progress...
 

Just catching up after being away from this forum for a bit. I'm excited as anybody about the new release, but reading all this, an analogy popped in my head:

Oleg is a mother with 10,000 needy babies, all trying to suckle at once.. He can't feed you all! lol...

I'm on a project now that is the usual development model... A date was set, so we are going to deliver much less than the design called for. I'm happy he is doing the design right, and pushing the date out instead!

Read please the comments of mazex above. He tell you the same like I tried to explain.

Hi Oleg, nice to see you are still around :)

I'd like to ask if you are able to provide the ability to save the game in-flight.
It isn't really possible to get the most out of the games with the type of lifestyles most of us lead. Not without sacrificing work and family.

Being able to fly a six-hour bomber sortie for example, in real time but spread out over a couple of sessions would be a great thing for the single player experience. We wouldn't be slaves to the short-hop missions or the time-skip key. If players could share and exchange save points too... Well, you can imagine the possibilities. ;)

Thanks Oleg. Allready sent you a mail.. ;-)

DayLight Flash
 

"Read please the comments of mazex above. He tell you the same like I tried to explain."

I understand Oleg. I guess you can compare this to any muzzle flash. (From a rifle for example), whereby it cannot be seen in daylight, but produces an orange fireball at night.

Flash Hiders: WWII aircraft had Flash Suppressors? (Flash Hiders only disperse the flash when you are looking down the barrel,) which allows the shooter to see through the flash. When looking at the barrel from the side, the flash hider does nothing. I would like to see the reference to WWII aircraft having flash hiders.

GF

I was asking about this feature our developers. It isn't promised, but maybe. Simly now we need to save even more data than in Il-2... and in Il-2 it was way more than in any shooter.

Yak-9K had recoil compensator working on the partial redicrection of muzzle flash. It was also reduced by this way the muzzle flash itself. Without this recoil compensator the recoil was some 3,5 tons force, - with compensator about 1,5 tons. Muzzle flash was reduced from 3 meters to almost 1,7 meters (measurements were taken on a day light for muzzle lash.

On some experimental German planes in the end of the war also used such recoil compensators.

Registartion of the size of the muzzle flash on film camera depending of the shutter speed and spectral sencitivity of the film.
With speed more than 1/16 sec muzzle flash sometime was registered completely on some types of films. For the gun MK108 it will be up to two metrers size in flight on the speed of 350 km/h.
On the same speed on Il-2 the muzzle flash size of 23 mm cannons is 1,7-2,3 meters leight
And it is is present even on a daylight black and white film :)

Really it was discussed in the past and some modern military guys confirmed this...

One developer did traccers like on gun cameras, that are looking like letter S.... This developer didn't make the research why the gun camera registered such effect... and simpy copied it in a sim... but it was incorrect. Just for example.

I will answer later. I'm not at office... I'm typing from home. A bit sick. My job emails I can read only in office. Please wait a bit

Good to see you are still around, to answer all our questions!

I already posted a few, but I of course got another one or two:

Will SoW have an ingame VoiceOverIP-included? It would be really cool to combine these functionalities with the simulation of the radio-system. :cool:

Also an ingame-server-browser or at least one, that is distributed with the game would be really helpful. Has this been considered, yet?

Sorry to hear that you are sick. Hope that you get well soon :)

All the best..

Henrik

*snort*

We got something in common then. I'm home, too ... mononucleosis (wherever I caught that one).

"Really it was discussed in the past and some modern military guys confirmed this..."

I've been an AA gunner in the Swiss army: for years, I shot during military courses with 20mm AA canons and saw many times too 35mm canons firing.

I never saw, even at night, flames in my gunsight.

In fact, flames can be seen (and not always, depends of the shutter time, exposure and weather conditions) on pictures or videos, but there are almost invisible to the human eye, because the flashes are too fast and very transparent too.

Btw, it's simple logic, do you think the technical services of any air force would accept a weapon system whose firing would annoy or even block the aiming of a pilot or a gunner?

Voice telephone? However in Il-2 the user interface for this features wasn't good.
Yes we plan. Because it is really good for the recording of tracks :)

We plan to make some browser. But probably it will be separate program from which you will be able to star the sim with automatic connection to selected server.
We had such things in the past in our previous (before Il-2) games.

But this program will be not the program that will replace others, that works fine with Il-2.
It will be in additional, if user prefer.

csThor in Denmark we call that illness for "Kissing sickness". So have you kissed someone recently that could be the possible colpret? ;) Get ready for 6 months of no alcohol and being fatiqued all the time. great fun :cool:

Oleg I have seen that models of planes and vehicles have hinges that can be manipulated. Is this also a feature that the player will be allowed to use? Like opening hatches on a tankturret or opening the cockpit of a fighterplane?
And will this feature also be applied to human figures? So the player will be able to position the arms and such of the body?

Partially agreed about transparency at day.
As for the WWII time there are enough recalls of gunners that was blinded at night from their MGs firng in enemy.

You also should take in account that the changes in modern guns and the evolution (better to say revolution) in gun powder changed a lot of things even in muzzle flash due to more greater speed of "powder" combustion :)

But really if you will take a look on modern camera shots of some terrorists shots - the muzzle flash is great from even 7,62 mm Kalashnikov :).

I personally also many times fired from guns (sigle and many) at everning time and almost always got partial blinding. The hunter gun of 12th caliber (with is like 20 mm cannon) that I used often in the past gives the same effect... And amount of powder in a cartrige there is more small than in 7,62 AKM cartridge....

Cool! Sounds great.

:grin:

From the beginning we are making all things openable... I dopn't know how many of these features will go in final reelase... but as with Il-2 this means we will modify the code that to use the BASE input at initial development. With the release we will have AA-guns controlbale by player... this is intersting for Online, but it will also works in a single missions, if you only like to create such.

And as I told... the code will be partially open in terms of modification with the use out of normal fixed parameters and code servers...

In time I think we may see even U-boat controlable :) The water is transparent in engine.

The point about modern powders is one of the biggest differences. Most of the weapons 70 years ago used cordite as it's combustible in closed cartridges. Today's modern smokeless powders, while still producing flash, burn much more efficiently than good 'ol cordite and produce a smaller, faster-burning flash.

As far as the in-game voice possibilities, I'd love to see something if able to be done without causing too much of a performance hit to the sim itself. Obviously the IL2 in-game voice attempt didn't pan out completely and TeamSpeak is still an excellent free alternative either way.

Personally, I'd really like to see a spartan user-friendly server-finder included for online play, but that's just me. Hyperlobby is a great service for the genre, but a bit klunky with limitations and not the most user-friendly proggy out there. I don't like the chat function in a server-finder. It just becomes another forum for 12 year olds to taunt one another. ASE was the best IMO and now I use XFire. I have no doubt that an included server finder would be a better alternative to either of these.


TB

Hello Oleg,

I have some questions regarding the multiplayer:

Will it be possible to change the inflight briefing during the game and will it be possible to paint the flightroute and mark objects on the map?
If so it would be helpfull to add an option to send that customized map to all other squad members during the game.
I also wonder if there is a chance to display own jpg's on the briefing screen (like air recon, notes or tactical maps).
Will the player be able to conquer airports and does that influence the support or reinforcements?

I do have some more questions regarding the mission editor:

Is there any chance of changing the ingame maps, to add markings or notes visible to other players?
I'd like to add a video to the briefing to present the map in the old fashioned "wochenschau" style will that be possible?
And last but not least, is there some sort of trigger so that a sound file (like a radio message) will be played when the player activates the trigger?

Thanks in advance

Best regards

NSU

U-boat controllable? Now you're talking my language. :)

Is there a reason you skipped answering my question?

Hope you get to feeling better soon.

Same here in Germany (and my parents asked the same), but no - that's not the source. Single by choice and conviction. ;)

This old biker always ask many questions :)

I can't say yes to all your questions. Recon maps we would like to make and it is in plan. However I don't know if it will be in release. The format of brief is HTML... so theoretically there is possible to use recon map and send to others across the map. But it will depending of many factors, so I can't tell you 100% yes.

As for the capture airfield.... we plan several online modes in additional to what we had in Il-2... Also can't say you final features


As for changes of map... don't know yet all features that will go in final. You know I never promise when I'm not sure, if you are NSU that I know...

Video in gif or flash player format probably will be possible in a brif. I don't know which type of HTML we will use in final. You know there is going the new version of HTML in future... Proabbly we will stay with the current for a long time. So if to make everything manually for single missions - then you probably may use all features of current HTML version :). If automatic - then just limited amount of features... However the engine of campaign (doesn''t matter single or online) will be open for modifications. Or even someone may developm completely own. We will give access to that item of code for modifications that will not damage the fair online gameplay.

You will be able to put on the map trigger with sound message with the defined radius of action.

Hope everything answered clear enough. :)

I can't try to find your question... There is too many pages.
If you'll repeast right now - I will try.

Thank you for your answer, sounds very good.

und meine NSU fährt sich immer noch gut :-)

Best regards NSU

Oleg,
Thanks for the updates.

One question....Will the AI still be able to make those impossible maneuvers like they do now? I mean the instant flips, turns, etc... It gets very annoying. I hope they will behave more realistically, and be subject to stalls, blackouts, redouts, etc...

Thanks again.
Monty


Old biker here too. :)

I can't say... Its relative thing of the player-pilot experience. My guys and me can shoot any AI fighter enemy...
Stall, black outs, redouts was a limit for AI even in Il-2. Simply they are robots and calculate it way faster than you.

Probably the right name for AI would be predictable calculation with 100% precise.

In BoB we will have more complex AI behaviour that will be more "humanized".

However before Il-2 there was no one sim with "humanized" aircraft AI like in Il-2...

I can shoot them down too. What I mean is, the AI can execute maneuvers that would send my plane crashing down. The 180 degree instant turns...and I mean instant, is one example.

That was the first thing that came to my mind, when I saw those riverbeds being modelled in those magazine-scans quite a while ago. :grin:


Can you give us a hint about the airborne radar? I remember a previous statement, where you stated this will be possible in SoW, but you were not sure wether this will be in the initial release. Looking at the antennas on the Beaufighter, has the decision been made in the meanwhile? ;)

Same was for radio navigation, if I remember that quote correctly.

Thanks.

Airborne radars (onboard) will be only on AI aircraft with the release.
We don't plan to model with the first release night fighers. Too much work for the too small effect in gamplay. The first thing is important that will be economicallyy right in development.

However I do think in future if the BoB will be successful, then we may work over such things as well. As well as third party developers.

Never saw myself AI instant turns that I can't repeat myself going by their trajectory.

However it is explained as well above about their precise.

Some time AI with level of Novice also crashes in a stall in dogfight...

Thank you very much for your info on th game sir.

I'm not sure if you spotted my qestions among so many of them so I'm reposting mine. I hope you don't mind. :)

Ok,

I must drop today my computer...
So prepare really right questions for which I CAN answer on monday.
Please not so much and please do not repeae already answered earlier.

Nice weekend to your all!

I will try to begin on monday from your questions.
If I will forget, remind one more time. :) I did right questions

hi Oleg

for the german radio speech, i send you a E Mail :-)

A small question to Oleg...
 

Hello Oleg!

I am perfectly happy with the questions of the others and your answers.

There is however one question which has been nagging me thince one year now! I will just repost it as in November 2007:

"Did you by any chance read the small document I try to send to you in August 2007 (to your personal MG address, via Luthier/RRG and on paper at MAKS 1C/booth)?...just curiosity...I believe that some of my statements in this paper were not completely without interest, especially as far as Luftwaffe airfields in France during BoB were concerned... "

Thanks for your time and dedication,

JVM

PS: If need to I can send you my small document again, just tell me where...

This is the zigzag tracers do on guncams? somebody knows why this happens?

Just curious.

It's been known for ages and is caused by the camera shaking.

Im certain this was probably already asked a long time ago, but I dont know your answer.

During online games with humans vs humans will the pilots head look where the player is looking. Meaning...if Im in a scissors duel will I be able to see my opponents head following my aircraft if he is doing so. I thought I noticed this with AI long ago but to be honest in the past 7 years I have spent little time mixing it up with AI.

Having such a feature, although small, brings tons of immersion to the table for me.

Thanks,

S!

I suppose it could help indicate weather or not a pilot see's you sneaking up on them... :)

Death graphics (of a slumped over pilot or gunner) could help you figure out if you killed the pilot or not.

Lots of questions... but as always happens to me, I can't remember anyone...

ok, here goes one:

Will be possible to set in the planes random or pre-defined malfunctions?? For example, when in an online war the aicrafts get worn and as a result of this, the failure percent increases.
How complex is going to be the procedure of starting the engines? (you said earlier that it might be more complex)
Will it have more realistic effects on starvation of engine, and mixture control??
How will the engine handle the flaps? Will it follow the historical procedures of every model or will it have 2 or 3 levels of predefined angle flaps?
How will the monitor resolution and "points of aircraft" (contacts at distance) work?? Today lot of people don´t use high resolution because they "don't see the contacts"...
Can we get out of the planes and walk? (At least, in the start of the mission)
Will be more data written in eventlog.lst?? It´s very useful to create dynamic campaings.

Thanks Oleg!!

I think tracers like that appeared in B17 The mighty 8th. I really liked them, but i never thought of the logical explanation behind the effect, so another question pops to mind...if i shoot i will be seeing straight lines, but is it possible to render S lines when we playback a track?
Of course this is not a really important thing, just eye candy, but this sim is looking like it will contain a whole lot of impressive effects, so why not.

As for the modding issue, i'm very glad that the new game is made with an open architecture. This way people can add things into the game without the need to "hack" the whole code and open up FM/DM to modification. It will be really nice to have varied theaters and operational environments, i'm especially looking forward to RAF's night bombing campaign, luftwaffe nightfighters and primitive radio devices to use.

The news about the HTML briefing is very encouraging as well, now imagine if we could also edit the briefing in some online modes.
We could have an online mode that will play on a big map and one side tries to conquer the other, or meet a certain objective set by the map maker.

Then each team would break down this objective into individual strategies and missions. Some players would set up missions for other players to fly and influence how the frontlines move.

Just imagine that we need to know the situation in the frontlines so we can order CAS missions. Someone types a small text outlining the mission and maybe even gives a basic flightplan and all this is in HTML. I read the mission brief and select "copy mission to pilot's notes" and another editable sheet opens up where i can modify my flightplan, loadout and maybe even make some notes that i can see inside the cockpit when i fly (for speeds and altitudes for each waypoint, since these are not visible in WWII era navigation systems). In short, i prepare my mission just like a real pilot would do and i'm doing it online, against other players with the time ticking away against me.

I take my nice blue photo-recon mosquito and make a good run over the front, taking photos of anything i might find. If i manage to land back at a friendly base, i have my film processed and i can see some black and white screenshots of the area i photographed. I mark the targets on the photos and place them on the team's bulletin board for the rest of my guys to see, so they can then plan the ground attack missions that we need to fly. And if the attack is successful, our troops gain a little ground on the front. Sounds good?

Hi Oleg!

Wouldn't it be better to have the missions, including briefings etc in xml? If you want to show the briefings as HTML you can just add an xslt file for parsing the briefing part. That way all mission briefings will follow a specified format - but let mission builders add their own xslt:s if they do not want the standard format.

Example xml (start of it - indentation lost pasting it here - full code in a zip at the bottom of post):

<sow-mission>
<briefing>
<meta-info>
<name>JG51-7</name>
<mission-date>1940-09-07 18:35</mission-date>
<version>1.0</version>
<creator>Mazex</creator>
</meta-info>

<images>
<region-images>
<region-image id="1" filename="region1.jpg">The London docks area</region-image>
</region-images>
<mission-overview-images>
<ov-image id="1" filename="overview1.jpg">The intended route</ov-image>
</mission-overview-images>
<recon-images>
<r-image id="1" filename="recon1.jpg" target-id="1">Target 1 - Recon image showing the football factory at XXX</r-image>
<r-image id="2" filename="recon2.jpg" target-id="2">Target 2 - Recon image showing the football yard of the team that beat Maj Molders sons soccer team in 1936 at XXX</r-image>
<r-image id="3" filename="recon3.jpg" target-id="3">Target 3 - Old image showing the ship that we added to this briefing for fun</r-image>
</recon-images>
</images>
...

Using a very simple xslt to parse it giving this look (just an example without the right WWII look etc. - not using all the xml data available like strategic map images etc, I did not have the time...)
http://web.telia.com/%7Eu55702101/un...screenshot.jpg

Full "code" download here (xml+xslt+css+images)

Please observe that the xml structure is just an example. There should be a lot of other attributes in it!

This is just a suggestion, but I really think that XML should be more "future proof" than HTML. If you later decide that you do not want to use HTML rendering of briefings, just show the info from the xml in the "thick GUI". Want to search all missions on disk that have a certain author? No problem... Someone wants to do a custom mission/briefing editor? Just follow the xml spec and you can make a WYSIG editor for it... There are many advantages in my opinon vs HTML.

What do you think?

EDIT: For interested people not familiar with xml/xsl - just unzip the file above to a local directory and double click the file "briefing_mis123_camp4.xml" to do a local inline xml/xslt transform in you browser (you will hopefully see the page above). The tag <?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="jg51_campaign.xsl"?> really shouldn't be there but it's simple for easy local testing. The data is in the .xml file and the html formatting is done in the .xsl file... If you open the file "briefing_mis123_camp4.xml" in a text editor (right click -> open with notepad) you will see that it actually contains xml data and not HTML. It's the row <?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="jg51_campaign.xsl"?> at the top that does the magic. It tells your browser to create HTML output bu using the specified .xsl file as a template for interpreting the xml data (for output). Maybe not the best explanation in the world ;)

/Mazex

Hi Oleg, it's nice to see you kicking around the clubhouse again (sorry your not feeling well)...

At the moment I have just one little question about "off-line" mission building. Will we be able to add "AI" objects that suffer from "battle damage"? Let me give you an example...I have always wanted to add an "in-flight" B-17 (that had 2 engines leaking oil and burning) to an "off-line" mission...right now that is not possible. Right now, if you want to make an off-line mission with wounded straggling bombers limping home as you and "AI" team mates B&Z them to death, you have to set their flight path through a FLAK barrage or something (their is no practical way of doing it) and hope that a few of them get hit. Also it might be nice to be able to set damage on AI aircraft carriers or battleships...
Thanks Oleg, and hope your feeling better soon. :)

Hello Oleg

I know the Refueling and Rearming question has been brought up long ago, but I can't remember if you've shown much interest in modeling it. Pilots in the Battle of Britain sometimes flew 4 or 5 sorties in a day, maybe even attacking the same bomber stream as it flew back from targets. I've found the refueling and rearming feature very emmerive in other sims and miss that capability in IL-2. I know its possible to fake it and hit refly on-line and stay in the same mission, but I don't think its possilbe off-line. I've just started flying off-line again for the first time in years and can't remember, lol.


~Salute~

Chivas

Hi Oleg, hope you are feeling better. ;)

I'd like to ask if SoW will feature bailing out in first-person perspective?

The current style of Il-2 and previous sims is for the "camera" to jump to an external perspective - right at the moment of greatest immersion. It tends to destroy the atmosphere more than a bit. As I'm planning on getting shot down a lot, it's something very important to me! :)

Hello Oleg !

I got 10 precise questions about SoW from other simmers, I hope you didn't yet answer them...

-About the servers, you said that we'll "probably" got server dedicated softwares. Can you say if there will be one for coop ?
-In the FMB, could we get a tool to see easily the range of artillery, for ex. ?
-Will we be able to get in a coop after the beginning ?
-Will we be able to open independantly the oil radiator and the glycol/water radiator ?
-Will mission makers be able to define a probability for a plane to have a precise breakdown (hydraulic 5%, engine 10%, etc... ) ?
-Will we be able to set a reference pressure for the altimeter ?
-Will flares (red, green) from control tower be modelised ? For example, will a plane approaching for landing with gear up got a red one ?
-Will IA ground (or sea) objects try to avoid attacks (by scattering, for ex.) ?
-Will triggers in the FMB include some probabilities ? (a trigger which have 30% chances to work, for ex.)
-How many clouds layer will be modelised ?


And as a bonus if you don't mind, a more private one : Could you tell us what are the three features of which you are the more proud ?

So many great question's answered by Oleg...I hope that this put's end to concern of worried people, that SOW was cancelled. :)

Give them a week ... or two. Then they'll be back to rattling teeth and nightmares. ;)

@Krasno: I asked for the wing icing before. He said it is possible to model it with the SoW-engine but it is not high on the priorities list and will most likely not be included in BoB.

Oleg, thank you for the answer regarding muzzle flash (never thought about speed of camera frames, or powder issues).

Quick question: As you say ground AA guns will be playable, Will AA guns on naval/merchant ships be playable as well?

Thanks Tbag I'll change for another !

Oleg are you able to tell us who the publisher for Bob Sow will be? :)

Hallo Oleg!

1. You've mentioned earlier that SOW series will be open for 3rd party add on makers and that they can implement a more detailed simulation of an aircrafts operating procedures than the default planes will feature. (realistic start up procedures etc.)
Can you say us what level of detail will be possible, what subsystems can actually be simulated?

2. Especially will it be possible to switch between different fuel tanks, which was very important in some aircraft like the P-51?

3. I've read in an old interview that AI crew members in BOB can panic and just fire around wildly. Is such an feature also planned for AI flak gunners? Something like crewmen abandoning their guns when under fire, so that you can use historic tactics to suppress the enemy AAA with strafing runs.

4. Will it be possible for the user to edit the available loadouts for each plane in any way or will there be a fixed predefined set like in Il-2?

Hi Oleg,

thx for answering questions here, it gives a much better idea of the detail in the BoB project

hope you can answer these questions to:

1) will there be "terrain masking" in BoB ?
- "terrain masking" means that AI aircraft and enemy radar can not see through mountains and ground obstacles if they are blocking "line of sight" . so for ex if we fly a german aircraft very low over england (say 30 meters altitude) then the english radar will not see us, and similarly when i fly behind a mountain then the radar and AI aircraft on the other side of the mountain will not see me.
(you answered the question for clouds now blocking AI aircraft vision, but you have not answered it for mountains and hills blocking radar and AI visibility)

2) will there be civilian road and rail traffic in BoB ?
- right now in il2 when you see a truck or car on the road it is always military (even the bicycles), same with the trains they are always a military target. if we have some civilian road traffic (few buses and cars maybe doing a programmed "loop" journey) and trains in england (and they existed in ww2 period) then points could be deducted for destroying innocent civilian objects, and that means we need to correctly identify a target before engaging it, not just shoot at anything that moves !

3) will there be AI traffic and activity at the airfields we fly from ?
- microsoft flightsim X already has this, there is refueling trucks, baggage trolleys, other trucks and shunt vehicles driving around the airfield, giving it an "alive" impression
- you mentioned you will have ambulances and fire trucks maybe rushing to a crashed aircraft, but can we have some active vehicles like refueling trucks, ammo trucks, tea truck, jeeps with pilots, base commander in jeep on inspection tour, etc type activity ? (could be switched on/off in options for low end pc not wasting resources)
- can we have similar friendly AI activity in the sky ? in real life there was not just fighter planes and bombers flying in the sky, there was supply planes, transport planes, replacement aircraft etc. can we have some of that activity in the sky and at our airfields ? for ex AI flying in new replacement aircrafts for the squadron, and maybe supply aircraft bringing in parts and supplies, or new pilots etc.. that means other planes will be landing and taking of at our airfield, and flying in the skies near our airfields.
- adding that type of simple activity can make a big difference in bringing the BoB world alive, instead of flying in an empty world like we have in il2 right now.

4) will destroying objects/buildings at an airfield affect the availability of resources at that airfield ?
- for ex if all the fuel dumps at an airfield are bombed it should take X amount of time before fuel is again available at that airfield (new supply needs to be transported to the airfield), during that X time delay there should be no fuel (or ammo for ex) available at that airfield. same principle if all aircraft stationary on that airfield are destroyed by an enemy bombing raid, then we should not be able to magically spawn a brand new aircraft from that location (or hit refly and get a new aircraft) for X amount of time (new aircraft need to be flown in , or damaged aircraft need time to be repaired with spare parts). same if a runway is bombed, the bomb craters should remain taxi/landing/takeoff obstacles for X amount of time till the runway is repaired (you can still use the part of the runway that is not damaged)
- in practice this means that we can gradually shut down an enemy airfield, and force their aircraft to use a more rear located airfield (so it forces the enemy to waste more flying time to reach the frontline)

5) will you correct and improve the "distant object visibility" problem we currently have in il2 ? ie seeing distant LoD models correctly as you would see the the same object (plane/truck/tank) from the same distance with the naked eye in real life
- this is not a problem in il2 when you look at a distant aircraft against the open sky because it is a black (or dark grey) object that is seen against a uniform light blue sky background, but there is a MAJOR problem looking for a small LoD model against the textures of the terrain background, it blends in to much.
- for ex right now in il2 when you fly your aircraft at 1500 meters altitude and you look down to scan the ground for objects, you can not see/locate/track an enemy truck or tank that is standing in an open field or is located on an open road (as you can in real life see it, and historical ww2 pilot reports available), but instead in il2 you need to fly at 500 meters altitude to be able to see it (using the 30 FoV zoom function is not the solution, because it creates tunnel vision and you can only scan a very small narrow part of the ground at a time, and loosing all your peripheral vision it makes you very vulnerable to fly like that). this is because the il2 LoD model blends in to much with the terrain textures (with pc grafix it is a flat 2 dimensional LoD model blending in with the colors of the flat 2 dimensional terrain textures, but in real life it is a 3 dimensional solid object that stands out much more)
- will you compensate for this pc grafix problem in BoB and make distant LoD models stand out more so they are correctly visible ? you mentioned we will have more LoD models in BoB, instead of the 3 currently used in il2, but i am asking about making the LoD model stand out more so it is correctly visible and we can see those objects like tank/truck/planes from the exact same distance as we can see them in real life !

thank you for any information you can provide :)

Bringing back from the beginning of the thread:

1. Damage of coolant lines; coolant leaks: will it be modeled? (yes/no, however detailed answer is welcome too).
2. Reversal of controls; wing twist;

Will there be an offline set of training missions (interactive) utilising the Tigermoth?

You have mentioned that you planned to allow two pilots to fly the Tigermoth online, is this still a possibility?

Originally Posted by T.}{.O.R.
Thank you for the time answering our questions sir.

I have a couple of my own questions too - speaking from a bomber pilot's view, will AI gunners now take into account friendly bombers flying in formation? In IL2 when we do formation flying online, often there is a friendly kill from one of our bombers in the formation.

YES. in BoB such situation shouldn't be possible. As well as fo other AI objects with AI gunners (guns cannons, etc)

You mentioned that gunners will differ from one to another by their skill level, but will they also interact more with the pilot, something like 'bandit 5 o'clock, coming in'?

We plan some speech of gunners and thier notices for pilot

Also will it be possible to hop into someone elses bomber on DF servers to take copilot seat, or at least a gunner position? No matter if this option will be for coops only, it will help a lot in training pilots how to fly formation and not to mention different formation positions which in IL2 are impossible to fly since we can't use copilot's seat (I know Ju88, He111 and RAF bombers had a single pilot, but this may be a good reference for the future ).

The online protocol of BoB is completely new and different to Il-2, so I would say yes... that would eb absolutley sepearate seats.

And last question - how much more complex will be using the bombsight compared to IL2? The biggest lack of automation release in IL2 for me is that it can't be used for online formation bombing because everyone will hit area behind the leader, no matter how close they fly in the formation.


For example in B-17II The Mighty Eighth, old game by Microprose, Norden bombsight had a small red light on the bombsight which would light up second or two before the sight would release the bombs - is it possible to model something like that in SoW (not sure what historical reference here is, to my understanding Loffte bombsights used by Luftwaffe were very similar to Norden)?

This question I don't understand. how this small red light will hep in a situation above (and I really didn't understand what do you mean... why behind.... Only if you order them to drop.... but if in missions is a target all others in a flight will bomb that target, but not behind.

Hello,

a interesting question from simhq:

Can players join coops after mission start?


Best regards MiniMe

What we normally do Oleg is to get the lead flight, usually Thor, to bomb aim for us. As we fly in formation behind him all our bombs can fall behind him and some quite far behind so they miss the target. To try and correct this we try and delay the bomb drop so they fall on the target together by Thor saying drop drop drop and we drop on the last drop. I think what Thor wants is in the old Micrprose and Infograms game where you targeted the target with the bombsite and got a red light showing when to drop the bombs which also made the rest of the flight drop theirs perfectly on target.

1. Yes. Will be another technology, but means the same. The polar pattern of radars we try to model as close to real things as it possible. Of course with some approximations, but anyway close.

2. It is possible. Probably we will minimize it in release, becasue of hit to resources, but in general Buses already now can travel by their own trajectory in a city and make stops as well cars will try to find place for parking in a end "waypoint". It is working already. Just would repeat the amount of such action probably we will need to minimize due to resource eater feature. But for Editor we will offere to use it for enduser to modify scenery, etc...

3. See above. Yes we plan some life on airfields. But the main goal of course still will be the air battles :)

4. Yes. Also we are currently working over "real" 3D craters of bomb hits on the ground.. that will destroy the usability of airfields for some time (real time for repair of runway or the time that defined in tunings of mission or on server)

5. The resolution of detials and LODs is way higher than in lL-2. How far we we will see the type of the object... I can't say right now. All will depends of the all final resource-eaters....
In Il-2 once we did halfransparent dot for the groun objects that to make some ability to see it from longer distance... howver users dislike this system and preffered to go back as it was.
It isn't definitiopn of the LOD only. It is definition of the screen resolution, and power of a system on which we will run BoB in fuuture in a middle settings.
Also due to online gamplay we will need to make it absolutely identical to medium system for the fair gameplay. Its a rule... Or the player with more power PC and greate resolution of the monitor you would be named as a cheater.... We already have great experience in that and many items of gameplay when we need to go for some middle level of details on middle to high power game machines...

Sorry what is about individual tunings of bombsight for each aircraft that fly in your formation... If the leader say drop it doesn't means you all should drop immediatly if there is no special order for square bombing, where the leader defined when to drop you all that to get the known effect. In the case you talk in each plane the cre should set the bombsight individually and it will drop as it should. I don't think that waht was done in mentioned above games that it is real thing...

Can if there is free place. One of selected in a special menu AI will be replaced by new player.

Sure with the release will be only ground AA-guns of some more or less similar by power types for both sides for the fair gameplay online. Later - we will see. The code will aloow much more than Il-2 code. And even more :)

Right. Don't know will be or not at the moment. The main issue how to model it visually that to get close to real picture. The code isn't hard, but the visual efect is hard that to get looking real.

So, currently can say it will be 50:50

1. Can't say at the moment. I only can say that in each cokpit we model we make all switches operable in 3D models. But not operable in the intial code. As I told it is for "masochists" :)

2. To switch different fuel tanks should be possible in intial release.

3. Not everything. Partially panic, but close to very historic types of attach - yes.

4. Probably. It will depending of the final GUI complexity. I can say that we now can change the load of the bullet/shell belts, but it will be anyway in a way of some amount of standard sets. And special effiency of each shell/bullet type will play more greater role than in Il-2.

1. Yes. More detailed when will be ready.

2. If you mean the problem on ailerons of Spitfire before and including initial series of MK V due to rodation of the wing relatively aileron - Yes we plan it. Wing twist - visually separate of each console - not. :)

New website NOTICE
 

On this week we are starting the development of new separate website for SoW series...
When ready - don't know. But I plan there forum as well. As a main forum.

Great to see you here Oleg,


May we NOT include these two things in SOW BOB

1. Elevator Trim on a slider facility or any quick trim change. Also flaps on a slider if not historically correct eg Spit ( by the way I mostly fly the spit)

2. Sonic radar. when plane you are attacking can hear you from a long way away and evade.

These two game "exploits" harm online play in my opinion

I know you are busy , but I think we are all very pleased you are able to spend some time here, thank you.

Moby

Its more than one isn't it?

1. It will be defined by a code. Player can't define it except the feature to swich it off in difficulty settings (as well as on a server).

2. Maybe a bit more complex, but maybe anyway by one button. It is still diputable in our team. But sure we wiill not copy rweal procedures for each aircraft. Fist becasue it is tioo much time eater in development. Second, becasue if to do, then to do it really correct, but not like others WWII sims developer declare that they have it realistic. Enough to compare with real manual the item "preparing for fligth(take off, or so)"...
The main thing is that most active people will play online our sim and opnly periodically - single play. In online gameplay the procedure for real starting engine will limit very much gameplay, so we MUST go there fro compromises with reality. The only real starting procedure will reduce interest for the gameplay very much... as well as some other real features (like real ACTUAL time of refueling and reloading) - then you will get German or Russian plane ready more quiker than British or US.... This will damage the online gameplay be sure...

3. Yes. A bit. Becasue we model more precise fuel consumption due to different input, than in Il-2.

4. This I already answered above in other answers.

5. No. But in a code it is possible alreay now. see my other answers.

6. We have completely new online protocol. More for sure.

1. Initially in Il-2 it was possible, but then a lot players that haven't such sliders on their home controller begun to sign a song that they are cheaters... That to make fair gameplay we did protection in a code for this feature that to make for all the speed of changes equal.

2. In Il-2 the sound engine was designed for HiEnd sound cards. It was so different sounding on Hi End and on regular cards.... On simple motherboard cards of some producers the panning was so simple, that we was unable to control it or regulate the distance... and some people begun to use it... In BoB we will have completely new sound engine that will not depending of type of sound card. We simply did own panning code, etc...

Also how to limit the ability of player to make louder his speakers... still don't know :) This will be the only one limit I know in a new sim...

Hi Oleg :)

In online wars we have the "rescue" type of missions, where someone lands close to a bailed-out pilot and "rescues" him.

Is there any chance you simulate this in a better way?

An idea would be that only planes that can carry extra pilot(s) to land near the bailed-out pilot(s) and by pressing some button to start the rescue procedure (that will last some time, according to the distance in between the plane and the pilot). Imagine a timer showing the countdown to the rescue, both to the rescuer and the bailed pilot. This should make them both sweat :D

Cheers!

And secondly please can you include this feature in SOW.

Ability to do instrument approaches. for bad weather.

For basic IFR aircraft (VDF) voice direction finding. Man in tower gives you direction of you planes from his radio station. we could design our own approach charts and would need the airport elevation , or a QFE altimeter setting.

http://www.atcmuseum.org/Surveillanc...ar_VDF_QGH.asp


For later planes a working ADF/NDB guage, needle- would need radio navigation beacons on maps

Later for the SOW KOREA -- ILS , DME and TACAN beacons and maybe PAR precision approach radar-- full talk down by airfield radar operator to 200 feet or 70 meters


Thanks Oleg

Having discussed this with a few friends who all fly online (ADW, Warbirds of prey etc.) we were wondering whether the map size would be historic?
Will the map be one large one stretching along the entire occupied territories including the Channel and the Atlantic?
Or will it be made up of smaller segments?
This would have specific impact for online play as flying 30-40 minutes over the channel without contact could create a boredom factor. This is especially true in the more airquake arena of play!

So my question is will the maps be scaleable for online play?

And the reverse of the same question, will they be realistic for off-line play and for those online enthusiasts who for the sake of realism will be willing to fly those extra 20 to 30 minutes?

Again with online wars (A classic example, that is in no way perfect is ADW) in mind how much development is going into a possible online Battle of Britain with related stats and other goodies?

Thanks for the answers.

Now that I look at my question I see it doesn't make much sence. Let me clarify a bit. :)

In IL2 if auto bomb release is used in formation bombing it causes the following effect:

leader doesn't know when his bombs will fall and others must observe his plane to see if any bombs are dropping. Now, when you see that other plane is dropping his bombs it is already too late - because of the delay between the server and the player infront of you who is aiming the bombsight + human reaction time which is average about two seconds - you will miss.

What I asked here is the following: in Microprose's game B-17II The Mighty Eighth there was a 3D model of Norden bombsight which had that red light going off just before the bombs were released. Why I mention this - if this was how real Norden bombsight operated than it would help us with online level bombing in formation to tell others when to drop and hit targets with precission. Currently in IL2 only leader's bombs will hit the target - everyone else will hit the area behind leader's aiming point.

I only ask this because to my knowledge Luftwaffe Loffte bombsights used during BoB were very similar to US Norden bombsight. If Microprose modeled Norden correctly as it was in WW2, and I think you and your development team have much more information on this subject - will such thing be in SoW?

Sorry for being such a perfectionist, but this is how we fly online:

http://img140.imageshack.us/img140/6...0529ck7.th.jpg


One more question if I may. :)

With all these great new features about bombers and stuff - will SoW: BOB feature large Luftwaffe formations like in BoB2 Wings of Wictory? (over 25 planes per formation, and sometimes there are missions with up to four such groups)

Birds...do we get to see birds? :D

Thor, is that how it was done IRL? If so, then why have a trained bombardier in each plane? All bombardiers in each flight should know what their target is, and line up and drop accordingly. I think that's what Oleg meant when he said it wasn't done that way. He said "I don't think that waht was done in mentioned above games that it is real thing..."


Correct me if I'm wrong.

It was the case in WW2. At one point 8th AF changed their tactics so that only lead plane was aiming at the target - rest of the bombardier's observed lead plane and when they saw bombs leave leader's plane they dropped as well. This was done to get tighter bomb patterns and more accuracy.

Now, with B-25s in the MTO there was another tactic used. Only lead plane and his deputy and maybe another one had bombsights. Rest of the planes had their bombsights removed and used this tactic described above.


So yes, it is based on real life tactics.


But I don't know about Luftwaffe, thats why I asked my question - I know only that Loffte BS was very similar and acctualy based upon Norden bombsight.

Just one quick question:

What amount of polygons does your models contain? For the groundvehicles, buildings and such?
Just a rough estimate..

Do you mean WAAFs or do you mean Women’s Luftwaffe Auxiliary Services or are you reffering to the feathered kind? :grin:

No, Thor is right.

It was quite common, that the other planes dropped their bombs when the leader of the formation did. You can see that in the documentary about the Memphis Belle, too (no, not the Hollywood-Movie). That is also visible on a lot of videos taken during bomb-raids. You will mostly see the leaders bombs impact before the bombs from the other planes do.

What you said, Monterey is true, too, though. All other planes had their bombardiers aiming, too, and this was vital for the mission success, because if it turned out there was a malfunction or a last second kill on the lead bombardier or even the whole plane, they could still release their bombs on target.


What Thor didn't say, though: This tactic is usually taken for carpet bombing, which means a large formation drops bomb over a wide area. Taking that into account, the (lead) bombardier of course aimed in front of the actual target, so the mass of bombs dropped right on and around it, massing the destruction around the center of the impact area.

Thor instead describes a "precision" attack, which of course uses different tactics and is usually flown by a line-formation and resulted in a much more concentrated impact-pattern.

The feathered kind. You know...Donald Duck, Duffy Duck, etc. :D

Flying in a line is equal to suicide if you're a bomber. ;) I didn't describe that.

In real life this tactic of observing when leader's bombs fall and then drop on your own works because there is no delay (measured by ping in milisec. in IL2) between the server and the server and the lead bomber and the planes following the leader. When automated bomb release is used in IL2, with server delay and human reaction delay - and when flying online on a public server, coop you name it - this tactic doesn't work - every bomber that isn't the leader, no matter how close they fly will miss the target, and not by a small margin.

Because of this we're forced to use manual bomb release in IL2 - details about this method you can find in my 70 page manual linked below.

With manual release I can tell others to drop a second before I drop to compensate for TS delay, server delay and human reaction delay. With this method not only formation bombing can be effectively used online but it has other benefits - formation does not depend on the lead bomber and his bombsight computer but instead plane designed as deputy can take over anytime as BS angle is calculated easily and fast (usually given over TS to every bomber in case something happens).


Now, back to WW2. Reason why 8th AF switched to this tactic was because not every bomber had a bombardier of a same skill. ;) And so bombs would land all over the place if some squadron had rookie bombardiers. Therefore, to insure tighter bomb patterns the best bombardier was selected to fly in a lead plane and few others to fly in the deputy planes which then used their bombsights but they didn't drop if the lead plane made it to target and was unobstructed on his bomb run.

For these reasons above Luftwaffe planes were regulary targeting the lead bombers. Flak gunners were instructed to do the same - they often even used lead plane as 'targeting point'.

Tail end charlie or lead - your choice. ;)


Thats why formations looked the way they did. Their purpose was to stack different flights at different altitudes for two reasons - to make aiming harder for flak and to enable better defensive cover.

In most cases it looked like this - 4 squadrons came in over the target (squadron equals a dozen (12) planes and usually BG had four squadrons), each on different altitude and with elements inside it on different altitude. Getting the altitude correctly was the toughest part for AAA gunners. Fighters usually communicated with them to get the correct altitude. I could go on.... :D


Please note this were 8th AF tactics. Let's get back to the subject - SoW. :D

Another quick thought, to do with bombing formation. In the mighty 8th game by infogrames it would show you a position box where you should be in the formation, this would just be a wire framed box nothing fancy. In previous answers you said it might be possible to do on screen pointers for beginners any chance of this?

Flying in a vertical staggered line was the first method to beat the Freya-Radar for British bombers. Their losses went from 60% to only 3 planes overall with that method, while raiding Hamburg. Suicide? Your choice.

How many high-level precision-bombings were made during daylight, that really deserved the description "precision", though?

So the problem gamewise would be to actually teach the Lead AI to drop his bombs early and the player to adapt to the pros and cons of the virtual battlefield.

I ask you to look again at my last post - I stated this was for 8thAF.

And please, you can't compare RAF night bombing to USAAF daylight bombing.

Plus, in terms of precission night bombing was 10 times as bad as daylight bombing.

If you want to discuss this further lets start another thread, not here.

That I agree with. I asked Oleg for a feature of 'red light going off' to help us bomb online. (only if it is historically correct, of course) I haven't played IL2 offline for last 3 years.

I didn't compare them in terms of precision, if you reread my post.

But you put up a "general rule" that was not even general with the 8th, as there were a lot of different tactics and formations used for bombing, especially in reaction to FlaK-usage and coverage, enemy fighter tactics and target characteristics. Just compare strikes on Cologne-Wesseling to the raid on the Cologne railroad-station. Completely different in almost any regard.

The usage of bomber-waves was always the most lacking part in TheMightyEigthII and in IL2, but according to previous statements, this hopefully will be history with BoB. :grin:

BTW, I recommend the MightyEigth Airforce Museum. Loads of information and a great documentary movie there - when I was there, a veteran B17 Crewman talked a bit about tactics and ammunitions used.

Effectively what needs to be done is to model what we germans call "Zündschaltkasten" in detail. So the player can set the necessary variables to a standard both online (where the formation leader determines the values) and offline (where the formation leader predetermines the values, regardless whether the player or the AI leads):

- salvo or individual drop
- attack method (horizontal attack or dive attack)
- drop delay
- bomb delay

These parameters could be set in the Ju 88.

+1 ! :cool:

Glad to see we're on the same page here. :)

I'm very familiar with most of the formations in the 8th AF. Some of them I've described in my manual v2.0. Tactics changed throughout the war, and most obviously - different targets require different aproach. ;)

...yeah 18 bombers out of which 12 are ghosts in B-17II - terrible. :D IL2 at least offeres FMB customization of formations.

+1!

True.

Maybe Oleg can share a little insight on bomberformations and waves for BoB? :grin:

In IL2 most of the times you encounter bomber-formations it's rather a few fighters against a few bombers, maybe with some fighter cover, but since we will have refueling and rearming in BoB, defending several waves of bombers would be much more realistic and thrilling, too, IMHO.

At least AFAIK this wave-tactics was used by German bombers quite often during their attacks?

Hello there,

I just want to ask whether the damaging sequence will be animated or not? To clarify for instance, in IL-2 your windscreen goes from "clean" to "oil-splashed" in a split frame, same goes for external areas, wings etc.. Is there anyway to animate those sequences for a bit...

I hope this wasn't asked already. And a big thanks to the Oleg and Co.. :)

Oleg,

During online games with humans vs humans will the pilots head look where the player is looking. Meaning...if Im in a scissors duel will I be able to see my opponents head following my aircraft if he is doing so. I thought I noticed this with AI long ago but to be honest in the past 7 years I have spent little time mixing it up with AI.

Having such a feature, although small, brings tons of immersion to the table for me.

Thanks,

S!

Well the best combination for me:
1) the ability to set in the difficulty settings "1 key engine start"
2) the "manual start", with only the common procedures of all aircraft, set the fuel tank, magnetos, etc.. a 4 or 5 keys will do it... :).

Thanks for the reply, and for IL-2, the best WW2 aircraft simulator out there.

Hi Oleg,

This is LukeFF, the He 162 cockpit modeler from FB. :)

I am wondering how much of a difference we will see in the offline dynamic campaigns. Even though a large number of people like to fly online, there are people like me who just don't have time for it. So, with that said, will see these sorts of things in the campaign:

1. Ability to assign individual pilots to a mission (once the player has reached a leadership rank)
2. Aircraft that are out of service for a certain amount of time due to combat damage.
3. Being able to award pilots medals.
4. Being able to see how an AI pilot's morale and stamina changes over time. This way, (going back to #1) which pilots to assign to a mission.
5. Historical squadrons being assigned only to their historically correct airfield (for example, Squadron A will only ever fly from Airfield A).

Thanks!

Question to Oleg RE: Bullet/Tracer Physics
 

Question to Oleg:

Someone sent me the Armament Files for "Evaluation of 50cal Tracer Smoke" (Never ever to be released to the public, as this would be copyrighted infringement).

The Tracer Smoke rises above the cockpit on level and incline flight, and falls below the cockpit on descending flight.

This should be "level smoke on level flight, tracer smoke rise on decline, and tracer smoke fall below the cockpit on incline". I could not correct the tracer smoke, but was able to make the trailing smoke "bend" on turns, incline and decline.

Will Tracers/Tracer Smoke/Trailing Gun Smoke have correct physics in BOB, and be present for appropriate calibers?

Thank you.

GF

Hey there Oleg.

I was wondering about SOW and came up with some questions.
Here it goes:

1.) Are there going to be AI aircraft in online dogfight missions?
2.) If they'll be present in DF, are we going to be able to preditermine certain things for AI? Things like, aircraft types, pilots skill, number of AI aircrafts and their objectives?
3.) During the DF game, are we going to be able to command the AI?
4.) Will each AI aircraft operate separately during DF game, or will they fly in small groups?

Thanks.

Can you be a bit more specific please? :)



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

I got four more questions if I may:

1) Will features like 'F6' be server controlable now? Meaning that we can have servers with externals on but no external padlock?

2) Will gunners now feel the effect of G-forces? IMHO, in IL2 the most unrealistic thing related to how gunners work is their resistance to G-forces. And this goes specificaly for tail gunners which can accuratly aim at you even if their plane is pulling extreme G's.

3) How will gun positions and bomber stations work in SoW? If the bombardier is on the bomb run - will he also be able to man the nose gun or will nose gun remain silent if you attack a bomber who is close to releasing his bombs? Another example are waist gunners - in He-111 to my knowledge only one person operated both waist gunners. If bomber is being attacked from 3 and 9 o'clock will only one gun fire?

4) Will gunners scan the horizon for enemy planes or will guns and turrets be in their default position at all times when no enemies are nearby?

Edit:

I thought of one more. :)

5) Will control surface movements be visible on other planes than just player's in online DF servers and tracks?

Edit 2:

Just thought of three more questions about ship modeling:

6) How will ships behave when heavily damaged / sinking? Will it be different from IL2 when they sink in a matter of seconds after being destroyed or will they sink by flooding or heavy damage (especialy if in stormy weather)? What about small (example: landing crafts or RAF rescue speedboats...) - will strafing be accompanied by an explosion to tell us that they are destroyed or will it be possible to model them like I asked above (just strafe them and they sink slowly, so we don't allways get that explosion which tells us that they are destroyed)?

7) In relation to the above questions, will ships have weak points - for example if hit in ammo magazine to cause fatal damage and if hit in other not vital areas to make them withstand more damage/hits?

9) Any chance for lifeboats / survivors in the sea after large ships sink? (I know it's maybe a long shot but...) :)