Official Fulqrum Publishing forum - Daidalos Team's Room -QUESTIONS AND REQUESTS ONLY on IL2 Authorized Addons

Official Fulqrum Publishing forum (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/index.php)

- IL-2 Sturmovik (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/forumdisplay.php?f=98)

- - Daidalos Team's Room -QUESTIONS AND REQUESTS ONLY on IL2 Authorized Addons (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/showthread.php?t=8815)

just found this post on Mission4Today

Quote:

Originally Posted by char_aznable

I'm glad to inform you that patch 4.09 release candidate has just been recompiled. After intensive testing, if no further bug will be found, it will be officially released soon. :D

PS. It will take surely less than "Two Weeks". :wink:
http://i170.photobucket.com/albums/u...os/td_logo.png

Quote:

Originally Posted by WWFlybert (Post 100291)

Even for clarity on the same side, no reason for there to be German markings for a Zero, if the server chooses

This.

There is always some dolt with a JG in his tag that refuses to use the Hinomaru when flying Japanese. I even know one who tried on one of my infrequent servers to wear crosses on a Mustang when he flew Allied because it was his "squad" markings. He got the boot.

Hello again,

is it possible to add "auto save option" for last sortie? It woukd be great for someone who wants to save his flights always.

Thanks...

Quote:

Originally Posted by WWFlybert (Post 100291)

It would make more sense for server to be able to restrict markings available on each side, then no one can make a mistake if they switch sides or come from another server where they were playing on the other side.

Even for clarity on the same side, no reason for there to be German markings for a Zero, if the server chooses

I really don't mind - kills according to markings would at least give a positive incentive to a) not put on the wrong markings b) hunt people down who put on wrong markings. :)

granted though that it might be not the cleanest way of doing it - if missions could restrict what markings are available for each side, that would be a dream... any chance of having this implemented?

Quote:

Originally Posted by llama_thumper (Post 100719)

I really don't mind - kills according to markings would at least give a positive incentive to a) not put on the wrong markings b) hunt people down who put on wrong markings. :)

or c) choose the wrong markings, and sit on the tarmac in a turret equipped bomber shooting at team-mates, and never get auto-kicked because negative points won't be awarded.

Still, that's taking it literally, and the game should know that German markings don't go on a B25.

I wish there was dynamic kill markings...

Personally, on my graphic setting, I recognise the aircraft by their shape and actions (friendly or otherwise)

I can't see the national markings at a distance and the only real time I notice wrong markings on a friendly aircraft is when their next to me on the runway.

It's not really an issue for me.

That said, if your on a server and the rules say to wear the right markings, I'ld follow the rules.

Cheers

" Originally Posted by char_aznable
I'm glad to inform you that patch 4.09 release candidate has just been recompiled. After intensive testing, if no further bug will be found, it will be officially released soon."

Yes but not with the promised plane set ...

not a really hot update therefore ....

What hapened and plans changed?

We were suposed to be stuned with a great surprize of a magnificent (while burning :P)
4 engine bomber plus the Radar thingy ...

quite disaponting actually.

Neither a 4-engined bomber nor anything regarding radar or triggers were promised for 4.09. All of that (apart from the 4-engined bomber, where did that come from?) was clearly marked as WIP and stuff for the time after 4.09. It would be a nice thing if people started reading what is being posted and stopped reading just what they want to read. :evil:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fall_Pink? (Post 100093)

Huge changes and new standards? Could you elaborate a tiny bit on that?

I can think of a lot of things but have no idea if then can be made at all when the whole thing keeps on running on a single core. I mean, a lot can be improved w.r.t. things like 'to know when and how to engage or disengage', Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats, Situation Awareness/Assessment and Prioritization, Training level and Proficiency, Moral, RL tactics and so on, but that would truly mean a huge undertaking. It would however change the game radically (running at 1 fps) ;-)

Hi,
I'm old enough to remember days of ZX80 :grin: Even than you could find very exciting and interesting games. It is all about imagination.

IMO today PC are so powerful that most of game designer took a Hollywood approach in game making. Let's put as many special effect as we can and forget about the substance. Unfortunately that approach work very well. I'm somewhat disappointed to see how much are players influenced with Hollywood BS but that doesn't mean that DT will follow the same route.

We have few ideas that will make AI more interesting IMO, we will not make dramatic changes in code but I believe that several small changes can change game experience a lot. IMO it's all about creating illusion, we don't have to make smart AI, we only need to make player think that AI is smart.:grin:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eki

A suggestion for the next patches: If you start working with the GUI, could you add a possibility to save ip-addresses of different multiplayer servers into a some sort of list under the multiplayer menu? That would really help those who don't use Hyper Lobby. Currently you have to copy-paste or write the ip address every time you want to change the multiplayer server.

We will try to do something about it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nearmiss

Approach patterns - the large semi-circle for landings not sensible or realistic.

Flying around in approach pattern circles , especially when the enemy is so close to the airbase, i.e., Henderson field,Guadalcanal. would not have been too dangerous. Straight in and straight out approaches was the only way to avoid small arms fire.

Consistent circular fixed patterns also overlap when several airbases are in close proximity.

Straight in and straight out with holding patterns further away from the airbases would make more sense.

We have made several landing patterns, which one will be used depend on mission maker, that change will be included in 5.0 probably.

You will be able to chose between:
1.Normal Left
2.Normal Right
3.Short Left
4.Short Right
5.Straight In

All of them accessible through FMB.

FC