I must agree with you WWFlybert about RoF. Nice models and a good FM do not a complete simulation make.

I'm not well liked on the SimHQ RoF forum because I don't drink the Kool Aide and I call 'em like I see 'em. And the way I see it, RoF won't survive.

I hope another publisher/developer picks up the pieces and develops it into a finished product, but that is a scant hope.

It really is sad because I, and many others want a high quality WW1 flight sim, and I have strong doublts that Canvas Knights will be anything more than a poorly modeled, low quality arcade shooter game.

SOW cannot get here fast enough.

If this post makes no sense... it's ok... just take below as the gist of it...........


I am looking forward to whatever TD brings out... and I just hope that some of the facts and possibilities revealed to the IL2 community with the whole modding issue do not become tossed out with the bath water in what ever changes TD has coming and are not lost on TD.

Pay attention - check this link

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=6846

Go to your postings with the above prohibited content and delete the prohibited content.

I don't like having to explain everytime content is deleted.

Help me out here guys, until the rules change prohibited content is still prohibited.

Thanks


Discussion about http://i293.photobucket.com/albums/m...BG/td_logo.png

is not prohibited, since they are working on an authorized patch and modifications.

@WWFlybert,can we put the off-topic aside please?

@Nearmiss,i'll be very happy if you can clear up this thread from the off-topic messages regarding other games and the modding for IL-2.
DT would like this thread to be clean.Thanks.

I do not like to clean up threads, because I don't have time to start at the beginning, read every thread. There is often viable content discussed and it could get deleted. No one likes their postings changed or have content deleted. They like it less when I extract content from their postings.

Create a new thread, in the first posting make it clear about postings you would like to allow, and discussion content that is helpful. I will sticky the thread for TD.

Thank you for Stickying up the thread,Nearmiss.

To everyone else,please keep the thread clean from now on.
Don't advertise mods or mod website through this thread,and don't discuss about other games here.
If you want to discuss those things,there are proper forums that are up and serving for this job.This is not the forum,nor the thread for such discussions.

Thanks.

This thread is a prime example of why I just don't bother over here much anymore.

I still have much love for IL2, but this forum...

My apologies.. also PM incoming to NM..

However..... my other post..



Will not be edited.. at least not by me.. because from my understanding this is already in the sim but it was locked by Oleg & 1C because the rest of the sim was also locked..... it was not a *** so again... my thus far unanswered question to TD is... Can this feature be unlocked and added to part of the CEM scalability that is in the sim. Some of us have been flying this sim since .. what ... 01-02.. and it would be great to have the option to fine tune the CEM.

I don't know which mod you have in mind but the one I checked doesn't unlock anything, it simply changes few parameters in FM. So this story about "locked" features sounds more like an excuse for messing with FM.

Whole FM issue is rather controversial, you can hardly find two RL pilots with same opinion about the torque so it's really hard to say what is correct and what not.

Anyway, there are no FM changes for 4.09, what is going to happen in 5.0 is yet to be decided, we have contacts with RL pilots and Oleg's main FM tester is helping us so anything is possible.

FC

TY....

DT:
Do you have in mind for the near future adding new brit and german bombers to be complementary whit the radar feature ?
And there´s one of you working or planning to work in new maps?
We really preciate your work. Thanks.

I dont post here very often, but I'd like to thank Team D. for volunteering their time, with 1C's approval, to make future patches for our favorite sim.

Please don't be afraid to work flight model issues, as there is zero controversy over a 1C - accredited group making those (or any other) changes. However, I completely understand your reasons for not wishing to discuss these issues on an open forum.

The sim already has many, many planes. More planes are nice to have, but I hope your priorities will become fixing the old. I moderate a forum elsewhere which discusses aircraft performance in game, and despite the inevitable arguments its a good thing that players are so interested in the sim that they will spend hours testing stuff and discussing the results. I think its one of the reasons we are all still here.

From those comments on that other forum, the major issues raised are what I'd call the consistency of aircraft performance 'within' the type and obviously the comparisons 'between' types. We also have a great deal of debate on the accuracy of the FM in areas such as stalling, spinning, and low speed high power flight regimes.

Good examples of things that leap out are:

1) Spitfire energy retention in tight turns
2) The relative performance of the 109G2 vs the 109G6
3) The relative performance of the A8 vs the A6, A5, and especially the A5-1.65

...so I hope you share my interest in those issues. Wishing you all the best and look forward to seeing your work.

We do already have many aircraft...I too would like torque looked at, as a possible priority to fine tune this great sim.

Hello DT,
i just want to you fix German plane damage moddelling. Pilot has no chance when his Bf-109 or FW-190 has a hole on wing. Becuse planes strart hardly roll to damaged side. However planes can not fly fast. But most of red planes still can do sharp maneuver even they have hole(s) on their wings.

For example, you are flying a FW-190 or a Bf-109 and one-two 50 cals bullets hitting your right wing. You can see only one or two black dots (not hole) but they are effecting too much on turnings. And also you can not fly fast anymore. And of course if you have a hole on your German fighters wing it means you already dead. It is same flying a Zero or any unarmored Japan planes. Only one difference is German fighter pilot dying a few seconds later, thats all.

Thanks

@rakinroll: I don't think that's an issue of German planes. I think it's some Russian ones that have a bit too generous DM.

I do not want to discuss in this threat but i am exactly sure about what i wrote.

Hi DT ))

I own a microsoft Sidewinder FFB2 joy. There will be the availability to set up custom feed back settings like i can do with ROF sim ?


THX 4S_Nero

Has the patch been released yet
 

So has the patch been officially released yet and irf not when is the planned date?

:rolleyes:

Can of worms officially opened.

It is interesting to read all the requests.

IMO, it would be good to get a final 4.09 with a final set of dlls, and the ability for IL2 to be playable with standard 4.09 online servers.

It is interesting to read all the requests.

IMO, it would be good to get a final 4.09 with a final set of dlls, and the ability for IL2 to be playable as standard on 4.09 online servers.

@ nearmiss

I look forward to this as well, 4.09b1m has been great for online, but a *final* would clear some confusion, and there are some squads and individuals that will not use a version unless it's *final* and "official".
The popular downloads for 4.09b1m include many unofficial items that can cause trouble for the user.

@ Daidalos Team

Please, if at all possible, include the recon triggers with 4.09. In my opinion, they would be a truly important change to IL-2 1946 that all players would enjoy more so than any particular plane addition, new map or other improvement proposed

All the work you are doing seems good and worthwhile, however the idea of new objectives in mission building and the gameplay is fantastic :cool:

We are thinking about all of the things you mentioned.

Like I said in my previous post, we have contacts with RL pilots and Oleg's FM tester (former fighter pilot) is helping us. We are not afraid to change things but we need solid proof before we do anything.

Good example is Spit E retention, I'm yet to see any proof that something is wrong with it, in fact when I compared it with NACA test of Spit ( TBH we don't have that variant in game but I used closest one we have) I was losing more E than in RL test so I doubt that something is very wrong with Spit but I might be wrong.:)

There is no special code for Axis aircraft in game, what happens to Axis planes happen to Allies too. keep in mind that graphics doesn't show exact damage and few holes in wing could represent much serious damage than you think.

We didn't plan that but we might take a look, if it is easy enough we might do something about it but this will not be very high on our priority list.

No Triggers in 4.09, 4.09 is basically done and only some minor things have to be checked before release.

Triggers will be released in later patch together with other changes to AI, we are making very big changes there and it is not possible to release some parts separately when they full functionality depend on many other things.

FC

Big changes... Mmm.... Waiting for BoB has now been replaced by waiting for 4.10 - nice with some variation in the agony :)

It will be possible to have a place as co-pilot and another to handle the level of the bombing Watch, as it existed in reality.
Thank you for your work
Sorry for my English
Google Translation


Sera posible tener un lugar como co-piloto y otro para que maneje la Mira del bombardeo a nivel , como existio en la realidad.
Gracias por su trabajo.
Perdon por mi ingles
Traduccion Google

He is asking for including in bombers a seat for a human co-pilot and another for a human bombardier, who would operate the bombsight, as in real life.

Charrua, you already have the bombardier available in IL 2 bombers. Just switch positions from pilot to bombardier and then open the bombsight, using the appropiate configurated keys. Copilot could be possible only for bombers like Liberator, B-17, B-29, but not He-111 or Pe-2, for instance

If you look for in Il2Mania web site you can find some good bombing tutorials to operate the bombsight, german and russian.

My 0.02 € : to have the navigator seat available for humans could be also interesting in future add-ons, so long range flights in "blind" conditions (night, bad weather) could be also possible. Specially, related to the future possible navigation radars, like H2S.


Charrua, ya tienes en IL-2 la posicion del bombardero disponible y puedes operar la mira de bombardeo. Simplemente cambia de posicion del piloto a bombardero y abre la mira usando las teclas que tengas configuradas para ello. El copiloto seria posible en aviones de bombardeo como el Liberator, B-17 o B-29, pero no en el He-111, por ejemplo.

En la web de IL2Mania tienes buenos manuales de operación para utilizar las miras de bombardeo tanto alemanas como rusas

OMG! 4.09 has a Sparrow Hawk! My malta campaign will be complete! ..

Discussion about, referrals and links to mods or MOD sites is prohibited on this site.

Threads with prohibited information will be edited, or deleted without explanation.

What i would like to see later in IL2 is flyable Hampden, great story on these in latest "Aeroplane" mag.

The multi-player He111 sounds fun .. but can the belly gunner urinate on the rear wheel before takeoff, for luck? LOL!

H

I was looking the you tube video on the 110 radar and at the end it zoom in on to the instrumentent panel.
I know from have all the IL2 game and there one thing that it has not done well is zoom in or out . It does in stages and from what it look like on the video clip (2:57 mark)is that you were using trackir.
If so does this mean that when the Bf 110g4 come out well get 6DOF

I am a member of a large bombing group.
We often fly bombers in historical formations.

We experience terrible problems with the AI gunner's friendly fire.
Often we lose six or more out of twenty bombers by friendly gunner fire, despite
keeping correct distances, staggering the VICs and not having any planes on
the six of any other planes.

In the B25 we even have to resort to turning off the waist gunners before missions.

Perhaps Team Daidalus would like to consider preventing the AI from targeting
fighters that are behind friendly planes and any other instances of friendly fire.

Thankyou for your consideration of the matter.

Comrade Cazador I think you misunderstood my question.
Use the views and level bombing.
My question goes beyond that, I mean the flight Co-op, with more complete human crews.
In nuetra squad do that kind of flight, as referred to, with observadors and stuff.

Google Translation


Camarada Cazador creo que has entendido mal mi pregunta.
Uso las miras y el bombardeo a nivel.
Mi pregunta va mas alla de eso , me refiero al vuelo coperativo, con tripulaciones mas completas de humanos.
En nuetro escuadron hacemos ese tipo de vuelo, como el que hace referencia , con observadors y cosas asi.
Saludos

Some needed help in the FMB
 

Working with the FMB could be improved

The FMB Object selector box would have a selctor box for choosing country/organization of choice prior to selecting any object ---> This shouldn't be a difficult fix, it would probably only require one additional selector box inside the object box.

Aircraft,stationary objects,artillery,vehicles Object choices would be chosen by country/organization, that relate specifically to that country and organization.

Select Country/organization,example...USA/USN,USA/USAAF,Japan/IJA,Japan/IJN,etc. by a selector box.

You could choose aircraft, vehicles or other objects that were used by that country/organization easily.

For example there would only be aircraft or objects use by USA/USN,USA/USAAF,Japan/IJA.Japan/IJN Only

Under the respective choice there would only be insignia, skins and air groups that relate to that country and organization only.

If an aircraft was used by several countries it would show up in every country/organization where it was used.

P-40 RAAF
P-40 AVG
P-40 RAF
P-40 USSR
P-40 USA

It is so tedious scrolling through the listing of objects and aircraft to make selections, which could be facilitate easily with such a simple search & sort routine. It wasn't such a problem when there were a few objects as in IL2 1.0. Those days are long past. Also, the way the object box is designed it is difficult making choices unless you are very careful moving the mouse.

With such a tool it would be so much easier to assure you are using skins, insignia and proper squadrons and flight groups for the country and organization.

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

One other REAL BIGGY is artillery. It is so tedious setting up artillery, because the guns all shoot straight ahead. You have to go into 3D mode to make sure you have line of site on targets for artillery. It would make sense, if artillery could just shoot a trajectory like in the real world.

Naturally artillery cannot shoot through hills, but artillery could sure shoot over hills and destroy targets.

I don't know how difficult this would be. This would sure make more sense for the artillery to be farther behind their own frontlines.

This could probably be handled with one extra selector box for setting the firing angle, 0-90 degrees of angle could be selected.

This would be enough,because you could test the trajectory angle for distance pretty easy, and set up the rest of your artillery.

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

Its zoom mapped to joystick axis, position of head did not change.

Wow, some very nice responses going. The more i hear about the new improvements, the more excited i get. I mean, the radar is a great feature on its own (even if we'll have to wait longer for it), but new AI and flying without nav lights at night is even better.


A few questions about gameplay issues in regards to fighting at night:

1) Since it's mentioned in the radar video that there is accurate ground clutter interference, i guess that there is some sort of ground data being parsed to the radar code. Does this make it possible to have navigation/bombing radars like H2S in the future?

2) Since it will be difficult to operate the radar while flying the aircraft, what about adding a level stabilizer feature for the night fighters too? For example, you could engage level stab while working the radar, disengage to correct your heading (the aircraft would still respond to stick inputs when you are in the radar seat and you don't have level stab on, just like it happens with bombers), reengage and so on.
Now if exhaust glow was modeled you could navigate this way close enough to a bomber to be able to see its silhouette or exhausts. From that point on you would disengage level stab, jump to the front seat and just open fire. This is pretty much the way it was done in real life as well, the pilot was guided to visual range by the radar operator, but he still needed to see the target before opening fire.
Which brings me to the final question...

3) Will the AI visual detection range be adjusted for night scenarios? In reality a lot of times bombers came under fire from night fighters that were very close to them, yet they hadn't seen them until the tracers started flying by. It would be highly discouraging to carefully sneak up on a lone Lancaster for 10 minutes only to have the AI gunners start firing at you 500m before you can see the bomber's silhouette outlined against the night sky.

Again, thanks for all your hard work guys, we're eagerly anticipating the first results. ;-)

Yes,adjusting the AI properties for night fighting are already done so don't worry,the gunners won't be a problem anymore.

The stabilizer is not needed,since the G-4 aircraft will be mainly a coop. airplane and there you'll have to find yourself a good bordfunker.Well of course you can fly it in dog.fight server,but i cannot see a G-4 dog.fighting with La-5;I-16 or stuff like that,and most of it's entire potential won't be fully available in a dog.fight server because of many reasons.The simplest one of them is that i have not seen a fully dark night map in a dog fight server since ages,and also using a radar in a dog.fight server where everyone is flying below 2000 is useless and stupid.

UK Dedicated 3 does have a midnight map, but it is certainly the exception.

Please do consider means of reducing AI gunner friendly fire if you are modifying the gunner's code for nighttime.

1) unfortunately no. Longwave radars as Lichtenstein are quite different than centimetric radars. Antennas for metric waves cannot be made big enough to shape beam into narrow cone and still be carried by a plane, so radar "sees" everything around and merges it into a lines on display. That means whole surrounding must be included in process, but direction to any point on ground does not have to be kept, sums of returned echoes can be updated quite lazily and only thing to draw are oscilloscope lines.
Centimetric radar has fairly narrow beam which is rotated around by moving antenna and usually can display bright point to any place on its screen. That makes three challenges, how to extract landscape geometry in chosen direction fast (hit by very fast moving beam), how to model screen which can contain anything and how to do afterglow which was very important to make information useful for user.
I'm afraid my explanation of differences between radar principles was very short, simplified and not much useful, if you want to know more, googling for lobe switched radars will be certainly better :-).

Centimetric radars are on priority list, but still in phase of searching for an algorithm. Modelling H2S would create additional trouble - aircraft for it. It would need heavy bomber (maybe with exception of some pathfinder mosquito variant) and those are very time consuming to model, especially cockpits.

2) still open question, probably will be included

It might be interesting for you that not all "Dogfight- Servers" have constant furballs.
There are some where coordinated bomber attacks are flown.
If that should happen during the night one would find very few fighters there, except night - fighters.
No furballs!!!
The Altitude of the Bombers is usually between 3500 and 6500 m.
Be assured there are more than a few who would really enjoy this feature on a "Dogfight - Server"

Yep, i was thinking of mission-oriented servers where a big part of the regular fliers actually takes the time to follow the mission brief. Thanks to everyone for the responses by the way.

Now that i think of it, lack of H2S-type radars will present another problem for multiplayer, regardless of the kind of mission (coop or DF server). Ok, in coops there is AI as well and in single player all we need is AI bombers, these can simply have with a Gattack waypoint, but what about using flyable bombers?

Most of the other issues can be cleared up down the line when the advertised features make it into the sim. For example a trigger that lights up runway fires when you approach the airfield.

The real issue is navigation, because if players can't navigate and hit the target nobody will want to fly a night bombing mission, and that leaves the night fighters without a target, unless we're talking about AI bombes in a coop against flyable night fighters.

Would a blind boming/navigation device like the British Oboe or the German knickebein (not sure on the spelling) be easier to model? Maybe this could be easier than simulating radar, but it would the need mission builder's input while designing the mission to mark the targets, since most of these systems were based on a couple of imaginary lines intersecting on the map. I guess it will be much easier to code a couple of audio signals when you reach an intersection, than doing an H2S radar.

Of course, i'm not demanding anything here. It's just that the start of electronic warfare is a very fascinating topic that's never been done before in a WWII sim and i'm getting a bit excited :grin:

I know that this official addon will be of higher quality than the unofficial ones, but i can't say no to a combination of both. To tell you the truth, i can't wait to fly a bomber night event on a full switch DF server with a night attack scenario. Navigating via Oboe, pathfinder Mosquitoes marking the target for the heavies, flak, searchlights and some 110G4s and Ju88s flying CAP overhead. It will be like a combination of IL2 and Silent Hunter III :cool:

Hi DT )))

I will ask if it is possible to correct the auto-flap in N1K2J, since they pop-up with minimal G-force being really unrealistic.

THX 4S_Nero

What I'd want for single player is auto allied bombers, auto german nightfighters, and flyable NF Mosquito nightfighter-killers. :grin:

I don't usually fly nights in single player, it simply isn't believable with nav lights on, and it wasn't playable without them, you couldn't see a thing, particularly as there are no exhaust flame plumes. Radar and visible exhausts would make all of that workable.

May I suggest that part of the problem with dark night fighting in IL-2 is the lack of dynamic reflective lighting. What I mean by this, is that you won't see any glints of light, say from the moon or other light source on the aircraft surface to catch your eye at distance

I don't know if it is possible or feasible in the IL-2 graphics engine to have relective object lighting. Perhaps a workaround would to have night missions only with significant moonlight and for craft to be lit as they are by sun, only with much less intensity .. also cloud tops lit as though by moonlight so a plane above clouds would be visable to a yet higher altitude plane rather clearly as a silhouette. Still from underneath it should be just about impossible to see a plane at night of course, unless lit by searchlight

@nearmiss
Edit: I misstook what you meant by "shoot straight ahead" with artillery .. AT cannon has proper trajectory just low angle only I believe.. what is needed I think is a new cannon type like howitzer that uses long range, higher angle adjustable setup as you describe ..

I imagine that if someone were able to achieve that we would also be able to get the highly reflective metal in the day as well.. but skins in this sim dont use the alpha channels that way like they do in TW or FS.. Perhaps that would be something that would also be a worthy undertaking for this sim..

Just a little idea for the map makers. Is it possible that you make an option in the full mission builder so that one can see the spawning places at the airfield. I know this is not important but usefull.

Too late for 4.09, will be included in 5.0 unless we find some problems during testing.

FC

I thank you on behalf of my self and the bombing group.
I'm most grateful that you have considered this. I hope you have the best of
luck in achieving all the goals you aim at with IL2.

FC, I think you should show Letum the video about AI gunners you have showed within DT today. :cool:

Why not, here is a link for YouTube demo.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ezXO0A_aMc
In this Demo B25 is shooter and FW190A is target. There is A20 between them, A20 is with Empty loadout and its gunners can't shoot. This improvement must be tried in realistic scenario but I hope that it will at least reduce friendly fire casualties.

This YouTube channel will be used for DT updates and demos in future. When we finish 4.09( very soon) we will focus completely on 5.0. We plan regular updates for public. It's not decided how often that will be but most likely twice per month.

FC

"When we finish 4.09"

I thought 4.09 was finished and sent to Maddox a few days ago, is that not so?

For me "finished" meant when patch is released, only than we can close that chapter and move on. Don't worry, it will be out very soon. :grin:

FC

:cool:

FC99, thank you for the quick reply.

Thankyou for the video.
It certainly looks promising.
I hope the in-flight tests go as well.

Do you have a - incomplete, preliminary - list of items that will be fixed in 5.0?

Anyway, it's very good to hear even more patches are on their way and personally, can't wait to see what you and your team have fixed or added ;-)

Always thought it was too early to write off Il2 as it has still so much to go for and glad to see Oleg was thinking the same and supported your request.

I understand someone of your team is working on AI fixes, so curious, but will things like preprogrammed landing patterns and their inability to react to danger be also part of those fixes? Will you perhaps include some stuff that triple A published?

What about a newer version of Java with better thread support and some multi-core fixes or is that too much to ask for? Just asking....

Thanks and regards,
Mark

Too early for that, all I can say is that we will cover everything, from FM and DM to GUI. Of course you can't expect that we will fix every bug in game but we will try to fix most serious ones.

There will be some huge changes in AI, I have personal interest in that so I'll try to set new standards for AI in WII simulations. Lot depend on PC performance though, it's easy to improve AI but it's even easier to bring PC to its knees with complex AI.

I'll check AI landing routines, they should abort landing and fight in most cases IMO but sometimes they should try to land even when enemy is close.Lot of planes were shot down in WWII during landing so we must leave that as possibility in game too.

We don't plan to include AAA mods, in most cases these mods are not done by game standards. That doesn't mean that some of the mods are not interesting and if and when we see something valuable we will contact people who made these mods.
We don't have such plans.

Thank you for continuing the work with this great sim. I am really waiting for the 4.09 and later updates.

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.

Thanks,
Eki

If you want potential changes, how about sorting out the pilot careers screen, it has not enough space for the career, barely space for the rank, but much space for the awards, completed and difficulty. The player can move the dividers themselves, but it isn't saved, the next time you start the game they are back to rubbish spacings. If the user selected spacings could be saved that would be fine, if it could be fixed without the user needing to do anything that would also be fine. I am using a 1600x1200 display, I have done for many years, my old CRT was that good, this issue is an old irritation. It is not important of course, it's just a niggling imperfection.

FC99,

"There will be some huge changes in AI, I have personal interest in that so I'll try to set new standards for AI in WII simulations. Lot depend on PC performance though, it's easy to improve AI but it's even easier to bring PC to its knees with complex AI.

I'll check AI landing routines, they should abort landing and fight in most cases IMO but sometimes they should try to land even when enemy is close.Lot of planes were shot down in WWII during landing so we must leave that as possibility in game too."

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) ;-)

Regards,
Mark

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.

slightly unconventional, but how about kills on multiplayer servers according to markings? i'm sick of seeing spities with german crosses...

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

just found this post on Mission4Today

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...

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?

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:

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:

We will try to do something about it.

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

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 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.

------------------ Excellent!

I remember building a campaign for 1943 in the Kuban. I gave it up, because there were no possibilities for implementing tactics.

Pokriskinin developed very successful tactics flying the P-39 and P-40 against the FW190 and 109s. His flight groups flew in tiered altitudes. The higher altitude flights delayed entry until the furrball has progressed enough for them to use their altitude (E advantage) to successfully combat the powerful nimble german aircraft. These were not elaborate tactical schemes, but they were very effective.

In the Il2 it doesn't matter where you position the AI they all drop into the furrball from all levels. This is suicide against the German aircraft, which are mostly successful in those engagements. It doesn't matter what skill level you applied the german aircraft were always the winners.

I gave up on the campaign, because I wanted to produce a winning campaign for users flying Russian side in the P-39 and P-40.

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

I don't know if this is possible, but I've often wondered why we can't have despawn waypoints to get unnecessary aircraft out of the mission. I remember crashing them into mountains and stuff to free up the FPS.

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

After hosting 1000's of coops I cant get humans to use those tactics let alone AI :)

The AI behave as most humans do and attack everything they see no matter what.
Usually after they have died they make a comment about bad mission because they died so fast, followed by my usual comment:
"did you read the brief"
"ermm what brief"
"well if you stayed with your flight instead of taking off along the taxi way...........etc etc etc"

My old Sunday campaigns had some disciplined pilots who would fly high/low tactics and they were very successful in this method, flying 4 high 4 low sweeping out targets areas, same for mud moving too using 2 up 2 down attack plan.

Unfortunately there were the points mongers that just attacked everything and usually died or bailed out as a result of "no tactics" and a must kill everything mentality pretty much like the AI at times.

Hopefully the AI has developed into something a bit more controllable from the FMB point of view and should be interesting building missions again.

Why are unnecessary aircraft in mission at all:confused: Anyway, I think that despawn waypoint would not be too hard to make but I would like to hear explanation where and when you need something like that, just out of curiosity.

FC

I think (I only THINK) that what nearmiss mean is those flights that are only necessary for a short period of time, like that pair of fighters who will do a low pass over the runway when you are taking-off, that bomber that will do only a single pass, that enemy that will pass close to you with the aim of dragging you off the planes you should escort so that his friends can have a easy ride when attacking the bomber, that sort of stuff that add much to the immersion but kills the frame rate.

I guess these are situations when it's worth having a despawn waypoint. If I misunderstood you, Nearmiss, sorry.

Lucas you are right on.

We are currently restricted on the number of aircraft we can have in the air, along with other moving objects. It varies, but it can be problem in missions.

FPS is affected by number of aircraft. If you have a bomber raid, and the bombers fly off what do you need them for anymore. If your action area is where the bombers dropped their bombs and enemy fighters jump into the contest they can eat up the FPS. Then you couple that with a dozen or so bombers flying off into the sunset with no value to your mission, along with some moving ground objects ...you have FPS slow downs and jerky flying. This can make the difference in the quality of graphics you select for your missions. You cannot select video quality levels as high as you would like in many situations.

Also, after your bombers are gone and still in the air eating FPS you cannot introduce new aircraft or objects without hit on FPS. So, you limit your mission.

Effectively it is all about FPS and the number of moving objects you can have working simultaneously in missions.

I know all this may be for naught in the SOW, but we are talking about IL2. I'm beginning to see on the horizon a lot more of IL2 than I would have ever thought, especially since you guys have dropped onto the scene with Oleg's blessing. So what if we only have 8 poly aircraft graphics. I've been enjoying this old sim for a long time as is. Now that DT is taking such an interest to make such excellent changes in the IL2 the prospects are exciting. :-P

I totally agree with you, Nearmiss.

And, in my case, this FPS thing just kill it for me. Why? Because I'm a graphic addict. I just can't turn the graphics down. It's a war crime! A game that delivers beutiful images not being pushed to its limits?! :evil:

Dedicated Camera View
 

As a player and mission builder, I'll tell you one thing that has driven me crazy all these years. There is no dedicated command for the camera view. The player needs to cycle through all the enemy planes in order to get the camera(s) view. Very frustrating.

I know that the camera's were not part of the original IL-2 and Oleg was reluctant to add new commands or change the GUI. However, since it has been mentioned that the GUI will be changed, maybe we can get a dedicated command for the camera(s) view?

Aviar

Indeed they were but not in this forum but in personal conversation between a member of
of the 4.09 team and a person i know that compiles Mods ...

Disapointed!!!!

And i'm not People by the way ...

You're not the first who "expressed his disappointment" that the radar and trigger stuff isn't part of 4.09. There were other people who did not read carefully or read what their mind wanted to read instead of what was written. And they got the same answer from me. ;)

So I did not single you out, GaGa. Nothing personal. :)

@FC

Howdy FC, Are we going to have changes regarding the way AI gunners act?

e.g., suppress in some way their snipper accuracy (as seen in the B25 or B17), ability to fire accurately through clouds/fog and/or under high G forces.

~S~

I don't think we will change that, too much work for something that is minor issue IMO.

You want option that will automatically save Track of your last sortie? If that is so we might do something about it if we will have time.

Tried to make it, it works will be in for 5.0 or 5.1.

Interesting idea, as we will add some new buttons anyway we could make dedicated camera view button too.

There will be changes in AI gunners shooting ability. TBH when you examine their behavior more thoroughly they are not exactly a snipers. IMO problem is that they don't hit you when they should and hit you when they shouldn't.

Hiding in clouds will be possible, shooting ability at night will be reduced , high G is already a factor in gunners shooting accuracy but that have to be reworked.

They will be easier to kill so that will reduce their effectiveness too.

FC

Thank you for the feedback FC, I'm really looking forward to the update. Wishes of a good work to you and Team Daidalos.

~S~

FC, I'm very pleased to know that you are on the Diadalos team. Your work in Il-2 has always been very imaginative and inventive.

If you are listening to suggestions, the one thing I really hope for is a save-game function that can be used within a mission. Very few of us will ever really get a chance to sit down and experience a mission of proper historical length. Unless we're prepared to scarifice work or family, there just isn't time.

If it were possible to quicksave, the variety of new opportunities it would bring would be tremendous. We might even be able to trade saves with friends. A sort of, here's me badly damaged in an impossible situation. Try to get out of that!

You seem to routinely achieve the impossible. So I thought I'd ask. ;)

Yes please, thank you. ;)

DeSpawn waypoints will make a huge difference for mission and campagin builders. How many times have we all wanted to keep bringing in bombers to attack ground targets as it was during the war, but cannot because the last flight of bombers that have finished bombing runs are still out there flying --- eating up the FPS. LOL

This is very good news that you can do this. ---- EXCELLENT

By the way.. and I don't know if this has been asked before or not.. but ... what are the chances of TD being able to put out a functioning DF server with AI feature.. It isn't like it is impossible.

BTW... Check your PMs..

when
 

How about a release date on the 4.09?

This is an excellent idea, heres hoping that its possible

Hi.

Thx TD for work in IL2.

Any option to disable "sonic radar" ( i think disable external sounds button in difficulty settings make it) in 5.0 or above?

At least read the interview and watch the public videos about new features for 4.10/5.0. The disclaimer in the beginning of each video clearly states it is not for 4.09. I don't know how much clearer explanation you need.

http://www.simhq.com/_air13/air_420b.html

BTW, where do you see a 4-engine bomber mentioned in the interview or video? At least get the facts right before you start blaming others.

I do hope you will read the whole XX page 4.09 Guide we are putting together before you start complaining.

Data for il2compare. Overwrite old files in your il2c folder with these. Weapons and max allowed speeds are not included, we do not have an algorithm for dumping them. Enjoy ;)

Using the old GUI ?

il2c :confused:

The program from Ross Youss or =BY=Youss

http://war.by-airforce.com/downloads/il2c407m.rar

So, when will 4.09 be released already?

Unfortunately this seems to be almost impossible to do, chances are better that I'll wake up with Angelina Jolie and Megan Fox in my bed than that we will make save mission option.

If we didn't find one silly error in last test, patch would be out already but now we have to wait for Oleg to recompile patch again. When Oleg compile it it will be out,I don't think we will even test it again.

FC

That means it can take half a year or longer?

I hope not, it would be funny to have 5.0 before 4.09 :grin:

Be Sure! :D

I'm actually just glad it might even take less than another week... I hope... :P