PDA

View Full Version : Ok so whats next?


GF_Mastiff
01-14-2012, 12:53 AM
I realy hope you guys will at least upgrade the sounds.

With CLOD in your guys influence from ILya, I bet you can do it.

F19_Klunk
01-14-2012, 01:04 AM
Next? the SB2C Helldiver of course :).. perfect to match Team Pacific's New Britain map..if it's ready by then...... VB-17 on USS Bunker Hill attacking Rabaul in -43 ;)

http://www.airgroup4.com/helldiver-02.jpg

4.11 will keep us occupied on Eastern front for awhile.. next theatre... .Pacific :D *fingers crossed*... and maybe some new carriers as well :)

But let the fellas have a rest first ;)

Treetop64
01-14-2012, 01:10 AM
But let the fellas have a rest first ;)

A well deserved one at that.

SPITACE
01-14-2012, 12:30 PM
i like to see some flyable british bombers in the sim :-P

Pursuivant
01-16-2012, 06:17 AM
I realy hope you guys will at least upgrade the sounds.

Or, just acknowledge what's the norm for modded IL2 installations and make it easy for users to import their own custom sounds. Copyright issues averted.

Orangeman
01-16-2012, 03:53 PM
Any idea if the Ki-44 (maybe Japancat's model for mods) will make 4.12?

[URU]BlackFox
01-16-2012, 04:18 PM
If it's only about asking...

I'd like that the ships and vehicles did some sort of evasive manouvers when enemy aircraft are in the vicinity. I know that's asking a lot, but it would really contribute to realism and immersion.

EJGr.Ost_Caspar
01-16-2012, 04:37 PM
Any idea if the Ki-44 (maybe Japancat's model for mods) will make 4.12?

Maybe. At least I hope so.

EJGr.Ost_Caspar
01-16-2012, 04:38 PM
BlackFox;380574']If it's only about asking...

I'd like that the ships and vehicles did some sort of evasive manouvers when enemy aircraft are in the vicinity. I know that's asking a lot, but it would really contribute to realism and immersion.

Something, that we would like to see too. No clue at this point, if its possible.

Lagarto
01-16-2012, 06:11 PM
What next? Hopefully some new maps, preferably eastern front stuff, ideally Donbass area :)

ElAurens
01-16-2012, 06:42 PM
Next? the SB2C Helldiver of course :).. perfect to match Team Pacific's New Britain map..if it's ready by then...... VB-17 on USS Bunker Hill attacking Rabaul in -43 ;)

http://www.airgroup4.com/helldiver-02.jpg

4.11 will keep us occupied on Eastern front for awhile.. next theatre... .Pacific :D *fingers crossed*... and maybe some new carriers as well :)

But let the fellas have a rest first ;)

*DROOL MODE ON*

I so want the Helldiver, being the Curtiss fan boy that I am. It's also a new US Navy aircraft with no "imperial entanglements".

:cool:

76.IAP-Blackbird
01-18-2012, 06:40 PM
That is a nice idea, I loved this bird in "Aces of the Pacific"!!!

But what could also be cool, early A-20 versions the A and B, cause it could be done form the current C version.

Or a complete A-20 series with the late H, J, K and the P-70 Nightfighterversions?!
The Basemodell is there .. ok I`m dreaming

Or some Aichi M6A with Floats and with normal Landing gear and the I-400 Submarine to start from ...:-P

Kittle
01-19-2012, 01:13 AM
The SB2C is #1 one my wish list. Now that we have the TBD, this is the only aircraft we need to round out the pac theater. I would also like to see the F4F-3A. This is a very slightly modified Wildcat. Important to me because they were active off CV decks in the Pearl Harbor - Midway period, like the raids on the Gilbers and Marcus Island.

The Ki-44 is next, as she is vital to the defense of homeland Japan.

The Ki-48 Lilly is one of the most needed bombers in the Pac, flew a ton of missions in PNG and was listed once as, "The Japanese aircraft which was destroyed on the ground in larger numbers then anything else" or something along those line.

Bristol Beaufort, a vital RAAF bomber in the Pac and used by Coastal Command in NWE.

A-29 Hudson. Yep, the Hudson, can't have a good pac fight early on without the Hudson.


Here is my Pacific Theater wish list!!!

WTE_Galway
01-19-2012, 01:53 AM
VB-17 on USS Bunker Hill attacking Rabaul in -43 ;)

http://www.airgroup4.com/helldiver-02.jpg




Something not quite right there.

Those air group markings belong to CV 9 (Essex).

CV 17 (Bunker Hill) had a vertical arrow.

Also (despite being popular with model kit makers) the geometric identifications were only used for a very short period in 1945 so the '43 date is way out.


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a4/US_Navy_Air_Group_Symbols_1944-1945.jpg/800px-US_Navy_Air_Group_Symbols_1944-1945.jpg

IceFire
01-19-2012, 03:12 AM
*DROOL MODE ON*

I so want the Helldiver, being the Curtiss fan boy that I am. It's also a new US Navy aircraft with no "imperial entanglements".

:cool:

Drool as well! :)

The Helldiver would be very much welcome... as would a bunch of other Curtiss favorites :)

Also I'd like to see a few more Japanese types and... maybe a Burma/China map for operations there.

P-38L
01-19-2012, 04:07 AM
Hello masters

We, the followers of this simulator, we would like many things, I know. But I think that for this simulation is perfect and does not need MODS should have:

1. The Rearm/Refuel/Repair option. :)
2. Variable weather during a mission. :grin:
3. The Curtiss SB2C Helldiver. :cool:
4. HOTAS in prop.
5. HOTAS in brake pedals. eg: Three of them: why? Not all the WWII aircraft had brakes on pedals, instead of that used a hand brake near to the stick. The rest of the WWII aircrat had independent brake pedal. So in HOTAS control should be like this:

HOTAS
Hand brake
Left pedal brake
Right pedal brake

The user can now select from his/her hardware.

Thank you.

Я люблю этот симулятор

Jumoschwanz
01-19-2012, 05:04 PM
I have never noticed that AI pilots use engine fire extinguishers.

I always thought that a drivable ground vehicle could be done easily in IL2.

I have before driven aircraft with tricycle landing gear between towns and airfields on some maps. If they happen to look like a tank or half-track and had good armor and a large cannon in their turret instead of a small caliber weapon then there you go.

Maybe the commands for aircraft squadron could be used to direct two or four other vehicles attached to you.

I just thought it would be funny to be on some popular dogfight server, sitting on a road on the side of a hill somewhere lobbing shells at the enemy base and watching them type obscenities in the chat bar....

[URU]BlackFox
01-19-2012, 05:12 PM
From my point of view, and I don't know about legal limitations for this, the effects in the game need a major overhaul (smokes, explosions, bullet trails, sounds). Some mods have made great improvements in these aspects, particularly HSFX in the smokes and particles area includes very nice modifications.

And maybe have the russian planes rechecked so that they are adjusted like germans, americans, british, etc.

As usual, I know it might be a lot to ask, but asking is free (for now :D).

Lagarto
01-19-2012, 05:18 PM
BlackFox;381874']From my point of view, and I don't know about legal limitations for this, the effects in the game need a major overhaul (smokes, explosions, bullet trails, sounds).

+1
Columns of smoke marking crash sites always go perfectly straight up in the air, which looks quite unrealistic. Aircraft in the game are affected by wind but smoke isn't.

Jumoschwanz
01-19-2012, 09:29 PM
BlackFox;381874']Some mods have made great improvements in these aspects, particularly HSFX in the smokes and particles area includes very nice modifications..

I think the effects in mods generally look like whoever designed them watched too many cheap Hollywood action movies. The effects in the official patches get better as time goes by, but I would hope that accuracy as a flight sim would take priority over working on things to entertain bored children...

Cloyd
01-19-2012, 10:14 PM
I think the effects in mods generally look like whoever designed them watched too many cheap Hollywood action movies. The effects in the official patches get better as time goes by, but I would hope that accuracy as a flight sim would take priority over working on things to entertain bored children...

Is it absolutely essential that you try to make your points by insulting people? I don't think it helps your case.

Cloyd

ElAurens
01-19-2012, 11:56 PM
Regardless of his delivery style, Jumoschwanz has a very valid point.

The smoke effects in HSFX, are utterly overdone, and can grind even a decent system in to very low frame rates.

Just because you can do something does not mean you should. This is one of those times.

mmaruda
01-20-2012, 12:18 AM
I use Plutonium effects pack exclusively - these are as far from Hollywood as you can get, based on real guncam footage. So as far as modded effects go, you cannot really say that they are overdone. You can chose the ones you like, so saying that people who like these watch too many cheap movies is a biased statement.

As for stock game - this is the most painful thing for most people. IL-2 stock has enough planes to keep everyone busy for a long time, but it's 2012 and many people use mods just to improve visual quality of the game. Let's face it flight realism is one thing, but visual realism is also important. If that makes me a bored child so be it.

I do not expect that stock patches will ever make IL-2 better looking (though the 2d smoketrails look horrible and the sounds are of a lawnmower), but it might be a good idea to make the possibility of at least adding textures, sound and effects mods to a stock game, without using mod activators, so those who fly stock only, and want to improve the visual quality, could easily add the stuff they like.

[URU]BlackFox
01-20-2012, 12:24 AM
Allright, maybe I crossed the line by putting a specific example, but I think every aspect contributes to the welfare of the game, and effects, sounds, etc. should not be overlooked when planning development.

I fully agree that there are a lot more important things to get done before, but it's up to us to request, and up to Team Daidalos to decide. So far, I'm very glad with the way things are going, and see no reason for that to change.

With 4.11 released, my CloD install will sit in my hard drive untouched for at least a couple more months :D.

IceFire
01-20-2012, 03:40 AM
I use Plutonium effects pack exclusively - these are as far from Hollywood as you can get, based on real guncam footage. So as far as modded effects go, you cannot really say that they are overdone. You can chose the ones you like, so saying that people who like these watch too many cheap movies is a biased statement.

As for stock game - this is the most painful thing for most people. IL-2 stock has enough planes to keep everyone busy for a long time, but it's 2012 and many people use mods just to improve visual quality of the game. Let's face it flight realism is one thing, but visual realism is also important. If that makes me a bored child so be it.

I do not expect that stock patches will ever make IL-2 better looking (though the 2d smoketrails look horrible and the sounds are of a lawnmower), but it might be a good idea to make the possibility of at least adding textures, sound and effects mods to a stock game, without using mod activators, so those who fly stock only, and want to improve the visual quality, could easily add the stuff they like.
I think it comes down to interest. If someone on the TD team has the knowledge, interest, and time then they could. If someone externally wants to work with TD to implement improved effects then I'm sure that would be welcomed as well.

Realism would (IMHO) still be the objective and so would efficiency and making sure that the new effects don't have a substantial extra requirement over the stock game as is. I'm sure it's doable within reasonable bounds.

Bearcat
01-20-2012, 04:21 AM
Would it ever be possible to edit the splash screen or the default skins in the stock sim .. I know it's a simple thing .. one that shouldn't take too much effort. I know I can already edit the mission loading image .. that has been around for a while .. but I have some pretty nice splash screens ... and I also like to come in on a base that has a fleet of Redtail Mustangs lined up .. Even being able to set the skin on static AC .. even if the chouces were limited ... say default .. or 1 or 2 choices .. BTW thanks for adding the mouse wheel zoom ... little things like that are big things for me because they enhance the overall experience..

Zorin
01-20-2012, 06:11 AM
What happened to the whole night fighter radar theme and the triggers? Those I believe are some feature that most were looking forward to.

julien673
01-20-2012, 10:53 AM
What happened to the whole night fighter radar theme and the triggers? Those I believe are some feature that most were looking forward to.

+1

pupo162
01-20-2012, 11:48 AM
i think it would be for the best to stop adding content for one aptch and brign to better standards whats done.

somne cockpits trully deserve better polly count, and soem exterior models too. thats a LOT of work, and could easely be a patch on its own.

also WIDESCREEN / MULTIPLE SCREEN support would be really nice.

FC99
01-20-2012, 12:00 PM
What happened to the whole night fighter radar theme and the triggers? Those I believe are some feature that most were looking forward to.
This is still planed, we have made and tested lot of individual modules but we have to put them together. I believe that sometime this year players will be able to enjoy these features.

In addition to that we are contemplating addition of strategical level to game AI to enhance usefulness of the triggers, naturally, radar and night fighter would benefit from it too.

These are our main coding tasks, we have spent incredible amount of time on 6DOF and AI for 4.11, since we are free from that we can focus on other important things and night fighting and triggers are on the top of the priority list.

While I'm here I'd like to know are players interested in "Branched Campaigns". I'll explain it a little to those who are not familiar with that concept.

Currently we have two types of campaigns in Il2, linear , custom made campaigns and dynamic campaigns like DGEN. Branched campaigns fit somewhere in the middle. They are hand made but unlike linear campaigns, we have now, they allow different outcome of the campaign.

That way player can affect what happens in the campaign(like in dynamic campaigns) but they retain all of the good sides of well designed hand made campaign.

On the bad side this makes task for campaign maker much harder because he must make missions for each of the campaign branches.

FC

GF_Mastiff
01-20-2012, 12:10 PM
that sounds interesting FC99. i.e your in an il2 squadron
your squadron makes a routine bombing run and depending on the
results from a scout bombing assessment you have to hit again or the campaign continues
good idea.

Juri_JS
01-20-2012, 12:25 PM
Branched campaigns are definitely a good idea.

And here two of my ideas. I think they can be added without causing too much work for Daidalos Team:

What about adding new countries, for example Vichy France, China or Nationalist and Republican Spain. Medal and speech packs already exist for these nations, all DT has to do is to ask the creators if they agree to add their work in a patch.

My second suggestion are winter versions for some of the existing maps. I would like to see a winter version of the Norway map. Some of the most well known missions in this part of Norway took place between December 1944 and February 1945. I would also appreciate a winter versions of the Berlin map.

Letum
01-20-2012, 12:26 PM
I suspect we already lack the mission builders to get more than three or four high quality branched campaigns within two years, even if it was added as a feature.

[URU]BlackFox
01-20-2012, 12:27 PM
It would be a nice addition to the game. If it can be implemented without much effort from your part I'm very interested in them.

fruitbat
01-20-2012, 12:36 PM
How about widescreen support.

Since its 2012, not 2002.

There's a really good tiny mod out there now that lets you set the default wide FOV to 101 in the conf.ini now.

This equates perfectly to what a crt 4:3 person see in wide fov vertically, you just get to see a little bit more on the sides, actually using your widescreen monitor.

It would be so nice being able to do this long overdue feature without having to use mods or sans fov changer.

GF_Mastiff
01-20-2012, 12:47 PM
+1 due to the fact 90% of monitors are now widescreen mines 32inch 1080p 120hrz16:9

FC99
01-20-2012, 12:47 PM
I suspect we already lack the mission builders to get more than three or four high quality branched campaigns within two years, even if it was added as a feature.
That's my main concern. Is it worth it to do it if there might be a handful of people who will use it in the end.

Juri_JS
01-20-2012, 12:53 PM
That's my main concern. Is it worth it to do it if there might be a handful of people who will use it in the end.

In my opinion a branched campaign system could be exactly the right thing to revive interest in mission building, especially in combination with triggers.

Letum
01-20-2012, 03:13 PM
That's my main concern. Is it worth it to do it if there might be a handful of people who will use it in the end.

It might be an idea to see if you can find some mission makers to start making missions for several branched campaigns so some can be released along side the branched campaign patch. If you struggle to find any one to make missions before you start work on a branched campaign mechanic, then it probably won't add much value to the game.

Lagarto
01-20-2012, 04:50 PM
How about widescreen support.

+1!

Kittle
01-20-2012, 04:57 PM
I am an avid "Combat Mission: Battle for Normandy" player, and branched campaigns are that games bread and butter. FYI, it's a 3D tactical ground combat sim/game on the battalion or lower level. I think IL2 would benefit from branched campaigns, and the campaign builders would eat it up. It would give them greater flexibility in campaign progress, and allow the people who fly their campaigns to really feel like they are having an effect on the out come. As we all know, scripted missions have more 'feel' and 'atmosphere' to them, but dynamic campaigns are different every time. To combine these into one campaign type, genius!!!

FC99
01-20-2012, 09:49 PM
It might be an idea to see if you can find some mission makers to start making missions for several branched campaigns so some can be released along side the branched campaign patch. If you struggle to find any one to make missions before you start work on a branched campaign mechanic, then it probably won't add much value to the game.
Good idea, so who is volunteering to make one or more branched campaigns for 4.12 ?

Juri_JS
01-20-2012, 10:33 PM
Good idea, so who is volunteering to make one or more branched campaigns for 4.12 ?

You will get more answers when you ask this question at http://www.mission4today.com/

II/JG54_Emil
01-20-2012, 11:17 PM
I realy hope you guys will at least upgrade the sounds.

With CLOD in your guys influence from ILya, I bet you can do it.

1+

JimmyBlonde
01-20-2012, 11:40 PM
An actual, honest to goodness, Dgen capable Channel Map...

Could somebody please explain this branched campaign stuff? Sounds interesting.

IceFire
01-21-2012, 12:11 AM
Good idea, so who is volunteering to make one or more branched campaigns for 4.12 ?

Hrmmm... I might be persuaded :)

I'm not sure how branching would or should work in the IL-2 context. Would ever mission have a branch or just key missions with specific events. The interesting part about this is that I would have to change how I view my campaigns... I tend to make them with this historical inevitability about them and the player is just caught up in the events. If they mess up then they have to play it again.

But with branching...say the enemy sinks your carrier or destroys a vital objective. Then in theory it could change the course of history. Or it could be small scale enough to not matter to the whole war but matter to you on the front.

The narrative would be important.

While we're talking about campaigns... Being able to do non-sepia filter tracks with text at the top might be a nice feature for campaign cinematics. Aside from NTRK playback in these modes not using Perfect mode... it would be nice to have the option of it appearing just like the game. Or having the sepia filter on for other instances.

Fighterace
01-21-2012, 12:36 AM
What about the 3D model fix of the P-40?

Pursuivant
01-21-2012, 01:17 AM
But with branching...say the enemy sinks your carrier or destroys a vital objective. Then in theory it could change the course of history. Or it could be small scale enough to not matter to the whole war but matter to you on the front.

It doesn't need to be that dramatic. Branching could be used for campaigns where you don't change history.

E.g.,

Assigned target
> knocked out > next objective
> not knocked out > fly another mission against it.

Squadron takes losses

> below X threshold > continues operations.
> above X threshold > halts operations.

Mission performance
> player performs well > given greater responsibility on future missions.
> player performs badly > given less responsibility on future missions.
> player performs amazingly well > recruited for special missions.
> player screws up entirely > demoted/transferred/court martialed/shot.

Squadron performance
> squadron does well > gets better missions/guards status/unit citations.
> squadron does badly > gets worse missions/senior officers demoted/transferred/shot.

Luno13
01-21-2012, 03:38 AM
Branching could be interesting, but the workload for mission-builders would be at least doubled for a given length of campaign.

Improvements to DGen may be more worthwhile. Apparently the creator, Starshoy, was found and it's being worked on.

Maybe the cross between dynamic and scripted can be achieved some other way. The DGen makes the environments, etc, but the mission builder writes the narrative and briefing, and tweaks the way each mission is generated, or inserts scripted missions into a dynamic campaign.

For instance, the player selects a Stuka Campaign for the North groups. The mission builder has selected a date, a map, and plane with specific loadout. In this case, the mission builder selects:

Date - 23, September, 1941.
Map - Finland
Aircraft - Ju-87
Loadout - SC 1000
Number of planes - 40

He also places a Marat object as a target in Kronstadt harbor.

When the player flies the campaign, starting in 22 June, he proceeds normally. But on the 23rd of September, the scripted mission loads, and he flies that mission.

Regardless of whether or not it was successful, the player loads the next mission and proceeds with the dynamic campaign as normal (such an attack was only carried out once, I think). The next dynamic mission takes the results of the scripted mission into account (the Marat had a target designation, so if sunk, the player gets a congrats in the briefing).

This can add elements of surprise and make missions interesting without having to carefully design each mission leading up to a specific event.

The mission designer can select which maps to use and for what time-frames to make a historical or what-if scenario and incorporate maps in clever ways (Med map can be used for a variety of locations; Guam map makes a decent Malta scenario, even if not totally accurate).

EDIT - another possibility: The designer sets an air-start spawn point for the player's Spitfire over the Channel on the Normandy map. The DGen decides whether the sortie is a combat patrol, or escort of B-25s, A-20s, Mosquitos, or P-47s, and what enemies will be encountered.

Another: The builder indicates dates and times for a mission to start. This would allow players to fly several sorties in a "day" such as in the BoB, or fly rarely, such as when planes were shared among pilots, or incorporate travel-time when being transferred to a new airfield or front.

Kittle
01-21-2012, 04:59 AM
Good idea, so who is volunteering to make one or more branched campaigns for 4.12 ?

I will FC! I have been mulling a South Pacific campaign for a while now. I have bought a couple GREAT reference books about the land and air battles (one book on each by same author) in the Solomons/New Guinea. With this, I think I could build a top notch branching campaign for 4.12. This is a map that really needs it's own campaign too, in the worst kind of way. Plus, since the Ki-45 was added, they will be that much more realistic, as all the other aircraft needed were present.

IceFire
01-21-2012, 05:07 AM
I will FC! I have been mulling a South Pacific campaign for a while now. I have bought a couple GREAT reference books about the land and air battles (one book on each by same author) in the Solomons/New Guinea. With this, I think I could build a top notch branching campaign for 4.12. This is a map that really needs it's own campaign too, in the worst kind of way. Plus, since the Ki-45 was added, they will be that much more realistic, as all the other aircraft needed were present.

Except the A6M3 Model 22 :D I was looking into this area too.

Kittle
01-21-2012, 11:54 AM
This is true Ice, I was just going to use the A6M3 we have in game as a stand in. No worse then the people who used the Bf-110 as a stand in for the Ki-45, right? I would be interested in collaborating if you are, one takes PNG and the other the Solomons? Just some ideas, they both need campaigns in the worst way.

ECV56_Guevara
01-21-2012, 01:35 PM
FC99 pm sent.

FC99
01-21-2012, 01:41 PM
Could somebody please explain this branched campaign stuff? Sounds interesting.
Take a look at attached pictures. This might help you. It is not visible on pictures but branched campaigns can have "horizontal randomization" too, I just didn't add that option there to make pictures easier to understand.


I'm not sure how branching would or should work in the IL-2 context. Would ever mission have a branch or just key missions with specific events.

Branching is just a tool, it's up to you to decide how to use it. You can branch after every mission, you can branch the branch and end up with hundred branches or you can use branches to only spice up your campaign with few bonus missions for those who are performing well.

Branching could be interesting, but the workload for mission-builders would be at least doubled for a given length of campaign.
Not necessarily, they can always make linear campaign, branching is an option and depends solely on mission makers.

But what about joint ventures, if you write good story you can put several linear campaigns made by different authors into single branched campaign.


Improvements to DGen may be more worthwhile. Apparently the creator, Starshoy, was found and it's being worked on.

We are not in touch with DGen creators, we might try to contact them.

FC

Juri_JS
01-21-2012, 01:49 PM
We are not in touch with DGen creators, we might try to contact them.


Some days ago Asura told me he tried to contact Daidalos Team via mail, please check the DT mailbox.

FC99
01-21-2012, 01:59 PM
Some days ago Asura told me he tried to contact Daidalos Team via mail, please check the DT mailbox.
Rgr, found it.

ElAurens
01-21-2012, 02:57 PM
I'm no mission maker, but a fully realized New Guinea campaign would get me flying offline, which as you know I don't do by and large.

The air war in New Guinea is one of the most overlooked, yet critically important campaigns in the entire Pacifc war. It was a grueling campaign that went on for 2 years or so. It tested the mettle of man and machine in a way that no 2 or 3 day carrier operation ever did, and it gutted the Imperial Japanese Army Flying Corps. It robbed them of their best and most experienced pilots and crews. It saw the operational introduction of their first "modern" army fighter, the Ki-61, which forced the US Army to allocate P 38s to New Guinea instead of other areas where their long range was needed as well.

And from my personal interest perspective, it was in many ways the "shining hour" of P 40 operations in WW2. The Curtiss Hawks served from the beginning till the end of the New Guinea Campaign with the USAAF and the ANZAC air forces, first primarily as a fighter then later it's capabilities as a very competent fighter bomber shown through.

Also it would mean someone would have to make a P40 N model for the sim... Hint, hint.

:cool:

Sita
01-21-2012, 03:00 PM
Some days ago Asura told me he tried to contact Daidalos Team via mail, please check the DT mailbox.


Asura? from aviaskins? soon will be new Dgen? ))))

Juri_JS
01-21-2012, 04:27 PM
Asura? from aviaskins? soon will be new Dgen? ))))

http://forum.aviaskins.com/showthread.php?t=2337

IceFire
01-21-2012, 04:39 PM
This is true Ice, I was just going to use the A6M3 we have in game as a stand in. No worse then the people who used the Bf-110 as a stand in for the Ki-45, right? I would be interested in collaborating if you are, one takes PNG and the other the Solomons? Just some ideas, they both need campaigns in the worst way.

Well a few months ago I did lay out a historical/semi-historical Blacksheep campaign with the F4U-1A and the second deployment of the squadron from when it was actually called the Blacksheep.

For it to be truly accurate I would need a A6M3 Type 22. Also the B-24D which is coming along. When we do get the B-24D the Solomons map is perfect for operations with the strategic size of the map.

New Guinea looks and sounds really interesting too...if we get the rest of that map then I'd love to do a Ki-61 campaign for it. I've already done a Ki-61 campaign but I'd love to do another. Or... even a Ki-43.. or Ki-45 campaign. I love the Japanese types. I probably don't have time to do full length of any of these campaigns but I could probably do shorter ones like I usually do.

IceFire
01-21-2012, 04:40 PM
I'm no mission maker, but a fully realized New Guinea campaign would get me flying offline, which as you know I don't do by and large.

The air war in New Guinea is one of the most overlooked, yet critically important campaigns in the entire Pacifc war. It was a grueling campaign that went on for 2 years or so. It tested the mettle of man and machine in a way that no 2 or 3 day carrier operation ever did, and it gutted the Imperial Japanese Army Flying Corps. It robbed them of their best and most experienced pilots and crews. It saw the operational introduction of their first "modern" army fighter, the Ki-61, which forced the US Army to allocate P 38s to New Guinea instead of other areas where their long range was needed as well.

And from my personal interest perspective, it was in many ways the "shining hour" of P 40 operations in WW2. The Curtiss Hawks served from the beginning till the end of the New Guinea Campaign with the USAAF and the ANZAC air forces, first primarily as a fighter then later it's capabilities as a very competent fighter bomber shown through.

Also it would mean someone would have to make a P40 N model for the sim... Hint, hint.

:cool:

Updated P-40s would be very cool :) The P-40N, plus New Guinea, gives tons of options.

Kittle
01-21-2012, 09:07 PM
One of the main reasons I fly Aces High 2 (not that often now that 4.11 is out) is to fly the P-40N and F. The option of cutting her down to 4 MGs is a nice touch, cutting a little weight. I have always liked the look of the N canopy past the N-5 model IIRC. I fully fleshed out 'Kittybomber' would be nice too. P-40 was such an important aircraft in WWII, yet so underrated.

IceFire
01-22-2012, 04:47 AM
All this has gotten me started on a Blacksheep Corsair campaign. One way or another I'm going to put something interesting together for the Solomon Islands map. Been thinking about this for a while so this is perfect :)

Tanyrhiew
01-22-2012, 10:16 AM
Hi,

After a period of 4 or so years without Il-2 on my HDD, 4.11 persuaded me to re-install to see the TD's work. Good Job!

After such a long time away, I'm a bit dissapointed that all these fantastic changes, i.e. aircraft, objects, navigation beacons etc are so hard to enjoy as they are not integrated into existing campaigns (old broken dgen) and therefore not accessable without a lot of work from the player who must integrate them themselves (adding 4.11 payloads is PITA to il2dcg is a PITA).

Basically offline, Il-2 is still at the same low level it was at when FB was released. I feel that the time has come for a rationalisation of the way the changes, additions and improvements is presented:

Some form of associated TD addon campaign pack using either il2dcg or the new dgen is needed so that the improvements through the work of TD are highlighted and show what Il-2 has become to best effect. With the developments that Lowengrin has done to il2dcg over the years since I last used it (timelines to control the flow of a campaign, MDS integration) and the new dgen that is in development, the tools already exist to make offline hugely enjoyable and accessable to a new or returning player without a huge amount of work on their part, i.e. trawling through campaigns on mission4today, downloading Enjoyr patches to make them compatible etc.

csThor
01-22-2012, 10:59 AM
Hi,

After a period of 4 or so years without Il-2 on my HDD, 4.11 persuaded me to re-install to see the TD's work. Good Job!

After such a long time away, I'm a bit dissapointed that all these fantastic changes, i.e. aircraft, objects, navigation beacons etc are so hard to enjoy as they are not integrated into existing campaigns (old broken dgen) and therefore not accessable without a lot of work from the player who must integrate them themselves (adding 4.11 payloads is PITA to il2dcg is a PITA).

Basically offline, Il-2 is still at the same low level it was at when FB was released. I feel that the time has come for a rationalisation of the way the changes, additions and improvements is presented:

Some form of associated TD addon campaign pack using either il2dcg or the new dgen is needed so that the improvements through the work of TD are highlighted and show what Il-2 has become to best effect. With the developments that Lowengrin has done to il2dcg over the years since I last used it (timelines to control the flow of a campaign, MDS integration) and the new dgen that is in development, the tools already exist to make offline hugely enjoyable and accessable to a new or returning player without a huge amount of work on their part, i.e. trawling through campaigns on mission4today, downloading Enjoyr patches to make them compatible etc.

Well ... TD is a team of freelancers, people who devote their spare time into something and not professionals who are getting paid for their work. A project as you propose is, IMO, out of TD's scope and capabilities simply for the size of it. The old DGen is a static entity no longer up to the latest changes in Il-2 and the "new DGen" is in its infancy (and nobody can really say what will come out of it). DCG is an entirely external development and I don't see a reason to change this ...

As far as I can see it TD's coding capacities are already devoted to further AI work and other things, so there are simply no capacities left for such an ambitious project.

Tanyrhiew
01-22-2012, 11:16 AM
Understandable!

Perhaps a second group of volunteers can be formed to help. Anyone interested?

My preference would be to base it on il2dcg as its the more flexible system (dgen replacement, ngen, mds), well documented (Tailspin did some sterling work there) . All it needs (!) is road, rail networks for the new larger MTO, Solomons maps and other new maps, new or editing of existing camapigns to take into account new aircraft, vehicles/objects and link them together to offer campaigns for the different nationalities.

IceFire
01-22-2012, 03:37 PM
Understandable!

Perhaps a second group of volunteers can be formed to help. Anyone interested?

My preference would be to base it on il2dcg as its the more flexible system (dgen replacement, ngen, mds), well documented (Tailspin did some sterling work there) . All it needs (!) is road, rail networks for the new larger MTO, Solomons maps and other new maps, new or editing of existing camapigns to take into account new aircraft, vehicles/objects and link them together to offer campaigns for the different nationalities.

There is someone working on an update to the DCG I think... others would know more than I. If those people work with TD to integrate the new features better then I'm sure that sort of thing could be really valuable.

Although time has been tight... I've been doing my best to work on some new missions and campaigns to go along with the newer features. You'll note that both 4.10 and 4.11 shipped with a small selection of new single missions to include at least a few features and new aircraft for people to experience. There was also (not done by me) a new campaign for the Fokker D.XXI.

It's a huge amount of effort to piece all of these things together and obviously there is a delay time for the community and TD to catch up and make the new materials work for players.

addman
01-22-2012, 05:42 PM
1. Flyable TBD
2. Flyable TBD
3. eeehhrr...flyable TBD

.......pretty please! :)

Kittle
01-22-2012, 08:02 PM
Yeah, it is a bit of a tease to see and be able to shoot down the TBD and Ki-45, but you can't fly em stock. I guess maybe getting older, and having twin 18 month old daughters plus 5 and 7 yr old step sons, really takes the punch out of my WEP if you know what I mean. I just don't have the energy to mod the game anymore. What time I do have, I spend playing, it would take close to two full days worth of playing time to remember the stuff I have to do, get the files, do the stuff, mess it up at least once, then finally get it right. All to drop crappy torpedoes from the TBD (awesome, but I digress....) I am content to wait for the next patch, loving what I have.

Monguse
01-22-2012, 08:34 PM
Patience ....

ElAurens
01-23-2012, 12:32 AM
:cool:

Luno13
01-23-2012, 04:43 AM
Other requests:

Apparently, the SBD had a slip indicator which was visible when looking through the sight.

Also, not all tube sights were "telescopic" as they are represented in the game. They are used to project a cross-hairs on a target without parallax problems associated with iron sights. The pilot can keep both eyes open, tracking a maneuvering target with one eye, and using the other to determine his aim point. In game, the use of these sights restricts view, making tracking difficult.

I would suggest that Shift+F1 moves the view much closer to the sight, allowing the player to see both the cross-hairs and objects in his periphery.

Aircraft changes (I don't claim to be an expert, but I've seen other members/sources bring some of these up):

- Zero roll rate: apparently roll rate suffered at higher speeds due to wing-flex caused by the large ailerons and wing structure. It seems in Il-2 that this loss occurs too late.

- Ki-61 has wrong interior color, and should be a khaki/green. It also lacks fire-extinguisher for fuel tanks (maybe engine?).

- Rufe has wrong interior color. Should be blue-coated silver.

- Ki-27 and other Army aircraft had a dark blue-grey interior.

- Exterior color for Japanese aircraft wasn't pale-grey/off-white as in game. Instead it looked Taupe or grey-green, and was surprisingly dark (ex. Ki-27, Ki-21, undersides for most aircraft). It faded and became chalky in sunlight, but was tough and didn't often chip. Dark green, if applied over this, didn't chip (ex. some Zeros). If the green was applied directly on aluminum, it would chip easily (ex. Ki-43, Ki-84, N1K). The natural-metal undersides would have dulled quickly and can appear like light-grey in B/W photos.

Here are a couple models (not my own) illustrating this:

Conventional view:
http://www.modellversium.de/galerie/img/3/5/6/2356/32219/nakajima-ki-27-nate-hasegawa.jpg

Revised:
http://www.rsmodels.cz/img/katalog/Ki-27_a.jpg

http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_nxN_vjldtng/S88bLXeU8pI/AAAAAAAABus/IR4h3YL6qWo/s1600/Ki-46_1.jpg


-LaGGs, Yaks, MiGs, Il-2s, etc. should have light grey interior surfaces.

- Il-2s from 1941-1943 should have dark-green and black camouflage(dark-green and brown is not correct). From 1943-45, dark green, dark grey, and Earth brown. It's possible that some late Il-2s had Earth brown replaced with dark blue-grey present on fighters.

an example of early scheme:

http://mig3.sovietwarplanes.com/il-2/il2-camo/il2m-bp-fl-am-3view-v-zavod30.jpg

Late scheme:

http://mig3.sovietwarplanes.com/il-2/il2-camo/il2m-bp-fl-al-3view-late-template1.jpg

Another late scheme (it's unknown how many were painted like this):

http://mig3.sovietwarplanes.com/il-2/il2-camo/il2m3-bp-fl-al-3view-temp1-43-mod45.jpg

Rare color photos:

http://mig3.sovietwarplanes.com/il-2/il2-camo/uil2-grey-prague45.jpg

http://mig3.sovietwarplanes.com/il-2/il2-camo/il2-grey-prague45a.jpg

- The same dark-green and black applies to LaGGs, Yaks, etc. The green on in-game LaGGs is too bright, and the black looks like dark grey. The later war scheme of two-tone grey over blue was sometimes applied in a "splinter" fashion, but research indicates that "wavy" and "splinter" probably didn't coexist on the same airframe as we have in La-7s, etc (compare fuselage to wings).

Wavy/serpentine:

http://mig3.sovietwarplanes.com/colors/1943-45-fighters/yak1moskit2.jpg

Splinter:

http://mig3.sovietwarplanes.com/colors/1943-45-fighters/tem-fighters1943.jpg

http://mig3.sovietwarplanes.com/colors/1943-45-fighters/la7etalon2.jpg

http://mig3.sovietwarplanes.com/colors/1943-45-fighters/la7etalon3.jpg

http://mig3.sovietwarplanes.com/colors/1943-45-fighters/yak9-930.jpg


- The Hurricane series could use upgraded skins. It would be nice if desert examples had sand filters. A Hurri Mk.IV for use in late-war scenarios would be nice, and so would a Mk.II D (anti-tank guns).

Luno13
01-23-2012, 11:22 AM
I finally had the chance to play a bit today. First of all, great work DT! As always, I can't wait to see what magic you guys will work for the next patch(es)....

Anyway a couple more requests/ideas:

- Please do away with or revise the 20mm hit induced spins. These only seem to occur with early German 20mm and guns in the Zero, etc. Hits to the wing will cause the plane to flip over suddenly. I always panic because I think I've lost a wing... It takes a lot of force to flip a large aircraft. I doubt a these rounds could do it (and meanwhile even 30+mm have no such effect).

Sorry if this sounds bitter, but it happened several times today, and it has me frazzled :-P

- It's interesting that the Mk101/Mk103 guns sound like "tak-tak-tak" while the Mk108 sounds like "BOOM-BOOM-BOOM". If I'm not mistaken, the Mk101/103 have a cartridge that's twice the size of that of the Mk108. Maybe the sounds should be reversed?

- I've mentioned it a few times, but custom HUD messages would be nice.

- Tracer visibility over long distances. I haven't seen guns fired from miles away, but I imagine the tracers would be faint at best. Night-time is a different story.

- Related to night-time: Blue-flames on exhaust. This doesn't have to be tied to engine settings such as in CloD, but it would enhance night operations (and give some advantage to those with exhaust shrouds). Shrouds would have to be made as options for some existing aircraft (maybe tied to skin file like mirrors and bumps on the Hs-129, etc).

- Mentioned a few times, but it would be nice to see bomb-bay door functions (some planes had spring-loaded doors and the weight of the bomb pushed them out). Jamming or damage could occur if the max-speed for open doors is exceeded.

Fighterace
01-23-2012, 11:37 AM
Early P-38s or the Me-410 series would be cool...

IceFire
01-23-2012, 11:23 PM
Luno13: Some great information in there. I've been doing some similar research for RAF aircraft which is much easier to do as the hard work has been done and it's just a matter of gathering references when needed. Hopefully to have more accurate markings in the future.

May be a good idea to gather up as much research as possible and maybe, if TD agrees, to work with some skin artist(s) to put together some sort of package that TD could use in future patches.

Kittle
01-24-2012, 12:14 AM
I was surprised at the color in the new Lagg skins, the Lagg-3 s66 has that blue tone in the default skin now. I think it looks amazing, and being historically accurate is a must for default skins (IMHO). I would certainly love to see the other Soviet birds done in a similar fashion. That tan, brown, almost sand colored IL2 is a beauty as well. Seems like she would be right at home in the Med. One thing I forget and must remind myself of constantly, is that the old USSR had such a vast diversity of terrain types. Skins that I see and go, "no way any where in Russia would that not stand out!" After some research, I always prove myself wrong, which is good, tis how we learn and all.

Lagarto
01-24-2012, 12:25 AM
AI escorts should be somehow tied down to the bombers/reconnaissance aircraft they're supposed to protect. As it is now, they all leave their charges high and dry to engage whatever passes by. It would be great to see them chase off any threat and resume their position. Or perhaps one flight could engage and the other remain with the bombers/reconnaissance aircraft. That's how it worked in real life.
Also, some AI fighters - notoriously I-16s - fire unrealistically long bursts, especially when engaging bombers. They actually hose them with bullets! In real life they would have ruined the rifling of their gun barrels.

Luno13
01-24-2012, 01:14 AM
Thanks Icefire.

I'll have to start looking for some real references. The stuff I posted is just secondary. Those guys who made the 3-views and models, etc. have studied real paint-chips and factory directives.

I like to build models, so I do sometimes pay attention to that kind of stuff.

I bring this up because I have absolutely no skill at painting skins. The most work I've done is to cut up other artists' works or alter the colors with curves in GIMP.

As you've already noticed, DT have been upgrading many skins and altered the code to allow for many options that vary based on map, date, etc. Since it's impossible to change the skin of AI for DGEN missions, etc, it would be great if a talented artist could continue the work on the defaults (Remember the sickly green of pre 4.09 Ju-87s et al.? Now the RLM 70/71/65 actually looks right.)

ElAurens
01-24-2012, 01:55 AM
The so called "splinter" paint scheme was done a long time ago, I can't remember who the skinner was.

The real thing was designed by the NKAP.

CzechTexan
01-24-2012, 04:25 AM
Luno13 mentioned fixing the tube sight and I think he has a good idea. I love flying the older planes that have it but i HATE using that sight. Can something be done to change how it works?

RPS69
01-24-2012, 03:38 PM
Something, that we would like to see too. No clue at this point, if its possible.

Ships are worst than land based units on AI implementation.

Land based units, will maneuver (clumsily) around a destroyed object, while a ship will just collide with it and get also destroyed.

This may be, because that hey don't have any reactions at all beyond previously traced WP.

Worst... they don't have a turning radius established. If I made a flight follow a 90º WP, the AI will turn around it as best as their plane allows it, but on a ship, if I place a 180º direction change, they will obey on the spot! It will turn on its central axis, and start sailing into the other direction. An admiral's dream!

In CloD, ships attempt some timid evasive maneuvers, but not to the point of doing a full circle. Still putting a bomb with a dive attack, on a zigzagging ship is much more taxing than doing so in il2.

Snake
01-24-2012, 04:09 PM
What's next? I'll tell you what's next: 4.11.1!!! A few days ago I was wondering why on Hyper Lobby there are so few 4.11 servers. And I got an answer from a guy: they are expecting for another fix to appear so that they will not have to change the servers twice: once for 4.11 and again for the new fix!
So, what I want to know: is it true?

P.S. That guy said the fix will come up in .....take a guess!! Two weeks! ;)