Thanks for all these updates! 4.10 will be a huge upgrade.

If the triggers make it into 4.10 as well this update is going to be absolutely perfect! Incredible work! Thank you so much!

Beautiful job on the Hs 129!

Thank you for your support guys. S!

Verry impressive! It suprises me that you can add such a great number of essential improvements in such a short amount time. Thanks for your hard work, that will breath new live into sim.

Including MDS in official patch? couldn't expect better news... now a support for 6dof and I am all happy :) thanx guys!

Where is the update posted?

on page 1 of this thread

Very good to see the MDS will be included in 4.10.

You guys really need your own forum, or at least your own subforum on this forum. Its very difficult to keep track of all your work and have meaningful discussion about elements of it in just one thread.

Wow! Fantastic update! The Hs129 looks spectacular!

Great news TD and thank you.

Some sound on the MDS vid would be nice for those who don't know how to set it up.:confused:

are your 109, Zeeks updates going to include the japcat model improvments?

No.

Just in case.

Don't forget that the Henschel Hs-129 has counter-rotating propellers (outside) like the P-38.

fantastic update ^^

Really? I didn't know that. That should make it fairly stable while trying to line up with that giant cannon :)

In fact the two engines had different model numbers.

+1

Also, is there a projected release date for 4.10?

First post, you'll find a timetable there.

Fantastic work on the 129!!!!!
Hope you'll keep updating the loadouts options (B-17, Fw 190D, ...)
Thanks DT for your work!

Why?

Bumping this post, as it was posted just after the forum came back and Team Daidalos announced they would post their update later in the day (it probably thus went unnoticed).

Another question - The Bf 110 G-2 loadout with Mk 108 cannons and the B.k. 3.7 only allows firing both at the same time, pressing "Weapon 2", making this load-out unusable. Could this be changed so the Mk 108's are Weapon 1? Or vice versa.

I have to say I´m very happy with the result we see from TD, il2 become a very nice and now a far more complex simulation, more than I could expect 10 years ago!

The short answer is because they aren't exactly following Maddox Games specs. There is a bit more to that, though, but since I am not a modeller I am not fully fluent in the gibberish they use for slang and so I am not really in the position to give the full background. :rolleyes:

Any chance of re-mapping the P-38 so skins aren't mirrored on the opposite side, which leads to numbers and letters being the wrong way round?

Any chance of 3D smoke and vapour effects, along with gun barrel smoke and tracer smoke from non-cannon gunfire?

Actually, if I could have one request to be 'fixed' or edited, please,please,please can you tone down the muzzle flash effect on all aircraft. The Yellow/Green flash on the fuselage is just completely wrong. It's like JUly 4th on the side of the aircraft when the guns are fired. Is it possible to just remove that flash effect completely?

Cheers, MP

Have you ever fired a gun in RL?! the flash is large in the dark and still visibel at day so .. think about it;)

Nope don't see the big yellow flash?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vh_FS...eature=related

Muzzle flash should only be visible at night, or in darkened conditions, like an indoor shooting range.

Since MDS is going to be included in 4.10 (Hurey! :D) is there any chance to also include what the mode has and maybe even more? Like the carrier catapult/take off?

Also two other things:

1. How about adopting the sHr's 6DoF mod too? It adds a lot to the game and there are small minuses (many corrected already).

2. How about wide screen support with proper FOV so people with (stadard nowdays) wide screen monitors see more of the game.

Thanks.

I agree with this, it'd be nice to not have to run the FOV Changer application just to make the sim usable in triple screen.

better cockpits
 

I know this is an old one be are you planning to make the old bf 109 f;g cockpits better the 109 is one of the main planes of this sim also the p47 cockpit needs some work i like to see this done than having the CW-21. ;)

Most fascinating improvements you show here. I can hardly wait until release but please take your time.

Thanks for all your work.

Not that I'm expecting this to happen at all... but I love new planes and I'm really really really excited about the Hs129 and I-15bis flyable but there are two others that I'd really love to see that would nicely plug a few holes for me and my campaign building experiences.

I'd love to see a Typhoon... practically speaking I'd love multiple variants but if I had to choose one then then the Normandy invasion Mark IB Late with 3 or 4 bladed propeller and bubble canopy would be my choice. Armed with either bombs or rockets.

I'd also love to see a Spitfire Mark F.XIV or FR.XIV (with bubble canopy and cameras)... mostly to plug the holes on my Storm Clouds campaign (3.0 anyone? :)) but also because it'd be a much greater challenge to fly with the powerful Griffon engine.

Something that I just wanted to get out there. You may now resume your regularly scheduled programming :)

Hello,

just a simple question : Is anything planned to improve the skin resolution on the aircrafts.

I'm asking this because I wanted to implement a nose art on the skin of the Bf110, and when flying luftwaffe you have to paint it directly on the skin, but the definition is so bad that all what came out of it was a bunch of pixels vaguely remembering the shape of a woman... :(

What editing software are you using? I use either CS3 or CS4 and I have had no problems.

No. 1024x1024pxl is standard and its already quite large. Remember that each of the skins is 1MB is size. So in the sense of multiplayer its acceptable with a decent visual quality. Personally I'm curious how SoW will handle this.

as it looks like the Team is overworking the westernfront fighter planes (Spit V, Spit IX'42, Fw190A-4 full boost , 109 series) perhaps it would be nice also to look on the american fighters there.

my "suggestions" would be:
- give the P-47D-22 the same performance as the D-27. So both can be used side by side if wanted. As it was in real btw. So it would be nice for a missiondesigner to choose betwenn a Razorback and a Bubbletop Thunderbolt without having differences in the Performance.
at the moment the D-10 and the D-22 are performing almost, if not at all, the same...... useless to have two Razorbacks in my opinioin.
-ad the armamant "aditional Ammo & Droptank" :)
-change the P-51D-20 to a 150octan boost version (like the Mustang III in comparison to the P-51C) and leave the P-51D-5 as it is.

and about the two Hellcats ( with the same performance), would it be too dangerous (Grumman wise...... ;) ) to change something already existend , like the F6F-5. To name it, to give it a better perfomance to have a 1944 Hellcat.
The two identical (beside the small windows :D ) F6F are, well, one is actially useless to have ;)

hello guys
S! Daidalos Team

i have another question

as you can see here
http://ultrapack.il2war.com/index.php/topic,1758.0.html

I did the FW-190 A8/A9, without the rack of bombs.
http://i303.photobucket.com/albums/n...3-53-14-74.jpg
http://i303.photobucket.com/albums/n...0-21-11-71.jpg

would be possible to create a new option for loudout FW's A8 and A9?
we could call lightened loudout (field mod)

the 3d modeling work is done.
and I would be happy to donate to you if they have interest.

sorry my bad english :(

As we know, there are a lot of talented modders out there who have been developing new planes, maps and other content for the sim. However as pointed out by TD, some of these do not adhere to the standard used for other content currently in-game (e.g. polygon counts, FM)

My questions are:
1) Is there a set of published 'specs' for modders to follow for developing new content? (plane, map, FX, sound, etc.)

2) Is there an established process for modders to submit their content to TD for assessment to be included in official patch? Normally, a spec sheet would accompany the submitted content with key info (e.g. polygon count) to reflect compliance with standard specs.

This way the community can benefit from the products of the creative energy from modders, and TD can maintain control on the quality of content going into official patches, while TD members can focus on core improvement areas in their plan.

Quite possibly such process is already in place but then I do not have visibility into the inner workings of the patch development process. Just curious.

Cheers,

a small one:
would it be possible to set the existend "Blenheim-Singapore"-skin as the default one for the Blenheim Mk.IV for ALL maps except the Finnlandmaps please ?
This little plane is a so important plane in early campaigns - the finnish skin looks mostly ugly in the MTO, Malaya, Burma, Normandie ......................... and to set it manually not always helps (and is often annyoing............. ;) )

because of the comming SoW:BOB to ask for a flyable one is sure out of possibilty - unfortunatly :( - as i said, a often forgotten, but so important bomber in early war scenarios.

People who need MORE FOV:
http://il2fovchanger.byethost7.com/

@ Franky

That "singapore" skin is actually the current "desert skin" which means the pacific maps are set to use the "desert" texture of aircraft if available. The finnish greens are the standard summer skin and are used on every summer map.

Just loaded 4.09m - love the Sparrowhawk, detail is devine. those trimotors aren't very powerful (probably historically correct).

if you could make 4.10 compatible with A_A_A unified 1.2, that would be sweet .. LOL! joking, actually I'd like to make a small donation for all the free goodies. what is your PAYPAL account details?

Keep up the good work - quality will be rewarded!

.

I have the same feeling... I'd like to give everyone a few beers.

Hi TD,
well done, keep it going ;) Salute!


I have a question about the weathermodel, do you plan to change something on it, like velocity, direction, top, turbulence and gust??

E.g. it would be nice to set in FMB some variables like direction and velocity, espacially Carrier Operations,start/landing, improves.

Best regards,
Cheers

Shame about that, I know you guys need to stick to the official specs but those updates really do improve the accuracy and visual quality of two of the most important fighters of WWII.

Will the triggers for the FMB be in 4.10?

Also do you plan on increasing the flight sizes? Something like upto 8 or 10 would be amazing.

Loving the updates.

The specs for 3D modelling are generally known and quite clear. They have been put together by 3rd party modellers several years ago while they were submitting planes directly to Maddox Games. They have been even posted on several mod community sites. Unfortunately there are very few modelers who have the patience to follow and stick to them.

In general we are open to cooperation with serious and dedicated modellers, progammers and texture artists who can get the job done within specified/agreed parameters. We are looking for those who are able to create complex modelling or programming usually from scratch rather than modifying existing IL-2 content.

1. The first step is to contact us via email: daidalos.team@gmail.com We have already communicated this before.

2. Then we do a technical evaluation and give our honest feedback to the author on his project. If we recognize a perspective development, we offer our further cooperation.

3. Then we provide our remote support/tutorials through our private development forum where we can discuss technical stuff only.

That's how it is working right now and it is quite productive.

That's how it is working right now and it is quite productive"

Ohhh! Do I love that statment? :)

Khun Viking

update today? ;-)

Preparation of release?
 

Hallo Team.Daidalos!

Looking at your ambitious schedule of releasing 4.10 in early April, I would like to ask whether you have started the release process already?

It is not an easy task to put all the bits together and we all remember how 4.09 was delayed several times due to the last minute bugs. Is it still the case that you need someone from MG guys to compile stuff for you?

+1 :)

Update posted.

Very good! Stats page is a nice addition, I've always missed stats ...


Insuber

Everytime I click on the images a bunch of sites are opened on my browser. The open behind the scenes, but when I click off the 1C there they are.

Imageshack is a nuisance with respect to this kind of thing.

Nevertheless, it is nice to have the pics.

All I'm hoping is I don't get porn or other not-so-nice junk, those creeps have all kinds of ways to infect your computer with spam.

Wow. As usual.

Thats not clear to answer. Generally all our doings aim for the release.
But while a few things are already done and working, others are still in progress. We have all the time a working copy ready, featuring the finished projects, which increases as work goes on. What you mean, will really happen as soon as the last content issue is considered as ready and only the search for bugs and shortcomings is left to do.

Honestly, this isn't sorted out 100% yet. Hopefully we will have this on our hands in the end.

Hello,

Thanks for the great update! It is very cool to see the progress on the Re.2000 cockpit. It does make me wonder if you guys are planning any additional Reggiane-related material such as the Re.2000 Serie II Carrier Fighter or the Re.2000(GA) Serie III Attack fighter. Other developments could include the Hungarian Heja II and the later Daimler-Benz or Piaggio-powered Re.2001, 2002 or 2005. I am hoping you can maybe shed some light on this.

Thanks for another awesome update,

Fafnir_6

Hs129B Rules!

You think, the Reggiane series topic is not yet exceeded? Maybe you are right.
No details yet. Maybe in one of the next updates. ;):rolleyes:

Guys, thank you so much for your work, it's simply stunning!

Let the speculation begin! ;)

Fafnir_6

Good stuff.

What a Great team you are
 

Hello and thank you very much.

I can see all the hard work you put on this simulator. For me is the best.

And I want to thank you for keep working in the development of new upgrades. I can't wait to see the 4.10 final release.

Thank you.

Thank you again for the great work. Quite an extensive improvement list this upcoming patch turns out to include.

My only concern remains with the changes in AI visibility - the potential improvement to offline game play with this is tremendous, but since this will have such broad impact the potential for completely unexpected result is there as well.

But I am sure that TD would have a good handle on the debugging process already...

Keep up the good work.

Stats in offline mode
 

Impressed by the amount and ambition of changes in the upcoming patch, well done team Daidalos! :-)

Very nice with the stats page. They are available for offline play now?

If so, would that be posted to the log as the online stats? I am asking because thats the way I can include stats in my G15 Applet (small LCD on keyboard showing stats).

If they are not posted to the log, maybe another way of accessing them offline is possible, for example with DeviceLink...?

Thanks for the update, very nice guys!

One suggestion: would be better to add the digit after the decimal point in the gun % statistics (last screenshot, Stats page), just integers in this area seems rather too coarse.

Maybe you're better guns but it's not uncommon to be below 10% for the hits, the way it's implemented now will leave most of us "mortals" with just one digit :P

Very nice work, TD!

My biggest hope is that you can enablle ture wide-screen support in the next patch.

I'm really looking forward to 4.10.

Keep up the good work!

Bump for wide screen suport and wider FOV ( at least 100 instead 90)

Will it be possible to make smoke and particle effects 3D, rather than the 'horrible' 2D sprites we have at the moment? Nothing breaks the immersion than following a slat stripe of smoke that sort of staggers around as you approach it :(

I think the QMB additions, especially the ability to load any map from FMB (Slovakia....wow!!) will make missions a joy, so many thanks for that.

Loving these updates, cheers, MP.

Lastly, do you see any chance in the future of 6 DoF being adopted?

Il2 is old game and whatever we do will not make it up to modern standards in terms of graphics. On the other hand changes in graphics can take a lot of PC power and consequence is that we wouldn't be able to add some other features.

With all of that in mind it should be easier to understand why we are focused more on adding improvements in other departments.

We have tested 6DOF but it is questionable if we will implement it. There is too many problems with it and in most cases it is not possible to have acceptable 6DOF without 3d changes in cockpits. To be clear, we are not against 6DOF, in fact we would love to implement it but we will not do it if it is not done properly.

FC

Would it be possible to update the way emblems (RAF circle, German cross, Red Army star, Japanese Red Circle, etc) so that they would no longer look as rough and ugly, but smoother and more "integrated" into the overall look of the plane's appearance? I know that there are mods for this sort of thing, but I would like to see it in default IL2... +its not hard to do;)

Big thanks for your effort regardless and I'll be waiting anxiously for the patch!

TD,

Impressive list of improvements so far - thanks for the great work.

Is there any plan for new map(s) in 4.10?

Cheers,

DT can you improve the performance in the game? like real multicore support and real imrpove of new vgas?

No. This would mean a complete rearranging of the core engine which is out of our possibilities. Its just too difficult.

Its on our list. Not sure when this will happen though.

Hi Daidalos Team,

like many other devoted users of IL-2 and your updates I want to thank you for the excellent work you guys are doing. Being very interested in the conflict between the Soviet Union and Finland, especially the Fokker D.XXI made my day, fantastic work!

I would like to place two requests to further enhance the simulation of the Finland wars:

Firstly:
Is a new map possible which depicts the area north of the current "Gulf of Finland"-map, more precisely the area North and East of lake Ladoga?

Secondly:
A (AI) Do-17Z that was used from 1942 onwards by the Finnish Air Force.


Of course you are receiving many, many requests, but I hope that my requests are somewhat within the scope of what TD is allowed to realize within Olegs limits and might be considered as a worthwhile addition to the great "Forgotten Battles".

Best regards

Holgersson

Possible 64 v 64 in QMB?
 

Hello guys, when I saw this, I thought it was one of the best steps forward since the QMB was ever created.

Can I ask a question though?

I appreciate that the number could be limited, as putting too many aircraft up, may cause issues for some players, however some of us do have the ability to have a lot of aircraft (128 nice and smooth in FMB) in the air at one time.

I'm wondering if it would be possible to have 64 v 64 as a maximum?

Currently I enjoy escorting large bomber groups (50+ aircraft) with 16 Fighter escorts into battle, but this is a pain to set up min FMB.

With the new Maps allowed in QMB, and the ability to have 64 on one side v 64 on the other, at-least you'd be able to have 52 bombers with 14 fighter escort, over Flak fields with oncoming enemy?

32, is still a great start, but doesn't lend itself to large Bomber formation escort.

Is there any chance of 64 v 64, even if it's only an option for those with more powerful machines?

Cheers, MP

Hmm... One of the problems with the default QMB waypoint groups is that they spread out the flights a lot.

I think the new copy and paste functionality in the FMB should make it much easier to set up such large missions.

Anyone thought of contacting UberDemon? UDQMG has a lot of features that could be used for inspiration or further developed/improved upon.

Oh thank god! Please fix the RAF roundel colours as well :)

I know it isn't a marking simulator but this would be much improved and we know with Mat Manager that a lot is possible!

This is the exact reason I thought of this, as the UD Mission Generator could have lots of aircraft, without any problems, so I wonder if they TD could incorporate some of his know-how to make large formations possible?

I just don't get on with FMB :(

Cheers, MP

You've got me thinking:
One thing that would be neat is if we could eventually make templates in the FMB and export them to the QMB... would this not be the optimal approach?

Team Daidlos,

Thank you for your continuing support of il2, really looking forward to 4.10.

One thing i would like to ask, is that with the release of the blind approach system and radio beacons for navigation in the upcoming 4.10 patch. Do you plan in the future at all to expand the gameplay of il2 in to the NightBomber/NightFighter war?

I remember there was talk of a radar at one stage, is this still capable of being implemented? or do you have any further ideas to make night battles more realistic?

some ideas such as H2S,Oboe,Window and jamming equipment for the bombers would be great.

Radar, Homing recievers, running commentary for the fighters.

maybe extra weapons such as incendaries, flares, TI's, blockbusters.

This is an area i have a great interest in and as yet have not seen implemented in any sim, would really add a new dimension to this already great game.

many thanks for any replies

regards

slipper

I have a question for TD: Could you get rid of bouncing aircraft on landing? It's caused me nothing but grief and yesterday it really got heartbreaking. Here's the topic I started for it elsewhere: At least in dogfight servers it doesn't matter how I land, but requiring a virtually impossible task to be achieved to keep being in a coop is seriously flawed, and no future patch will be releasable IMO if this isn't addressed.

Landing without bouncing is of course a matter of skills, like in the real world. But the mass of the planes seems indeed to be undermodeled while the tendency to flip over when landing off an airfield is for sure overmodeled on planes with a tailwheel. I'm a real world pilot and fly tailwheeled planes a lot and land them on grassfields and it never happened to me in real, while I always flip over when I land in IL2 beside an airfield. ;-)

Really looking forward to radionavgation! :-)

Decent rate, speed, power, three point landing. I don't have much problems with bouncing. Except when landing on rough ground of course.
So if you bounce and break of your tailwheel while performing a three point landing, you must have stalled it too high because your decent was too quick.

Sometimes I forget my brake lever, then I flip over or break my gear :)

The bouncing is pretty realistic, that's just what happens in a real aircraft when you come down too hard. You need to know the approach speed for landing and flare at the correct time.

Is there going to be an update today?

It's realistic, there's no reason for removing it, as far as I'm concerned.

You might be bouncing every time for a number of reasons. You only need to figure out which one's causing your constant bouncing and correct them.

It's sure not Il-2's fault, because even I manage to pull a decent landing.

Just set a mission in the FMB already in final approach, and try landing every single way possible. When you find the perfect one, just repeat it until you master it.

My 2 kopek-worth guess, it's high sink-rate. MrMoonlight did a very instructive post on your thread at Mission4Today, try his suggestions and see if you can fix it.

Good luck ;)

update? :D

Bad landings are not a bug, they are just bad landings. Why do you think that in your special case it's a bug?

I didn't say it was a bug. I said it was a problem. I just learned that the failing to lower flaps was what did me in.

In regards to landings, I am not a real pilot. But I do 'support' the thoughts of mr dafat1 above. The 'doesn't behave heavy enough but instead has some other oddity' is a super common phenomenon in 1990-2010 game physics. Most easily seen on armored vehicles doing stuff (WWII online for example) but any object can be used as an example.

The tendency to stand on the nose could partially be explained by the differences in using our controllers, lack of acceleration sensation and differences in aircraft/brake design. Our controllers make it easy to apply maximum brake force without feeling a thing. Modern planes may have more easily modulated brakes and perhaps not even as powerful ones as in WW2. And in either way, the real pilots might brake much less than we do by reflex and seat of pants feeling.

A training video I saw for the IL-2 Sturmovik (plane) from 1943 taught to brake, then come off the brakes and repeat the process when having touched down. This probably to avoid standing on the nose, but since the pilots were such noobs they needed to teach them a simple way to avoid it rather than threshhold braking.

--

Radio Navigation seems awesome! I need to go learn morse code now.

It should also be noted that Cessnas (or passenger jets for that matter) are not WWII fighters. The design requirements, performance and air/ground handling are quite a bit different.

Don't land a WWII fighter like a jet on a trap. Keep the nose low (even a negative pitch), then pull out so as to skim the runway. Make sure you end up close to stall speed and within a metre of the ground, only then can you throttle down and assume a positive angle of attack.

Just a small update today guys. Refresh first page. Enjoy.

Thanks DT, nice update, as always!

TD,

Thank you for the update as always.

Quick question on AI visibility changes - does it include blind spot on a plane?

For example, can the player be easily spotted if s/he approach, say, a lone rookie AI fighter plane from six o'clock below; or if bouncing it from 'out of the sun'?

Thanks again,

Awesome
 

Team Daidalos, you guys rock big time. The AI seeing thru clouds was always the thorn in my IL2 side. It's a game changer having that sorted.

And you're setting a good model for the client side of software development.

Keep up the good work!


Flying Nutcase

PS What Ben asked: Will there be blind spots for AI aircraft? Being able to do genuine bounces on AI aircraft would be superb.

I like the new night.

Apologies for my stupidity. I originally read about this feature, but I was apparently too excited to remember it.

With you work il2 becomes the game it has to be, it`s 10 years old but its a whole new expiriance to fly now around with those new nice detailed and with love created birds.. can`T wait to check the new AI improvements in a offline campaign, AAA limited by clouds and daytime .. damn that`s what we realy need!!! You guys rock!!!

Still wondering if there is any chance of updating the dll's for the next patch?

Just asking.

Cheers, MP.