niche games and therefore dont get a high priority.

[jamesdietz]

FPS-not fixed for two months? This is a serious setback for those of us who hoped this would be among the first things solved...sigh...
I'll bet this will delay U.S. release til about then...

[Trooper117]

I can't play the game for more than 10 mins at a time before it locks up.. this has happened since the last 'hotfix'.. oh well..

[Rattlehead]

FPS-not fixed for two months? This is a serious setback for those of us who hoped this would be among the first things solved...sigh...
I'll bet this will delay U.S. release til about then...

I'm not sure we can expect too much more from the engine, performance-wise. Luthier pretty much hinted at that in the opening post.
The performance has come a long way from the initial launch in the west, believe it or not.
Not to suggest simply throwing money at a problem (always easy to do if you have it) but in this case we're getting close to the time when an upgrade is the only thing that will make the game run better.

Your machine is good, but that video card of yours is getting on now. If you can sort yourself out with a decent card, the game should by rights run very well for you.

[Rage]

By sounds you mean...real MERLIN and BMW sound implemented into the game..
I understand that will take some time(a couple of months).
But its worth it...its what this game needs.
Thank you in advance.

By the way...i cant get rid of the feeling that people are running away from this game faster than they run away from their mother in law...NOT GOOD!!

[Viper2000]

By sounds you mean...real MERLIN and BMW sound implemented into the game.. No need for BMW sounds until we get to 1941 and the Fw190 appears...

I understand that will take some time(a couple of months).
But its worth it...its what this game needs.
Thank you in advance.

By the way...i cant get rid of the feeling that people are running away from this game faster than they run away from their mother in law...NOT GOOD!! Time is precious.

Playing the game and complaining about its flaws won't make the next patch come any faster, so I for one am mostly doing other things, popping back in to check the forum from time to time.

When the next patch comes, I'll probably fly a bit again and see whether the sim is yet worth investing time in. If not then I'll go back to mostly doing other stuff until it is.

I suspect that a lot of people are just quietly doing much the same thing. But we don't write threads about it, whereas the people who are angry tend to be quite vocal in writing "screw you guys, I'm going home!" threads. So there's perhaps a false impression that loads of people have quit, when the reality is probably that a few people want attention for their anger, and the majority are just doing other things whilst they wait for the sim to be finished.

Personally, I think it might have been more honest if the sim had been released as a cheap paid beta, with a cheap upgrade to the full version for those people who bought the beta. That way we would probably have avoided some of the angst, and a lot of the bad reviews.

In any case, I suspect that there are a lot of people out there who will suddenly return once the patches take us to "finished product" levels of quality.

[Gollum]

If you can't run the game at decent fps now then why on earth are you clamoring for AA? That would only make the situation worse for you. Also if you want better graphics and smoother gameplay you probably need to upgrade.

Despite the title this game is about 100 times more complex than the old IL series, so if you expect it to run the same as IL2:FB did on your system you can forget it.

I have top of the line computer. Before the last patch my AA worked and FPS high in the rediculous range. Now I have no AA and a quarter of the FPS. They broke something and I haven't been able to play since so it's not just him.

-Gollum

[Gollum]

Well done on the issues that have been adressed but Fps and video problems should be regarded as a prority issue as the smooth runing of CLOD far outweighs any other issue at present .
Sounds ,FMs, DMs & user interfaces can all be bought up to scratch with modification updates at any time as long as the game runs smoothly.Even iL2 when it was first released ran smoother than the first release of CLOD on the specified minamal spec systems .Updates have made big improvements but surelyliquid video output is the escence of having a sound foundation for the game

Amen... Add stutters that didn't exist before latest patch to the list too.

[Gollum]

I'm not sure we can expect too much more from the engine, performance-wise. Luthier pretty much hinted at that in the opening post.
The performance has come a long way from the initial launch in the west, believe it or not.
Not to suggest simply throwing money at a problem (always easy to do if you have it) but in this case we're getting close to the time when an upgrade is the only thing that will make the game run better.

Your machine is good, but that video card of yours is getting on now. If you can sort yourself out with a decent card, the game should by rights run very well for you.

I hope your wrong because my system should be screaming and I have worst FPS Ive ever had since day one. I had no problems until last patch.

[335th_GRSwaty]

Thank you!

Keep up the good work!

[sgt fury]

i dont understand why Combat flight simulator 2 which is over 10 years old allows real weather as an option extra cloud sets and has over the years had uploaded by the fans the real sounds of almost all the aircraft present in WW2,they simply went out with the recording equipment to the airshows and recorded them start up, etc,same goes for gun sound whats the big deal? so why cant the developers here do the same!!??:confused:

[JG14_Jagr]

i dont understand why Combat flight simulator 2 which is over 10 years old allows real weather as an option extra cloud sets and has over the years had uploaded by the fans the real sounds of almost all the aircraft present in WW2,they simply went out with the recording equipment to the airshows and recorded them start up, etc,same goes for gun sound whats the big deal? so why cant the developers here do the same!!??:confused:

Ironically, they use EXTERIOR sounds for their aircraft.. it sounds NOTHING like that when you are seated inside a plane..

[jimbop]

Personally, I think it might have been more honest if the sim had been released as a cheap paid beta, with a cheap upgrade to the full version for those people who bought the beta. That way we would probably have avoided some of the angst, and a lot of the bad reviews.

In any case, I suspect that there are a lot of people out there who will suddenly return once the patches take us to "finished product" levels of quality.

+1 on the first paragraph and I hope you're right on the second.

[AARPRazorbacks]

Thanks for the up date on the next patch.

There are problem's with CLoD as we know.

I also know that the CLoD team are using new engines to make this sim that have never been used before.

And there working to make things work in uncharted waters.

I'm glad thy released this sim when thy did and not months or years form now.

I'm having a blast with this sim.

[nearmiss]

i dont understand why Combat flight simulator 2 which is over 10 years old allows real weather as an option extra cloud sets and has over the years had uploaded by the fans the real sounds of almost all the aircraft present in WW2,they simply went out with the recording equipment to the airshows and recorded them start up, etc,same goes for gun sound whats the big deal? so why cant the developers here do the same!!??:confused:

The real weather as you call it, has some issues in CFS2. As I recall it ate up the FPS and was pretty well worthless.

Yes, cloud sets but the landscape is basically archaic and you can't do a darn thing but color it.

The sounds are excellent, gotta admit. Yet, remember the sounds weren't there for several years after the initial release.

All the aircraft, is a plus... You can't do anything with the AI performance it's locked into the code.

There is no monitoring of Online gaming. The Zone when it was up was a nightmare of cheats.

The one absolute best thing about CFS2. THe misson builder was the best available for any ww2 air combat sim.

The BOB COD FMB should best it, because of programmable scripting.

We should all wait and see on things, before we conclude too much about what the BOB COD isn't or won't be.

The facts are - sounds are already availabe witnin the IL2 mods, which are equal or superior to the CFS2 sounds.

Get yourself a copy of IL2 1946 and then download one of mod packs, with sounds. You'll be astonished what has already been done.

The BOB COD developers could just use those sounds, and make life easy. Then again, taking the easy route has never been what this sim is about is it?

There are many options and an SDK is in the works for BOB COD. I suspect the developer will allow the hooks within SDK for using third party sounds.

[Untamo]

Waiting the patch in anticipation. Too bad the patch will come just as I will go for a trip for a week :O

[Rage]

Ironically, they use EXTERIOR sounds for their aircraft.. it sounds NOTHING like that when you are seated inside a plane..

I get that...no biggie..but if i push F5 or whatever button you have to push to get the flyby i really want to hear a MERLIN roar....or the high pitched sound of a ME109....

It should be implemented into game,and i think they will.

[He111]

PLEASE, fix the AI for the Defiant, i just watched a excellent video (Oleg?) showing a squadron of defiants being attacked by 110s .. for some reason the defiant AI did very little except climb & dive ???? say what? One of the defiants weak spots was its belly, it wasn't going to show it to the enemy!

AI tactics should be to bank left OR right, to give gunner full view of rear attacking enemy, especially from 6 O'clock low.

Please add this.

Thanks

He111.

[oho]

When can we have decent anti-alliassing?

[JZG_Con]

Thanks for the update...though you prob should look here...
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=23405

And the MP sound bug needs a very quick hotfix because its killing MP right now.

No word on FSAA?

i agree went online tonight ..no sound again ..so i disconnected and went played il-2 UP30..BATTLE OF BRITAIN SERVER ...40+ online.....why stay when its broke ...

[PLebre]

Please Fix the plane options, and loadouts.

[roadczar]

So much for...:rolleyes:
Hi everyone,
.
.
.
So stay tuned for more patch info next week. I'll try to do more regular weekly Friday updates from now on.

[Blackdog_kt]

i dont understand why Combat flight simulator 2 which is over 10 years old allows real weather as an option extra cloud sets and has over the years had uploaded by the fans the real sounds of almost all the aircraft present in WW2,they simply went out with the recording equipment to the airshows and recorded them start up, etc,same goes for gun sound whats the big deal? so why cant the developers here do the same!!??:confused:

Copyrights and royalty fees.

It's one thing for me to record sounds from an airshow and upload a mod because nobody can hold me responsible thanks to internet anonymity, but it's a completely different thing for a software publishing company to do the same and have lawyers knocking on the door.

Selling memorabilia and sound recordings is usually what pays for the expenses of keeping restored warbirds in an airworthy state, so i doubt the associations maintaining them would take kindly to having their aircraft sounds used without permission. Sure, these are non-profit groups of volunteers but that doesn't mean they don't need money, it's very expensive to keep a 70 year old engine running when there's no supply of spare parts.

[nearmiss]

I don't know how anyone would know if they were hearing their specific aircraft or not.

I mean an aircraft engine sounds like what it sounds like.

So, I would'nt think air show participants would give a flip.

I know the guys that worked on BOB II WOV actually went out to airports and recorded aircraft sounds under all kinds of conditions. The aircraft owners were very helpful. The owners were very helpful, afterall they encourage all simmers for the most part. We go to airshows and air museums and are very interested in the aircraft.

I think you might get in more trouble plagerizing sounds on the internet than actual aircraft. Then again... I think with all the sound editing tools available.... I don't see how anyone could point a finger and identify their specific recorded sounds.

[Seeker]

It would make sense to me if 1C avoided unsourced sounds such as Jaffa's, but found away to allow an individual user to integrate them into his copy of the game.

Flexibility would seem to be the way forward.

[zakkandrachoff]

Hi everyone,

We've been hard at work on a whole bunch of stuff here. Quicker fixes are now a thing of the past; we're working on larger more complex stuff and so patches, updates and improvements will be coming at a slower pace.

Our next BETA patch is tentatively scheduled for two weeks from now for Friday the 17th, and the release version of it is scheduled for the Friday after that, June 24th.

The next patch will contain:

* Improved streamlined multiplayer GUI
* Other multiplayer improvements - more stability, all plane settings like convergence and paintscheme working at all times, less rare bugs, etc.
* Various graphical improvements. The distant clouds are finally back - i.e. the flat representations of clouds you saw on beta screenshots with pretty sunlit borders. Finally fixed the landscape stripes bug, etc.
* Improvements to FM and DM and various cockpit systems, as usual - long list there.
* AI improvements, including at least the majority, if not all, of the order system working.
* A new warship!

Other things that are in the pipeline:

* Sound. This is probably the biggest issue we're facing. We're taking a very drastic approach to the issue and pretty much redoing our sound from scratch. This means you won't see the new sound for a few more months.
* FPS. The final remaining performance issues, which fortunately are comparatively minor, lie very deep in the engine, and require us to do a significant amount of work. Probably at least 2 months of it.
* Online stability, more anti-cheating controls, and server and aircraft SDK - also a few months out. Dedicated Server SDK and documentation is probably going to be done the quickest.

NOTE: this isn't an exhaustive list, but rather the main bullet points.

So stay tuned for more patch info next week. I'll try to do more regular weekly Friday updates from now on.

and... E-4 ???

[Sven]

Must... Have .... E4 . .. Sooon!

:grin:

and E1, E7, and 110 with actual MG FF/M

[nearmiss]

It would make sense to me if 1C avoided unsourced sounds such as Jaffa's, but found away to allow an individual user to integrate them into his copy of the game.

Flexibility would seem to be the way forward.

1+

[Phazon]

I haven't actually installed Cliffs of Dover on my new PC because of the sad state it is in at the moment. Why bang my head against the brickwall with that when I could be playing other games such as Rise of Flight or DCS A-10C, both of which just recieved significant updates further polishing what were already fine games to begin with.

That said I am looking forward to this next patch. As long as it addresses most of the critical bugs currently plaguing the game (no sound bug and graphical artifacts) I'll be happy to wait for future patches to finally give us a completed game and will reinstall it.

[klem]

Civil and respectful discussions are welcome on this forums. Rants and continual barrage of whines is not acceptable content.:rolleyes:

This thread was started by Luthier in a sharing spirit. No one would dare to stand in his face and make some of the kinds of remarks I've read and deleted from this thread.
...............

Good call.

This has degenerated into a wishing whining slanging match. There's no way Luthier is going to read through this heap to find valid questions on his original post. What a wasted opportunity.

[jg27_mc]

I haven't actually installed Cliffs of Dover on my new PC because of the sad state it is in at the moment. Why bang my head against the brickwall with that when I could be playing other games such as Rise of Flight or DCS A-10C, both of which just recieved significant updates further polishing what were already fine games to begin with.

That said I am looking forward to this next patch. As long as it addresses most of the critical bugs currently plaguing the game (no sound bug and graphical artifacts) I'll be happy to wait for future patches to finally give us a completed game and will reinstall it.

Wise man... My only problem is that I'm addicted to WW II era. And 1946 doesn't suit my needs anymore (after experiencing CloD, I can´t go back to cartoon cockpits and arcadish CEM).

[JG14_Jagr]

I haven't actually installed Cliffs of Dover on my new PC because of the sad state it is in at the moment. Why bang my head against the brickwall with that when I could be playing other games such as Rise of Flight or DCS A-10C, both of which just recieved significant updates further polishing what were already fine games to begin with.

That said I am looking forward to this next patch. As long as it addresses most of the critical bugs currently plaguing the game (no sound bug and graphical artifacts) I'll be happy to wait for future patches to finally give us a completed game and will reinstall it.

It should run VERY well on your setup right now..

[jg27_mc]

It should run VERY well on your setup right now..

Yep, Phazon has a great system indeed... It really should!!!

@Phazon - You will notice some good improvement since the release, although not enough if you ask me...

[LoBiSoMeM]

Wise man... My only problem is that I'm addicted to WW II era. And 1946 doesn't suit my needs anymore (after experiencing CloD, I can´t go back to cartoon cockpits and arcadish CEM).

And sniper AI bombers gunners, poor FM, obsolete DM, invisible forests...

IL-2 1946 is really near to be deleted of my HD soon...

[pupo162]

And sniper AI bombers gunners, poor FM, obsolete DM, invisible forests...

IL-2 1946 is really near to be deleted of my HD soon...

you would be disapointed if you saw how similar fms in cod are with 1946..... only a few refined features thats all.

[JG52Krupi]

you would be disapointed if you saw how similar fms in cod are with 1946..... only a few refined features thats all.

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-4wjBdOOGaHE/TdjwXXiNrXI/AAAAAAAABSU/sdVbUIIdoYw/s1600/orly_155.jpg

damn trolls, the fms are a bit messed up at the moment. I havent played 1946 for a while but last time i checked I could turn in a 109 E.

[pupo162]

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-4wjBdOOGaHE/TdjwXXiNrXI/AAAAAAAABSU/sdVbUIIdoYw/s1600/orly_155.jpg

damn trolls, the fms are a bit messed up at the moment. I havent played 1946 for a while but last time i checked I could turn in a 109 E.

have you seen them?

[LoBiSoMeM]

you would be disapointed if you saw how similar fms in cod are with 1946..... only a few refined features thats all.

These "few refined features" makes a WORLD of difference... Read:

"ILYA: Simple. The formulas process more variables and are therefore more precise. Il-2 was pretty darn close to the real thing, so the flight model in Cliffs of Dover doesn’t feel drastically new. You will see the most differences at low speeds and in adverse conditions such as stalls and spins. Basically, in Il-2 we calculated simpler physics at fewer points around the aircraft. In Cliffs of Dover, we look at more parameters in more places. In reality this means a codebase that’s many times larger. Our engine model alone is over 20 times the size of that of Il-2."

"Flight Model" isn't just a few variables as "turn rate" or "max speed". If you fly in IL-2: Cliffs of Dover after years in old IL-2 series, you can fell the new engine work providing a much better flying experience.

[pupo162]

These "few refined features" makes a WORLD of difference...

they do :)

[Blackdog_kt]

Haven't touched IL2:1946 since installing CoD, despite the initial optimization troubles. Now that it actually runs well on my 2 year old PC with mostly medium settings (which look better than IL2's high settings), there's definitely no way of going back.

Sure, i miss my FW190A sometimes, but the CEM alone in the new sim makes IL2 feel like a toy to me now :-P

[JG52Krupi]

Haven't touched IL2:1946 since installing CoD, despite the initial optimization troubles. Now that it actually runs well on my 2 year old PC with mostly medium settings (which look better than IL2's high settings), there's definitely no way of going back.

Sure, i miss my FW190A sometimes, but the CEM alone in the new sim makes IL2 feel like a toy to me now :-P

+1

From what I have seen CoD with poor ground textures looks terrible compared to 1946 but from medium to high settings you just cannot compare them, CoD looks fantastic.

[JG27CaptStubing]

Looks are subjective period. I don't think CODs terrain looks all that much better. Sure some higher res textures here and there at a cost of FPS I might add. Flickering Shadows and the same clouds as IL2. Yeah it's that much better?

For those of you not able to fly anything but COD because of its CEM and Graphics... IL2 with the mods is years beyond COD in terms of Content and Game Play at the moment. COD has a long ways to go before it comes even close to what we have now.

COD is not even a complete game and I do wish the developers luck and fortune so the developement can continue. At this point we are all Beta testers at best.

[ATAG_Doc]

I don't think it looks too bad I can deal with it. I bet these are not final at all.

[JG27CaptStubing]

I agree... I was just saying that it wasn't all that others make it out to be... It's really not that much different than IL2 with exception of a few high res textures. I'm not completely floored like others.

[LoBiSoMeM]

I agree... I was just saying that it wasn't all that others make it out to be... It's really not that much different than IL2 with exception of a few high res textures. I'm not completely floored like others.

More nonsense, sorry.

In CloD we have much better trees. We don't have "invisible trees".

We have more real railroads and roads. We have CURVES!

We have much better terrain shading.

We have much better planes and cockpits, and pilots, gunners, etc.

We have amazing and detailed ground units, with decent physics.

And MUCH more, effects, etc... A long list!

"Not that much different than IL2 with exception of a few high res textures" is a joke... And a bad one!

But I can understand... People think in "terrain" as just the ground itself, with a big texture on it. Well, all look the same in any modern flight sim: texture work. What makes ALL THE DIFFERENCE is the shading and things above ground... And I don't see anything near CloD quality today!

[JG27CaptStubing]

More nonsense, sorry.

In CloD we have much better trees. We don't have "invisible trees".!

Are you comparing the texture trees the ones that cover large areas against the individual trees we have in COD? Sorry, apples and oranges. Remember at the time IL2 was released we had Pentium IIIs and 4 along with ATI 9800s. Sure the invisible trees is a pain but from Alt they look fine and in fact do a much better job than the handful of trees we have now that Kill FPS dramatically. Go back and read the patch notes. Trees = FPS Killer. I have several times the horse power now and the new trees don't really look at that much better and they Flicker to boot. Talk about nonesense.

We have more real railroads and roads. We have CURVES! Woot... Not that much of a Sim Killer IMO

We have much better terrain shading.!

Again not that much of a difference and at the cost of Performance. COD is a PIG right now.

We have much better planes and cockpits, and pilots, gunners, etc.

Better planes... You mean the handful that are flyable? Sure the Models are nicer but not that much different than some of the latest fromt the Mod groups. The people are much better looking but again at what cost to performance?

We have amazing and detailed ground units, with decent physics.

Great for a shooter and Physics... Any CPU cycle spent on animating a Wheel over terrain is a waste of time. The game is just now becoming playable even on VERY high end rigs.

And MUCH more, effects, etc... A long list!.

Like what specifically? The special effects are subtle at best. Heck the dang sound doesn't even work properly. Crappy IL2 sounds to boot.

"Not that much different than IL2 with exception of a few high res textures" is a joke... And a bad one!

You're right it is a joke at this stage of the game. I wouldn't even consider it to be a fully funtional a game yet. It's beta with many many things missing. QMB? There is more funtionality in IL2 QMB when it was released in 2001 than COD has here in 2011.

Take a look at DCS A10c. It's a DX9c game that is doing WAY more than IL2 COD which is a DX10 game and runs much nicer and it even has Cockpit shadows and HDR to boot. As I said before if you can have all that eye candy and it performs you have my attention. Right now COD is on my hard drive ready for the next few patches before I will look at it again. It's missing way too much content and it has a long way to go before I would consider it to be Viable. It's and early Beta. Guy salavating over the graphics need to go back and look at SAS and UP3.0 RC before they throw the baby out with the bath water. COD is not all that and a hand bag.

[louisv]

you know you can deconstruct any argument that way, it doesn't matter if its true or not...

[skouras]

don't forget that this sim isnt ready yet as Luthier states
many new features isn't ready yet
at the end we will have the best WWII sim ever
-S-

[ATAG_Doc]

Snip

You're right it is a joke at this stage of the game. I wouldn't even consider it to be a fully funtional a game yet. It's beta with many many things missing.

God it's killing me...Oh OK what did you expect?

Everyone sounds like a used car salesmen. This doesn't have this and its beta and it sucks however I have this 1990 toyota that has this ashtray. Find a car today that includes an ashtray. YOU CAN'T FIND IT! This is why you need this and you look so good in it.

[JG27CaptStubing]

God it's killing me...Oh OK what did you expect?

Everyone sounds like a used car salesmen. This doesn't have this and its beta and it sucks however I have this 1990 toyota that has this ashtray. Find a car today that includes an ashtray. YOU CAN'T FIND IT! This is why you need this and you look so good in it.

Hmmm you should catch up with the conversation... We were talking about comparing Graphics of COD and IL2. I simply stated the difference between the two games as it stands now doesn't warrent some of the praise I've seen on these boards. It runs like poop at the moment and I certainly hope they continue to improve things hence why I bought it.

[VO101_Tom]

DCS A-10 great game, bacause of avionics, and cocpit interior... but the landscape... I hate the satelite images. Looks good from 10k, but ugly as sh*t in low flight :cool:

[Blackdog_kt]

For me it's not about the graphics so much. The aircraft are better looking than IL2, the terrain depends on time of day but i don't mind it that much because it does have multiple times the objects IL2 had. I run mostly medium settings on two year old hardware and it plays fine in any case.

What does it for me is operating the aircraft.
Flying IL2 after flying CoD is like having a co-pilot in the 109 squeezed behind the cockpit, making sure i don't have to do a bunch of stuff that needed to be done, or at the very least hold my hand through it and mitigate any possible negative consequences from my mishandling. And after sampling what little CoD currently has to offer, that is a giant step back for me.

I want the aircraft modeling to reflect some of the individual quirks and nuances of each type, compared to that IL2 currently feels like some accurate numbers (FM) strapped onto a 3d model and not a complete piece of wartime machinery.

There's no feel for what lurks under the hood and how it might come back to bite me in the behind if i'm not careful with it, the workload is highly diminished to the benefit of situational awareness and improved ability to focus on maneuvering and the pretty artificial CEM limitations combined with the small maps make it possible to run around at top performance all day long (reduced fuel and almost constant WEP use).

This doesn't just completely skew tactical considerations and limitations further away from reality, it also influences immersion because there's no feel of having a complex machine around you.

Don't get me wrong, i loved IL2 and have every single title since 2001, but after giving CoD a try it doesn't do much for me anymore.

For me it's the CEM, the detailed autopilots and bombsights, the ability and requirement to properly balance my fuel load in a twin engined aircraft and so on. I wanted IL2 with a bit of FSX thrown in and i got it, so i'm perfectly happy. In other words, it's a matter of taste and priorities.

[LoBiSoMeM]

Are you comparing the texture trees the ones that cover large areas against the individual trees we have in COD? Sorry, apples and oranges. Remember at the time IL2 was released we had Pentium IIIs and 4 along with ATI 9800s. Sure the invisible trees is a pain but from Alt they look fine and in fact do a much better job than the handful of trees we have now that Kill FPS dramatically. Go back and read the patch notes. Trees = FPS Killer. I have several times the horse power now and the new trees don't really look at that much better and they Flicker to boot. Talk about nonesense.

Woot... Not that much of a Sim Killer IMO



Again not that much of a difference and at the cost of Performance. COD is a PIG right now.



Better planes... You mean the handful that are flyable? Sure the Models are nicer but not that much different than some of the latest fromt the Mod groups. The people are much better looking but again at what cost to performance?



Great for a shooter and Physics... Any CPU cycle spent on animating a Wheel over terrain is a waste of time. The game is just now becoming playable even on VERY high end rigs.



Like what specifically? The special effects are subtle at best. Heck the dang sound doesn't even work properly. Crappy IL2 sounds to boot.



You're right it is a joke at this stage of the game. I wouldn't even consider it to be a fully funtional a game yet. It's beta with many many things missing. QMB? There is more funtionality in IL2 QMB when it was released in 2001 than COD has here in 2011.

Take a look at DCS A10c. It's a DX9c game that is doing WAY more than IL2 COD which is a DX10 game and runs much nicer and it even has Cockpit shadows and HDR to boot. As I said before if you can have all that eye candy and it performs you have my attention. Right now COD is on my hard drive ready for the next few patches before I will look at it again. It's missing way too much content and it has a long way to go before I would consider it to be Viable. It's and early Beta. Guy salavating over the graphics need to go back and look at SAS and UP3.0 RC before they throw the baby out with the bath water. COD is not all that and a hand bag.

If you can't fly with great performance in your rig, maybe you must donate it to someone who can use a computer, sorry to say.

But I understand you: you are a fanboy of UP. I like the modpack, but I'm not blind and don't tell lies.

The funny part is you talking that IL-2 with mods looks good as CloD and when exposed to the obvious flaws in old IL-2 1946 engine you start with "apples and oranges"... Go do something usefull, please.

By the way, in my rig trees aren't "FPS killers" at all: I fly with forest = medium and all runs OK.

Tired of all this crap. People don't fly CloD and jump here to talk a lot of Bull#@$@.

[LoBiSoMeM]

Like what specifically? The special effects are subtle at best.\

The proof that this guy NEVER explore CloD and jump here to talk crap!

"Subtle"? Geta life, please! Watch the explosions in CloD, hits on units, smoke effects, physics in vehicles exploding...

"Subtle"... Go fly UP3.0RC, please, untill 2020...

[VO101_Tom]

...

The game is already released in USA? I ask it, because what you write, it experience (you were flying with cod), or you looked at videos on the youtube, or only you saw a couple of screenshots on google?

For who there is anything experience with the game, and understands it what happens why in the cockpit, it does not say one like that, that the il-2 better. Absurdity, if you look at the CEM only, nothing else, there are light-years between the two games then. In the il-2, one thing better: 300 flyable planes. That's it. (yey yes, cod has many bugs now, but its temporary)

[Frequent_Flyer]

For me it's not about the graphics so much. The aircraft are better looking than IL2, the terrain depends on time of day but i don't mind it that much because it does have multiple times the objects IL2 had. I run mostly medium settings on two year old hardware and it plays fine in any case.

What does it for me is operating the aircraft.
Flying IL2 after flying CoD is like having a co-pilot in the 109 squeezed behind the cockpit, making sure i don't have to do a bunch of stuff that needed to be done, or at the very least hold my hand through it and mitigate any possible negative consequences from my mishandling. And after sampling what little CoD currently has to offer, that is a giant step back for me.

I want the aircraft modeling to reflect some of the individual quirks and nuances of each type, compared to that IL2 currently feels like some accurate numbers (FM) strapped onto a 3d model and not a complete piece of wartime machinery.

There's no feel for what lurks under the hood and how it might come back to bite me in the behind if i'm not careful with it, the workload is highly diminished to the benefit of situational awareness and improved ability to focus on maneuvering and the pretty artificial CEM limitations combined with the small maps make it possible to run around at top performance all day long (reduced fuel and almost constant WEP use).

This doesn't just completely skew tactical considerations and limitations further away from reality, it also influences immersion because there's no feel of having a complex machine around you.

Don't get me wrong, i loved IL2 and have every single title since 2001, but after giving CoD a try it doesn't do much for me anymore.

For me it's the CEM, the detailed autopilots and bombsights, the ability and requirement to properly balance my fuel load in a twin engined aircraft and so on. I wanted IL2 with a bit of FSX thrown in and i got it, so i'm perfectly happy. In other words, it's a matter of taste and priorities.

I completely agree, the simulation of flying a WW II combat aircraft is much more historically accurate experience in COD. The complex damage modelling is also light years ahead of IL-2 1946, and is as important to me as the CEM.

It is a refresing change not to have the rear gunner of a EA put a round into raditor while his aircraft alternates between cart wheels and barrel rolls, and never losing any speed in the process. The maps in IL-2 look like your flying over various colors of felt, no comparision to COD.

[CWMV]

Comparing stock IL2 '46 to CoD is just a little bit silly, why not compare it to something like UP3 or HSFX?
Maps-UP/HSFX win. The maps are huge, highly detailed, and don't look like the countryside has been irradiated. Not to mention that at this point there are maps for just about everywhere you would want to go.
Aircraft-Easy win for UP3/HSFX. There are sooooooo many aircraft of high quality that one can add it boggles the mind, and with the 3d done by the likes of japancat the external models rival CoD, at least in my eyes.
Effects-I haven't seen much to impress me over the work of the Cinema effects pack or HG&P's effects packages.
DM-Easily CoD. Still kinda cartoony in '46.
FM-Such an easy win for UP3/HSFX. In these you can actually fly the aircraft against real world war time evaluations and they are dang close, at least with the 109's. I'm sure there are some that are off but when your talking about hundreds and hundreds of aircraft Christ, there will be exceptions.

And in the end it comes down to one thing for me-CoD just feels like a shell of a game. Its got nothing more than great 3d models. Its like the great looking blonde with assets in all the right places, but dumb as a box of rocks. Shell be fun for a few days, but after that, eh, whats the point?

needless to say Ill be sticking with UP3.
Besides who wants to play the same 6 month period of the war over, and over, and over again?

[LoBiSoMeM]

Comparing stock IL2 '46 to CoD is just a little bit silly, why not compare it to something like UP3 or HSFX?
Maps-UP/HSFX win. The maps are huge, highly detailed, and don't look like the countryside has been irradiated. Not to mention that at this point there are maps for just about everywhere you would want to go.
Aircraft-Easy win for UP3/HSFX. There are sooooooo many aircraft of high quality that one can add it boggles the mind, and with the 3d done by the likes of japancat the external models rival CoD, at least in my eyes.
Effects-I haven't seen much to impress me over the work of the Cinema effects pack or HG&P's effects packages.
DM-Easily CoD. Still kinda cartoony in '46.
FM-Such an easy win for UP3/HSFX. In these you can actually fly the aircraft against real world war time evaluations and they are dang close, at least with the 109's. I'm sure there are some that are off but when your talking about hundreds and hundreds of aircraft Christ, there will be exceptions.

And in the end it comes down to one thing for me-CoD just feels like a shell of a game. Its got nothing more than great 3d models. Its like the great looking blonde with assets in all the right places, but dumb as a box of rocks. Shell be fun for a few days, but after that, eh, whats the point?

needless to say Ill be sticking with UP3.
Besides who wants to play the same 6 month period of the war over, and over, and over again?

Another sick one.

People like so much their 109s uber in some mod that became blind.

Too much stupidity for me to handle.

[Cdr84]

Must be a lot of Silent Hunter 5 fans here.

I for one am tired of waiting years for a sim to come out, buying it, and then waiting months, years, or never for it to work properly.

This is what is killing sims.

Silent Hunter 5 torpedoed WWII sub sims for the foreseeable future. CloD most likely has done the same for WWII flight sims.

Time will tell.

Cdr

[MadBlaster]

What does it for me is operating the aircraft.
Flying IL2 after flying CoD is like having a co-pilot in the 109 squeezed behind the cockpit, making sure i don't have to do a bunch of stuff that needed to be done, or at the very least hold my hand through it and mitigate any possible negative consequences from my mishandling. And after sampling what little CoD currently has to offer, that is a giant step back for me.

I want the aircraft modeling to reflect some of the individual quirks and nuances of each type, compared to that IL2 currently feels like some accurate numbers (FM) strapped onto a 3d model and not a complete piece of wartime machinery.

There's no feel for what lurks under the hood and how it might come back to bite me in the behind if i'm not careful with it, the workload is highly diminished to the benefit of situational awareness and improved ability to focus on maneuvering and the pretty artificial CEM limitations combined with the small maps make it possible to run around at top performance all day long (reduced fuel and almost constant WEP use).

This doesn't just completely skew tactical considerations and limitations further away from reality, it also influences immersion because there's no feel of having a complex machine around you.

Don't get me wrong, i loved IL2 and have every single title since 2001, but after giving CoD a try it doesn't do much for me anymore.

For me it's the CEM, the detailed autopilots and bombsights, the ability and requirement to properly balance my fuel load in a twin engined aircraft and so on. I wanted IL2 with a bit of FSX thrown in and i got it, so i'm perfectly happy. In other words, it's a matter of taste and priorities.

I have to chuckle at this because I know you have made the CEM realism point many times as the basis for your enjoyment of CLoD and I think to try and win people over?:-P Testing the mags, pumping the fuel pump...for me it's a novelty. Something I can easily macro control away. Then the CLoD 109 becomes pretty simple. I mainly fly online. So I want to get in the game, not spend my time doing this imaginary stuff. Also, I have to disagree about your simplified take on 1946 modeling. Overheating is modeled. If WEP is on, it gets hotter faster and you lose power until eventually your engine blows. If you enter a dogfight hot engine, you are going to take a performance hit. And different WEPs (e.g., mw50) are modeled differently. The rads affect speed, but they also affect drag. And there are also times when you want to use manual over auto prop pitch for better acceleration. I guess what I am saying is that the workload potential is there in 1946 and if pilots choose to ignore it, they do get penalized. It's not as "simple" a model as it appears. It's probably true that many have been able to make kills by getting away with bad practice, and in this sense, I would agree that CLoD as the potential to be the better test of piloting skill. But I think it will be a long while for me. The DT and Mod patches have added a lot to this game and the flight model is realistic enough to prevent me from spending $1000 to enjoy CLoD's added realism.

[klem]

Must be a lot of Silent Hunter 5 fans here.

I for one am tired of waiting years for a sim to come out, buying it, and then waiting months, years, or never for it to work properly.

This is what is killing sims.

Silent Hunter 5 torpedoed WWII sub sims for the foreseeable future. CloD most likely has done the same for WWII flight sims.

Time will tell.

Cdr

Yes, time will tell.

Get off the fanboy wagons guys, this isn't a competition. I know there's a genuine and strong feeling for IL-2 and the mods have taken it way beyond what MG were prepared to allow - I liked the mods very much and was fed up with the simulation restrictions of the outdated version 4.xx - but at its heart CoD is a better simulation.

Anyone who hasn't flown CoD just isn't in a position to appreciate what it has and will become when the bugs have been sorted.

Anyone who has flown it and can see past the bugs will know that as a flight combat sim it is ahead of IL-2 - as you'd expect ten years down the line even with the mods - its just that its easy to be put off by all the bugs and I can sympathise with that. No it isn't fully ready yet, yes it's still not much more than beta, but there is an undeniable difference between the two simulations. Perhaps its only experienced at its potential best at 'full switch' settings as that is where some of the best features lie.

Of course it's a limited planeset and map options. There is only one planeset and only one serious map because this is just the first of many theatres and periods. In that respect its like IL-2 when it first came out. It's pointless to compare the scope of IL_2 with CoD.

Madblaster, no-one is saying IL_2 isn't a good sim or that it doesn't have CEM but there is more to the CoD CEM than just testing the mags etc.. It takes IL-2's CEM a stage further as it has more of an impact on combat than IL-2's CEM which is much more forgiving. The thing that keeps you in the air is your engine. It is a big consideration for a combat pilot but one that can be managed with practice and many of us don't want to macro away the experience. IL_2 has everything you say but a key phrase of yours is "if pilots choose to ignore it, they do get penalized". They get penalised in CoD too but much sooner and under a few more possibilities than in IL-2.

The combat experience is different, I think Blackdog_kt has nailed the basics in his last post. If CoD isn't what you want then let it go, fly IL-2.

[LoBiSoMeM]

The most anoying thing about this sick bunch blaming CloD is the simple fact that the new sim is just the new release, the evolution, of their beloved IL-2 series...

Why this people are so proud of IL-2 1946 modded and talk a lot of crap of IL-2 1946 "vanilla" and CloD?

I spend just about 200 euros to enjoy CloD and wait for BF3. A new 1GB Dx11 VGA.

What I really can see here is a bunch of lazy people or people with dated hardware that STILL talking crap.

[JG52Krupi]

Don't forget that a lot of them are probably trying to play on max settings and start to cry when it crashes :( sad times

[LLv26_Mikko]

I think so that most people that have bought their rig like 1-2 years ago expected that COD runs smoothly on max settings. That just is not anyway posible. My old rig core2 duo 2.4Ghz whit 8G DDR2 was able to run smoothly medium settings -forest low -building ammount low. My old rig was 3 years old so i bought a new one.

Now i have:
Core i7 2600k 3,4Ghz
8GB DDR3 1600Mhz
Gainward GeForce GTX560 Ti Panthom 2GB
Asus P8P67

Now COD runs MAX settings whit AVG fps around 40.
I dropped building detail to medium (cant see any different when airborne)
Also i dropped forest to Medium (cant see any different when airborne)
After this modification to MAX settings i get AVG fps around 50. Depending on the ammount of AC at close range.

I tested my rig Whit MAX settings and whit total number of 125 planes in combat in radius of 3X3km and then fps avg dropped unplayable. Did same test whit 70 planes and it was playable only that AVG fps dropped to around 30.

Whit my old rig 30 planes was absolute limit whit medium settings.

[MadBlaster]

Guys, we aren't morons. I have CLoD. Cdr has CLoD. I think Stubing probably has the game. We all play at WoP Spit/109 for long time. I spent a bunch of time mapping out my controls for CLoD, writing macros for it and I tweaked my settings on my low end system enough to where I could dogfight with 109 just fine. I expected to be buying a new computer when CLoD came out. But the problem is all these "bugs" or just bad design/implementation totally unrelated to CEM/DM. So much so that it overshadows greatly the new CEM and DM models imho.

The question is do you want to spend the next year beta testing CLoD or do you want to spend your time playing upcoming UP 3.0? If you don't have the hardware, why invest in top end hardware for a beta CLoD game and then have that hardware obsolete by the time CLoD is polished a year from now? If you do have the hardware now, why waste your time on a beta game that may or may not ever be completed? At least we have reasonable assurance that UP 3.0 will rock. Vanilla, DT patches and community mods all rolled into one. You get the sounds, the maps...everything. Why not play that for now? We paid money for CLoD to be a complete game. They need to fix it. But it's been like 6 years and Oleg is gone. We're just being realistic I think. Hope to see you at spit/109 when they get 3.0 running.:)

[JG52Krupi]

Everything's in place it is basically complete, all they need to do is optimise the engine and then start work on new aircraft.

That's it we have the new engine yes it's bugged but thats hardly surprising. All we have to do is wait for more content to come along, which it will and like some others on this forum the level of detail in the models, DM and cem have blown me away. I haven't touched 1946 since cod arrived.

I just wish I could fly over London with 60 fps and when we can do that man everyone will finially have to open there eyes and see what a amazing job MG has done.

[MadBlaster]

No, it's not basically complete. It's basically beta. Go to the first page of this thread where luthier has the word BETA, "there are things in the pipline", "not a complete list"...etc. It's all beta now guy. They didn't tell us that when we bought the game. I'm not complaining, that's just reality. There are no 128 plane online battles going on right now. "60fps over London", I don't think the hardware is out yet to do that.

[JG52Krupi]

Oh he of little faith and no imagination. :) time will tell.

I don't disagree that they should have delayed the release but all that is missing from cod at present is polish.

If you have so little interest in Cod why don't you spend your time elsewhere instead of moaning?

[MadBlaster]

I'm not moaning and I still have interest in CLoD. Just don't understand how guys can blow off UP 3.0./1946 because of the CEM and DM in CLoD. I just don't get that. Sure it's more realistic, but not that much different. I have flown CLoD 109, so I'm not making this up out of thin air.

[JG52Krupi]

You couldn't have flown it for more than 2mins then.

The damage model blows 1946 out of the water around 10 times the number of components that are modelled in 1946 and the sane for cem. I could take off in 2 seconds in 1946 and not have to worry about anything until the temperature warning came up. In cod the first few times I took off I would soon find myself juddering towards Dover and have to turn back before my engine failed. By the end of my time playing 1946 I had turned from a wonder woman flyer to a cockpit on only, but I was not expecting to have to keep my eyes on so many more dials than we currently do.

Now its easy to keep an eye on the cem but I am still learning about the new fm.

As someone said before if you fly wonder women view and little cem 1946 has more content but if your a full cem guy then you won't be able to go back to 1946.

[JG14_Jagr]

"60fps over London", I don't think the hardware is out yet to do that.

I get more than that at 1920X1200.. just FYI

[Frequent_Flyer]

If you are a fan of the cannon armed,small aircraft with a thimble full of fuel, and prefer your enemy engagement at low altitude over small maps with a historically inacurate biaed in favor of the VVS planes, IL-2 1946 is what you want to fly.
COD offers a more realistic " simulation " of the WW II aerial combat even with its limited plane set and single map.I am hopefull COD can make it to other theaters of operation, where navigation and weather play a significant role in the success of an enemy engagement.

[JG53Frankyboy]

good for you that the next planed scenario is easternfront again :D

you know, because of the small, canon armed, not much fuel carrying nimble ones ;)

[Frequent_Flyer]

good for you that the next planed scenario is easternfront again :D

you know, because of the small, canon armed, not much fuel carrying nimble ones ;)

It should be exciting the wooden ,oil leaking,Yellow canopy, overheating, dispoable, slow LaGG, Yak- Poor choice for the next add on !!!

[JG52Krupi]

I get more than that at 1920X1200.. just FYI

Nice what settings do you use?

[JG27CaptStubing]

The proof that this guy NEVER explore CloD and jump here to talk crap!

"Subtle"? Geta life, please! Watch the explosions in CloD, hits on units, smoke effects, physics in vehicles exploding...

"Subtle"... Go fly UP3.0RC, please, untill 2020...

Well you can always tell when someone is losing an argument because they take it to a personal level as you have done now in your last two postings.

In terms of being a fan boy of anything... Shut it because you know nothing about me and or my experiences with both Cliffs and Mods for that matter. The sad reality is the wholly grail of WWII Flight Sims is far from being complete. If you're happy with puffs of smoke and other fancy "Special Effects" so be it but it doesn't make Cliffs any better than a 10 year old game like IL2. Right now you can't argue that Cliffs is broken in many areas hence why so much is being worked on right now. I bought Cliffs quite a while ago and because it's so broken I haven't bothered to waste time with it beyond playing several hours after each patch. It became very clear to me this thing is a long way off.

Regardless of how much you are in love with the game I have a different opinion and I get to voice it as much as you do. In the mean time keep the personal stuff to your self it doesn't help you in your attempts to argue.

[JG27CaptStubing]

The game is already released in USA? I ask it, because what you write, it experience (you were flying with cod), or you looked at videos on the youtube, or only you saw a couple of screenshots on google?

For who there is anything experience with the game, and understands it what happens why in the cockpit, it does not say one like that, that the il-2 better. Absurdity, if you look at the CEM only, nothing else, there are light-years between the two games then. In the il-2, one thing better: 300 flyable planes. That's it. (yey yes, cod has many bugs now, but its temporary)

You can purchase IL2 CloD on several sites and download it here in the US.

[JG27CaptStubing]

Comparing stock IL2 '46 to CoD is just a little bit silly, why not compare it to something like UP3 or HSFX?
Maps-UP/HSFX win. The maps are huge, highly detailed, and don't look like the countryside has been irradiated. Not to mention that at this point there are maps for just about everywhere you would want to go.
Aircraft-Easy win for UP3/HSFX. There are sooooooo many aircraft of high quality that one can add it boggles the mind, and with the 3d done by the likes of japancat the external models rival CoD, at least in my eyes.
Effects-I haven't seen much to impress me over the work of the Cinema effects pack or HG&P's effects packages.
DM-Easily CoD. Still kinda cartoony in '46.
FM-Such an easy win for UP3/HSFX. In these you can actually fly the aircraft against real world war time evaluations and they are dang close, at least with the 109's. I'm sure there are some that are off but when your talking about hundreds and hundreds of aircraft Christ, there will be exceptions.

And in the end it comes down to one thing for me-CoD just feels like a shell of a game. Its got nothing more than great 3d models. Its like the great looking blonde with assets in all the right places, but dumb as a box of rocks. Shell be fun for a few days, but after that, eh, whats the point?

needless to say Ill be sticking with UP3.
Besides who wants to play the same 6 month period of the war over, and over, and over again?

Bingo! +1

[JG27CaptStubing]

The most anoying thing about this sick bunch blaming CloD is the simple fact that the new sim is just the new release, the evolution, of their beloved IL-2 series...

Why this people are so proud of IL-2 1946 modded and talk a lot of crap of IL-2 1946 "vanilla" and CloD?

I spend just about 200 euros to enjoy CloD and wait for BF3. A new 1GB Dx11 VGA.

What I really can see here is a bunch of lazy people or people with dated hardware that STILL talking crap.

Really? This is your argument? That people that don't have enough hardware to play CloD shouldn't make comments? Sorry man but it's a very weak attempt.

I have the hardware and like others have posted CloD is nothing more than a shell of a game at the moment. Sure it will improve but turning on Magnetos and flipping a prop switch is not going to hold interest for very long.

CloD is missing a ton of content... Just look at what was promised and see where that is at this time.

Maybe you need some coffee

[JG27CaptStubing]

Don't forget that a lot of them are probably trying to play on max settings and start to cry when it crashes :( sad times

Mine doesn't... So what is your point?

[klem]

I'm not moaning and I still have interest in CLoD. Just don't understand how guys can blow off UP 3.0./1946 because of the CEM and DM in CLoD. I just don't get that. Sure it's more realistic, but not that much different. I have flown CLoD 109, so I'm not making this up out of thin air.

..... because I find CoD a more rewarding experience. There are two major bugs for me, lost sound and disconnecting servers but for me its still a better flying experience. I went back into IL-2 last week and it just isn't the same to me.

But as I said, if you prefer IL-2 then fly it and perhaps wait until SoW (remember the 'SoW' concept?) has more to offer you.

[Tiger27]

Well you can always tell when someone is losing an argument because they take it to a personal level as you have done now in your last two postings.

In terms of being a fan boy of anything... Shut it because you know nothing about me and or my experiences with both Cliffs and Mods for that matter. The sad reality is the wholly grail of WWII Flight Sims is far from being complete. If you're happy with puffs of smoke and other fancy "Special Effects" so be it but it doesn't make Cliffs any better than a 10 year old game like IL2. Right now you can't argue that Cliffs is broken in many areas hence why so much is being worked on right now. I bought Cliffs quite a while ago and because it's so broken I haven't bothered to waste time with it beyond playing several hours after each patch. It became very clear to me this thing is a long way off.

Regardless of how much you are in love with the game I have a different opinion and I get to voice it as much as you do. In the mean time keep the personal stuff to your self it doesn't help you in your attempts to argue.

If this is the case why even come here and stir up trouble, you dont really have much experience with CoD, so I assume you are just re postiong a lot of information you have heard or read secondhand from others that have actually spent some time playing it, yes you have a right to say what you want within the rules of the forum but why bother, just keep playing IL2 until you feel this is up to scratch.

[Blackdog_kt]

I have to chuckle at this because I know you have made the CEM realism point many times as the basis for your enjoyment of CLoD and I think to try and win people over?:-P Testing the mags, pumping the fuel pump...for me it's a novelty. Something I can easily macro control away. Then the CLoD 109 becomes pretty simple. I mainly fly online. So I want to get in the game, not spend my time doing this imaginary stuff. Also, I have to disagree about your simplified take on 1946 modeling. Overheating is modeled. If WEP is on, it gets hotter faster and you lose power until eventually your engine blows. If you enter a dogfight hot engine, you are going to take a performance hit. And different WEPs (e.g., mw50) are modeled differently. The rads affect speed, but they also affect drag. And there are also times when you want to use manual over auto prop pitch for better acceleration. I guess what I am saying is that the workload potential is there in 1946 and if pilots choose to ignore it, they do get penalized. It's not as "simple" a model as it appears. It's probably true that many have been able to make kills by getting away with bad practice, and in this sense, I would agree that CLoD as the potential to be the better test of piloting skill. But I think it will be a long while for me. The DT and Mod patches have added a lot to this game and the flight model is realistic enough to prevent me from spending $1000 to enjoy CLoD's added realism.


Nah, i actually have to chuckle at the thought of me trying to win anyone over as i'm a "do as you like as long as you don't axiomatically expect me to like the same thing" kind of guy.
I would just appreciate it if people who are disinterested in CoD simply follow their own advice and stop paying so much attention to it. This would let the rest of us focus on bug reporting, community made content, documentation and so on, you know, things that will probably benefit everyone in the long run :-P


On a serious note, the CEM and systems workload in IL2 is dead simple for this day and age, so much that it does qualify as a co-pilot with magical powers. CoD is not perfect either (i actually expected more) but it's much better and at the very least it has the basic foundation set right, which is completely missing from IL2: the way you work with what your aircraft gives you can cost you your virtual life without a single shot being fired at you.

If you want to know what it really means to operate (not fly, operate) a WWII warbird or something from a similar time frame try the A2A add-ons for FSX (P-47, Spitfire, Boeing Stratocruiser), the aerosoft PBY Catalina is also a good one in terms of CEM. Then try to think how it must have been like having to do all that in the midst of combat. Further on, if that is too much of a hassle for your taste, just fly on a server with disabled CEM.

Ironically enough, i don't even have my own copy of FSX (i just fly it when visiting a friend of mine who's got a bunch 3rd party add-ons ) and it was that which put the first nail in the IL2 coffin for me. Suddenly i was all "damn, is it really so complicated to fly an airplane? bah, these are modern ones with avionics and what not", because like every other propeller-head combat simmer i was under the impression that's it's all mostly throttle, stick and rudder (which it is for the most part, but in reality you have to actually turn things on and make sure they remain on).

Then i tried the 1940-1950 designs and they were even more of a handful. It was such a revelation i actually had my buddy give me a crash course on it. Then we spent 3 consecutive evenings taking turns on the controls, saving mid-flight and continuing the next day, while flying a 10 hour flight in a Catalina (Bahamas to St.Marten) with real-time weather downloaded off the internet. To this day, it's among the best flying hours i've probably ever logged in a flight sim. Why? Because that rickety old plane needed so much care to stay afloat and complete that run, it actually felt alive. Not to mention the feeling of satisfaction when we finally managed to get all things running in their sweet spot range and have it cruise effortlessly (though sedately at a mere 100-110 knots indicated, there are cars that go faster than that :grin: ) while we finally had time to focus on properly following the flight-plan, tuning the radio navigation beacons and staying on course.

It was not only a "have my hands full" situation (in reality Catalinas are not meant to be flown by a single pilot, even today), it was more nerve wracking than certain instances of flying combat in other sims. And i got hooked to that and wanted to see it in a WWII-era combat sim, IL2 couldn't give it to me and i started flying less and less of it.

Obviously, you shouldn't have to suffer for my choice of gameplay and you have tools to avoid that in the realism/difficulty options panel.
I shouldn't have to take what for me is a giant step back to 2000 either, but if a sim doesn't even model all that plane-particular stuff i like so much, then i have no switch to choose if i will set them on or off, or a server with appropriate settings to fly on.

If it completely lacks what i consider a huge part of the actual workings of getting an aircraft in the air and keeping it there, along with how this lack of workload combined with the small maps imbalances the historical tactical considerations and results in unrealistic engagements and player behaviour despite the realistic FMs, then i just have no choice in the matter.

And that's why i can't go back to IL2, because there's a new sim that gives me that choice.

I hope this provides a satisfactory answer to how i can ignore IL2 and the new mod packs and patches. I'm not mod-averse either, far from it, in fact i was eagerly expecting a new UP release and the TD patches, mainly because i loved flying mosquitoes and WWII nightfighters was one of my all-time top of the wish-list item for flight sims. I would have flown it like mad but then CoD happened, shuffled the cards and ruined IL2 for me pretty much.

In other words, what you describe as imaginary things, plus many more on top of them, is a very real part of aircraft operation that you are just not interested in, so you are content to fly a sim that doesn't model them in much detail, if at all.

However, other people will place increased importance on them and will gravitate to a sim that does.




Guys, we aren't morons. I have CLoD. Cdr has CLoD. I think Stubing probably has the game. We all play at WoP Spit/109 for long time. I spent a bunch of time mapping out my controls for CLoD, writing macros for it and I tweaked my settings on my low end system enough to where I could dogfight with 109 just fine. I expected to be buying a new computer when CLoD came out. But the problem is all these "bugs" or just bad design/implementation totally unrelated to CEM/DM. So much so that it overshadows greatly the new CEM and DM models imho.

The question is do you want to spend the next year beta testing CLoD or do you want to spend your time playing upcoming UP 3.0? If you don't have the hardware, why invest in top end hardware for a beta CLoD game and then have that hardware obsolete by the time CLoD is polished a year from now? If you do have the hardware now, why waste your time on a beta game that may or may not ever be completed? At least we have reasonable assurance that UP 3.0 will rock. Vanilla, DT patches and community mods all rolled into one. You get the sounds, the maps...everything. Why not play that for now? We paid money for CLoD to be a complete game. They need to fix it. But it's been like 6 years and Oleg is gone. We're just being realistic I think. Hope to see you at spit/109 when they get 3.0 running.:)

Personally, i like tinkering with the new stuff. I'm sorry but, beta or no beta, flying IL2 after CoD feels just like it felt when i used to fly European Air War after IL2 back in the day: more planes, bigger battles, smoother frame rates, bigger map, yet something was tangibly missing from EAW and i had to fire up IL2 (the very first one back in 2001) and fly for a couple of hours in its non-dynamic, completely scripted campaign to get my flight sim fix.

Despite the lack of content IL2 had something that i couldn't yet pinpoint, which was much much better than EAW.

The same thing happens to me today between CoD and IL2:1946. I don't actually fly CoD that much in the proper sense of the word, i'm mostly testing, but what i see makes IL2 feels very "artificial" to me for lack of a better word, just like EAW felt artificial compared to IL2 back in 2001.

[ptisinge]

I just wanted to add that the sounds disappearing in MP have killed COD for while for me and my friends. We need a fix really quick for that, it should be one of the absolute top priority. There is just not much at all to do in single player, and MP without sound just won't do it for us, we've gone back to IL2 UP and RoF and I'm the only one still checking the forums here actually. In a few months it will be hard to convince anyone around me to come back to COD. Even though it started high, my trust has eroded a bit and I'm worried about the chances for COD to survive on the long term... So keep up chasing the bugs, it's needed more than ever and it might be a little bit early to call the quick patches and hotfix period over.

[Positronic]

Well blackdog I think you just sold me on the catalina.

It is hard to go back even to clod after flying the accusim spitfire, but the amount of work those guys put into that plane, which also meant having access to the real thing, I don't think it's fair to expect that level of quality in every plane in a combat sim. Also the a2a spit costs almost as much as clod on it's own.

Hope this new patch comes soon.

[mazex]

Nah, i actually have to chuckle at the thought of me trying to win anyone over as i'm a "do as you like as long as you don't axiomatically expect me to like the same thing" kind of guy.
I would just appreciate it if people who are disinterested in CoD simply follow their own advice and stop paying so much attention to it. This would let the rest of us focus on bug reporting, community made content, documentation and so on, you know, things that will probably benefit everyone in the long run :-P


On a serious note, the CEM and systems workload in IL2 is dead simple for this day and age, so much that it does qualify as a co-pilot with magical powers. CoD is not perfect either (i actually expected more) but it's much better and at the very least it has the basic foundation set right, which is completely missing from IL2: the way you work with what your aircraft gives you can cost you your virtual life without a single shot being fired at you.

If you want to know what it really means to operate (not fly, operate) a WWII warbird or something from a similar time frame try the A2A add-ons for FSX (P-47, Spitfire, Boeing Stratocruiser), the aerosoft PBY Catalina is also a good one in terms of CEM. Then try to think how it must have been like having to do all that in the midst of combat. Further on, if that is too much of a hassle for your taste, just fly on a server with disabled CEM.

Ironically enough, i don't even have my own copy of FSX (i just fly it when visiting a friend of mine who's got a bunch 3rd party add-ons ) and it was that which put the first nail in the IL2 coffin for me. Suddenly i was all "damn, is it really so complicated to fly an airplane? bah, these are modern ones with avionics and what not", because like every other propeller-head combat simmer i was under the impression that's it's all mostly throttle, stick and rudder (which it is for the most part, but in reality you have to actually turn things on and make sure they remain on).

Then i tried the 1940-1950 designs and they were even more of a handful. It was such a revelation i actually had my buddy give me a crash course on it. Then we spent 3 consecutive evenings taking turns on the controls, saving mid-flight and continuing the next day, while flying a 10 hour flight in a Catalina (Bahamas to St.Marten) with real-time weather downloaded off the internet. To this day, it's among the best flying hours i've probably ever logged in a flight sim. Why? Because that rickety old plane needed so much care to stay afloat and complete that run, it actually felt alive. Not to mention the feeling of satisfaction when we finally managed to get all things running in their sweet spot range and have it cruise effortlessly (though sedately at a mere 100-110 knots indicated, there are cars that go faster than that :grin: ) while we finally had time to focus on properly following the flight-plan, tuning the radio navigation beacons and staying on course.

It was not only a "have my hands full" situation (in reality Catalinas are not meant to be flown by a single pilot, even today), it was more nerve wracking than certain instances of flying combat in other sims. And i got hooked to that and wanted to see it in a WWII-era combat sim, IL2 couldn't give it to me and i started flying less and less of it.

Obviously, you shouldn't have to suffer for my choice of gameplay and you have tools to avoid that in the realism/difficulty options panel.
I shouldn't have to take what for me is a giant step back to 2000 either, but if a sim doesn't even model all that plane-particular stuff i like so much, then i have no switch to choose if i will set them on or off, or a server with appropriate settings to fly on.

If it completely lacks what i consider a huge part of the actual workings of getting an aircraft in the air and keeping it there, along with how this lack of workload combined with the small maps imbalances the historical tactical considerations and results in unrealistic engagements and player behaviour despite the realistic FMs, then i just have no choice in the matter.

And that's why i can't go back to IL2, because there's a new sim that gives me that choice.

I hope this provides a satisfactory answer to how i can ignore IL2 and the new mod packs and patches. I'm not mod-averse either, far from it, in fact i was eagerly expecting a new UP release and the TD patches, mainly because i loved flying mosquitoes and WWII nightfighters was one of my all-time top of the wish-list item for flight sims. I would have flown it like mad but then CoD happened, shuffled the cards and ruined IL2 for me pretty much.

In other words, what you describe as imaginary things, plus many more on top of them, is a very real part of aircraft operation that you are just not interested in, so you are content to fly a sim that doesn't model them in much detail, if at all.

However, other people will place increased importance on them and will gravitate to a sim that does.






Personally, i like tinkering with the new stuff. I'm sorry but, beta or no beta, flying IL2 after CoD feels just like it felt when i used to fly European Air War after IL2 back in the day: more planes, bigger battles, smoother frame rates, bigger map, yet something was tangibly missing from EAW and i had to fire up IL2 (the very first one back in 2001) and fly for a couple of hours in its non-dynamic, completely scripted campaign to get my flight sim fix.

Despite the lack of content IL2 had something that i couldn't yet pinpoint, which was much much better than EAW.

The same thing happens to me today between CoD and IL2:1946. I don't actually fly CoD that much in the proper sense of the word, i'm mostly testing, but what i see makes IL2 feels very "artificial" to me for lack of a better word, just like EAW felt artificial compared to IL2 back in 2001.

+1

A very good summary of my feelings too. It is so hard going back to IL2, even though CoD needs more work...

[xnomad]

Same here, I share Blackdog_kt's views on this and can't go back to IL2.

I want to be able to get as close to the experience the pilots had in those days. I want to be able to get a good representation of what they had to do and I also want to know if I could do it.

We'll probably never be able to simulate G forces, fatigue and disorientation that real pilots had to contend with but anything we can simulate I want included. IL2 just feels arcade-like after COD, yes I've modded up but it just doesn't come close.

I really enjoy the procedures you need to follow to keep your plane in the air, however not that much that I'll fly FSX as I also need the excitement of hunting or being hunted.

[Redroach]

yeah, I concur, too - The basics of CoD are just superior to Il-2 and going back is really hard. And that's what makes me even more angry, as we have the choice to get annoyed by the CoD alpha or do that step back to Il-2... a dilemma that shouldn't have reached the end-user at all.

[RE77ACTION]

yeah, I concur, too - The basics of CoD are just superior to Il-2 and going back is really hard. And that's what makes me even more angry, as we have the choice to get annoyed by the CoD alpha or do that step back to Il-2... a dilemma that shouldn't have reached the end-user at all.

I do not fully agree with you. I rather play CloD as it is now than having to wait another year. The sim isn't finished by far but it has already a lot to offer. And every new (and free) update will feel like getting a new game. It couldn't be better in my opinion... ;)

[David198502]

I do not fully agree with you. I rather play CloD as it is now than having to wait another year. The sim isn't finished by far but it has already a lot to offer. And every new (and free) update will feel like getting a new game. It couldn't be better in my opinion... ;)

i agree!the only concern i have, is that there is the possibility that cod will get abandoned by devs one day, if they dont get enough cash in their wallet, leaving us with an rough diamand.

[Ze-Jamz]

Totally agree, my old man loves Il2 ..hes just happy to sit as a gunner in a Lancaster,b-17 etc and shoot some planes but for me it looks crap, i mean real bad and as you can see that is with the latest mod packs..

Il always have mucho respect for the creators of Mods for Il2..~S~

But for me it looks rubbish now, the cockpits are just rubbish, it reminds me when i was playing WW2 online (subscription) as a pilot, oh the days :) and then come over to Il2 which was about 5-6 years ago..the difference in detail, cockpits even FM back then was amazing..i never went back to WW2OL just as i cant go back to Il2 now, if this game failed and ceased to exist then yes i would as its a ww2 sim and thats my tipple..always has been

The bugs are dam annoying in Clod but i hope that they are soon to be ironed out and that we can then start to enjoy new content etc etc just like when Il2 was first released, lack of AC, biased AC, performance issues etc, lack of content..

Ive vented my anger in these forums more than once and ive upset some folks so appolgies if i offended anyone in the process but i will still be here playing this game for a long time yet, even in its current form i enjoy it more than Il2... that reason is the only reason i care about

[csThor]

First to say I don't like the d*ck length comparisons and the squabbling CloD vs RoF. Where does the testosterone and the territorial jousting come from? What's the point? RoF has - in my opinion - currently the far superior offline experience, despite the perceived or real FM/DM issues (don't have the time to play ATM so I can't check it thoroughly). CloD is - at the moment - not more than a very interesting flight sim engine with a load of potential ... and an equally large load of bugs and issues. But one thing it is not: a game. I haven't found any gameplay so far - the campaigns are a bad joke, the FMB is still very much a work in progress so the community is very limited in what it can do with it to improve the campaign situation and a number of key objects (read: warships) aren't present at all so a realistic campaign is hard to create anyway.

Once the technical issues with the engine will be fixed the real challenge for Maddox Games will come: giving the engine a campaign system worth the name. This I consider a much greater challenge than fixing the numerous technical issues (regardless how obstinate these prove to be, SLI anyone? :rolleyes: ) because it requires not only technical skills such as 3D modelling, creation of textures or coding but sheer creativity.

[JG53Frankyboy]

i dont think anything about "gameplay" will come from the oficial side.....

A more userfriendly , or a least a proper documentation for it, FullMissionBuilder and a working eventlog files should enable the community to create at least the same on- and offline experience like in IL2.
I can remember , after 2 month of original IL2 release i had already plenty of online COOP missions in my logbock. And i was in missionbuilding.
Nothing so far about that in CoD.
That the secanario/planeset is limited we knew long time before CoD release. So that is no reason to complain for me (even i dont realy like the BoB scenario, but thats a very personal opinion!).

Comparisons with RoF i also dont like. Its a game from another developer. With a FMB far from beeing simple i have to ad :D ............
And it has also its Bugs and little mistakes - as IL2 had also for all its years :)

In a time when CoD will 'work' for me, i still will fly RoF too.

[JG52Krupi]

Yes even though my squad doesn't fly rof I have and still plan on supporting them.

Unfortunately it's not ww2 and the planes are quite simple and it's very hard to compare two aircraft like you can with the 109 and spit. The ww1 planes in the axis and allied sides are too different (I know some can be compared but at the end of the day the Germans had manoeuvrable aircraft and the allies fast ones).

[Skoshi Tiger]

(regardless how obstinate these prove to be, SLI anyone? :rolleyes: ) because it requires not only technical skills such as 3D modelling, creation of textures or coding but sheer creativity.

Seams like COD isn't the only sim that's having problems with SLI/ Crossfire.

http://riseofflight.com/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=45&t=18901

The issues sound very similar to COD.

[JG53Frankyboy]

yep, but at least:
"After months of testing and a lot of headache, our official recommendation to users about adopting SLI/Crossfire for ROF remains the same. Our engine was not designed for it and implementing it was very difficult and as I mention above the results are somewhat mixed. We still recommend that you invest in a really strong single card solution to boost your ROF frame rate if you feel it necessary. We suggest you save the money you would spend on a second video card and use it to buy a better processor if need be

http://riseofflight.com/Forum/viewtopic.php?t=20189

[csThor]

Franky - I disagree about gameplay not coming from the developers. Quite frankly they'll have to deliver at least a platform that enables the community to create campaigns and missions with ease. Right now ... Well, ask Tom from Desastersoft about the campaign interface as it is. If you know what I mean.

I do remember sharing my thoughts on campaign systems with Oleg years ago. I still have some of the documents we exchanged on my HDD and what was listed there, ideas and concepts mostly as well as some details we came up with, would be very useful for a very good dynamic campaign system. That's what they'll have to deliver and quite honestly I firmly believe that a dynamic campaign engine needs to be an integral part of the game and not a bolt-on accessory that behaves like a spare rocketpack. ;)

[Skoshi Tiger]

yep, but at least:
"After months of testing and a lot of headache, our official recommendation to users about adopting SLI/Crossfire for ROF remains the same. Our engine was not designed for it and implementing it was very difficult and as I mention above the results are somewhat mixed. We still recommend that you invest in a really strong single card solution to boost your ROF frame rate if you feel it necessary. We suggest you save the money you would spend on a second video card and use it to buy a better processor if need be

http://riseofflight.com/Forum/viewtopic.php?t=20189

Ah! that was the quote I was originally looking for. Thanks!

Is it just flight sims that are making the multi gpu cards have issues with micro stutters etc or are other genres of video games having them as well?

The last two motherboards I've build systems around where chosen for SLI support, unfortunately the original IL2 had issue with SLI, so I never went and got the second card. Is the current SLI/Crossfire technology fundermentally flawed?

The only real success I've had with SLI was the performance increase I got with Janes Longbow and a couple of Voodoo 2 cards! cheers!

Cheers!

[tintifaxl]

I'm very much looking forward to Desastersoft's campaign "Fliegerasse - Helmut Wick vs. J. C. Dundas". I did enjoy two of their campaigns for IL2: Fall Blau and Eismeerjäger tremendously.

And I really hope the COD campaign engine will be enhanced, so at least scripted campaigns can be created properly.

[JG53Frankyboy]

Franky - I disagree about gameplay not coming from the developers. Quite frankly they'll have to deliver at least a platform that enables the community to create campaigns and missions with ease. Right now ... Well, ask Tom from Desastersoft about the campaign interface as it is. If you know what I mean.



yep, that was what i ment, the basic instruments have to work !
In IL2 it was the FMB and the improvements over the time the eventlog got and the release of a deticated server software (<- took its time)

This enabled 3.party people to create missions, campaigns, online wars COOP, scripted dogfightservers. That is what i call gameplay content.
IIRC nothing of that ever was from official 1C MaddoxGames.

I never expected a full switch from the gameplaypossibilites from IL2 to CoD. I can remember it took years of experience to come to the IL2 status of 2010. But now with CoD, time will tell. I stopped missionbuilding as i saw i need some kind oftrigger/script to put something easy as a missiontarget in the mission. Not to talk about the CoD COOP play.....

[skouras]

personally i don't have problem with ROF since i running everything on very high and maximum
i really enjoy it espesially online:grin:

[smink1701]

How's it looking for Friday beta release?

[csThor]

Simply put I use the term "dynamic campaign" meaning dynamically generated missions within a believable environment, but I do absolutely not speak about gamey crutches such as "a single pilot single-handedly wins the war" (or loses it, for that matter).

[Doc_uk]

How's it looking for Friday beta release?
You had to do it didnt you, you just had to ask,
And i bet, He Was just hopeing, Every one had forgot
:grin:

[Ze-Jamz]

How's it looking for Friday beta release?

Oh Oh, thats done it

[Vengeanze]

What beta?

[smink1701]

His original post said the beta was tentative for June 17 so I was just trying to manage everyone's expectations as a public service.:)

[Ataros]

To manage everyone's expectations in a safe way I'd rather say "2 weeks be sure" :grin: The key word is "tentative" as usual, you know those Parkinson's Laws.

Just kidding.

[JG52Krupi]

Dude the British would have been defeated if they had continued to pound the airfields it was due to the bombing of cities that gave the RAF the relief that they needed to be able to continue fighting.

[philip.ed]

What is the purpose of this? You will only get an answer when Luthier comes online to post the update, in which case the answer will be obvious.
If you're so bored, take a breath of fresh air and see what the world really is like. :rolleyes:

[JG27CaptStubing]

If this is the case why even come here and stir up trouble, you dont really have much experience with CoD, so I assume you are just re postiong a lot of information you have heard or read secondhand from others that have actually spent some time playing it, yes you have a right to say what you want within the rules of the forum but why bother, just keep playing IL2 until you feel this is up to scratch.

Trouble? Posting my opinion as others do is creating trouble? I'm not reposting anything I OWN THE GAME. You're assesment is way off. Meanwhile instead of posting something negative about me why don't you try and come up with a better argument. Taking your own suggestion why bother posting at all?

Bottom line is the game is half baked. Some day we will see it fleshed out.

[robtek]

Bottom line is that this prematurely released sim is getting better with each patch.
It is really not necessary to denigrate it again and again with the same stale facts (real and imaginated), which are, btw, weighted differently by different people.

[Qpassa]

I think is going to be tomorrow, lets wait

[Buzpilot]

Will be nice to know if not a word means 'All is good, and patch coming out as predicted', or 'Because of unpredicted problems, it's not going to happen, this or next week':-P

[Qpassa]

They said " Its going to be more comunication between Users and Developers" http://imgur.com/5X0hu.png