BOM is not an expansion....it's a new title.

So what should the community do with an SDK? and why would that be sorting out 1C's issues?

Do you remember how it was the original IL-2 Sturmovik at first ? :rolleyes:

LOL ... with this mentality there would not be any Daidalos Team or SAS, would it? I have friends still creating objects and content for the venerable 1946, such as the upcoming 4.12; do you think that they do it to sort out 1C issues?

There was no Daidalos when IL2 was released and we all managed without it so your point is moot.

Well part of the stuff Daidalos do is fix flight models etc and they have corrected many faulty values. They don't just create new objects. So yes in a way they have fixed a number of 1C issues!

@bongodriver. It is an expansion (albeit capable as a standalone). Just as PF was an expansion from IL2. I guess you can define expansion differently but for me it's an extension of the existing gameword...with fixes to the main game..ergo expansion.

No it's a standalone but mergeable just like Pacific Fighters.

Which in turn was defined as a standalone expansion.

So would people consider DCS A-10 to be an expansion of Black Shark?......same game world.....they are compatible online.

Your point that the community should not create objects, maps or missions with the planned SDK, only because you want 1C to deal with their issues alone, is laughable and childish. Of course MG must fix the game engine and other proprietary portions, such as FM and DM. But when this game will be completely fixed it will provide a lot of room for third party add ons, free or rentable. This was the original plan of Oleg, right after the experience of Il2.

Cheers,
Ins.

It's quite simple really, it's a stand-alone expansion which you may:

A: Merge with CloD if you have it and enjoy the content of that game together with BoM
or
B: Play it as a separate game without CloD content

If I have understood it properly.

Ok so if it's just like Pacific fighters in that regards....why do people think it's a crime to pay for it?

What did Luither say that gave you the impression that MB would 'merge' with CoD? Where you would need to have a copy of CoD for MB to 'merge' with to play both CoD and MB?

Because all the quotes I have seen by Luither (see sig) lead me to belive that what he means by 'merge' is to do it the way they did IL-2..

Where each 'sequel' will be a stand alone game that contains all the content from previous versions, thus no need, let alone a requirement, to have/own the previous versions.

That is to say MB will have the maps, planes, etc included in it along with all the new maps, planes, etc

Thus no need for CoD anymore.. Just like we don't need IL-2 PF anymore now that we have IL-2 46 if we want to fly a F4u vs. Zero on a pacific map

Good question.. In light of the fact that is how 1C has been doing it for 10+ years. Money does not grow on trees.. People don't work for free.. If you want new content and upgrades you either pay per plane like RoF, or pay for sequals like IL-2

LOL! No, you've got it wrong. The Pacific Fighters stand-alone expansion didn't contain anything previous, it only contained the Pacific scenario together with planes and objects of that scenario. You could play on it's own with the Pacific scenario only OR you could merge it with Forgotten Battles (if you already owned it) and enjoy Forgotten Battles and Pacific Fighters in a merged (you do understand the word right?) game with the content of both. Pacific Fighters didn't contain the content of Forgotten Battles and neither did the Aces Expansion. BoM will play on it's own without CloD but if you want to fly your MiG-3 over the English channel then you are gonna need both. That's what a stand-alone expansion is.

Oh that's right, my bad! I forgot that the inital versin of PF allowed you to install PF seperate, with just PF, or merge it.. It was later on that they came out with an install that combined all the content

Your right.. it was the version after that, that combined everything into one


Ah, ok.. that will work too.. Sorry for the confusion!

Yups, if they are doing it like they've done before it's gonna be like Pacific Fighters. I guess some people think that they should have CloD fixed rather than having to shell out for an expansion but that's not a problem really since luthier has stated they will fix CloD, expansion or no expansion. I think it's all just become a big pile of misunderstandings.

That's alright, it's kind of confusing at first but makes sense when you understand it. Forgotten Battles was a stand-alone expansion but the Aces Expansion pack was only an expansion pack and couldn't be played on it's own. Oh crap! now I'm dizzy...

Either way CloD will be fixed and we have a nice expansion to play..

Years of enjoyment, thats all I care about atm

I remember the dizzying amount of patches there were after Pacific Fighters up until finally that other expansion came out. I keep forgetting the name of it and it's hard to find pics of it online. Then 1946 came out. Peshka or something like that.

Here they are. Old 2001 IL-2. It had 2 free patches during it's run.
Then the newer generation
Forgotten Battles 2003. The base game. I forget how many free patches there were but there were a lot.
Ace Expansion Pack. The first pay for patch
Pacific Fighters. A pay for patch and also stand alone game.
Pe-2 Peshka. A pay for patch
IL-2 Sturmovik 1946 2006 not shown. has all this content and much more

http://il2yellowpages.tripod.com/

After Pacific Fighters came the "Complete Edition" and then the Pe-2 Peshka addon, Sturmoviks Over Manchuria, and finally 1946.

Correct me if im wrong but to me it seems that the expansions will be done in a way similar to ARMA...

in that you can play arma 2 OR arma OA either together or each separate...

with DLC available (BAF & PMC) that need the latest iteration of the arma which would be the OA...

this at least seems like a logical way of doing it...
CORRECT ME IF IM WRONG PLS....

arma???

i dont know

S!

Arma = Armed Assault series.

To be fair Hamish much of what you've said appears a bit naive and out of touch to me.

What's naive about the facts? Please enlighten me as I fail to see where I have been naive in voicing my dissapointment on how CloD is not being expanded on based on Luthier's post.

If you start a new server, it is already there is an optional list: core.100 and bob.100. I think this section will be very similar to the arma launcher. But I am sure that will not be able to play the low res textured DLC for those who have not purchased. IMHO this is not possible, if there are variable areas and aircrafts.

My interpretation was that if you have played IL2 you know exactly how the series will be expanded apart from the fact that instead of a modding community that had fingers pointed at them for 'hacking' the game code there will be authorised mods via SDK's.

Or I could be totally wrong !

Well it all sounds splendid to me.

Happy new year! :grin::grin:

:mrgreen::mrgreen::-D

Sorry... I just laughed my exhaust off. I hope "the fans" will not ask for new planes... heck... we might lose the Spitfire and 109........

He meant that the fans requested to remove the shaking, which was present in the release. Not the other way round ...:-)

:lol::lol:

LOL! Yeah, better stop "whining" ASAP.:grin:

This mainly
But others had a go at explaining and you didn't agree so not much point.

You have taken my point completely out of context.

I never said the community 'should not create using the planned SDK' at all. I said the community should not have to create stuff to fix 'issues'. Re-read what I said rather than placing your own spin on it. There is nothing childish or laughable about wanting a solid product released.

The point is that whilst I totally agree that SDK is a good thing long term 1C could technically have supported making more aircraft models etc for longer just as they did with IL2 long before Daidalos appeared. Why is that childish or laughable?

Like you I have followed the IL2 series since it's Demo nearly 10 years ago. I am perfectly entitles to air my grievances just as the fans can also lavish praise. Get a grip sunshine.

Nothing naive about that...I offered my opinion on the subject. I could say 'naive' to all for putting up with something poor for over 8 months and then accepting that you will have to pay for certain elements (BoM) that should have been in the game in the first place.

That said this is the only decent WWII sim out there and I have faith that it will be resolved.

Just dissapointed that it has become a sandbox very early on (or not in this case) than further developer support on kit in the game.

BOM has nothing to do with the BOB, why should it have been included?

Have you been living in a dark hole? Because they are already in CloD, because they were heavily discussed in developer posts by Oleg prior to CloD's release and because 1C have realised they have bitten off more than they can chew in getting CloD engine up to scratch so they have been downgraded in priority and shifted to BoM that will use the new 'updated' engine from scratch.

Welcome to the forum.

Trololol, well said Hamish.

What are 'they'?

Why shouldn't BOM use the upgraded engine from scratch? after all the updated engine will be a result of successfully patching COD, the hole I live in is obviously not as deep as yours.

Robtek, what would be a reasonable time frame from release to expect the AI to be fixed?

it certainly isn't going to happen overnight......

How long then?

That depends on your definition of "fixed". If you expect it to act like a human, then the answer is "never".

Who is to say? if I asked you to read war and peace could you tell me exactly when you will finish it? and if you've already read it then don't be smart about it.....

Im asking if you buy a product, how long is it reasonable to leave it before you can expect a fix?
its a simple question.

Robtek, if when reading your book you find the last 50 pages missing, should you expect the publishers to send you the missing pages? and how long should it take?

furbs, how much AI coding experience do you have?

That depends on my other options. If I have other options I would expect it to be ready at release. If I don't have other options then I'm going to have no choice but to wait (and spend every day trolling their message board).

Is this conversation anything new or the same 'going round in circles' again?

I assume this reply was for me unless I missed a robteck post using a book analogy?........what missing pages? simple question, if you had a coplete copy of war and peace how long would it take you to read it?

We 'all' know CoD was released in bad shape, even the devs 'have' admitted it, they 'are' working on it, please let them get on with it instead of having to answer every 'are we there yet'

WOW!! thats so simple.....you should be a programmer...

Taken it to PM Uther.

Thanks Furbs. Enjoy...

Mod edit
Take it to pm david if you want to continue your chat with furbs.

I missed that post.
I see your point, but they actually like this game: it could just be improved immensely. Indeed, as Luthier himself said, without the complaints, the series would never have gotten to where it is today. From where I stand, constructive criticism is far more benefitial than absolute (blind) devotion.

I don't really understand why people feel the need to express that some of these areas don't need improvement. This sim should be the top-dog in ALL areas, be it AI, graphics etc. It is possible, and for that reason people are happy to push the developers to make it happen.

I suggest people read this again and take note:

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=21176

I agree. If people want to talk about BoB2, either do it in the pilots lounge or on the BoB2 forum.

i think it was Oleg himself who said his flight sims focus on offline players.

I play mainly offline, that goes for most of my games with the exception of Left4Dead 2 of course. Even if the split is 80% online and only 20% offline players (which it most likely isn't) it still means that 20% of the players might be put off by the lack of offline content and might not continue to buy MG sims in the future. For such a niche market those 20% are very important. But hey, if they don't want my money, that's fine too.:)

I like to fly online, unfortunately co-ops are my favorite way of playing. I hope in the future releases both online and offline will get a good treatment though.:)

Well...they better hope they can sort offline. because if there is more people online than offline then CLOD IS toast.

A open question.

Does any have a idea when this series will be as strong as IL2 now?
im talking 400-700 every night, sqds playing online wars.

are we talking something that is still years off? or can we hope that BOM will be the start?

You misunderstood what I was saying..

I was not talking about the SPLIT between 'user' types, i.e. ONLINE USER vs OFFLINE USER

I was referring to the SPLIT in game makers resources.. As in prior to ONLINE gaming (1990 like) game makers did NOT have to devote some of their resources to the ONLINE aspect of the game.. Because there was none.. Thus those resources could be applied to making better AI and OFFLINE Campaigns

Since you brought it up, I would guess the SPLIT in users is even smaller than 20% OFFLINE only.. Which should not be confused with how vocal that group can be! as in the squeaky wheel senario! ;)

My guess is when it will happen it will be a title wave effect..

IMHO The problem is not with the current state of CoD bugs as much as the limited number of planes one can fly and the number of maps.. Everyone knows a new sim takes time to work out the bugs!

Which is why I am so happy to hear about the sequel!!

So I think it will be a few more sequels before you see CoD numbers matching IL-2s

But it does say a lot for 1C and their products!

When the biggest competition they have is a sim they made 10 years ago! ;)

Ok, simple misunderstanding there.:)

Thanks for the information B6 and Luthier!! Nice to hear that there is a future for the game and the sequels.

Please don't listen too much to those who speak loudest.

This effect was overdone in early versions so guess is why the players get annoyed.

But the completely remove of cockpit shake is a waste :

- this cockpit shake can be a useful effect for stall entry's, standard and dynamic.

- Also on high structural stress in turnings, can be a perfect combination with the wind sound and structural stress sound.

Of course if its not overdone.

+1

+1+1

Hello Luthier,

Could you post a "Friday update information" each Friday to give us some information about the work made by your team during the week ? Just some words with or without screenshoots.

I think it will be a very good thing for the game and for everybody (your team and COD community)

Probably won't see anything for a week or two, as aren't the Russian holidays right now?But yes after that I'd like to bring back some friday updates.

S!

As Kestrel said. Russian holidays now so would not expect anything big in a week or two.

Blacksix posted this in the Sukhoi.ru thread 2 days ago:

We have not worked from January 1 to January 9, in Russia was a long weekend.
Work began just this Tuesday. During this time, we can't generate news or update.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthr...=28174&page=58

What about the 2 months before that? did they not generate ANYTHING?

Obviously not anything worth reporting

Why deleted my post??? wasn't true that we will not have any patch till they will release the sequel?

Read the first post in this thread, and make your own minds up. If you want to have an argument about it, go somewhere else.

i want stay here, problems? I bought the game and i want it working, ok? or is forbidden to ask it?

Asking once won't hurt, but repeatedly ad nauseum?

Developer posts suggested they were close to releasing the new graphics patch before Christmas, but posts from BS suggested they ran into some severe bugs. Common sense would tell me that they are still working thru the bugs and testing. If they couldn't release the patch before Christmas its unlikely they would be able to release it just a few days after they come back.

Awesome post count there Chivas, don't break it. ;)

Of course, silly me. Common sense. :rolleyes:

Ive got some magic beans for sale cheap Chivas only 100 quid each...send me the cash and they are yours.

what about ask until you're answered? if the first question would have been answered, there wouldn't be any need to ask it a second time.. common sense..

I'd like to support your product Furbs, but you have no history of accomplishing anything, you haven't involved the community with your product, no screenshots, no website, so I can't get involved at this time. Hopefully after you've spent a few more years working on your product, you will have gained more respect for the hard work of others.

Common sense for a 5 yr old.

Are we there yet? Are we there yet? Are we there yet?

No not really....pettyness yes, the answer you are looking for is a fixed game yes?......everybody has asked for that, but most of us are inteligent enough to realise it will be done when its done, and secondly we are patient enough not to need to whinge about it every 5 seconds, but that migh be too much like actual common sense.

Respect is pointless if the product fails to deliver. I think you chose the wrong forum to work this irony mate.

Oh, the product will deliver, i'm pretty shure about that.

The only thing failing is the patience of some people.

If you think it will be a good product, stay and be patient, if not, maybe you should cut bait??

And, common sense is much overvalued :D :D :P

I have alot of respect for what the developer has accomplished so far and fully understand that it is still a work in progress. I suppose people could come to your conclusion if it hadn't dawned on them that it is still a WIP, and a considerable amount of patience is required.

I'm pretty sure the product will deliver as well, it just might take a year or two. I guess the thing is we missed that piece of info stated on the box at the time of purchase.

As far as trust in what has been accomplished in the past, the driving force resposible for previous titles has left the building just prior to release. It remains to be seen if the new team can deliver and might give people cause for concern.

Unless you did absolutely no research into it before purchasing, bought from Russia or were living under a rock it was very well known what state it was in upon release.

I agree there is considerable cause for concern. Everyone understands the development hasn't reached the level they've been striving for, for many years, and there is certainly no guarantee they will succeed. The sim hasn't died yet, so there is still hope. What has been accomplished so far runs well on my system, so I take it out for a sping once and awhile, while I wait patiently for further patches.

http://img193.imageshack.us/img193/7...oloredplas.jpg
By furbs9999 at 2012-01-14

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K1GQXmC_P-g

Chivas do understand these are a WIP magic beans and any magic might have to be added after release in a series of patches that could take up to a year.
Dont worry though! the magic is coming!

You are missing the fact that only us long-term fans appreciate this. My comment was a unanimous statement referring to the publics reaction.

+1

Tree, Furbs, Force 10, AOA, David all the same to me bunch of Trolls no matter which "side" they are on they both drag this forum down with there pathetic bullshit!

We all know flight sims need patches. It's just taking a long time for some basic stuff.

Example: TD's 4.11 patch was causing CTD's for most folks. 24 hours later there is a hot fix. How long has the Launcher crash been for COD now?

+1, TD's support the last 24 hours has been A+ quality.

They stated that they would not fix it because resources are going into the new patch which is coming with a reworked graphics engine... then they ran into some problems they didn't want to work on patching a problem that could take a long time when they are already presumable stretched working on the new patch and addon.

why waste the resources on making a 'hotfix' for a program that is going through intensive therapy, the launcher crash is probably related to the deeper issues going on with it anyway, I get CTD's too but am willing to wait until the job is done properly, the 4.11 CTD problem was probably a tiny issue that took a couple of hours to fix.

That's ok, I find your sanctimonious ignorance to be equally trollish.

I am not being sanctimonious I am just a patient guy and don't feel the need to tell everyone what they should do or think... so maybe as you are the one telling everyone that the game is working fine you are actually the sanctimonious one LOL :rolleyes: