Fresh stuff from sukhoi.ru (Discussion)

[Insuber]

I just had a google translated read of BlackSix thread in sukhoi.ru. The guy is working hard at communication, no breaking news but a listening ear and about a 100 of "I take note". He confirmed that the MG 3d modelers are full steam on the "battle for Moskov" expansion, so no hope for new flyable BoB planes, such as Wellington or Beaufighter, the latter being not ruled out completely though. They have opened a sort of rolling bug report, but without feedback from the devs because they have not enough time. Podvoxx was nice as it was him who asked BS to pop in the yellow forum to inform us, which he did. all in all BS is a nice guy.
Despite feeling quite disappointed, I can understand the logics behind this choice: avoid language issues and need to get info on the battle for Moskov, plus the fact that the main market for this expansion will surely be Russia.

Cheers,
Insuber

[JG52Uther]

Thanks Insuber!

[JG52Krupi]

Kudos Insuber,

There shouldn't be a barrier between sukhoi and this forum, hopefully the incident the other day was just a one off.

[Tavingon]

A little disspointed on no new flyables, hopefully modders can slip them in.

Interesting about the expansion.. hopefully clod will be shipshape by then!

[Kupsised]

Thanks Insuber! Was there any news of a timescale for the expansion though? I wonder if it'll be next year, or if it's still a way off yet, as it could certainly kick some life into the series with new planes to get more players interested

[ECV56_LeChuck]

Thanks for the report!

[Insuber]

Thanks Insuber! Was there any news of a timescale for the expansion though? I wonder if it'll be next year, or if it's still a way off yet, as it could certainly kick some life into the series with new planes to get more players interested

No additional news, in fact the new game has not been yet announced officially.

[He111]

I'm willing to pay for modders to slip in .. if allowed?

.

[Trumper]

Well they need to get this one finished before people will have faith to purchase any more,once bitten twice shy.
If they can't get it right on a small theatre of ops such as BoB how on earth are they going to cope with something many times larger.

[Insuber]

the poor guys are changing the flat tire while the car is running, simple.

[bw_wolverine]

For English language speakers it's a little unfortunate that their new Community Liaison's name shortens down to BS. :P

[Luno13]

I wouldn't worry too much if no new BoB planes will be built by Ilya's team. According to the old pre-release updates Il-2 is supposed to be pretty open to 3rd party modeling of planes, vehicles, maps, etc. They just haven't released the SDK and other tools because they're still working on fixing the code for the game.

PS- The guys working on BoM are mostly 3D graphics artists and not programmers, so no resources are being diverted from CoD at the moment. We'll get our Wellingtons someday from a 3rd part developer.

[TomcatViP]

Guys the BoB is nearly done on the graphics part. They can afford to switch part of their team on a new project.

My own guess is that the coders and FM guys will hve a wild ride until the 1st january. Let's hve an humble tough for them :cool:

EDIT : Luno13 beat me on the line ;)

[JVM]

....the BoB is nearly done on the graphics part

You have to be quite optimistic to say this...this may be true for the planes, but the map has to be completed/revamped to even remotely resemble to something OK!

I understand that 1C may not have the resources to do it, as I think that even staging the work/rework over time (ie coast line and airfields, then harbors, then large towns, then smaller towns then railways, and i just consider the french side here) there is at least one year of work for a small but dedicated team.
This would depend on 1C agreement, and also on some core software improvements, like the ability to create woods as full objects (not a gathering of trees), to have 3D rivers, to be able to modify textures at least locally (airfields, railways)...

I believe much of these improvements are in the tubes, if not already existing, they are just not activated yet. There is also a distinct possibility that the next episode(s) will bring its(their) own set(s) of improvements which will be then be retrofittable to BoB.

Discussion with the Dev Team about this subject is difficult now because they are otherwise busy, but I have good hopes the time for a more relaxed stance will come, and then we will be able to set plans in motion.

JV

PS I wonder if there would be an interest in providing the community with photos of the different approaches to the various BoB airfields...from the air...the real airfields, as they stand now (=not terribly changed since 1940)...(french side only, sorry)?

[Tacoma74]

I wouldn't worry too much if no new BoB planes will be built by Ilya's team. According to the old pre-release updates Il-2 is supposed to be pretty open to 3rd party modeling of planes, vehicles, maps, etc. They just haven't released the SDK and other tools because they're still working on fixing the code for the game.

PS- The guys working on BoM are mostly 3D graphics artists and not programmers, so no resources are being diverted from CoD at the moment. We'll get our Wellingtons someday from a 3rd part developer.

This. My thoughts exactly. I for one am soooooo glad they are moving ahead with the expansion. Would be awesome if BlackSix could give us some "friday development updates" on it in the near future. Can't wait to go to the eastern front :)

[Hunden]

For English language speakers it's a little unfortunate that their new Community Liaison's name shortens down to BS. :P

LMAO when I first read it cause something seemed off on the post that mentioned BS and now you put it into perspective.......

[JG14_Jagr]

Remember that 3D modellers build 3D things.. once they are done they don't just sit there..they are getting paid. So they build future things..some will never get in the game, but they build it so when the time comes that work has already been done..

[Chivas]

We will eventually have plenty of planes for the BOB theater. All planes build for other theaters will be usable in the BOB theater. Any planes built for let say the North African campaign that are applicable to BOB can be used, even if they are not applicable. Also third parties aircraft will also be available at some point.

[Chivas]

That may be the case, but it would be nice for them to finish this project before packing up and moving to the next.

Originally the Battle for Moscow was going to be a third party addon. This may have changed, but I doubt very much they will be applying to many resources to the Battle for Moscow. That said much of the work being done will apply to both theaters so I wouldn't worry to much that this will any way delay the full completion of BOB.

[MD_Titus]

That may be the case, but it would be nice for them to finish this project before packing up and moving to the next.

it's an extension of the same project

[F19_Klunk]

Well they need to get this one finished before people will have faith to purchase any more,once bitten twice shy.
If they can't get it right on a small theatre of ops such as BoB how on earth are they going to cope with something many times larger.


I totally agree...
Not that I regret that they focus on Eastern front, Battle of Britain has always been in my "Not interested in- sphere"... But they should really focus on getting the platform in order: sound, gfx..you name it.. AND introduce these changes on the existing product before release of this second title. If this title continue to be broken, there is no chance mpst of us will buy another title.
Amongst our squadmembers, maybe 15 bought Clod when it was released, and maybe 3 fly it occasionally... the rest can't or won't play it as it is now.

it's an extension of the same project

sure, but they can't "wait" to fix Clod. It must be in order before the release of this ..."extension" ...

[SEE]

Will the proposed expansion be similar to IL1946 where any new theatres form part of the CloD engine or is it likely to be a separate title that is independent of CloD?

[III/JG53_Don]

Would be a huge disappointment if they cannot be merged. The Success of Il2 1946 is connected directly with its bonding with the previous addons / stand alones

[Robert]

I imagine the expansions will be like IL2... then Forgotten Battles.... EAP.... followed by Pacific Fighters.... and after thatPE2.... and Sturmoviks Over Manchuria... which finally culminated into 1946.

Each of those were paid add ons from different theatres. Between most of those we had various patches providing tweaks, improvements and features. some planes were released in patches too.

[CWMV]

Hopefully we can skip pacific fighters this time Lol!

[ElAurens]

I imagine the expansions will be like IL2... then Forgotten Battles.... EAP.... followed by Pacific Fighters.... and after thatPE2.... and Sturmoviks Over Manchuria... which finally culminated into 1946.

Each of those were paid add ons from different theatres. Between most of those we had various patches providing tweaks, improvements and features. some planes were released in patches too.

If they are smart they will follow this tried and true formula from IL2. The Moscow expansion should be a merged install with CLOD.

[ATAG_Doc]

can not wait for it

[IamNotDavid]

Depends on how they market it, if they release it free as a patch, its the same project. I doubt that's what will occur(<--speculation). If its an expansion, that you pay for, different project. If its a collection of individual planes/maps, that you pay for each part, then I'd say same project again.

It seems pretty obvious that it uses the same engine. That means that any improvements to the code will apply to both projects.

[CWMV]

If they are smart they will follow this tried and true formula from IL2. The Moscow expansion should be a merged install with CLOD.

Like they were smart when they kept the tried and true quick mission builder setup?
man, hope they fix that!:-P

[SEE]

Hopefully we can skip pacific fighters this time Lol!

Nooo! Pacific fighters was one of my favourites, with the updated graphics engine with 3D, wow!

Landing on the deck of an aircraft carrier rendered in 3D could just tempt me to try it!

[Tree_UK]

Surley to keep up with the current trend of calling your game a ridiculous name i.e 'IL2 Sturmovik Cliffs Of Dover' they should call it 'IL2 Sturmovk - IL2 Sturmovik' or maybe 'SPITFIRE Battle of Moscow'!

[He111]

I'm in BOB mode .. please don't screw me up by changing theatres and then back again! .. my wallet won't like it! :(

.

[Flanker35M]

S!

Fix the damn GFX engine, FM/DM and sounds + other things. Then add more stuff when you have a solid platform to work with. But again in Russia the BoM expansion will sell like heck so propably we will SOME day have a product that will satisfy our needs for years to come.

[Chivas]

It has been stated by the developers in the past, the new series will be modelled in the same manor as the old IL-2 series, with each theater addition being both stand alone, and/or merged.

[Chivas]

I'm in BOB mode .. please don't screw me up by changing theatres and then back again! .. my wallet won't like it! :(

.

You will pay for new theater addons, but any graphic updates, aircraft, objects etc will be applied to COD if you merge the theaters, just as it was done in the first IL-2 series.

[Chivas]

Surley to keep up with the current trend of calling your game a ridiculous name i.e 'IL2 Sturmovik Cliffs Of Dover' they should call it 'IL2 Sturmovk - IL2 Sturmovik' or maybe 'SPITFIRE Battle of Moscow'!

I agree that choice of names could have been better, but IL2 Sturmovik, is immediately recognized name in combat flight sim community, and the Cliffs of Dover is immediately associated with the Battle of Britain. Especially with the Hurricane, and 109 on the box cover.

Not sure why they didn't use Battle of Britain on the cover in Western release unless there was copyright or confusion issues with other products.

[Tvrdi]

So they will abandon CLOD which isnt (still) optimized at all just to deliver a product for russian market...great....I gave them 50 bucks....NO MORE from me....

[GF_Mastiff]

Surley to keep up with the current trend of calling your game a ridiculous name i.e 'IL2 Sturmovik Cliffs Of Dover' they should call it 'IL2 Sturmovk - IL2 Sturmovik' or maybe 'SPITFIRE Battle of Moscow'!

IL2 SturmovikII

[Foo'bar]

That may be the case, but it would be nice for them to finish this project before packing up and moving to the next.

The last 10% are always the most difficult to be done. Most products never get over the 90% stage. And you will agree that 90% of CloD already have been done, won't you?

[Kupsised]

No additional news, in fact the new game has not been yet announced officially.

Ah, of course, I hadn't realised that it hadn't been announced! Thanks for the reply anyway

[Insuber]

So they will abandon CLOD which isnt (still) optimized at all just to deliver a prodcut for russian market...great....I hgave them 50 bucks....NO MORE from me....

No. The addon is 99% constituted by maps and 3D objects, done by 3D modelers. The game engine is common, so the GFX, DM, FM teams will continue to work on the bugs and improvements or the Il2: Cliffs of Dover series. Not so difficult to understand.

[Tavingon]

If its to be merged then that's great...

[Bobb4]

All il2 games in the past have merged, I do not see them changing this. I do see them selling it firstly as a stand alone game with the ability to merge both and then as with all il2 incarnations, a gold pack with an udated merge patch forcing players to buy both at a later stage normally six months after release :rolleyes:
One hopes the SDK is released soon and modders can get active fixing (maybe fixing is too harsh a work, lets say creating )what needs to be fixed. It is just sad to think that I still fly il2-1946 with it's mods more than I fly it's replacement.

[von Pilsner]

The last 10% are always the most difficult to be done. Most products never get over the 90% stage. And you will agree that 90% of CloD already have been done, won't you?

It may be 90% done (that would depend on what you are basing that percentage on: lines of code? man hours? final in-game content?), but there is some important stuff left to fix. The devs are still hard at work on CloD. :)

from: http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?p=350181#post350181

Our main priorities now are:

1. Physics and FM. This means plane behavior in the air, brand new landing gear model on the ground, collision modeling including tree collision (if performance allows), and improved vehicle physics.
2. AI. Currently working on everyone’s favorite controls flutter and AI wingman behavior. Also working on improving radio comms, getting your crew to be more verbose on the intercom, and lots of other changes. Coupled with #1, this should give us quite a dramatic change in how air combat looks and feels.
3. Performance. We are in final stages of testing a thorough overhaul of the game’s graphic engine. It won’t look any different but it will be much more streamlined. It’s too early to say what the FPS increase will be in the final version, but it shouldn’t be less than 50%.
4. Sound. The sound in the v15950 is considered a beta. We will continue to improve existing sound, and to add new ones to the aircraft and to the world around them.
5. SDK. As promised earlier, still planning to release a map-making SDK in the near future. More details will be released when we are ready for them.

[Skoshi Tiger]

I've got my money's worth out of it so far. Luckly I haven't had the stability issues some people have been having!

I definately will be buying the next upgrade or expansion pack that the developers release.

Cheers!

[von Pilsner]

I've got my money's worth out of it so far. Luckly I haven't had the stability issues some people have been having!

I definately will be buying the next upgrade or expansion pack that the developers release.

Cheers!

It's tough waiting for the AI and comms fixes, but I agree 100%. ;)

[Tavingon]

Don't forget a few bonus planes!

[furbs]

The last 10% are always the most difficult to be done. Most products never get over the 90% stage. And you will agree that 90% of CloD already have been done, won't you?

No Foobar i dont, FM, DM, clouds, dynamic weather, any weather!, sound,radio coms, memory leaks, Exe crashes, Track record feature, ground handling, map features, FSAA, Full screen, FMB docs, QMB, AI, single player campaign all need quite a bit of work.

Its about 60% done to me so far.

[BPickles]

No Foobar i dont, FM, DM, sound,radio coms, memory leaks, Exe crashes, Track record feature, ground handling, map features, FSAA, Full screen, FMB docs, QMB, AI, single player campaigns all need quite a bit of work.

Its about 60% done to me so far.

I have to agree, best way to gauge it is take someone not interested in this niche and ask them to gauge the game itself as a game. You wont get a good response. I feel just like as for my own self, its aviation bias that makes me still try to play it.
Yes there are features that impress, to a aviation enthusiast, but it fails in so many regular standard ways that its still no where near a level that i believe should be on sale, not having an effective fullscreen is just terrible standards.

[Sternjaeger II]

I reckon all of this wouldn't be happening if someone had the decency of using his English language skills and post the road map (which apparently is there and well clear too) on the future of this sim :rolleyes:

[flyingblind]

My reading of the situation is that if they brought out a sequel now is that it would have all the underlying issues that presently exist. They are working on these issues and plan to have them sorted before the next release. In the meantime they are working on the maps and models so they are ready for the fully sorted engine. So no, I don't think they have any intention of just abandoning CloD as the code will be optimized first and then used for the Russian theatre. And no, I have no problem with spending what is a pitance on something that is being improved and developed and will give me years of real pleasure.

[Vengeanze]

With these news and what we've experienced since 31 of March it is pretty clear that CloD was more of a beta, testing the engine on some happy campers in the west, prior to the russian release of Battle of Moscow.
"Hey, lets start with a beta and call it something brittish so we get a hole community to test it for us"

Even though we in the west thought the IL-2 was groundbreaking and a big hit that everyone into cfs was playing, the number of sold copies was nothing compared to the russian market. So no surprise they focus on that market for the sequel.

They're not fixing the game for us. They're trimming the engine for the BoM release. We didn't make Oleg a billionair, the russian players did.

Look into a mirror and say hello to a beta tester for a russian company.

We've been marginalized...and it hurts. :(

[Majo]

Originally Posted by Foo'bar
The last 10% are always the most difficult to be done. Most products never get over the 90% stage. And you will agree that 90% of CloD already have been done, won't you?

Maybe I was expecting too much but...
Do we really think that CloD, in terms of project goals, has achieved 90% of the target?
Does anybody believe that a product about 10% better than CloD has any chance to survive in the actual market?
Still, Is 90% good enough? I might… it depends whether the other 10% is above o below the “surviving margin”.

Salutes

[Insuber]

Conspiracy theories again, eh?

[yakaddict]

Is there any word of when BoM will be released in north america/europe?

[JG53Frankyboy]

sure , im not able to read russian.
but IIRC the tone in the sukhoi froum was/is also not awlays friendly about the CoD status. imagine if 'their' great patriatic war will be released in such a status. this bananaforum will be a plac of holiday compared to the sukhoi one :D

[robtek]

Tree, i can't believe that you really believe what you are posting here.

I think there are two Tree's, one is flying online and having fun and the other one needs to feel slighted and mistreated by Maddox Games.

[jamesdietz]

First ..please- get everything to work with what we've got & get performance working for those of us with Pcs a year old?"Up with FPS!"

[JG53Frankyboy]

as long BoB and BoM scenarios will be mergeable, its not important "fix it first" actually.
the "fixes" ( at least of 3D enigine and GUI) will be downwards compatible.

as all improvements since 2001 were in IL2

FM and CEM things are another question...as long the planes are not needed for the BoM. We will see!

[JG53Frankyboy]

to be honest, i beliv ethe most costumers are not interested in our forum talk.........
they are interested in official working output of the development team - read "STEAM patches"

Sure , its far beyond my understanding how someone can use this game with fun without getting help from the forums because of the totaly inadequate documantation/manual

[JVM]

Last new of BlackSix is they have stumbled on a very unexpected difficulty with the last patch so do not expect news before one or two weeks more, hoping it will be faster than that.

See http://www.sukhoi.ru/forum/showthread.php?t=73239&p=1742364&viewfull=1#post1742364

[klem]

Last new of BlackSix is they have stumbled on a very unexpected difficulty with the last patch so do not expect news before one or two weeks more, hoping it will be faster than that.

See http://www.sukhoi.ru/forum/showthread.php?t=73239&p=1742364&viewfull=1#post1742364

"So, consider it a mini-news updates: we have absolutely unexpected complexity and duration of occurrence of all the promised information pushed at least 1.5-2 weeks. I'll be very happy if mistaken in a big way. Details can not disclose. We will try as soon as possible to reduce the backlog of plans"

Patience guys. And turn "Troll ignore" on.

[JG52Uther]

Guess what. This forum is NOT here as a public playground for certain people to fight amongst themselves and attack each other. I have deleted around THIRTY posts from this thread alone. Think about that. I don't want to close it because I, and others like to hear info from Sukhoi.ru.
Last warning to those involved. Think before you post, be respectful towards each other or don't post. If you don't like a post, and you think it breaches the rules, report it.
Next time there will be a holiday for those involved, and I don't care what side of the argument you are on. This forum is not just for a vocal minority.

[JG52Uther]

Last new of BlackSix is they have stumbled on a very unexpected difficulty with the last patch so do not expect news before one or two weeks more, hoping it will be faster than that.

See http://www.sukhoi.ru/forum/showthread.php?t=73239&p=1742364&viewfull=1#post1742364

Thanks JVM, hopefully they can sort it out a bit sooner.

[Insuber]

One week more, two weeks more ... but with reference to WHAT? The discussion on dates is becoming esoteric at least ... announcing a delay on undisclosed dates is quite bizarre ... or did I loose a piece of information?

[Chivas]

The sooner people realize how fluid the situation is regarding developing and testing a product like this the less they will be fixated on fixed dates. The developers are not only trying to fix existing features, but adding features that can throw a grenade into whats already developed. You fix one thing and break something else...this requires alot of patience.

[furbs]

Quote:
Originally Posted by JVM View Post
Last new of BlackSix is they have stumbled on a very unexpected difficulty with the last patch so do not expect news before one or two weeks more, hoping it will be faster than that.

See http://www.sukhoi.ru/forum/showthrea...=1#post1742364

Why am i not in the least surprised.

[Insuber]

Chivas, I fully agree, I was just wondering why BS speaks of delay when he never promised any date whatsoever. anyway the game industry is basically a prototype business, each game is a unique piece. Schedules and budgets go astray more than in other businesses. But communication can still be kept on different subjects, without harming the confidence, stimulating interest and keeping the kids awaken.

[BPickles]

That's why in my humble opinion they should have started right back at square one and fixed fullscreen as a first priority rather than introduce changes to visual graphics in case those changes cannot be implemented or implemented with great difficulty after fullscreen is fixed.

[IamNotDavid]

Chivas, I fully agree, I was just wondering why BS speaks of delay when he never promised any date whatsoever. anyway the game industry is basically a prototype business, each game is a unique piece. Schedules and budgets go astray more than in other businesses. But communication can still be kept on different subjects, without harming the confidence, stimulating interest and keeping the kids awaken.

They had an internal date for releasing the update. This problem caused a delay from that date.

[Insuber]

The 1 or 2 weeks will become three (developers are a galaxy of optimists), then Christmas and the New Year, the Epiphany ... expect nothing until after Easter .. :D :D :D

[Insuber]

They had an internal date for releasing the update. This problem caused a delay from that date.
OK David, thx for the explanation. We are in the world of relativity here :D

[BPickles]

The 1 or 2 weeks will become three (developers are a galaxy of optimists), then Christmas and the New Year, the Epiphany ... expect nothing until after Easter .. :D :D :D

Hahaha OK time to uninstall again fellas

[JG52Krupi]

I am purely speculating but I personally think they had an internal date for releasing the update. This problem caused a delay from that date.

FIXED... no need to thank me.

[IamNotDavid]

FIXED... no need to thank me.

I wasn't speculating. I do this for a living. That's how it works.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

The sooner people realize how fluid the situation is regarding developing and testing a product like this the less they will be fixated on fixed dates. The developers are not only trying to fix existing features, but adding features that can throw a grenade into whats already developed. You fix one thing and break something else...this requires alot of patience.
Agreed 100%

Where alot forum members are lacking the bold portions

[JG52Uther]

They had an internal date for releasing the update. This problem caused a delay from that date.

Makes sense to me.

[Insuber]

Agreed 100%

Where alot forum members are lacking the bold portions

I have patience, but I understand people who waited 8 months and don't have a working game yet. I know personally some of them.

[pupo162]

I have patience, but I understand people who waited 8 months and don't have a working game yet. I know personally some of them.

pick me! pick me ! ;)

as it stnads, ill buy a new pc for crishtams if COD getds a good update till then. Else i will post pone it to october,

[Ctrl E]

Have there been any new pix over at the sukoi forum?

[ACE-OF-ACES]

but I understand people who waited 8 months and don't have a working game yet. I know personally some of them.
Ok lets take a closer look..

We know for a FACT that some people have a 'working game'

And your saying you know some people who don't have a 'working game'

The FACT that some do and some don't tells 'us' that it is not an issue with the game as much as it is an 'issue' with the people you know

What the 'issue' is depends on which 'people' you talk to

On the 'reasonable' end of the scale said 'people' would define a NON WORKING GAME as one that will not start when started, thus they are unable to fly at all

On the un-reasonable' end of the scale said 'people' would define a NON WORKING GAME as one where the shade of green on the trees is not correct ITHO

Long story short the definiton of 'working game' means different things to differnt people

And with that said, I care not for those people at or near the un-reasonable end of the scale

[Friendly_flyer]

My reading of the situation is that if they brought out a sequel now is that it would have all the underlying issues that presently exist. They are working on these issues and plan to have them sorted before the next release. In the meantime they are working on the maps and models so they are ready for the fully sorted engine. So no, I don't think they have any intention of just abandoning CloD as the code will be optimized first and then used for the Russian theatre. And no, I have no problem with spending what is a pitance on something that is being improved and developed and will give me years of real pleasure.

That's how I read it too.

[Insuber]

Ok lets take a closer look..

We know for a FACT that some people have a 'working game'

And your saying you know some people who don't have a 'working game'

The FACT that some do and some don't tells 'us' that it is not an issue with the game as much as it is an 'issue' with the people you know

What the 'issue' is depends on which 'people' you talk to

On the 'reasonable' end of the scale said 'people' would define a NON WORKING GAME as one that will not start when started, thus they are unable to fly at all

On the un-reasonable' end of the scale said 'people' would define a NON WORKING GAME as one where the shade of green on the trees is not correct ITHO

Long story short the definiton of 'working game' means different things to differnt people

And with that said, I care not for those people at or near the un-reasonable end of the scale

You are riding a dead horse here, my friend. The "people" I'm speaking about are long date CF simmers; one is a programmer and one of the BEST Il2 pilots I know. Three of them are Il2 instructors. The issue is simple and everyone here knows it: H/W or S/W incompatibilities make the game not running or running with serious issues/low quality, while all the other games and recent simulations, from RoF to ARMA, are running big time + top quality.

Cheers!

[Insuber]

I found a good explanation for the preference of our preferred devs for the sukhoi forum: censorship. I just tried to post, but every single post is checked and moderated before publishing. Insults and whining are very rare there ... we have our explanation, I guess.

[IamNotDavid]

I found a good explanation for the preference of our preferred devs for the sukhoi forum: censorship. I just tried to post, but every single post is checked and moderated before publishing. Insults and whining are very rare there ... we have our explanation, I guess.

They prefer to post where they're not being called liars? That is crazy.

[Tigertooo]

..

We know for a FACT that some people have a 'working game'

That seems to be true but if i look at those chaps who have a "working game" they mostly seem to have high end rigs to say the least ( SLI (working or not working)with cards with 3 GB DDR5, 12 to 16 Gig RAM at 1600 Mhz,240 Gig SSD etc...)
I have 6 GB RAM 1333 Mhz,Nvidia GFX 295 2.6 Gig DDR3,Intell i7-965 extreme quadcore 3.2 Ghz X 58 chipset etc. I should have been told before that with my rig, i would not be able to fly over London ,on full settings,with only 3 fps avarage,as i have. sorry

[Rather peeved]

Have there been any new pix over at the sukoi forum?

sukhoi, rather.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

You are riding a dead horse here, my friend.
I know.. but my hope is if I keep pointing out the fact that the game works fine for some people and not others that some of the people who are on the fence about CoD will say to themself

"Well, CoD is not the only game on the market that does not work on every PC out there"

Which says more about 'those' PC than CoD.. At which point they will feel more comfortable buying CoD knowing that the game runs fine for more people than not

The "people" I'm speaking about are long date CF simmers; one is a programmer and one of the BEST Il2 pilots I know. Three of them are Il2 instructors.
And there are CF simmers, programers, etc out there whos PCs run CoD just fine!

Just to be clear, I am not saying CoD will run fine on any PC out there! What I am saying there are PCs out there that CoD runs fine on. Since CoD runs fine on some and not others points the finger at the PC more than it does CoD

The issue is simple and everyone here knows it: H/W or S/W incompatibilities make the game not running or running with serious issues/low quality, while all the other games and recent simulations, from RoF to ARMA, are running big time + top quality.
Which is true of many games.. I know people who I play ARMA with who have to turn down the graphics setings to obtain decent FPS.. I also know guys who fly RoF who have to do the same. I also know guys in both camps that 'found something' after much tweaking of there PC that made the 'game' run better. Which brings us back to spaure one..

That being IMHO most of the issues people are having with CoD has more to do with thier PC than CoD. Only comming here you get a FILTERED impression that it is more bad than good.

Why?

Becuse most people for whom CoD runs fine on their PC are off playing CoD and not bothering with this forum. Where as people with problems come here looking for soultuions, some find them and move on, some dont. Its that simple

[ACE-OF-ACES]

I should have been told before that with my rig, i would not be able to fly over London ,on full settings,with only 3 fps avarage,as i have. sorry
First.. There is an options menu where you can turn down the details to improve the FPS

Second.. As I noted, I know guys with simular rigs that say it is running fine for them.. So, this again points a finger at the PC more than it does CoD

[JG52Uther]

Issues with CoD performance can be discussed in the relevant sub forum here:
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/forumdisplay.php?f=195

As it appears we are not going to hear much from Sukhoi.ru for a while now due to the new problems being found with the patch, and as it appears this thread is veering off topic again, its locked. I'm sure if there is any news someone will post it.

[BPickles]

Anyone found any news at the sukhoi forum ?

[Feathered_IV]

Most recent news was the news that the new graphics engine had some newly discovered bugs, so no further news would be forthcoming for some time. Sorry about the bad news. :wink:

[klem]

Anyone found any news at the sukhoi forum ?

http://www.microsofttranslator.com/bv.aspx?from=&to=en&a=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sukhoi.ru%2Fforum%2Fshowthread. php%3Ft%3D73239%26s%3Da841858625e0ef83092a94b1c758 94f6%26p%3D1742364%26viewfull%3D1%23post1742364

"at least 1.5 to 2 weeks" but I'd guess more like 4-6.

[phoenix1963]

I've heard claims originating from Beta testers that the new graphics is both faster and better-looking.

56RAF_phoenix

[JG52Uther]

I've heard claims originating from Beta testers that the new graphics is both faster and better-looking.

56RAF_phoenix

Thats great news if thats the case! :)

[Tavingon]

Excellent!

[hiro]

read through some of it . . .



Google translation is strange, maybe native Russian speakers can get the translation correct.

but this is what I understood . . .



some highlights:



SE topic

b6-> Hello Mazex
The "Battle for Moscow" has not yet been announced. I'm sorry, but we can not disclose the details and tell you about installation options.


------


*patch


b6-> Given the difficulties we have encountered no exact dates now indicate. Naturally, we will try to release a patch as quickly as possible.


------

*41-42 new planes ->



The question to read-whether to expect the BzB (patches) increase in the fleet, namely Bf-109F, Fw-190 early models, the Spitfire V and others. If you expect, what time? Isn't the next addon, namely patches to BzB.


b6 -> Expansion of the fleet of 1941-42. release will need to create a new terrestrial technology ships, expansion cards, etc small blood is not a cost. To this add-on BzB, as far as I know, is not planned. Modellery already switched to a new project.


-------

* I demand immediate Soviet aircraft .

B6-> All, now I'm calm)



---


* PS excuse about speed such that cannot be seen simply does not look DCS KA50 there too the blades
3-dimensional and pitch adjustable and all perfectly visible.

B6 -> this spoils the picture, the modern game is inconceivable without anti-aliasing and the problem should be solved in the future.




----


* BlackSix message from
I was surprised that at Russian Forum asked about the Western front, and do not require immediate Soviet aircraft

-> B6 -> Yes, it was planned that will evolve also. BzB But all the details will only appear after the announcement the next project.





-----



Hi! You can create a special topic in the English language http://www.sukhoi.ru/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=233 .in section and continuously update its. Developers will watch it.




------

* on potential theaters ->

b6-> Changes in technology are still there, despite the fact that Britain slala almost all novelties in Africa and Germany to the East. The new destroyers, hunters, subs (no ŝas). All this further complicates the potential problem of development at 41-42 BZB. Think about the unavoidable in this case, requests to Dieppe and breakthrough of German battleships across the English channel. But first it is important to the Publisher-make this add-on or not.

[Insuber]

Good news! Source? Sukhoi?

[Ataros]

BzB = BoB

B6 explains why F4 or 190 will not be included(most likely) into BoB but will appear in new theatres only.

[Chivas]

BzB = BoB

B6 explains why F4 or 190 will not be included(most likely) into BoB but will appear in new theatres only.

The F4 and 190 will appear in new theaters, but there is nothing to stop people from making missions with the F4's and 190's on the BOB map when you've done a merged install. The plan for all new theaters will be merged or standalone installs.

[6S.Manu]

The F4 and 190 will appear in new theaters, but there is nothing to stop people from making missions with the F4's and 190's on the BOB map when you've done a merged install. The plan for all new theaters will be merged or standalone installs.

You don't know how much I fear we'll have the bomber version AGAIN ... the one who performs worser than a damaged 190 with a Stuka propeller.

[fruitbat]

You don't know how much I fear we'll have the bomber version AGAIN ... the one who performs worser than a damaged 190 with a Stuka propeller.

please please please, a 190 with historical acceleration, and not that of a pregnant wilderbeast.

[JG53Frankyboy]

the old plan was IIRC to release scenario related planesets.
If 1C is still following this plan, its a good decission IMO !

So no Würger for the Battle of Britain !!
And not for Battle of Moskau too btw. I consider it a Winter 1941/42 scenario.

that a lot of people here in this forum would have liked a 1942 Channel scenario AdOn like Dieppe or something MTO , well, and it will be now easterfront again so fast - may have to do that it is a russian developer :D

you remember the good old I-16 tanks with their green lasers ;) we will meet them soon again :D

[jimbop]

I'm glad they are in good enough shape to continue with BoM expansion - I hope they make a packet. Further expansion of BoB would have been nice but this might come later. Remember that after Moscow there will be other expansions.

[JG53Frankyboy]

i would guess that depends on the succes of this BoM AdOn.......

[Chivas]

As far as battles like Dieppe, they can be done by third parties. I don't see the need for the developer to cover or concentrate resources on small short campaigns.

[JG53Frankyboy]

its actually not about the campaigns....the official ones were never a strong part of this developer. its more about to give a planeset a timeframe.
and a channel 42 one would be interesting. BUT, its sensless in the moment to discuss this. the more or less near future is the Battle of Moskau.

[hiro]

Good news! Source? Sukhoi?


I looked in pages 6-8

http://www.sukhoi.ru/forum/showthread.php?t=73239&page=9


I am following the thread above and using google translate and just picking out black6's answers




-----

update; more on monday (woot!)



BlackSix ->

Re: Communicating and working with the community in the "IL-2 BzB"
People, I will answer questions on Monday. Over the weekend, very busy always, will appear occasionally on the forum.

[zapatista]

No Foobar i dont, FM, DM, clouds, dynamic weather, any weather!, sound,radio coms, memory leaks, Exe crashes, Track record feature, ground handling, map features, FSAA, Full screen, FMB docs, QMB, AI, single player campaign all need quite a bit of work.

Its about 60% done to me so far.

i'd call it 30% done (of what they need to fix, and they still need to add elements not included at the last moment because of the release debacle)

the ones you forgot in your list are,
- ground AI traffic at airfields and on roads. this was going to be a big part of the new BoB series to bring the virtual world alive ( and there is no sign of any of this so far)
- dynamic campaign which can run 24/7 on a server (with AI activity on both sides) over several weeks/months (in the style of falcon 4, confirmed by oleg to be included albeit in a "limited effect by individual player actions on battle outcome "
- dynamic weather
- complex AI ground battles with moving front lines (for coop and other online servers)
- some player control over artillery and flak guns (ideally this would be control over a flak battery for ex, but oleg iirc only ever spoke specifically about manning individual guns), and some control over ground vehicles and ships

another point, but i havnt seen to many people complain about this in the last months. right now CoD scenery simply doesnt look/feel like you are flying over england. in CoD you have mainly medium/large trees lining roads, and some token trees randomly placed as parts of boundaries between fields. the south of england should really mainly show large hedges lining the smaller country roads roads (and separating fields, with some trees and shrubbery added), and then area's of woodland separately.

i still have high hopes luthier and Co will deal with most of these major flaws soonish, and that the staff working on battle for Moscow are just surplus designers not needed on the "plu the sinking boat" project.

[zapatista]

I'm glad they are in good enough shape to continue with BoM expansion - I hope they make a packet. Further expansion of BoB would have been nice but this might come later. Remember that after Moscow there will be other expansions.

good point !

and they have taken new staff on recently (including programmers), so it cant be all bad financially for them. lets just hope some of the main problems and omitted material gets dealt with soon.

[Chivas]

I originally thought that the Battle for Moscow was a third party add on, but I'm not so sure anymore. Either way it should provide a much needed influx of cash. I've said for many years that I didn't know how the development could build all the planned features and still have a playable fps. Even after eight months it still looks like a long shot, so I think they will probably have to phase in features like dynamic weather over the long term with each additional theater. So far online play is very good, but offline play will require that the AI and commands be fixed sooner than later.

[Ataros]

I am following the thread above and using google translate and just picking out black6's answers

You can also try http://translate.yandex.com/ from a #1 Russian search engine company. They may have a better translation sometimes but not always.

This one is good too and Russian-native http://www.online-translator.com/Default.aspx/Site

PS. Oops, sorry, Yandex uses PROMPT engine so they are the same.

[JG52Uther]

Latest from Blacksix at sukhoi using google translate...

Hello!

Voicing plans for this work week (05.12-09.12):

1) in the first place I have been sending all of us received offers of assistance and cooperation
2) early in the week I will form a list of the comments made above the wishes and requests and pass them to Ilya
3) in the middle of the week launched a project "Handbook of the mission designer"
4) at about the same time, create a list of your questions and also give Ilia
5) at the end of the week I'll start to see the section "What do virpily?" in search of interesting proposals

Some explanations:
- Feedback on your suggestions and requests will most likely not, if something is implemented - this information appears in the Readme for the patch
- I begin its substantive work and appear on the forum will become a little less

[salmo]

"Handbook of the mission designer"
At last. We might get some useful information about many of those objects, switches, hooks, *.cpp scripts, and other object-related tickbox variables in the FMB.

[BlackSix]

"Handbook of the mission designer"
At last. We might get some useful information about many of those objects, switches, hooks, *.cpp scripts, and other object-related tickbox variables in the FMB.

No, there's another problem solved.
Handbook of the mission designer - the creation of a detailed document on the composition and changes in military states (from platoon to division or corps) for the Red Army and Wehrmacht, covering certain periods of the war. This will help us develop future projects, as well as provide you with structured information in a convenient way to create missions and campaigns.

[swiss]

So that will be a "History" manual?
Will there also be "Technical" manual for functions of the FMB?

[salmo]

No, there's another problem solved.
Handbook of the mission designer - the creation of a detailed document on the composition and changes in military states (from platoon to division or corps) for the Red Army and Wehrmacht, covering certain periods of the war. This will help us develop future projects, as well as provide you with structured information in a convenient way to create missions and campaigns.

Thankyou for the prompt response BlackSix. It's great that background information to assist mission building is being compiled. Perhaps you'd be kind enough to ask when might we expect a FMB manual. Something with information about object interactions, switches, hooks, *.cpp scripts, and other object-related tickbox variables in the FMB.

[BlackSix]

So that will be a "History" manual?
Will there also be "Technical" manual for functions of the FMB?
Yes. I don't plan a technical manual. I myself still need to understand the features editor.

[BlackSix]

Thankyou for the prompt response BlackSix. It's great that background information to assist mission building is being compiled. Perhaps you'd be kind enough to ask when might we expect a FMB manual. Something with information about object interactions, switches, hooks, *.cpp scripts, and other object-related tickbox variables in the FMB.

For BoB missions make Ilya Shevchenko and Ilya Steshov (programmer and 3D modeler). They are very busy, as the programmers who created the FMB. Now write a manual just a nobody. Sorry.

[JG52Krupi]

Hey Black6 any news regarding the two week delay?

[BlackSix]

Hey Black6 any news regarding the two week delay?

No, the problem still persists. Unfortunately, I can not tell what it was.


Another note about the message here:
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpost.php?p=365154&postcount=9
It was not about this forum.

I was referring to an old Russian official forum 1C, which had yellow skin.
Now he has changed and looks like http://forum.1csc.ru/

[JG52Krupi]

Okay, thanks for the info.

[5./JG27 Lehmann]

I think (hope) I speak for everyone in the community when I thank you for posting here BlackSix, it's nice to have some official word now and again :)

By the way, your English is not as bad as you think it is!

[BlackSix]

I think (hope) I speak for everyone in the community when I thank you for posting here BlackSix, it's nice to have some official word now and again :)

By the way, your English is not as bad as you think it is!

I'm very concerned about the current situation here with the paucity of information. Important news and updates will continue to post Ilya Shevchenko. I will try where possible to monitor this forum and respond to critical issues.

However, to conduct large-scale projects here, as in Sukhoi.ru associated with handling large volumes of information, I can not.
I read in English, but had to write through the translator and it gives a lot of problems.

[Crane]

No, the problem still persists. Unfortunately, I can not tell what it was.


Another note about the message here:
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpost.php?p=365154&postcount=9
It was not about this forum.

I was referring to an old Russian official forum 1C, which had yellow skin.
Now he has changed and looks like http://forum.1csc.ru/

Thank you for trying to explain whats going on, is it possible u could copy everything you put in the sukhoi forum and paste it here please for future posts that is, it will only take a minute to do then we can at least try to translate it and be kept in the loop. It must be very frustrating for you not being able to communicate properly with the die hard fans on the only 'OFFICIAL' forum, maybe you could explain this to Luthier and let him know that the 'OFFICIAL' forum members would like some of the benefits that the 'UNOFFICIAL' forum members at sukhoi are getting.

Many Thanks

Crane.

[flyingblind]

Please do not worry about your English, BlackSix. We understand what you say well enough and it is very good to hear what is happening. Thank you very much.

[BlackSix]

Thank you for trying to explain whats going on, is it possible u could copy everything you put in the sukhoi forum and paste it here please for future posts that is, it will only take a minute to do then we can at least try to translate it and be kept in the loop.

Here is the problem. Large positions, such as this (http://www.sukhoi.ru/forum/showthread.php?t=73239&p=1744077&viewfull=1#post1744077), it is impossible to insert a translator. Can I post it here in Russian and you are going to translate?

It must be very frustrating for you not being able to communicate properly with the die hard fans on the only 'OFFICIAL' forum, maybe you could explain this to Luthier and let him know that the 'OFFICIAL' forum members would like some of the benefits that the 'UNOFFICIAL' forum members at sukhoi are getting.

Luthier know about it. My inceptions duty - the development of missions. Working with the Russian official and unofficial forums - additional duty.
We have a very small team. Select someone who would be specially studied English forums we can not. It is the responsibility rests with Ilya, I will help where possible.

[csThor]

No, there's another problem solved.
Handbook of the mission designer - the creation of a detailed document on the composition and changes in military states (from platoon to division or corps) for the Red Army and Wehrmacht, covering certain periods of the war. This will help us develop future projects, as well as provide you with structured information in a convenient way to create missions and campaigns.

That sounds interesting. If you want input on the german armed forces and the Luftwaffe just ask ... ;)

[BlackSix]

That sounds interesting. If you want input on the german armed forces and the Luftwaffe just ask ... ;)

Thanks, I'll try to start this project in the December 7

[Feathered_IV]

I read in English, but had to write through the translator and it gives a lot of problems.

It's okay. Many of us are veterans of translating Oleg-ish. After that, everything else seems simple.

:-P

[Flanker35M]

S!

I bet even the postings are not in perfect English, people are more than happy to get some information how things are progressing :) And what we got now already calmed down the atmosphere somewhat IMO as people know work is progressing :)

[BlackSix]

It's okay. Many of us are veterans of translating Oleg-ish. After that, everything else seems simple.

:-P

Ок)

S!

I bet even the postings are not in perfect English, people are more than happy to get some information how things are progressing :) And what we got now already calmed down the atmosphere somewhat IMO as people know work is progressing :)

Well, I will try to inform you.

[BlackSix]

The list of requests and suggestions that will be passed on to Ilya Last week:
http://www.sukhoi.ru/forum/showthread.php?t=73239&p=1744838&viewfull=1#post1744838

General

1. If possible, please upload templates psd-skin aircraft.


2. Realize the effect the opening of the lantern on the characteristics of the aircraft in flight

3. Solve the problem with radiators, removing the endless supply of coolant does not decrease when damaged.


4. It is desirable to realize the impact of cloud hot gases from ground explosions (for example, if it enters the tank) on the plane flying through them.

5. When selecting an aircraft, the model is desirable to display the menu hung bombs.


6. It is desirable to add the button to instantly hide and restore all of the information windows.


Fixing options

7. When switching to the look and slips back sight, please fix it at the last position.

8. Capture card in the last selected position and size.


9. Memorize the selected number of fuel for each aircraft in the menu.


10. Memorize enable or disable the rear-view mirror on Spitfire and Hurricanes.

Recording tracks

11. When viewing a previously recorded track to realize the opportunity to watch the battle, not only from the cab player, but from the booths of enemy bots (and his too) (we are only about offline).

12. It is desirable to simplify the process of recording tracks to assignable buttons - hit record went, once again pressed - stop asking about the file name, or prescribe it by default.

Online

13. Enable statistics for online bombers of the type, as is done offline. Now there are only records of destroyed ships.

14. The proposal to integrate count downed opponents online.
Now it is implemented as a percentage of number of points gets brought down to either one or three for and more. It is desirable division of downed aircraft in the clean victory and the group. That is, if 100% of injured player is counted as a single victory, and if the relationship with anyone within 1-99%, the group has already scored a victory.
It might be better not just change, and the addition of such accounting kills an already existing one for dogfayta, the other for projects.

It would also be a good idea to consider separately the pilots of aircraft.

15. In the derivation of Statistics online (shot down, deaths) to emphasize the player's nickname and the whole line with the figures, since difficult to find yourself on the list and do not lose when you view the results.

[JG52Uther]

Thanks!

[Friendly_flyer]

Thank you for stepping by, BlackSix! Your effort to share information is very much appreciated!

[Insuber]

Thank you for coming here BlackSix! your work is much appreciated!

[ElAurens]

Thank you sir.

[hiro]

thanks for the updates

[BlackSix]

I have an idea to divide the work on the Handbook of the mission designer between this forum and Sukhoi.ru. Tell you more tomorrow)

[jimbop]

Looking forward to it - thanks for the effort!

[Foo'bar]

It is also desirable to count destroyed ground targets and ships in the netstats as well.

Sorry if already mentioned before somewhere else.

[ReconNZ]

Thanks blacksix, your time here is much appreciated, your English is fine!! :-)

[ParaB]

Thank you Black Six, your efforts are much appreciated.

[BlackSix]

It is also desirable to count destroyed ground targets and ships in the netstats as well.

Sorry if already mentioned before somewhere else.

Thank you!
The list is not final and will continue to be adjusted.

[Flanker35M]

S!

Also this strange thing in Multiplayer. You shoot at a plane but he returns to base. All is OK until he exits the plane when game shows AI has been shot down. Same applies to you too, if you get hit and land then exit plane = game tells someone shot AI plane down.

[Dano]

Would just like to add my thanks for your efforts Blacksix :)

While we're discussing things that need adding or adjusting how about some control issues such as zoom on a slider or axis and progressive wheel brakes for those that don't have a spare axis for them.

[335th_GRAthos]

progressive wheel brakes for those that don't have a spare axis for them.

It is like asking for the "squaring of the circle".
Just get used to press-release the brake key quickly, it will do the job as long as you do not have a spare axis to use....


~S~

[Dano]

It is like asking for the "squaring of the circle".
Just get used to press-release the brake key quickly, it will do the job as long as you do not have a spare axis to use....


~S~

Sorry, I understand what you are saying but there is no harm in adding the option is there? I should not have to hammer away at a key just to use the brakes, IL2 worked perfectly so why change.

[Sokol1]

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpost.php?p=365154&postcount=9
It was not about this forum.

I was referring to an old Russian official forum 1C, which had yellow skin.
Now he has changed and looks like http://forum.1csc.ru/

This forum here is more know as "Banana's" than "Yellow". :)

Sokol1

[pupo162]

Sorry, I understand what you are saying but there is no harm in adding the option is there? I should not have to hammer away at a key just to use the brakes, IL2 worked perfectly so why change.

for realism sake.

[jimbop]

for realism sake.

What does on/off button mashing have to do with a foot brake?

Realism seems to be the catch-all response for cumbersome controls...

[robtek]

It's a hand-brake in british fighters, isn't it?

[Tavingon]

Getting a lil' stale here now, would be good for some news!

[Dano]

for realism sake.

Don't be ridiculous.

[klem]

It's a hand-brake in british fighters, isn't it?

Yes, it was a lever on the Spade Grip (like an overgrown bicycle brake lever) which passed variable hydraulic pressure to both wheel brakes, i.e. the harder you squeezed the more pressure it passed (which CoD does not do, it gives full pressure even on my slider). Using the rudder changed how much pressure went to each wheel. Left rudder reduced the right brake pressure and increased left pessure (which CoD does).

[jimbop]

Interesting, thanks klem.

[salmo]

BlackSix,
Could you ask the Dev's about the AI & *.cpp script objects in FMB. Speciifically, what they do & how to use them.

AI OBJECTS
Airfield - Function unknown, how to use unknown.
Anti-Air - Function unknown, how to use unknown.
Ground - Function unknown, how to use unknown.

CPP SCRIPTS
airport.cpp- Function unknown, how to use unknown.
baseAntiAir.cpp - Function unknown, how to use unknown.
bus_car.cpp - Function unknown (seems to work like car.cpp)
car.cpp - When used on a vehicle & attached to a spline road, the vehicle will travel up & down that road indefinitely.
emrg_car.cpp - Function unknown, how to use unknown.
poweron.cpp - use to provide power to 'poered objects'. Attach to generator for searchlights.

[Buchon]

^

I dont watched the files but the .cpp extension mean C++.

So I guess that it are files that contain the behavior of those AI objects, but writes in C++ code.

You can watch the code opening the files with a text editor, but write C++ code requires a high knowledge in compute programing, it is not a easy task.

[BlackSix]

BlackSix,
Could you ask the Dev's about the AI & *.cpp script objects in FMB. Speciifically, what they do & how to use them.

AI OBJECTS
Airfield - Function unknown, how to use unknown.
Anti-Air - Function unknown, how to use unknown.
Ground - Function unknown, how to use unknown.

CPP SCRIPTS
airport.cpp- Function unknown, how to use unknown.
baseAntiAir.cpp - Function unknown, how to use unknown.
bus_car.cpp - Function unknown (seems to work like car.cpp)
car.cpp - When used on a vehicle & attached to a spline road, the vehicle will travel up & down that road indefinitely.
emrg_car.cpp - Function unknown, how to use unknown.
poweron.cpp - use to provide power to 'poered objects'. Attach to generator for searchlights.

I can ask, but most likely I will not receive a response.
Our programmers are not able now to write this statement.

[BlackSix]

The final version of the list of requests that will be passed to Ilya last week. Part I.

General

- Если будет возможность, просьба выложить psd-шаблоны скинов самолетов.
- If possible, please upload templates psd-skin aircraft.

- Реализовать влияние на ТТХ открытие фонарей в полете.
- Realize the effect the opening of the canopy on the characteristics of the aircraft in flight

- Решить проблему с радиаторами, убрав бесконечный запас охлаждающей жидкости, не уменьшающейся при повреждении.
- Solve the problem with the radiator by removing the endless supply of coolant does not decrease when damaged.

- При выборе самолета, на модели в меню желательно отображать подвешенные бомбы.
- When the aircraft model in the menu, it is desirable to display the bomb suspended.

- Желательно добавить кнопку для мгновенного скрытия и восстановления всех информационных окон.
- It is desirable to add the button to instantly hide and restore all of the information windows.

- Разрешить использовать колесо мыши как дополнительную ось.
- Allow to use the mouse wheel as a secondary axis.

Fixing options

- При переключении на внешние виды и обратно сбивается последний выбор настройки "Взгляд через прицел", просьба фиксировать прицел в последнем положении.
- When switching over to look and slips back to the last option settings "Looking through the scope", please fix the sight in the last position.

- Фиксировать карту в последнем выбранном положении и размере, сохранять эту настройку после выхода из игры.
- Fixed the map in the last selected position and size, to keep this setting after you exit the game.

- Запоминать выбранное кол-во топлива для каждого конкретного самолета в меню.
- Remember the chosen number of fuel for each aircraft in the menu.

- Запоминать включение или отключение зеркала заднего обзора на Спитфайрах и Харрикейнах.
- Remember to enable or disable the rearview mirror on the Spitfire and Hurricanes.

Recording tracks

- При просмотре записанного ранее трека реализовать возможность следить за боем не только из кабины игрока, но и из кабин вражеских ботов (и своих тоже) (речь только об оффлайне).
- When viewing a previously recorded track to realize the opportunity to watch the battle, not only from the cab player, but from the booths of enemy bots (and his too) (we are only about offline).

- Желательно упростить процесс записи треков до назначаемой кнопки - при нажатии начинается запись, ещё одно нажатие - остановилась с вопросом об имени файла, или прописывать его по умолчанию или дать выбрать заранее в настройках.
- It is desirable to simplify the process of recording tracks to assignable buttons - when you begin writing, one more click - stop asking about the file name, or to prescribe it as a default or give pre-select in the settings.

Online

- Включение статистики в онлайне для бомбардировщиков по типу того, как это сделано в оффлайне.
- Enable statistics for online bombers of the type, as is done offline.

- Предложение по учёту кол-ва сбитых противников в онлайне.
Сейчас это реализовано в процентном соотношении кол-во очков попадает либо к одному сбившему, либо к троим и более.

Желательно разделение сбитых самолётов на чистые победы и групповые.
Т.е.если 100% повреждёно игроком, то засчитывается как одиночная победа, а если соотношение с кем-либо в пределах 1-99%, то засчитывается уже групповая победа. Возможно, лучше не просто изменение, а добавление такого учёта килов к уже существующему, один для догфайта, другой для проектов.
Также было бы неплохо считать пилотов отдельно от самолетов.- Proposal for accounting of number of downed opponents online.
- Now it is implemented as a percentage of number of points gets brought down to either one or three for and more. It is desirable division of downed aircraft in the clean victory and the group.
That is, if 100% of injured player is counted as a single victory, and if the relationship with anyone within 1-99%, the group has already scored a victory.
It might be better not just change, and the addition of such accounting kills an already existing one for dogfayta, the other for projects.
It would also be a good idea to consider separately the pilots of aircraft.

- При выводе статистики в онлайне (сбито-смертей) подчеркивать ник игрока и всю строчку с цифрами (или выделять ее жирным шрифтом), т.к. сложно найти себя в списке и не сбиться при просмотре результатов.
- In the derivation of Statistics online (shot down, deaths) to emphasize the player's nickname and the entire line of figures (or highlight it in bold), because difficult to find yourself on the list and do not lose when you view the results.

Sorry, but I can not collect your comments and questions on this forum. Very big load right now.
Can someone from the moderators or users us take up the challenge of a similar list of your wishes?

[Sokol1]

Someone understand this request?

Realize (Actualize) the effect the opening of the lantern (lamps) on the characteristics of the aircraft in flight

"Opening lamps... lanterns..." Maybee canopy/radiators?

Sokol1

[addman]

Someone understand this request?



"Opening lamps... lanterns..." Maybee canopy/radiators?

Sokol1

I think they mean lanterns=navigational lights. They aren't functioning yet. Another one to add to the endless list of missing basic features.:(

[BlackSix]

Someone understand this request?

"Opening lamps... lanterns..." Maybee canopy/radiators?

Sokol1

Yes, a canopy. Now I will correct.
Transfer problem through Google

[Insuber]

I think they mean lanterns=navigational lights. They aren't functioning yet. Another one to add to the endless list of missing basic features.:(

Nope lantern it's the canopy, at present opening it does not penalise the speed; apart from the realism aspects, this facilitates the "sound radar" cheat.

[BPickles]

yeah they cant add anymore lights yet till they sort out how they shine through your plane and all other objects.

[BPickles]

Can we ask questions? If so BS, could you ask when they are going to add Structural Limits to the FM's

[BlackSix]

Can we ask questions? If so BS, could you ask when they are going to add Structural Limits to the FM's

You mean the allowable load structure of the aircraft?

[Insuber]

You mean the allowable load structure of the aircraft?

Yes, maximum allowable g acceleration on the aircraft structure. And the aircraft damage due to exceeding the Vne or maximum g acceleration.

[BlackSix]

Yes, maximum allowable g acceleration on the aircraft structure. And the aircraft damage due to exceeding the Vne or maximum g acceleration.

Well, I'll ask

Will we get planes that can approach the historical Vne values? Everything is a bit too slow, except for one culprit.

It requires specific examples with detailed explanations and proofs

[KG26_Alpha]

Forum Members

Please be very specific in any questions/requests, coming here and being vague helps no one.

Feeling something is wrong is no good, please bring hard data and or screenshots where applicable to graphic issues for BlackSix to address any genuine problems/bugs.

FM/DM problems require in game data v real world data where possible.

If you want to help be very specific please.

Many Thanks.



.

[BlackSix]

Guys!
I promised to tell you today about the creation of Handbook of the missions designer. There are several unresolved issues. First I want to discuss this with the moderators, and try to find the best way to work with your forum. Please wait.

[ReconNZ]

Thanks Blacksix, even the the small updates telling us you will get back to us are great to hear! :)

I'd also like to ask about navigational lights please on planes, - these would add a lot to the sim. Are they working in the new graphics engine?

S

Recon.

[salmo]

Guys!
I promised to tell you today about the creation of Handbook of the missions designer. There are several unresolved issues. First I want to discuss this with the moderators, and try to find the best way to work with your forum. Please wait.
Making a document with collaboration from many individuals is difficult. Keeping contributors up to date with the latest version, checking facts, incorporating content etc. May I respectfully suggest you consider using a wiki-based approach.

[BlackSix]

Thanks Blacksix, even the the small updates telling us you will get back to us are great to hear! :)

I'd also like to ask about navigational lights please on planes, - these would add a lot to the sim. Are they working in the new graphics engine?

S

Recon.

I'll make a list of questions to Ilya. Question about navigation lights, landing lights and the smoke alarm is there. The list will be published here.

Making a document with collaboration from many individuals is difficult. Keeping contributors up to date with the latest version, checking facts, incorporating content etc. May I respectfully suggest you consider using a wiki-based approach.

Yeah, I thought about it. But I will not be able to lead such a project because of problems with English. You will need to find a leader in your community :)

[Peril]

I'll have a stab at commenting on this.

I have pondered this topic for awhile, being a FM builder for Targetware for 6 years gave me a unique view on the issues involved with the quest to achieve close to reality (having been involved at the pointy end).

Data vs RL. Will IL2 guys be interested in the finer points, spending the time seeking the 'quality' data ie. the data varies and we need to make a call on which data or blend of data is most 'logical'. Then there is the accuracy, I have 70Gs of tested data, some has error and these are only evident after much research and time invested. So whilst someone can quote data, there is nothing to say it's the 'best data' or more representative average performance data.

I am willing to offer up my collection of original manual and tested data to help define/refine performance targets. Most of my good data streams start post BoB as the sim I build was WW2 Pacific. However; I do have a Gig or so on 109s and 110s, some good stuff on Spits from the MkV onwards, especially tropical varients. If the requests are specific I'm more able to possibly locate the answer and supply proofs, perhaps a few proofs that give a better average.

Anyway, point being it's not as simple as finding one source and saying it's 100% correct. Even tested data has a 10% margin of error, and planes do vary. Clean, dirty, which time period, what fuel etc etc. BUT if the data is clear and specifies the details then you can make a good representation.

I agree, some planes seem 'estimated', there would be much room for improvement, if we are allowed to help. I think this sim could get on top of any failings rather more quickly than going it alone with the one source of data that IL2 had used now.. to be more accurate IL2 CoD could call on the vast collections of the hard core FM guys like myself, it does exist and can be used to fill the data gaps.

I only ask that the data is used to improve the accuracy of ClOD, not to 'sell' to another company.

[CaptainDoggles]

A lot of us were under the impression that the flight models were undergoing review and would be fixed in the upcoming patch.

Is this still true?

[BlackSix]

I'll have a stab at commenting on this.

I have pondered this topic for awhile, being a FM builder for Targetware for 6 years gave me a unique view on the issues involved with the quest to achieve close to reality (having been involved at the pointy end).

Data vs RL. Will IL2 guys be interested in the finer points, spending the time seeking the 'quality' data ie. the data varies and we need to make a call on which data or blend of data is most 'logical'. Then there is the accuracy, I have 70Gs of tested data, some has error and these are only evident after much research and time invested. So whilst someone can quote data, there is nothing to say it's the 'best data' or more representative average performance data.

I am willing to offer up my collection of original manual and tested data to help define/refine performance targets. Most of my good data streams start post BoB as the sim I build was WW2 Pacific. However; I do have a Gig or so on 109s and 110s, some good stuff on Spits from the MkV onwards, especially tropical varients. If the requests are specific I'm more able to possibly locate the answer and supply proofs, perhaps a few proofs that give a better average.

Anyway, point being it's not as simple as finding one source and saying it's 100% correct. Even tested data has a 10% margin of error, and planes do vary. Clean, dirty, which time period, what fuel etc etc. BUT if the data is clear and specifies the details then you can make a good representation.

I agree, some planes seem 'estimated', there would be much room for improvement, if we are allowed to help. I think this sim could get on top of any failings rather more quickly than going it alone with the one source of data that IL2 had used now.. to be more accurate IL2 CoD could call on the vast collections of the hard core FM guys like myself, it does exist and can be used to fill the data gaps.

I only ask that the data is used to improve the accuracy of ClOD, not to 'sell' to another company.

Thank you. I will show your message to Ilya today.

A lot of us were under the impression that the flight models were undergoing review and would be fixed in the upcoming patch.

Is this still true?

Now we have such problems, and I can not say right now that will be in the patch. Need to wait for information from Ilya.

[David198502]

i would like to ask, if a dynamic campaign is in the works for COD.

[BlackSix]

i would like to ask, if a dynamic campaign is in the works for COD.

Now is not planned. Maybe this will be done in our next projects.

[Peril]

A lot of us were under the impression that the flight models were undergoing review and would be fixed in the upcoming patch.

Is this still true?

Without depressing you, I spent 6 years doing nothing but FMs, they are never 'fixed' in one patch :) hehehe.

But they do change for the better over time as more data presents itself and the game engine evolves.

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

Thanks BlackSix, the offer is no guarantee I can help, but I will search what I have if asked.

[CaptainDoggles]

Now we have such problems, and I can not say right now that will be in the patch. Need to wait for information from Ilya.

Thank you

[David198502]

thx BlackSix for your quick answer!!!
its really nice that you communicate with us on this forum as well!a BIG THANKS to you.

however,...a dynamic campaign would be a really important feature for the series i think.cause it makes the game worth to replay it again and again.so i really hope that this will be implemented at least in the next title.

heck, i just reinstalled 1946 to play the dynamic campaign of stalingrad...it really looks and feels old, but it has content at least.

[David198502]

@BackSix

i understand that a dynamic campaign is really time consuming to create....but if the devs could give us the tools to create them by ourselves, then im pretty certain, that it would be done by the comunity.
but to my knowledge, the tools are not there yet, to make a real dynamic campaign like in 1946.

[jimbop]

@BackSix

i understand that a dynamic campaign is really time consuming to create....but if the devs could give us the tools to create them by ourselves, then im pretty certain, that it would be done by the comunity.
but to my knowledge, the tools are not there yet, to make a real dynamic campaign like in 1946.

Yes, I'm sure this will be a community or third party thing. There are already prototypes being produced but I guess it needs the sdk.

[David198502]

yes but all the campaigns made by the communtiy are only semi-dynamic.
i would like to have the real thing like in 1946, with moving frontlines,...destryed buildings and targets stay destroyed on the map,your success influences the outcome,the possibility of getting medals and new ranks.

i agree that this could be done by the community, and i think that this would be even better for both, the devs and the customers.the community could possibly create dynamic campaigns in less time, while the devs can focuse on other things.but we would need the tools for it.
to my knowledge its not possible yet.

[BlackSix]

thx BlackSix for your quick answer!!!
its really nice that you communicate with us on this forum as well!a BIG THANKS to you.

however,...a dynamic campaign would be a really important feature for the series i think.cause it makes the game worth to replay it again and again.so i really hope that this will be implemented at least in the next title.

heck, i just reinstalled 1946 to play the dynamic campaign of stalingrad...it really looks and feels old, but it has content at least.

Yes you're right, dynamic campaigns provide a good replayability
However, I started doing in 2002 hardcore static campaign, always refers to dynamic negative. It's always problems with balance and historical accuracy. It is best suited for a hypothetical conflict than the actual events.
But the dynamic campaign certainly would be useful now.

[jimbop]

Without depressing you, I spent 6 years doing nothing but FMs, they are never 'fixed' in one patch :) hehehe.

But they do change for the better over time as more data presents itself and the game engine evolves.

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

Thanks BlackSix, the offer is no guarantee I can help, but I will search what I have if asked.

I mustn't understand this properly... surely there were hundreds of pages of debate and records dredged up etc during late IL-2 development - is there still not broad consensus of what the model windows should be? If not I doubt there ever will be.

[BlackSix]

@BackSix

i understand that a dynamic campaign is really time consuming to create....but if the devs could give us the tools to create them by ourselves, then im pretty certain, that it would be done by the comunity.
but to my knowledge, the tools are not there yet, to make a real dynamic campaign like in 1946.

I honestly don't know whether the opportunity to make a campaign with the SDK. I can not now answer this question.

[David198502]

ok no problem if you dont know yet...but maybe you can ask??

[BlackSix]

ok no problem if you dont know yet...but maybe you can ask??

Maybe ;)

[David198502]

Maybe ;)

:grin: thx

[BlackSix]

@BackSix

i understand that a dynamic campaign is really time consuming to create....but if the devs could give us the tools to create them by ourselves, then im pretty certain, that it would be done by the comunity.
but to my knowledge, the tools are not there yet, to make a real dynamic campaign like in 1946.

Can you rewrite it in a clearer and more specific question?

[Luno13]

Yes you're right, dynamic campaigns provide a good replayability
However, I started doing in 2002 hardcore static campaign, always refers to dynamic negative. It's always problems with balance and historical accuracy. It is best suited for a hypothetical conflict than the actual events.
But the dynamic campaign certainly would be useful now.

By "dynamic" campaign, we are not asking for the chance to change the course of history. The idea is for the computer to instantly generate a new mission with realistic situations and objectives. Static campaigns take a long time to write, and it's hard to be surprised by the enemy if you wrote the mission yourself and know exactly where they are ;)

Without depressing you, I spent 6 years doing nothing but FMs, they are never 'fixed' in one patch hehehe.

But they do change for the better over time as more data presents itself and the game engine evolves.

The FM's in this game are suffering not from lack of documentation, but from some deep rooted game engine problems, as I understand it. Among other things, there is an in-game ceiling at ~20,000 feet above which no aircraft can fly. The relative performance of various fighters don't agree with most sources (absolute performance is impossible to get 100% right) which makes the dog-fighting experience disappointing. Hopefully these outstanding issues will be corrected in a timely manner (after all, we were shown images of the CoD world at over 40k meters).

[41Sqn_Banks]

yes but all the campaigns made by the communtiy are only semi-dynamic.
i would like to have the real thing like in 1946, with moving frontlines,...destryed buildings and targets stay destroyed on the map,your success influences the outcome,the possibility of getting medals and new ranks.

i agree that this could be done by the community, and i think that this would be even better for both, the devs and the customers.the community could possibly create dynamic campaigns in less time, while the devs can focuse on other things.but we would need the tools for it.
to my knowledge its not possible yet.

I can assure you that the tools are there and it is already possible to create a fully dynamic campaign with all the features you have listed and that is even way ahead of what was possible in Il-2: 1946. It simply takes time to implement it.

The missing bridges and roads through cities are the biggest problem right know for a dynamic campaign because the ground units can't reach certain areas of a map.

[ReconNZ]

I'll make a list of questions to Ilya. Question about navigation lights, landing lights and the smoke alarm is there. The list will be published here.



Yeah, I thought about it. But I will not be able to lead such a project because of problems with English. You will need to find a leader in your community :)

Thanks Blacksix, much appreciated! ;)

[adonys]

Three quick questions, sir, please:

1) Will the Radio Comms finally fully work on this next build?
2) Is AI work being done (matching the Radio Comms, and getting rid of foolish AI behaviors)?
3) Can Luthier give us any estimate regarding the release date for this patch?

Thank you!

[David198502]

I can assure you that the tools are there and it is already possible to create a fully dynamic campaign with all the features you have listed and that is even way ahead of what was possible in Il-2: 1946. It simply takes time to implement it.

The missing bridges and roads through cities are the biggest problem right know for a dynamic campaign because the ground units can't reach certain areas of a map.

ok...i was only assuming, cause there isnt one dynamic campaign available yet.
are you sure that its possible?...i hope so.

[41Sqn_Banks]

ok...i was only assuming, cause there isnt one dynamic campaign available yet.
are you sure that its possible?...i hope so.

Yes absolutly sure. The current source (not compiled release version) of IL2DCE has moving ground war where tanks capture enemy front markers to move the front line. Tanks that are destroyed (by air or ground) remain destroyed or respawn at a "factory" building (if available) somewhere else on the map.

The ground units use roads and find their way to the next front marker on their own, no need to provide a road network for each map (like in Il-2: 1946).
I can store the current position of each ground unit when the mission is closed so the next mission they will be at this position. This is not implemented yet but it's really a piece of cake and could be added to the current source with 10 lines of code (just hat more important stuff to do so far).

It simply takes time to implement all this (in ones free time) ...

For some more advanced features I'm sure there might be missing some functions (e.g. recording destruction of "static" objects and "buildings").

[BlackSix]

Three quick questions, sir, please:

1) Will the Radio Comms finally fully work on this next build?
2) Is AI work being done (matching the Radio Comms, and getting rid of foolish AI behaviors)?
3) Can Luthier give us any estimate regarding the release date for this patch?

Thank you!

1) your question is on my list and will be sent to Ilya
2) it's a complex problem that we can not solve quickly
3) No, there is a problem that prevents us move forward in the development

[McFeckit]

No, there is a problem that prevents us move forward in the development

Can you tell us if the problem is a financial one or a coding one ?

[Verhängnis]

I 'doubt' that it is a financial issue, they are a big company. Knowing anything about how the previous IL-2 series works, and the vast array of problems with this one, it's more than definitely a coding problem.

But , either 2 weeks or 2 weeks and 2 days. (Christmas) ;) :)

[BlackSix]

Can you tell us if the problem is a financial one or a coding one ?

No, the problem is not financial or programming. I can not tell more.

[Continu0]

UH, OH.... let´s hope for the best...

[Sokol1]

I'd also like to ask about navigational lights please on planes, - these would add a lot to the sim.

In the end navegational lighs only remit to problems of 1946:
Users using online as "Morse code"... some flying with landing light on like UFO... servers proibing use of then...
IA that dont turn lighs of in the night over combat zone...

Sokol1

[ATAG_Striker]

Is there plans for dedicated servers files?

[Tvrdi]

No, the problem is not financial or programming. I can not tell more.

Are we talking about patch for Cliffs of dover which should bring some optimisations to the game engine (performance)?

[bw_wolverine]

Are we talking about patch for Cliffs of dover which should bring some optimisations to the game engine (performance)?

Might be some legal blah regarding Speedtree stuff, contracts to use the code, etc. If they've made sweeping changes to the game's graphics that affect the trees, the changes may be outside of the contract agreement.

[BlackSix]

Is there plans for dedicated servers files?

Add to the list of questions

Are we talking about patch for Cliffs of dover which should bring some optimisations to the game engine (performance)?

Yes. As soon as we resume work on the patch - I'll let you know about this.

[JG52Krupi]

Might be some legal blah regarding Speedtree stuff, contracts to use the code, etc. If they've made sweeping changes to the game's graphics that affect the trees, the changes may be outside of the contract agreement.

Might be something to do with steam?

[bw_wolverine]

Might be something to do with steam?

Hmm, it's possible, but unlikely. Steam's just the delivery service really. Graphics and engine updates aren't likely to impact on the net code that interfaces with Steam. That said, it's not impossible.

All this is speculation anyway. Let's just hope it's not a 'dealbreaker'. Remember the epilepsy filter emergency? :P

[conio]

No, the problem is not financial or programming. I can not tell more.

Thanks BlackSix,

Does this problem include the risk of further development being completely cancelled or is it for sure, just a temporal problem?

[BlackSix]

Thanks BlackSix,

Does this problem include the risk of further development being completely cancelled or is it for sure, just a temporal problem?

A temporal problem.

[Trumper]

Black six ,your English is excellent :) all your postings are appreciated.

[Sutts]

I sincerely hope it's not more blood sucking lawyers demanding payment for use of wartime designs - paid for by the people I might add.:evil:

It really sucks that we'll never see a full complement of aircraft and ships in a Pacific campaign for this very reason. A real disgrace.


I'd like to add my appreciation for your input BlackSix, it really makes a difference to the mood of the forum.:grin:

[JG52Krupi]

Have to agree, thanks BlackSix.

[Dano]

A temporal problem.

Always good to hear, any benchmarks on performance yet? :)

[335th_GRAthos]

Have to agree, thanks BlackSix.

+1

[Peril]

I mustn't understand this properly... surely there were hundreds of pages of debate and records dredged up etc during late IL-2 development - is there still not broad consensus of what the model windows should be? If not I doubt there ever will be.

Jimbop, I can say 100% from experience that not everyone will agree on an end result from a FM build. Your last comment is correct, there will 'never' be a 100% agreement on which data to use. If I dig up data for an A6M that has it at 358mph @ 15000ft, and also data that shows a test of the same plane as 325mph on the day of testing, which is correct?

Just one example of the quandary.

Of course if you aim to only use calculated data, it's equally a problem. You can't win the data source argument, only do your best to ensure it's 'consistent' criteria data, and that all aircraft are treated equally and with parity. The coffee table books most often used as a source of data by newer sim users looking to help, are a constant source of aggravation for those who have studded the topic for many years and invested lots of money buying original source material. There will always be arguments over this plane verses that based on stories, books, and even opinions.

My only advise, and the way I tackle it, is to gather as much original data, then use this as your basis for determining performance. It should be original source data but more so you need to understand aerodynamics, research any differences in the data, to understand why any variations exist so you are better armed to make a judgement call of which data is more likely accurate. Yes, unfortunately it required lots of study and experience to be able to do a good job in building FMs, and many 'sim builders' don't have the background or the spare time to do justice to this area.

I remain hopeful that some of the hard core FM guys that stalk these places can offer their help and vast collections of data and experience to what is most often (understandably) an under financed (in time and money) aspect of any commercial simulation.

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

If they ever release the core engine for us to build a game around, I'm first on board to build a Pacific Simulation. I have a few mates that may also be interested in working for nothing just to battle over the pacific.

IL2-BOP (Battle Over the Pacific)


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

Hang in there BlackSix, you're doing a great job, I know how hard it is to manage a community of passionate people :)

[Ataros]

The missing bridges and roads through cities are the biggest problem right know for a dynamic campaign because the ground units can't reach certain areas of a map.

I witnessed this issue in naryv's examples and hc-wolf's missions when run on Repka servers and I think the best solution is to respawn the groundgroup 500 m. further on the way to their next waypoint if it is stuck for 3-5 minutes and not in combat. Just an idea.

[ATAG_Bliss]

I witnessed this issue in naryv's examples and hc-wolf's missions when run on Repka servers and I think the best solution is to respawn the groundgroup 500 m. further on the way to their next waypoint if it is stuck for 3-5 minutes and not in combat. Just an idea.

Has anyone gotten spline roads to load in the -server environment yet? I think the disappearance of some of the ground objects/bridges/land marks between SP/FMB and the dedicated server exist because of the spline road problem we have in the dedicated world.

@BlackSix,

Thanks for taking the time to answer many people's questions here. It is much appreciated!

I have several suggestions, but I'll leave the more complex out for now. My suggestion is to have a server sided option that makes players not able to leave their aircraft unless landed/crashed/died/bailed out. (Similar to what we had in the old IL2, via the "refly" button). Currently an online player can hit escape and simply spawn into a new plane any time he/she wishes, even in the middle of combat. This is annoying to say the least.

Thanks!

[41Sqn_Banks]

I witnessed this issue in naryv's examples and hc-wolf's missions when run on Repka servers and I think the best solution is to respawn the groundgroup 500 m. further on the way to their next waypoint if it is stuck for 3-5 minutes and not in combat. Just an idea.

Yes this is possible and will solve the problem. An additional check against the ground type could prevent spawning within an ocean.

[Insuber]

If I must add my wild guess about the temporary stop to the patch finalization, I would opt for a sudden need on another 1C project, e.g. to meet a deadline, requiring all hands on board to switch job. Temporarily :-)

[Rather peeved]

Staffing problem, I reckon.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Jimbop, I can say 100% from experience that not everyone will agree on an end result from a FM build. Your last comment is correct, there will 'never' be a 100% agreement on which data to use.
Agreed 100%

If by everyone you mean any Joe Blow flight simmer.. You know the kind of flight simmer who complains his P51 is too slow.. And when you asked what values he used, TAS or IAS.. His response is a blank stare and he says 'what is TAS and IAS'?

But..

IMHO if you limit the 'everyone' to 'everyone who is qualified' than I think you could obtain 100% agreement on 'most' items

If I dig up data for an A6M that has it at 358mph @ 15000ft, and also data that shows a test of the same plane as 325mph on the day of testing, which is correct?
The test that provides enough information to re-produce the test.. Chances are the difference in speed is due to some difference in the plane configuration and or test day conditions.. As in maybe the data was not converted back to STD ATM conditions.. That is to say, most if not all of the data I have reviewed, where there was a different in speed, there was also a difference in the plane configuration.

Of course if you aim to only use calculated data, it's equally a problem.
Agreed 100%

You can't win the data source argument, only do your best to ensure it's 'consistent' criteria data, and that all aircraft are treated equally and with parity.
The goal should not be to 'win' over every Joe blow simmer.. for reasons I noted above. Because there is no winning that fight! The goal should be to win over a qualified group of people that the Joe blows trust

The coffee table books most often used as a source of data by newer sim users looking to help, are a constant source of aggravation for those who have studded the topic for many years and invested lots of money buying original source material.
Agreed 100%

Nothing like Joe Blow simmer reading the coffee book table that says the P51's max speed is 426mph, and than he wonders whey he cant get no where near that value at sea level! Why? Because it was obtained at 26kft! ;)

There will always be arguments over this plane verses that based on stories, books, and even opinions.
Combat reports do cause a lot of problems.. Why? Well for one most if not all of them are one sided stories.. Most if not all of them DON'T provide enough information to recreate the scenario.. And most if not all of them did not have any recording devices running like they do in a standard test.

For example a P51 pilot writes in his report that he 'turned inside' a Bf109 and shot it down..

Problem begins when Joe Blow simmer reads that and thinks his simulated P51 should be able to out turn a Bf109..

Because Joe Blow simmer never stops to ask what altitude did this occur at, what was the P51s E state retaliative to the Bf109s E state prior to the scenario, what was the Bf109 pilots state? As in did the Bf109 pilot even see the P51 and try to avoid it? Was he wounded? etc.. etc..

My only advise, and the way I tackle it, is to gather as much original data, then use this as your basis for determining performance. It should be original source data but more so you need to understand aerodynamics, research any differences in the data, to understand why any variations exist so you are better armed to make a judgement call of which data is more likely accurate.
Agreed 100%

Yes, unfortunately it required lots of study and experience to be able to do a good job in building FMs, and many 'sim builders' don't have the background or the spare time to do justice to this area.
So true

I remain hopeful that some of the hard core FM guys that stalk these places can offer their help and vast collections of data and experience to what is most often (understandably) an under financed (in time and money) aspect of any commercial simulation.
I am willing..

And able! ;)

I have been analyzing IL-2 data for some 10 years now and have written several programs to extract the data from IL-2 via DeviceLink and have written dozens of MATLAB script files to process the data collected during testing

Problem with CoD at the moment is they have not implemented the DeviceLink interface, there is the C# script method that can be used to collected (get) data but as far as I can tell there is no C# script methods to send (set) data. Thus porting over the IL-2 3rd party auto pilot will be hard to do with no way to send commands..

Thus we would have to rely on real sim pilots to preform the test.. And the down side there is, the errors due to the sim pilot are bigger then the errors you are looking for..

That is to say real sim pilots are no test pilots!

At least based on the dozens upon dozens of track files I have reviewed from IL-2 over the past 10 or so years

[zapatista]

Yes. As soon as we resume work on the patch - I'll let you know about this.

resume ?

you mean all work on it has been halted for some time now ?

i thought the further delays were caused by added problems being fixed, or the gfx engine problem being more complex and time consuming then originally anticipated

having an imposed work stoppage for other reasons is rather worrying

[zapatista]

@BlackSix, My suggestion is to have a server sided option that makes players not able to leave their aircraft unless landed/crashed/died/bailed out. (Similar to what we had in the old IL2, via the "refly" button). Currently an online player can hit escape and simply spawn into a new plane any time he/she wishes, even in the middle of combat. This is annoying to say the least.



i dont think that is a good idea

having players being able to switch crew positions in one aircraft, or change aircraft (when killed or bored) adds "playability" for players.

to solve your problem, which is presumably that players switching aircraft use it as a cheat to avoid being registered as killed, is to make the server change the nick of the "jumping" player to something more generic (eg they loose their original nick tag, and get assigned a default new nick like "re-spawned"

if you notice players use the re-spawned method multiple times, you could even have the server number the name-tag, eg respawn1-12x etc

trying to completely remove a very good new feature (re-spawning to a new vehicle/plane) to try and solve a minor problem cause by a few idiots is not a very good idea

[Luno13]

It could be made into a difficulty setting which is set by the server as well. Or a minor point penalty could be given (again, depending on the server settings) for re-spawning before landing or crashing.

[BlackSix]

Tonight will be the Friday update. Ilya answer questions that have been collected here and in the forum Sukhoi.ru.

[JG52Uther]

Thanks BlackSix, looking forward to it!

[BlackSix]

Here is a list of questions in Russian (two in English).
http://www.sukhoi.ru/forum/showthread.php?t=73407

If anyone wants, it can pre-translate them into English. It's very help me.

"АНО, фар и сигнальных дымов" - - translated as "navigation lights, landing lights and the smoke alarm".
(АНО - Авиационные навигационные огни - Aircraft navigation lights)

[Flanker35M]

S!

Great :) Good to see some info coming in. I am sure will calm down the crowd and easen the work of our moderators ;)

[David198502]

thx BlackSix!
its really good that we now have a base to commincate with the devs through you!i think its really important for the customers as well as for the devs that there is a constant chat between both parties.

[salmo]

Here is a list of questions in Russian (two in English).
http://www.sukhoi.ru/forum/showthread.php?t=73407

If anyone wants, it can pre-translate them into English. It's very help me.

"АНО, фар и сигнальных дымов" - - translated as "navigation lights, landing lights and the smoke alarm".
(АНО - Авиационные навигационные огни - Aircraft navigation lights)

Here's the questions translated from Russian into Russian-English.

1. They will earn in that preparing or subsequently [patche] of radio command?

2. Is planned the possibility of abandoning aircraft on the earth?

3. How do move the matters concerning SDK and documentation on the scripts and the triggers?

4. Is it possible officially to represent on the forum of new colleague, who carries out tuning flying model? Will be it occupied by tuning the current aircraft or has already been was switched to the new project?

5. Will appear the possibility to use in the game simultaneously 3 monitors?

6. Is expected the appearance of a possibility of including OF ANES, headlights and signal smokes as in the old “Il-2”?

7. Earlier it was declared, that in the game it will originally be present functional analogous Il-2_Compare. It is understandable that now this is priority task. But in the future will see we this functional or from it is decided to entirely refuse?

8. Prompt, is fixed collaboration on the optimization of drivers with the companies Of nvidia and AMD? Especially interests AMD, since to 69[khkh] of a series are observed essential artifacts.

9. Is planned the appearance of a cannon “Spitfire”?

10. Is planned the editing of on-line maps or the appearance of new?

11. Is planned the realization of the function of the rescuing of pilot on the water?

12. Is planned the realization of the possibility of collision with the detached components of aircraft?

13. It is planned to soon introduce into the system the system of titles and rewardings?

14. Is planned further work on the weather effects (sediments, thunderstorm so forth)?

15. Possible whether with the start of aircraft in air to automatically place radiator to the completely open position?

16. What does specifically affect the size of the file of the user diagram of painting in the plan of productivity?

17. Is planned the correction of the flying model Of bristol Of blenheim Of mk.IV on the basis of transmitted to you data?

18. When of you of are of going to of add Of structural Of limits to of the FM' s? (maximum of allowable g of acceleration on of the of aircraft of structure. And the of aircraft of damage of due to of exceeding of the Of vne or of maximum g of acceleration). (When you you will introduce the maximum permissible overloads for LA and destruction LA in the consequence of exceeding these overloads?)

19. Will make it possible SDK to create to users dynamic campaigns? 20. Is there of plans of for of dedicated of servers of files?

To these I would add my previous question.

a. Can we have some information about the AI objects & CPP scripts please. How to use them & what they do.

Можем мы иметь некоторую информацию о & предметов AI; CPP scripts пожалуйста. Как использовать их & чего они делают.

[BlackSix]

Here's the questions translated from Russian into Russian-English.

To these I would add my previous question.

a. Can we have some information about the AI objects & CPP scripts please. How to use them & what they do.

Thank you!
You'll find the answer to your question, when I will publish the answers of Ilya in the evening. The answer is the same as in question number 3.

Ok, slightly revised translation of questions:

1. Radio commands will work in the upcoming patch or in the future?

2. Is planned the possibility of ejection aircraft on the ground?

3. How do move the matters concerning SDK and documentation on the scripts and the triggers?

4. Is it possible officially to represent on the forum of new colleague, who carries out tuning flight model? Will be it occupied by tuning the current aircraft or has already been was switched to the new project?

5. Will appear the possibility to use in the game simultaneously 3 monitors?

6. Do you expect the appearance of the possibility of including the navigation lights, landing lights and the signal smokes, as the old "IL-2"?

7. Earlier it was declared, that in the game it will originally be present functional analogous Il-2_Compare. It is understandable that now this is no priority task. But in the future will see we this functional or from it is decided to entirely refuse?

8. Prompt, established a partnership to optimize the driver with the companies Nvidia and AMD? Particularly interested in AMD, since to 69xx of a series are observed essential artifacts.

9. Is planned the appearance of "Spitfire" with guns Hispano Suiza 20mm?

10. Is planned the editing of on-line maps or the appearance of new?

11. Is planned the realization of the function of the rescuing of pilot on the water?

12. Is planned the realization of the possibility of collision with the detached components of aircraft?

13. It is planned to soon introduce the system of military rank and rewardings?

14. Is planned further work on the weather effects (sediments, thunderstorm so forth)?

15. Possible whether with the start of aircraft in air to automatically place radiator to the completely open position?

16. At that specifically affect the file size custom user skin in terms of performance?

17. Is planned the correction of the flying model Bristol Blenheim MK.IV on the basis of transmitted to you data?

18. When you are going to add Structural Limits to the FM's? (maximum allowable g acceleration on the aircraft structure. And the aircraft damage due to exceeding the Vne or maximum g acceleration).

19. Will the SDK ability to create dynamic campaigns?

20. Is there plans for dedicated servers files?


Everything is normal?
Guys, I'm trying very hard but I do it all at the same time in two forums. It takes time to learn how to do it better.

[Vulcanel]

Fantastic job BlackSix!

My acknowledgment.

Regards.

[Anders_And]

Thanx alot Blacksix!!
Your wofk here on the official forum is very much appreciated!!! I just wanted to tell you that!!

[adonys]

1) your question is on my list and will be sent to Ilya
2) it's a complex problem that we can not solve quickly
3) No, there is a problem that prevents us move forward in the development

Thank you for your answers, Black.

And just one more question, please:
4) Can you guys give us access to the AI programming functions, to can over-ride/improve them in 3rd party code (dll's)?

This would be a great step forward, as we have many users around here with good programming and flight sim AI development experience in order to start things moving in this direction.

[BlackSix]

thx BlackSix!
its really good that we now have a base to commincate with the devs through you!i think its really important for the customers as well as for the devs that there is a constant chat between both parties.

S!

Great :) Good to see some info coming in. I am sure will calm down the crowd and easen the work of our moderators ;)

Thanks BlackSix, looking forward to it!

Fantastic job BlackSix!

My acknowledgment.

Regards.

Thanx alot Blacksix!!
Your wofk here on the official forum is very much appreciated!!! I just wanted to tell you that!!

Thank you for your answers, Black.

Thank you

And just one more question, please:
4) Can you guys give us access to the AI programming functions, to can over-ride/improve them in 3rd party code (dll's)?

This would be a great step forward, as we have many users around here with good programming and flight sim AI development experience in order to start things moving in this direction.

Now it's too late to ask. I wrote down the question and pass it in the next list.

[ReconNZ]

Yeah thanks BlackSix, great work.

[Avimimus]

Black six ,your English is excellent :) all your postings are appreciated.

+1

[Tacoma74]

It's so great that we're hearing some consistent news agian. We definitely had a dry spell there for awhile.

Thank you for your time BlackSix! It's really keeping my interest alive in this sim.

[Kwiatek]

HI BlackSix.

Do i remember correctly that You made some job with flight models to BoB2 Wings of Victory?

Salute 303_Kwiatek

[BlackSix]

Friday Update - December 9, 2011 (http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?p=368526#post368526)

[BlackSix]

HI BlackSix.

Do i remember correctly that You made some job with flight models to BoB2 Wings of Victory?

Salute 303_Kwiatek

No, there never has not worked. I started working on the simulators to immediately with Oleg Maddox in 2003.

[Kwiatek]

No, there never has not worked. I started working on the simulators to immediately with Oleg Maddox in 2003.

Ok thx for answer. You right i checked my old PM's and it was Blue Six who worked over Bob2 VOW FM's.

Keep good working.

S!

[jimbop]

BlackSix, could you please confirm that improvements to core game (weather etc) in Battle of Moscow will also apply to current game content? Thanks.

[Insuber]

Dear BlackSix,

I have few questions:
- will the dynamic stall be implemented in the Flight Model?
- will the maximum altitude of the planes (ceiling) be raised to the historical values of ~10-11000 m ? Today it is 7-8000 m for most planes, and much less for the Fiat G.50
- will the performances of the poor G.50 be upgraded to be closer to the real historical values? The G.50 maximum speed today is ~350 kmh at sea level against 407 kmh found in books and online references. The G.50 ceiling in game is some 5000 m, against 10500 m found in various sources.
- will the UBI intro .wmv video issue be finally corrected? Today it clocks down the ATI cards to 2D-power saving mode, and gives really poor performances to the users that do not delete or rename it. That is most of ATI users I guess.
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=28054
- will the ghost dots issue be corrected? Today in online servers you see far contacts which disappear when you close in.
- will the GUI be optimized ? Today it's quite clumsy and not practical.
- will the track recording be improved? Today the main issues are: need to exit from flight to start recording, need to manually type a track file name, need to exit again from flight to stop the video, frequent crashes in the procedure, frequent crashes when trying to record an avi from a track.
- will the damage of a radiator by bullets produce a damage to the engine? Today you get the message "radiator leak" but the engine continues to run.

[mazex]

BlackSix, could you please confirm that improvements to core game (weather etc) in Battle of Moscow will also apply to current game content? Thanks.

I did ask that question on Sukhoi.ru (using Google translate ;)). Blacksix answered there that as the game was not yet announced he could not answer if it would be released as a merged install...

This is my number one question also - if it's not going to be released as a merged install I would be very sad. Oleg said that they where going to use the same addon strategy with CoD as IL2 when he was still in command and it would be very odd to abandon that strategy IMO... Still, it would be nice to get it confirmed!

[III/JG53_Don]

My No1 question as well....

If a merged install isn't possible I would kinda loose interest in the series and this would be the biggest letdown for me personally. I mean I don't want to have 2/3/4 or more different Flight simulations with the same core on my pc and when I want to play a Spit I have to exit the game and start the old CoD which will be no longer supported.
The possibility to merge all addons like the old il2 style was THE factor for the great success of this game imho.

Just imagine how it would be like if all il2 expansions were stand alones. There would never be this strong community...

[csThor]

Take a look at your CloD directory. There you'll find a folder called parts with a sub-folder named CORE and one named BOB. Which means the engine is geared towards modular additions. You can now stop panicking. :-P ;)