Thanks a lot Oleg for the feedback
Well now I post in the correct thread:
What kind of interaction betwen ground units/objects could we expect (i.e. will be Driveable vehicles, human AAA, radar station, ground crew...?)?
thanks in advance

Very witty Billy. Now, try to re-read what AkDavis was saying:

"I see that right side blue text "messages" are still present (but maybe only for development). If we will still have these messages in game, will they be customizable? I feel that messages like "enemy tank destroyed" are big immersion killers (and sort of pointless), but at the same time messages for certain aspects of engine management are very needed due to lack of direct tactile feedback in a sim."

Basically, You can turn off HUD-Log, but it becomes impossible to program a bomber's bomb sight, and difficult to know at what setting your radiator/throttle/P-pitch/mixture is.

Cheers!

Read again. Customize. Please explain how the ability to customize those messages denies you satisfaction.

Yup, and it gets rid of everything, including important engine messages. Either I have to play with arcade kill messages (apparently important for the gratification of people like AdMan) or none at all, unless I play with mods. I would love to play with no messages at all, but I can't (for example) tell the difference between 100% and 101% on my desktop throttle here.

Geez, you guys are fiesty today.

I've never had the desire to turn them off, so this doesn't really apply to me. Also I admit, I don't know every single customization in IL-2. Sorry.

customized messages would be cool if certain ones bother you. All engine gauges are emulated so you have all the information the actual pilot would have, if your going for complete immersion. Not sure how "tactile feedback" is going to tell you if your engine is at 100% or 101% . But whatever floats your boat. Seems like Oleg is thinking of everything with this bad boy. :grin:

Salute Oleg

Everything is superb. Absolutely wonderful.

Congratulations to you and your team. This game will be a revolution.

One question: Are there any plans for Force Feedback which focuses on the effects of flight?

By that I mean force feedback which is tuned to highlight the Buffeting, turbulence and other effects which can allow a player in front of a computer to get a sense of how well his aircraft is flying. Effects from firing the guns, or from being hit are not as important.

With this very obviously complex flight model, a system of feedback which can allow the player to get a 'seat of the pants' feel for how well he is flying and whether or not he is coming close to his stall point, etc. would be helpful.

I am sure you will make the trim status of an aircraft a real issue in this game.

There are now some mechanical devices which can be bought and which can translate sound into vibration feedback, but when they are sent a sound signal which includes engine noise, and other less important sounds, they are not very useful. Ideally they need to be sent a signal which focuses on the sounds which tell the player how well the aircraft is being flown. If your team can isolate the buffeting, turbulence, and other sounds relating to the aerodynamic status of the aircraft this would be helpful.

Here is one of the companies which manufacture these feedback devices:

http://www.thebuttkicker.com/gaming/index.htm

And of course, there are the normal force feedback joysticks.

Thanks again for your excellent work, everyone who has watched you for the last 12 years knows that you will produce in SOW, a brilliant game which will make even your masterpiece IL-2 take a step back into the shadows.

Chaps

Excellent screen shots.
I am glad to see the increase in activity now that the Playstation (or whatever - Im not interested in that) IL2:BoP version is on the streets. Let's hope it generates a whole new young fan base that will realise that BoB:SoW is where the future of flight sim action really is...

I have not read all the 11 pages of this or 55+ pages of the previous thread so this may have been mentioned before...

Everything is excellent - and answers have been given for the obvious terrain issues. Weather and terrain are unbelievebly difficult things to get right.

I flew from Woodvale to Yeovilton yesterday - 40knot head wind!!!!:

We had wispy Cu at about 2000ft with a really thick haze below but at 3000ft we were above the inversion where the horizontal vis was near perfect. Looking down we had only about a 4 mile radius slant vis through the haze and aircraft below us further away appreared as clear black/white dots against the uniform grey haze...
High were layers of AltoCu and AltoSt in various grey and blues with some blue sky between and even landing at 1230 I noticed pink and redish tints to this altoCu way off to the south over the channel.... That's real life ..... Model that....

Obviously, I am not expecting this and my opinion is that current IL2 clouds (IL2:4.09 UI1.2 for me) are excellent. Apart from a slight blockiness, flying formation in cloud is exactly as it is for real and (like many others here I'm sure) I know because I have done it.

The point of this post is to congratulate Oleg and his team for their outstanding work and diligence, but to raise one small thing.

In the spit the power supply lead for the gunsight hangs down partially obsuring the attitude indicator!!!! What a pain in the proverbial when it comes to blind flying in IMC!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! LOL Can it be moved out of the way please.....?

Gos

So excited about BoB:SoW I built my first computer in anticipation - Intel I7, GTX275, 6GB, 750GB, 850watt - Will that be enough please???????????

Oleg

Great screen shots. Attention to detail is astonishing.

While I looked at them I wondered how many posts would offer up inaccuracies. Glad to see I wasn't disapointed with that. ;)

Thanks again fr posting the shots.

PR

Wow, this is great, it's the first time, at least that i know of, that we can do something like this.
Will become handy to make vehicle, trains and/or ship convoys with diferent damage model betwenn the cargo and the carrier. Straffin a cargo ship you may destroy trucks over it but not the ship, an so on. :cool:

Yes, now with all these high poly vehicles etc is the time to finally include that "walk back to base if you like so". Everyone has been talking about it since the first combat simulator was born... How hard could it really be? No need for realistic skeletal animations etc, just let us walk if we want to!

We would probably use it one time and then never more - but it's the added realism of knowing you CAN do it is what making me seriously propose it. As it is now after ditching a plane in a dogfight and watching that pilot jump out, run 50 meters and dive to the ground is frustrating. I would like to run myself and then be able to stand there watching the fight a bit from the ground before hitting refly. Maybe hide behind the wreck if someone tries strafing me afterwards :) Why not add another possibility (yes I know I will get bashed for hollywood stuff like this - but still) - add a feature to do pickup rescues like the one from "Dark Blue World" (the Czech movie). If a pilot is down (ditch or parachute), you can land and pick him up to avoid loosing a pilot on a dogfight map... Maybe not with a spit like in the movie - but a Lysander, or a Do 18 in the water. But heck why not in a Spit like that movie. I remember reading about mechanics going with the pilots in their fighters at emergency evacuations in Russia so it's theoretically possible...

Then we naturally would like to have the ability to walk from the jeep to the plane at the hone base. No need for a fancy animation getting into the plane, it's better with a Battlefield 1942 "pop and your in there" than nothing. Imagine listening to the briefing, then get into a jeep and drive to the plane where the ground crew reports the status and walk up to the plane and press "E" to enter the plane...

A lot of work doing it, but so rewarding for immersion. We have all dreamed of it since playing sims on the C64 - put some cheap hot junior developer that has done FPS programming on it. As I understand that your budget does not allow for non essential features like this, I will happily pay his wages for one day, then I guess we can find about 100 here that does the same to let him work on it for 2-3 months to get it done. Come on - send me an account number! ;)

Actually rescue of downed pilots, especially at sea with floatplanes, would make for some interesting mission possibilities.

Setting your Walrus down on the swells of the Channel to pick up a downed pilot, hoping some 110s don't come by to spoil the day. Pretty gripping stuff actually. Then getting him back safely. It would be an interesting mission in an online team play environment where the number of available pilots bears directly on mission success.

Will this be possible Oleg?

AFAIK Oleg mentioned already that rescuing will be possibble in single mission.

Getting home with a abandoned car or by train after beeing shot down is one of my top ten SoW dreams ;)

Ahhhh yeah
 

Ahhhhhh yeah . . . .

That's the good stuff.

Thanks for the update, Oleg.

The sky shots are coming in great. Looks photo quality. And looks the blue text from IL-2 is in (but looks like there's more since there's more detail).

LOL @ the Bicycle Queen Song reference.


And the ME / BF - 109!!!

As soon as I saw the yellow nose and the familiar shape. Yep.

I got a question, they've had tons of debates of ME-109 E (I think the resident 109 expert Kurfürst mentioned there was a possibility of the 109 E-2having nose cannon, but the E-2 information is elusive so its philisophical / academic debate at best) having a nose cannon.

Will there be an E-2 available? If so, will nose cannon / machine gun be an option for the E-2?

Having a 3x20mm and 2x7.92 mm 's would be nice.


Another question is how will aircraft reliability be modelled? I remember reading how Morane-Saulnier fighters used by the Finns had a cannon that "sometimes" worked and at worst, the shell would detonate in the barrel (But the plane was still flyable).

Or I remember someone mentioning LA-7s were made of wood but IL-2 doesn't model the degration after many flying hours that had on the wooden versions.


Will aircraft materials play a role in the game? Such as wooden mosquitos being harder to detect via radar or by shape like the go-229?

Thanks for the update!


Another question, alots of requests for walking / infrantry / person / FPS related movement.

You mentioned before, "No battles with infantry, we are doing flight sim", so just how much first person / 3rd person / pilot walking is planned for the game?

Or is that just an exercise of the game engine that is going to be licensed for use outside of BOB SOW?

Also I notice there are alot of bikes (heck even a trailer to haul bicycles) around, and vehicular action is included so will that go down to bikes?


and final,

Are you guys going to keep the Storm of War as series title?

surviving behind enemy lines would be something else! But that would basically mean the game would have to turn into a FPS or TPS, probably asking too much.

BoB SoW praise and a question. In fact THE question.
 

Oleg, I am a huge fan of your work and have been since the original IL2 Sturmovik. As a retired city of London marketing manager and head hunter I have also always admired the strategic intelligence of your long term marketing plan, saving the most easily saleable BoB program with the new physics engine until you have built up the market for it with your former air-combat sim product generations. Plus the emminently sensible target of creating a combat air sim sub industry around your apex product just as one arose around the FS series, now conveniently no longer in competition. Finally I admire the obsessive detail, accuracy and realism of your approach which has always made your product line unique and enabled you to defeat the mighty MS CFS series with your very first product.

I used to feel that you paid insufficient attention to the ground detail and realism but that has more than been addressed in BoB SoW from the screenshots I have seen and now you have a real time weather engine too. (Ground texture tiles still appear to produce herringbone patterns from altitude but perhaps that can be randomised?)

I have only one remaining caveat which may well also prove misplaced. In all the screen shots I have seen the incredibly detailed and realistic machines, aircraft, vehicles, buildings, countryside and roadways have remained empty and sans people. Hopefully in the final release the ground environment will be populated with AI soldiers and civilians, all artillery and AA guns will be manned and all aircraft in flight will have populated cockpits and gun positions? I also want to look down and see my own knees and hands on the stick in the cockpit (as in LOMAC). If so this sim is definitely going to be the all-tim bench mark for online air combat and worth every second of the long wait.

Now to the point of my post. The latest rumour in the online air-combat community is that BoB SoW is to finally be published in November 2009 later this month with the first patch to come in 2010.

You are THE MAN Oleg so is it true?
(I have had it on pre-order and pre-paid for for ages.)

I have built my whole new PC system in anticipation of BoB and am anxious to start engines and get airborne.

So will there finally be a Scramble Klaxon in November?

Hell I even have a fan on my desk so that when I srt engines with the cockpit open I will feel the backdraft and yes I am a retired single man whio urgently needs a new girl friend! LOL

Tally Ho!

:grin:

hi Oleg,

Thanks for the updates. Really enjoying them and becoming more and more impatient to get my hands on the game as a result.

I'd be interested to know if RAF and Luftwaffe will use authentic historical formations as standard in BOB? That is will the RAF be flying in tight VICs with the Germans using 'finger four'. All accounts I've read of the battle emphasise the effect of these tactical formations - it took the Brits quite a while to catch up.

Very frustrating to try to get RAF in VICs in il-2!!

Also, I'm hoping that AI wingmen DON'T abandon formation and charge headlong at the enemy on first sighting (except maybe rookies? or the Polish(!))
Be nice if they could report "aircraft 3 O'clock", etc while maintaining discipline and formation.

Oleg said something we will see system spec in around 6-7 months (or omsething like that) so this november is out of the question. However, he said it would have to be released before the end of next year so....;)

Lionman, 2009 is totallyout of the question :)
Hopefully by Xmas 2010 we'll be able to get it.

I think the Oleg I knew from the very first days of Il2 is really back.
You kept your word, and posted new pictures on friday like you said. I must say I was somewhat skeptical. And you answered interactively to the posts again like before.
After so many years that's great to have you back Oleg.

Very nice pictures, and thank you to answer my question about modelling humans.
The level of detail you have is really enough at this point. If you model the soldiers, paratroopers etc. at the same level of detail then nothing more to say.

If you could just give us some elements about the FMB I would be happy. I used the FMB and invested more time probably to build scenarios (NOT multiplayer), than I played missions, so the FMB is a very important feature for me. Here some FMB related questions if it is not too early to ask :

1) Will we have full grasp to position objects, that is to translate and rotate objects on the three spatial axis.
2) Will we have the possibility to group objects into a superobject and clone the superobject.
3) If yes to 2 then will we have full 3D control to position the superobject.
4) Will airplanes be able to taxi, takeoff, land indipendently of the runway. That is near the runway as an example.
5) Will it be possible to ditch a plane. AI controlled plane in FMB.
6) Once a plane appears (at a given clock time) will it be possible to make it disappear also at a certain time.
7) Will it be possible to set multiple airplanes to takeoff at the same time as a group.
8) Will it be possible to add motion to soldiers (or group of soldiers) like it was possible with cars. They walk or run along a trajectory with control points like for cars.
9) Will it be possible to add a script to an object so as to have it animated.
10) Will all the objects when positioned on the ground then be flat on it whatever the slope. And not have objects staying horizontal even if the ground is with a slope.
11) One problem I had with a linear campaign, that was made say with 20 missions linked with a chronological sequence, was that if I decided to scrap (or add) some objects out of the first mission, and for campaign coherence had to have the same operation done in the 19 other missions coming after, I had to painstakingly remove or add them from each mission file. This is a terrible time consuming operation. Will there be the possibility that changes made in a mission file affect other mission files linked to it.
12) Will the ships (are there ships?) have their flag floating in the wind. I hope damage model on ships should be more detailed than in IL2 were it was very basic.
13) Will the objects database of BoB be as rich as the IL2 one has become.

Sorry to bother you with so many questions but the FMB was an important element in the success and longevity of IL2.

Thank's again for your posts Oleg, I will be every friday in front of my screen to watch and read your posts.

Gold

THX for update!
I think for this part of history they will tell: "virtual world started to looks better than real world, so, people stopped completely to watch trough windows..."

Ju87B rotatnigprop.jpg
 

Oleg,
Thanks for all your responses to the development jpgs, it has been very good to see you back answering lots of questions like the 'old days'.

My question is regarding aircraft propellor pitch changes, which you mention are visible during rotation.

Can you change the propellor pitch from the cockpit by using the mouse on-screen and perhaps see the words 'fine pitch' or 'course pitch' or 'feathered'?

With IL2 I found changing propellor pitch difficult sometimes, yet very vital for aircraft performance during the mission.

DFLion

Hellow Mr Maddox.
I have some nature and phisics questions
1) Will be Birds and docks? i mean is groups, flying in V, and will be a dangerous problem to the moment of landing?
2) In a storm, a lightning bolt will can maybe destroy o damage our plane? and waht about hailstone storm?
3) a little question , o sugestion: when, for example, we are in a He 111 or a bf 110 over England, will be littles interfears on the radio of a FM whit music o something like that?
4) I can´t see any electric post in the pics. will be, at least, in the routs?
5) what will be next to Stor Of War - Battle of Britain? Korea? Battle for France? East front? The Flying thigers?
best reegards.zak. (Sry my english)
PD: Nice windows in houses, its remains me the First Su.27 Flanker;)

Hello,

If you search through some of Oleg's earlier posts I'm pretty sure you will find him implying that panels/hatches have opening and shutting animations. I believe he's said as much with respect to the BR-20 and a mobile generator. It is a good question though.

Oleg already said that bird will be dangerous if you run on them, so the answe is yes. :grin:

Hi again, :grin:

I have some ideas about the sim ::rolleyes:

1.- Could have light signals (flares in diferent colors) for the pilots? (by example: when a pilot is going to lands whitout gear, the oficcer shots color signal; or emergency take off).

2.-I can read in Rudel books, that the latest Stuka machines had a device in cockpit for throw or launch the gear for emergency belly landing. Do you now if this have the first Stukas (Stukas sim)?


3.- Please take care whit the sounds, they are very, very important for a real sim.(crash, belly landing, radio, wind, enviroment...)

4.-In real planes, small flames and fire could see some times in exhaust. It can see especially in night (nights fighters find his target see it, and they can know by it, what kind of bomber was). Are flames in sim?

THX . King regards :) (srt for my bad english)

hi from france.
 

I live in north of France in an aera near the channel.During Ww2, there was a complex of bunkers where Hitler planned to build his third secret weapon.In fact, it was a super canon concept with selfpowered rocketshells.This is an underground built fortress with 400 meters long concrete galeries called "the Mimoyecques fortress"(that is the place name).Fortunatelly, the allies, noticelly Captain Kennedy a JFK relative bombed the entire area and destroyed it.Captain Kennedy died during one of the raids toward the fortress. http://www.theotherside.co.uk/tm-her...ec-v3.htm#info
Most of the complex still remain.How would like to make scenarii like one of this including making historical events with some of the originals characters?
I think it would be interesting to confront players with historical characters to reach the goal of fitting both hyper realistic details with more historical accuracy as well. To my opinion, IL2 BOB would be a perfect simulation if it could reach this goal.
Are you interested in pics of the bunkers and the rural surroundings of the northern part of france, near the Channel?

Le jeu est centré sur la bataille d'angleterre, je doute qu'ils y mettent un scénario de 1944, non ?

Vergeltungswaffen 3
http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk...ingSite/v3.jpg
was not in battle of england

it's just an exemple you can find orders historical characters. I just think it's interesting to confront players with historical characters

Machine for SOW
 

If you said that prices will plummet, i will wait to January o February to buy a radeon 4890 and then, then when prices "plummet" more (September 2010), I will buy another and do a Crossfire. Buth first i will buy a power OCZ 750W P&cool for support that SLI. I have a Sentey 600w:(
And I thing that I need change my Quad 9400 (2.66):( for a I7, buth in a very distant future...
Very nice News that Storm Of War will work whit 64bits , I have 4GBram, and will puth another 4GBram. For now, the only game i have that recognaice that is Arma2.
and Yes, i am thinking in SOW when i think in actializing my machine... so what?

Of course were all still waiting on specs, but I'm waiting for PCI-e 3.0 to be released before doing a full upgrade which should be showing up on shelves in 2010. With a Q9400 you should be able to OC to at least 3ghz with a decent board, wouldn't be to concerned there, that's a pretty good processor. I'd wait for pci3.0 mainboards to be released and get one that's a good overclocker. In the meantime maybe get a better Power Supply if you want to run SLI but I see SLI becoming more of a novelty than anything, even now unless your trying to play Crysis on high settings you can get most games to run great with a single card solution and PCI 3.0 will double the bandwidth of PCI 2.0

I'd definitely lose the 64bit OS if at all possible tho.

What will be interesting to see is whether the pilots (both AI and human) will obey the orders that Dowding and Park were issuing to their 11 Group squadrons, viz. do not engage the escorts unless it becomes necessary, the bombers are the primary target.
Scenarios fall apart when pilots disobey their orders and go dogfight-crazy.

B

hey oleg,
as a cinematographer and long time il2 fan, I have dreamed of the day when your planes would reach HD quality. Based on the screens I cant help but feel the time is very near. A very pleasing site for us all. So, I was wondering if there would be any way to set the models in an editing mode with a blue/green screen~esque area for composites for film/video. I would love to use and see filmmakers be able to incorporate these new flight models into videos & film formats since they look so real!

In this case it would be much more logical to make a mission with this special target. Maybe somebody will make a modell of this gun and implement it.

But you can't expect every little detail of WW2 implemented, units with exact position and status or soldier with rifle and magazine how it was in the exact moment in WW2. Even modelling every bunker with exact position and equipment would probably postpone SoW by 10 years. But then again, that's why you can add such stuff yourself. Hopefully with thousands of enthousiasts the density of realistic installations will increase drastically, if the engine allows the large number of objects, that is ;)

In the end the old wisdom still has some truth: If you make a 100% realistic simulation, you build the real thing.

Same is true for bailing out behind enemy lines and fighting your way back. That game won't be a shooter. If you use your gun, you won't stand a chance. It's more a tactical game like "Lost Platoon", where you can decide to dig through the minefield or go sneak by the surveillance post. But in neither case you can simulate what it was like to make it back home, so you'd never succeed in recreating that.

These latest screenshots are looking very good. I almost jumped in with some comments on the last set, but I'm glad I didn't now.

I think a lot of people (including myself) didn't quite appreciate what stage of development they were showing and expected the screenshots to be an indication of "this is the best we can do" rather than "this is where we are at now", even if told otherwise :).

I have one question. In the latest screens (the ones with the planes and various times of day) it looks like there may be some antialiasing - perhaps 2x. Did you find a way to make antialiasing work with HDR, or are the images just scaled down in photoshop?

How long would it take to walk 200 miles? The "SoW" maps are all in real size...it could take days, weeks or months to walk back to base if you where a German shot down over the UK (forget about swimming the channel). That would be one hell-a-va gaming session_lol!!!

I think this is the exact reason Oleg said it wouldn't be done by him...why do all the work needed to walk around in 1st person, if you are only going to use it once?

Well, if one had to walk back after being shot down and also if one had to wait for his virtual burial ceremony
before taking to the skies again it would make him (her) very much more consient for ones mortality and would
hugely improve the realism!!!
No glory hunters with those risks!!!

Well, I doubt Oleg will implement such feature, but there would be various ways to get home after beeing shot down. First, of course, if the distance isn't too far, as a pedestrian. Secondly you could call a transport plane via command or TS e.g. wich could land near your position at night to grab you up. Or you could try to reach the next railroad and hop onto a freight train wich is waiting in front a signal semaphore. Or just steal a car in the next village. There are many ways to get home wich could be made wich small effort in a sim. Don't forget about SAR missions over the channel wich Oleg told about already. I have a vision ;) One day there will be a sim presenting all those features. Will SoW be the first?

And it would piss off a lot of people.

There weren't many Germans being able to walk home after they were shot down over England. So what? Playing evade and escape for 5 weeks before you can fly again? Sorry, but that does not add to realism at all.

What about this compromise: You vote for serversettings that gets your game-ID banned for 24 hours from online playing, after you've been captured or shot down behind enemy lines. Then you have enough time to play an WW2-Mod ArmA2-Mission until you are able to fly again. Of course, if you die in ArmA2 as well, you'll be banned for another 24 hours.

:-P

Ich glaube, robtek hatte das ironisch gemeint ;)

robtek was the last one replying to the discussion about these ideas, so I quoted him.

While he in particular may have been sarcastic about what he wrote, others apparently were not. ;)

If you happen to get shot down over the UK Feuerfalke just let me know, you can bunk down here for a bit until we can arange some kind of pilot swap. :grin: And can you please stop using the word 'banned' it brings up bad memories.

It's a game after all. Banning someone for 24 hours from a server means never to see him again there.

I think that "banning" is not what he meant.
Feuerfalke means that X-pilot won't be able to fly in this server for Y-time.
If this player wants to play in this server, he can always join with another nickname.

I think that such feature might be added in the end, translating how the online world will be (from Oleg's latests posts).
If we see a model like ADW's, with a war going on in a 24-hours operating server, then there should be a way to limit pilots if the "war rules" need this.

By the way, where is Oleg?
We got used of him :D

Today he's out of office AFAIK. Tomorrow he will be back.

:grin:

Thanks for the offer!
(Sorry I got to use the b-word in one more post)


@ Foo'bar / banning players:
Banning players is not just a product of my sarcasm. There were several PC-games, that use death-penalty in varous form, even locking a given character of your game for 24 hours. Don't remember the name, but a rpg-shooter from the early 90s used such a feature.
Same is for other simulations, where you simply have to reactivate your character and reset it to continue flying or at least collecting stats if you didn't enable immortality.

Besides that, you probably know the good old WarClouds-Server. They had bans active, varying from just a kick from the server to up to a 15min ban (IIRC), ranging from one death to 3 or 5 deaths. I don't think you can honestly conclude that banning a player means nobody will ever join that server again, as WC is one of the most renown servers for IL2.

It also had definitely a positive effect on teamwork and you saw a lot less hotshots in these times.

I agree, I personally liked the 'death kick' used on warclouds it did somewhat stop the just 'pile in' pilots and made staying alive to be has equally important has getting a kill.

Yes I do but never been there. In the olden days I used to play on FBOW server where killed players were banned for about 1 hour AFAIK.

The so called "Death kick" option is already used on some IL2 servers. It's not popular at all and usually it never is in place for very long.

This is something we do for fun.

It's not fun when you are told you can't do it by some over zealous server admin who thinks he can actually recreate World War Two, which of course he cannot do, ever.

Trying to walk you way home would be a pitty attempt to recreate WW2. Deathkick is a penalty for hotshots.

Oleg is out today. Hopefully he'll feel better tomorrow and be back to answer questions. For now, I'll just take this one.

This just came up today for the umpteenth time. We discussed it at length.

We don't have anywhere near the time needed to animate the pilot model properly. We can put his hands on throttle and stick and feet on pedals, and then in half the cockpits he'll have other levers clipping through his body, stick clipping through his knees, etc. His arms will obscure important gauges on the dashboard.

With our new 6DOF free camera system that allows you to poke your head out the window or "bend" forward and look at the seat back, there's just no way we can animate the body to follow the camera, meaning you'd be able to twist your neck and look back on your own headless contorted body.

So, the answer is no. A poltergeist cockpit is not perfect, but the alternative is even worse.

I understand your possition on this matter, and it makes sence to me. Lets just get the game done and get up in the air. I wont have time to be looking at my ugly hairy legs anyway:-P

Note pilot's refection in photo...

http://file.walagata.com/w/bearcat/99thpolished51_0.jpg

Many of the 332nd AC were like this..

Hope you are feeling better when you read this..

At least with the 6DOF we'll be able to put our heads out of the cockpit when using the pilot relief tube when we eventually get planes like the P40!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That's one animation I DON'T want to see ;)

And I thought nothing could look as good as Il2 with all the fancy mods and then you produce this masterpiece.
I love the reflextion of the sun on the glass cockpits and this brings me to my question.
Will wing glare and cockpit clare be modeled over distance.
Many times contacts between enemy planes were the result of the flash of sunlight on a plane's cockpit or wings several kilometres away.

I'm sure that was a rarity but it would still be a great option to have as a mod.

Who wouldn't want to fly around a buffed-out p-51?

I foresee a third party addon for this, lol. I like the way this is being aimed at the FSX third party crowd, those guys can focus development on ONE aspect and do some amazing stuff.

Gunnery Training aids
 

Hi Oleg,

A big "well done!" for what I've seen. You are a valuable person for the WWII combat flying sim enthusiasts community. I highly appreciate also the time that you and Luthier are now devoting to the forum, and after your honest explanations about the past workforce issues and the recent improvements, I am more optimistic about the release of this new masterpiece.

I have a couple of questions, one which you answered me a long time ago ...

1. what type of training are you setting up in the game, other than what seen in Il2, already quite good indeed ?
2. are you still considering an aerial gunnery training aid for beginners, e.g. a "mobile yellow dot", working as a predictive gunsight to show at any moment where to aim during the lesson ?

I believe that the training sections are key to get new adepts to our game, and the gunnery is by far one of the most difficult skills. Having a "predictive pipper" in a gunnery drill can dramatically improve the learning curve of beginners ... and of others as well... ;-)

Regards,
Insuber

Hi Oleg & co,

Never posted before so here goes.

Firstly, thank you for Il-2, and now the amazing screenshots.

Just a thought about SoW. Often in Il-2 I will sit in the cockpit by the side of the runway after a mission and watch my squadron mates land. There are certain sounds that are quintessential to an English summer. It would be great to have birdsong in the background or hear the gentle sound of the breeze after a frantic combat whilst just sitting there and unwinding, watching the activity of the airfield.

Thanks again.

Mat. :-)

Insuber, boy that is what this old man needs also. At one time if I remember right Oleg said it would be included in training...

I hope so for my sake!

My gosh, the knees, the knuckes, the stick, the feet are all just obstructions to the instrument panel. Occassionally, I look at the trim switches to make sure they are working and I hate having to pull back on the stick in some aircraft to see the instruments.

Too bad we can't look around the stick, but really who cares. If the stick weren't there you don't need a fix.

Also, I don't know of reading where pilots were sticking their head out of cockpit except when taxi. Otherwise, the wind was too strong at flight speeds.

6DOF with something like a freetrack or trackir would be nice.

I do like to see a pilot in the cockpit outside views, and looking across at my mates or enemies. It does make a lot more sense than viewing an aircraft in flight with an empty cockpit.

Hello Oleg,

I have a question about the damage model and how the damage produced by the various types of ammunition will be calculated. You have already stated that damage will be represented as a "1 shot, 1 hole" feature in the final game. But one of the oldest debates in the history of "IL2 1946" is how the 50cal damage is modeled...I'm wondering if you can share your thinking on how the game will calculate the various kinds of damage that each kind of ammo will produced.

"HE" ammo will produce a different effect then "AP", and "incendiary" ammo will inflict yet another kind of damage on the systems of a machine. What (historical) data source will you use to calculate the force of damage?

Thanks you for reading my question...I hope I have made my (thoughts) questions clear.


P.s. I'm not unhappy with the original 50 cal modeling...but I'm curious about the games future! Thanks! :)

:!: Such an automatic aiming mechanism may be exploited by hackers and eventually become harmful to the sim. If it exits, some people will think about transplanting it into their own online flight and use it when shooting at others. No one wants to be shot at by a hacker who has an automatic, all precise aiming pipper on his screen.

I hope I have been over-cautious here.

Not really, its a pretty legit concern. The guys back then didn't have that why should we? Its where practice comes in. Its understandable for beginners but instead of having an arrow or sight showing where to aim why not an instructor voice teaching where to shoot?

Flyingbullseye

Exactly.

In fairness, how would it be any more difficult (or unfair) than hacking any of the other difficulty settings? I think the idea of it is good for beginners, and the potential for exploitation is no greater than someone for example hacking the flight dynamics or weapon ballistics. I don't see how it makes a difference if it exists as long as the anti-cheat protection in the game is up to the task.

Is it just me, or do some some of us expect "weird" things from this sim? I mean, it's a matter of taste obviously and every opinion is welcome, but think about it.
Given the limited development time remaining and the need to get everything right and released within 2010, wouldn't it be more important for a flight sim to have something else modelled in place of an FPS mini-game when you get shot down? There's countless of things that could be done to enhance immersion when you're still in the cockpit, why think about what happens when we leave the cockpit when we're still this early in the sim's life?

For example, if Oleg's team told us they had time for one more cosmetic feature and put up a poll on this forum, i wouldn't vote for "let me kill some women's auxiliary baloon corp members with my luger, before i dive from the cliffs of Dover and swim across the channel back to Abbeville" :grin:
I would vote for things like historical engine start sequences, with an option to have it both ways like FSX and Black Shark. That is, you can click all the switches yourself, or press the ignition button and the AI does it for you, but there's still a check-list to go through and you can't just get it running in seconds. It would make for some interesting scramble missions, don't you think?

Or the ability to be a ground controller in multiplayer, which would only take a screen of a radar scope to implement. Maybe the ability to have animated crewmembers inside a mutli-crewed bomber and give specific orders to them like lowering gear manually, putting out a fire or giving first aid to the tail gunner, like it was in B17 II: the mighty 8th.

If we really want to run wild with ideas, there's a lot of things we haven't yet covered about the experience of flying these aircraft. In a flight sim, i think these are more important than trying to turn the game around from a flight sim to a semi-tactical shooter.

Don't get me wrong, i'd love to see servers someday where we have air, land and sea units all battling it out and it could also be done in 1:1 scale maps. If a unit was too slow (eg, infantry or tanks) or too far away from the target (like a B17 flying a 6 hour raid), we could have certain nodes and tell the AI to drive there, then the players take control. So, a fighter pilot on a CAS sortie would start inside the hangar but the infatryman would respawn at a node much closer to the action, while the heavies would be halfway across the North Sea and nearing Holland before the player jumped in and took over control from the AI. There's a load of things that could be done and a lot of terrific ideas are being proposed, i just think it's a bit early to be focusing on anything else than aircraft and air combat right now.

In any case, i'm mighty impressed during the past couple of weeks. Keep up the good work Oleg and team and as for the rest of us, let's keep the ideas going. ;)

Bad news. I warmly suggest to insert it as an option and let the player choose whether he likes it or not.

Good day,

Didn't you notice this part of the reply:
We don't have anywhere near the time needed to animate the pilot model properly.

Simple as that, they can't do it within the time schedule they have.

I hope they don't ask for a device link to a vibrator, that will make them...feel the turbulence :D

You are right, though there are things that can be added, with not much cost, in the game and add to it a lot.
It doesn't have to be the...walking from enemy lines to friendly territory (as Feuerfalke said, you can always play some FPS game), but adding some more RPG features (ONLY in stats/missions/other data and NOT in graphics which need a lot of development), this would make the game appealing to a much bigger audience.

Anyway, I'm sure that with every update, we'll see a lot of weird requests, but who knows, there might be some interesing ones as well, and Oleg & Co get inspired to make the game as good as they can.

Yes I love hearing that... Time frame means only one thing, release time is getting closer :grin:

2 quick questions
 

Hi Oleg and team

1) Will participation be allowed by users to do modifications on objects, landscapes, effects and sounds?

2) Will there be more camera and view options to allow better movie making possibilities?

Thanks!

Hey, somebody else is reading between the lines :grin:


Yeah, getting closer now :cool:

Sound is probably open for modification in general, landscape can be added for smaller maps, objects and even planes and cockpits seem to be possible to implement by 3rd party

Well, I don't think is too weird a request, and hope that Oleg & Co see it as a useful one. How's about the ability for the FMB (or whatever it is going to be called) to have the ability to generate realistic looking recon photos that you can easily annotate via a GUI. Then, in the briefing stage of missions, players can actually see this image. Something like ...

http://www.360vision.co.uk/uploads/v1_rocket.jpg

I think this would greatly add to the enjoyment, realism and immersion of the sim.

EDIT ... apologies if this wasn't really the right place the post this.

Cheers

PPanPan

In full mission builder now you are able to take a "grab" view of the map...could that shot not be edited to produce the image you seek? This is more of a asking question to you, since I have not put much effort into this.

Actually I think PeterPanPan doesn't mean that he needs these pictures to be made through FMB. This is already possible, as you mention SlipBall.

What we expect to see, and Oleg is aware of it, is the possibility of online taking pictures (by some recon planes) and then the possibility of adding these pictures in the mission briefing, along with leader's comments/orders.
That, I guess we should be seeing it.

Hi Slipball

Yes, you can take a 'grab' of the scene in FMB already. That is how I made this image, just by pressing the 'Print Screen' key. I then used Photoshop and manually added the 'folded paper' effect and all the words and arrows and changed it to black & white. It's all a bit time consuming and fiddly and not easy for those with no or little skills in this area. I was just thinking it would be a whole lot easier if there was an in-game menu driven method of achieving this type of result.

Hi HFC Dolphin

Yes, the ability to shoot in-game recon photos would be great too, and I'm pleased to hear Oleg is aware of this. I have read another post too about the ability to have gun-cams producing those iconic, shaky, black & white, low frame rate clips.

Cheers

PPanPan

It would be nice to have some of those film effects in-game. Not just for recon and gun cams but for tracks as well. one could just import the vids into a program like adobe after effects and create the camera effects themselves but it would be cool to have them in-game for those who aren't well versed in motion graphics. Especially if the they were emulated after actual cameras that existed and were used at that time.

So often we see history in our minds the way it appears on film, it would give the player a real sense of living history. This is also similar to the intro of the original IL-2, which took game tracks and added film grain and a black and white effect.

I may be mistaken (I often am) but I think I remember something about the mission briefing for SOW being made in some kind of markup language (HTML or XML????) if so you should be able to put in images.

You never know I may have dreamt it...or may have been having flashbacks to an earlier life in a parallel universe where SOW Bob has already been released????

Just give him his crewable panzer/tiger tank Oleg so we can move on to other things ..... He was born in angry condition :-P

I spent a lot of time building single and co-op missions for Il-2, so I had a laundry list of things to be done to briefings.

You're going to loooove the new mission briefings.

Hi Oleg and guys!! :grin:

I found this!!:
And well, i cant explain me?

That's AWESOME news! Thanks for the info Ilya! It brings me to another idea: Multiplayer mission briefings. Would it be possible to include an interactive mission screen where you can draw on the map and other users can see it? This would be soooo cool for coop missions! But I can see that this is probably asked too much.

The Mig and the Mustang are from the SoW:Korea project wich is currently on hold until SoW:BoB is finished (at least thats what I understood).

Neither can the rest of us!;) lol, jk jk. Welcome to the banana forums HB, its good to see more new people around here.

Flyingbullseye

Oooh nice ;) Did you get the PM luthier? ;)

Now I ´m horny.....
Pics pics pics !!! we want pics!!!
(It´s a wonderfull news to me you noticed it, didn´t you?

Bones are thrown high and low lately - me like!

Maybe Im mistaken, but it's called Project Galba, in development by RRG Studios. The engine is the same as BoB's, guess they bought it from 1C, under some conditions/restrictions (guess it won't come out before BoB).

There were some photos on their website (If remember correctly when Peshka addon was out) but they disappeared very fast :)

Great news Luthier - thank you!! :grin:

Cheers

PPanPan

This for me are the BEST and MORE interesting news about the SoW, even if technically it says nothing, but at the same time says a lot. I always wanted, that when time was right, to have a large discussion and thread talking only about the mission builder. I think that the FMB of IL-2 is one of the best, but it had SO MANY things to improve, being triggers an important but small part of all the improvements it could be made.
The mission builder forum of UBI, when it was created, had a lot of good ideas to help improve the FMB of IL2. Really would like to know in the future how much of it we'll see on SoW.

Thanks a lot Luthier for the bone, hope to see more insight info in the future about this. :)

I very hope they puth so many missions, but so many many missions, i dont talking about 30 missiones, i am talking about very much more than 100 missions.
For example, ArmA2 have only 7 missions, and Dragon Rising 11. Very crappy and desolated.
And i remember the first Su27 that have so many missions (I dont remember Il-2), and good missions. hope this will be repeat in SOW

from Alex Voicu.this is the same guy taht do the tempest in il2
http://www.alexvoicu.domeniuweb.ro/typhoon44.jpg
i ask my self if that typhoon is for a series of SOW

is there going to be another update this week?

Tbag is correct from what I have read, RRG (was/is luthier's baby) but was put on hold (Oleg mentioned this) was working on the project Galba http://www.rrgstudios.com/EN_01_02_AboutCompany.shtml

Oleg just gave us two updates and a lot of his time on the forums. I think it's understandable if he lets us digest all the new stuff for some weeks.

Relax

All the picture updates are not going to make the SOW release any faster.

Single Player Game
 

My question is regarding the single player game.
I know you have stated that this is not so important anymore, but for many of us living in remote areas, or distant countries, ping rate or bandwidth or even time time available for gaming make online gaming difficult or impossible.
Here in New Zealand, for example ping to overseas servers is very bad, and there are few flight sim enthusiasts locally.
I realise that many or perhaps most are interested mainly in online gaming, but I suspect that the online gamers are also far more likely to frequent forums like this and so have their point of view heard more.
For the rest of us, the single player game is everything.
The most important part of this is the AI, so...my questions are:

Does the statement that single player game is less important now mean that less work will now be done on the AI in order to advance the multi-player game?

Will the morale of the AI be modeled (as in for example close combat series) so that AI may run in fear or go crazy with anger etc.?

Will the AI use realistic tactics of the time (for example RAF predominant use of line astern/vic formation)

Are you able to give us some idea of what we can and can't expect from the AI in general?

Your apprehensions maybe be misguided.

Oleg has promised alot of new things in SOW, among them is a much improved mission builder. The mission builder is very important for Offline play. Also, Oleg knows as well as most of his users the Online game can get very boring.

Looking for targets, manuevering for the kill, making the kill has rewards. Night after night of that action gets old fast. Coops help of course.

The AI is supposed to be improved a great deal. I would expect that to be a for sure improvement that will be done. Explaining things in AI performance could take hours. I think you'll not get a complete response in that area. I'm not sure if Oleg has ever made a thorough explanation of the IL2 ai performance, it was best explained by doing the sim.

If you have time go back through some of the postings where Oleg has answered questions.

The game will be for worldwide distribution, therefore a lot will be done for non-broadband players to play it.