Thats ok buddy, no problem :grin:

Come now TREE,
its the same landscape you've been slating the whole time... 'cept in this top down view there are no weather effects between your eye and the landscape.
And it is now most likely far better than this old screenshot from 2 years ago.

But like we agreed in the HL we'll sure be gunning for each other over the channel, you in your Hurricane and me in my E3.

No..about 10 months ago. The same time this 109 was put up.

Maybe Oleg is realizing that many of his high res stuff is far more than todays pcs can handle.

It was deforested to make way for farmland and build our mighty navy, however the south east is actually one of the most forested parts of the country. Take a trip up and around Surrey/Sussex/Kent in a light aircraft and it will honestly surprise you just how forested the area is.

The one with the repeating textures that brought howls of complaint!? [sound of Oleg banging his head against his desk]

Okay, I stand corrected, 8 months. Still 8 months of landscape development can produce even better results...

@TREE_UK
Olegs got a photographers eye... And the experience of living in Euro-Russian weather conditions, AND he has been in the sky... So he knows what it should look like... And no matter how hard everyone may feel you are being on Oleg, I can tell you absolutely that he is 10 times as hard on himself and his team to get it just right.

Hasn't this guy demonstated time and time again, to the world (and us) that he is a perfectionist that sticks to his principles of Quality first, profit second... Tree, from the heart... you have not got the qualifications, or the eye, or as it turn out, the memory to make definitive judgements on how the sim should look.

Ok Tree...sense you really seem to need an answer from someone (lol)...

I could be wrong, but...I believe that the screen shot you have selected to display was an example of a "terrain tile" that was built for the "old" "SoW" engine...as some of you might remember, "SOW" was originally built on the old "IL 1946" game engine, and then Oleg and team realized that if they really wanted a 21st century game (for the future) they need to go back to the beginning and built a game engine "from scratch"...

Even though the "old" engine was limited in possibility's (for expansion)...Olegs team had a lot of experience with the old engine and the graphics (and colors) had been highly tuned, over the years.

The new game is not finished, and all the screen shots are a "WiP"...

Well, you don't actually have to fly, just google

Surrey
http://www.webbaviation.co.uk/galler...al-ba27024.jpg

Sussex
http://cache2.asset-cache.net/xc/852...0A760B0D811297

Kent
http://www.privateschoolreview.com/p...21188_5368.jpg

I'm not jumping on anyone, Dutch, I promise. I even joked with Tree about his what he calls his direct honesty. That post just gave me a chuckle because of the spleen venting lol. So don't take insult.

As for the weathering, it would be a neat thing but here again, it's not anywhere near a priority in my mind. However, I will say it will look a bit awkward if the planes weather but the lettering does not. A big deal even at that point? Not to me, just one of those things that would/should be fixed in a future patch.

Peace, brothers :).

Splitter

what the frak? ! you can see 12 repeats in that little texture. The terrain looks way better than that now, BUT I think it is at medium details, because the quality gets less good when the distance increases a bit, in some of the newer screens you can look at the closest patch of ground and that's incredibly detailed, but the ones behind that are less detailed. It's just because of the graphic settings.
And every update I see different textures. In the stuka shot there were square fields, and in the blenheim shots from the week before that the patches were all different shapes. A lot of variaty.

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachm...4&d=1283522562
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachm...5&d=1284729362
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/attachm...8&d=1276867657

Thanks for those pics Osprey.

It seems Speedtree don't do hedges. In Britain, and parts of Europe, that's a big problem, even if hedges are unusual in the US of A.

yeah i think you are correct regarding the old tile proton, but the colouring is pretty much bang on, The close up terrain we have seen with the ground objects is superb, its the 'middle distance' of the terrain that looks odd to me, and the terrain from high altitude it looks 'washed out'. I have said previously that it may not be the finished terrain but it is slightly worrying when oleg says that the game is just going through a de bugging stage, this suggest that all other work is finished.

WOW! No I didn't remember that one.

So they had it working and now it is bugged! Damn! Software is a frustrating business!

Thanks.

Similar situation to the flaking paint perhaps?

Interesting to see how this debugging and 'polishing' will turn out...

You mean from a few miles away and say 10,000 - 20,000 feet high Tree? If that's what you mean I agree. Something is turned down though like distance view or something like that.

Thats exactly what i mean Richie.

On my last trip to England I have done these photos.

re: the various photos posted. Brought to mind something I mentioned before - I don't recall ever seeing dense woodland/forest in any of the SOW pics that have been posted..?!

A while back there was an image showing a larger area than normal of trees but the density was very low - made me think that they are having fps issues or some such and that everything has been trimmed down to the bare minimum?

(or - once again - LOW settings, like il2 running with trees=1 or 0 set in config.ini ???)

ok, went back and checked - there are a few, but from way back. All the recent shots show very lo-density tree coverage

Awesome shots :D Notice the flat bottomed clouds :o

Check out the October 2009 shots. Dense woodland was shown there.

promising feature, although the transparency of the markings rather than full chipping away looks a bit off, as identified.
yeah, pretty much. huge improvement over the pasted images afforded by either mat manager or mods.
perfect.
it may be that the only thing recent about the screenshots is that they were posted recently, rather than taken recently.
all three.
good shots. although not totally pan bottom flat, the cloud base altitude is probably within a 10m variance or so? if that's the difference that you were talking about earlier, then you were correct.

That was possibly before the Speedtree software was bought in. :( :confused:

Concerning the weathering of the G50 marking keep in mind that the original picture in the modeller (the one dug out by Foo'bar) shows a completely weathered skin where obviously the weathering has been applied over the paint + marking layer before merging layers of the skin.
In the last screenshot the marking are of the automatic type as we know them from Il2 and are applied over the basic skin. To avoid to a certtain degree the effect of "newly repainted squadron markings" the markings themselves are made a bit transparent: you can see the weathering below the 'paint" of the marking!

It is certainly not a bug, more like an unfortunate feature :-). To avoid this it would be needed to have the engine applying the weathering after the selection of the auto-markings for this flight...this implies a certain layering structure of the skin which can be applied at starting time by the engine.
Maybe it is intended, as the progressive weathering has been touted a while ago by Oleg, but probably considered as a detail to deal with later!

JV

Just asking how the terrain and crops have altered since 1940.We now grow rape seed which is not an old crop here,infact filming the film BoB in 1969 was plagued by crops and roads that were not around in the 1940's.

There was more countryside,we are now over populated,less roads and built up areas then and don't forget they were digging to feed the country.
You need to compare to historically correct crops,fields [which will affect the colours] and also weather [was it wet or dry,once again colours] or just the light from the sky.
That Autumnal shot of Surrey is not really an average view,blues too blue,reds and oranges also too powerful.
Don't forget 1940's Britain was smoky and grimy in places ,coal fired industries ,steam railways etc.

your a hypocrite and a liar tree, and you can add that to the tittle of coward you rightfully earned here before

a) your a hypocrite for now pretending you are a normal poster here who just contributes by constructive feedback, and pretending you are "misunderstood" in your intentions here. as your proven track record here shows in print for the last year for all to see, you are the exact opposite and deliberately post nothing but whining and bitching about release dates, to which you have now added deliberately offensive remarks to oleg and the updates he is sharing here

b) you'r a liar for posting in this exact thread (a few pages back) that you private msg'd me to try and resolve differences (was funny to see you type that, o the web you weave)

c) and your a coward for backtracking on your proclamation here a couple of months ago, where you said that BoB wouldnt come out for another yr, after which you got called on it by me to put your money where your mouth was, and all you did was to slithered away like a rodent

so no tree, pretending you are a normal contributor here and want to clear personal differences so that the forum can operate normally does not cut the mustard, you'r a phony

ahh, and should i now add "no offense of course" or can you type that yourself instead ?

all that is expected from you, like anybody else here, is that you
1) "contribute" to the forum
2) participate in a civilized constructive and adult manner in giving feedback on the glimpses we get in the regular updates

but you cant do it can you ? you really cant ! ehh because thats not why you are here boyo eh ;) common, tell the good folks why you are really here, some barely know you and still fall for it :)

note to other forum users: sorry folks for all the negativity distracting from savoring your crumpet with your morning coffee, but the hypocrisy of that last post of his is just astounding and is purely aimed at blowing smoke up your..... mmmm well you know where i mean :) some might actually fall for it if their not fully awake on what they are asked to swallow, its called the "tree's slithering act part 1 of his backward peddling opus", and its a load of bull

MD, that's exactly what I was talking about earlier. Obviously the bottom won't be ruler straight, but it's very defined. IMO the clouds in SoW just need to be tweaked in shape, and then everything is there for the game to have the most realistic clouds ever. Indeed, it'd be great to see the type of sun reflection on the clouds, as that is something that I've noticed is really strong when flying over clouds. ;) We have yet to see this shown clearly in SoW due to the angle of the shots taken ;)


Zap; this is all virtual. Tree has nothing to give to you and neither do you to him or anyone to you or you to anyone. You bitching to Tree is just as bad as him doing so to you. Just cut it out; it does my head in seeing posts that have nothing to do with the game, but are just about moaning about forum members.

Actually there's a lot of good shots of the ground in the movie I made especially out of the nose of the Heinkle on time 26 seconds


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=scZ_1-lhsIE

[QUOTE=philip.ed;186966]MD, that's exactly what I was talking about earlier. Obviously the bottom won't be ruler straight, but it's very defined. IMO the clouds in SoW just need to be tweaked in shape, and then everything is there for the game to have the most realistic clouds ever. Indeed, it'd be great to see the type of sun reflection on the clouds, as that is something that I've noticed is really strong when flying over clouds. ;) We have yet to see this shown clearly in SoW due to the angle of the shots taken ;)(quote)


as a rule clouds base are flat but how do you know that they are not flat in the sim? you complained but have nothing to show us as proof of what you see? i have not seen a pic that lets you see the base i think oleg knows about clouds :rolleyes:

Going to be hard to tell what we are seeing in all these work in progress screen shots we've been treated to, don't you think?

;)

I have every reason to believe, based on the trend line of all the screens that have been posted from the first "wire frame" renders of the Hurri to the latest shots, and all that has been said by Oleg, Luthier, and other members of the dev team, that SoW:BoB will be a ground breaking title, and set the standard for all air combat simulation for at least a decade.

It's not about picking apart one or two screen shots folks. It's about the trend line, the distance travelled so far. I realize this is a hard concept for some to grasp, but grasp it you should.

Oleg,

You probably gave up reading this many pages ago but I'd like to add my appreciation for your efforts to provide an update despite the upheaval caused by the office move.

The Wellington shots are magnificent, they really are photorealistic. I love being able to see the interior detail like the flare tube through the windows.
The clouds look great too.

Please don't be put off by a few immature remarks. Your posts are really valued by the majority of us here.

Hope the move went well.

In terms of flat cloud bases....Oleg has mentioned that many different cloud types are modelled and I'm sure that his knowledge of weather at least matches the attention to detail we see in the airframes.

I agree that this type of cloud formation is very common in Britain but the fact that we haven't seen it yet doesn't mean it ain't there. I think weather might be one of the items that is still being tweaked....it's pretty complex stuff if you think about it.

As Oddball would say...have a little faith baby...have a little faith.:grin:

AWESOME reference! I think he would have also said, "Always with he negative waves...".

No negative waves.

ElAurens is right, you have to look at the trend, which is promising.

Splitter

http://fooblog.mexxoft.com/wp-conten...at_G-50_08.jpg
I actually think the weathering is not bad.

On my last adventure to New Guinea, (July this year) I took a few photo 's of 'Bar Fly' a B25A-5-NA (SN43-4450)
She's guarding the airport at Popondetta (North East coast of New Guinea)

http://i1042.photobucket.com/albums/.../Kokoda076.jpg

As you can see the lettering weathers differently to the body of the aircraft, possibly due to the different paints/application methods used to paint them(?)
(bare in mind that this plane has been in the open for 67 years!)

http://i1042.photobucket.com/albums/.../Kokoda083.jpg

Oh! and here is me with a Bren Gun at Efogi.

http://i1042.photobucket.com/albums/.../Kokoda406.jpg

Cheers!

Just for fond memories for you guys who were there this is from the first big movie competition that was help for old IL-2 2001. Here's the 3rd place winner "Fear"


Lighten the mood in here lol.


http://s158.photobucket.com/albums/t...rrent=Fear.mp4

Sorry for being direct here, but i'll say it short and simple for a change. So excuse me if i come off as rude because that's not my intention at all, i'm just too bored to reply in a properly sized post with nice words and eloquent structure. Let's go then! :-P

You make some interesting and useful posts in there forums, this is not one of them.
Take it up on PM with him or something, or petition the mods to ban him, put him in your ignore list, whatever, it's your business and not ours. In short, and i say this with the best of possible intentions and no ill will at all directed towards you...





















Dude,








we








don't










care

:grin:



Back on topic,

I agree on most if not all counts. It's the trends of the whole package that matter to me the most and not isolated features that can be corrected via patching.

i think that is probably one of the best real life photo's posted here yet, showing the combination of fields and pockets of dense woodlands that is typical for the south of england (but this photo being from surrey instead of kent)

by all indications in this weeks oleg screenshots, his current ingame performance can display this level of detail from higher altitude (? but we havnt seen medium altitude yet).

the low level screenshots from the last month or 2 however show only a very sparse tree cover on the ground, with a few shrubs and hedges sparingly placed at field boundaries, and near some roads (rather then the typical continues hedges that are present in real life scenery)

so the real questions this raises:
- were olegs low level previous shots done on the medium level pc he/luthier previously mentioned in another thread, and will we be able to get the high density tree-cover/hedges for low altitude eye candy when running a high end current pc at 1920 x 1200 screen rez ?
- or is the sparse hedge/tree cover on a maxed out high end pc, and will the new gfx engine in oleg's current build only be able to show it in a year or 2 with newer/better/faster pc's ?

either way, i dont think its a show stopper or warrants further delays. with the effort/time spent on it so far the most important factor is how many features he can include in the core of his new engine, because that will determine how much it can improve/expand in the next 5 to 10 yrs imho

On the other hand, i do care about this. Excellent points in this post. ;)

since you seem to need some help with this


Dude,

I

don't

care

if you care or not

:grin:


neither do i specifically seek tree out, i simply treat him in direct proportion to how he behaves at the time i see his "contribution" (which are turds mostly, all he seem to do is "thread crap")). if he makes "normal" post i mostly ignore him, largely because he usually doesnt really contribute anything interesting or topical anyway

if he continues to be so rude and offensive with his constant petulant little snide remarks which are deliberately directed at oleg and the WiP he is sharing here, then i will continue to treat tree-uk accordingly

in case you missed a post from the 1c moderator earlier in this thread

to which i will add a relevant recent observation posted by a user in another il2 forum where tree-uk sprouts the same constant crap

hear hear !!

it isnt a solution for half the people here to simply put tree on ignore and pretend what he is doing suddenly disappears from the universe. worse, by inaction and passive tollerance of it you are complicit to the problems he creates, which in the end will affect us all (and is affecting us already as you can well see).

having oleg's direct interaction with his fanbase (and him being responsive to it, having incorporated many of the previous good suggestions made), is a PRIVILEGE, and not a "right" to be petulantly abused by a few who are CONSTANTLY and DELIBERATELY disruptive and offensive to him (for years now in tree's case)

turbulence is over, please stay tuned and do not adjust you set !

we shall now resume normal broadcasting in a moment :)

thank you for flying 1C and showing interest in oleg's upcoming creation and new masterpiece

/que music and hostesses serving drinks and light refreshments

Zapatista, please read your PM.

Wow
 

Thanks for the screen shots devs.
Thanks for demonstrating why no one in the industry does this. Because you get the dredges of geeky internet society feeling they are important and they matter and that they are owed something.
Its amazing, but pathetic.

Oleg,
thanks for the pics! They look amazing! Somehow the landscape colors seem to be a lot more realistic. Is it just me or you guys tweaked them a bit? Anyway, great job, good luck hunting bugs, I really can't wait to finlly jump into a SoW Spitfire! :cool:

I agree reflected....the colors do look better. Thats the first thing I noticed when I zoomed in on the terrain of the Isle of Wight, in the latest screenshots. I have my concerns, but trust, most of the these concerns will be addressed either before or after release in future addons.

I hope everyone noticed the beautiful backlit clouds in the wellington shot. Impressive stuff.

Thanks for the Video and Screens. They look fantastic, amazing levels of detail.

[QUOTE=Abbeville-Boy;186989]Actually, I do. Check out every update. Look here: http://fooblog.mexxoft.com/category/...s/2010/page/2/

It's really clear. The cloud-base is really profund on cumulus clouds, I posted a scientific review that showed how big a feature the flat-bottoms are, and currently they are missing from SoW. I am not complaining; I'm just asking SoW if this is currently being worked on, as the particle system for the clouds in SoW look amazing; the shape just looks a bit 'off' currently. I'd be interested in what pictures you have seen. I'm not being rude, but it doesn't seem like you've seen much.


The lighting in this sim looks amazing. If they can capture the reflection that one can see off the top of the 'cauliflower' tops of clouds, I'd be dead-impressed. Remember this :o It gave me goosebumps ;)

http://fooblog.mexxoft.com/wp-conten...04751-copy.jpg

Also, I will add that the only thing i hate more than reading posts from people than either ask for more-updates or slam other users for posting their feelings (unless the poster has been abusive) are messages that are aimed at forum members and try and stir of 'shit'. There's no other word for it; shit-stirrers ruin forums like this. So what if someone said something at another forum? Don't bring the crap from one forum here and vice-versa. ;) Have a nice week all.

Forgot about foobars site. I was looking in the other forum for all the older screens.

:grin: That must have taken ages.
It's a great site for looking at the pictures. I favourited it the minute I got linked to it.

From

Oleg Moddox's News...is where I got the old ones


http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=2040

Ah, I see what you mean. Foo'bar's site really is the dogs. As far as I can see, he has every-SoW picture ever posted there, and some shots that I'd never seen posted before too.

Just thought I'd post this.. Same pic but darker.

http://i822.photobucket.com/albums/z...W/sow7copy.jpg

Again, I'm not trying to out-do anyone but I've a few of these that I already did. Just shows what you pointed out.

Looks quite nice Winny, could job. Would I be alone in saying the clouds could do with a bit more texture? maybe if the 'cauliflower' top-effect of the cumulus clouds could be a bit more defined?

http://images.usatoday.com/weather/p...ds/cumulus.jpg

Just an example, these clouds don't best match the ones shown in Oleg's but the representation is clear.

You might have a point, the problem with clouds is they are just so, er.. different. I wouldn't like to say one way or another about the screenshot because I have no idea what the weather is like generally.

I just hope we get lots of variation from thin and wispy to thick and fluffy!

I live in the UK so I'm sick of clouds. Can we discuss something else please?

Hood

ps nice update, can't wait!

:D Certainly sir.
The weather looks nice today.

I agree with some of your points, although not 100%, and i can see where you're coming from. What makes the two of you similiar in a lot of ways is that Tree is coming off like a backseat-developer and you are coming off like a backseat-moderator. Your winding him up only serves to aggravate things further and get others sucked into your vendetta's debate (just like i'm doing right now) which, for the purposes of SoW, is largely irrelevant and useless to most of the people on this forum. Both you and him make some good points and some noise, like we all do, but when it's the two of you together you both only make noise and nothing else, that's all.

You can't banish him to Alpha Centauri and you can't force him to change his mind, put him on ignore if it vexes you so much and let the moderators deal with it if it needs to be dealt with. It's Oleg's forum after all and i doubt he needs "virtual bodyguards", you think he's so defenceless that he couldn't ask a moderator to ban a few people if he wanted to? ;)


Back on topic, i think we finally managed to come to a bit of an agreement on some things after all this arguing (see, not everything is negative after all). Instead of saying "the terrain is gorgeous" or "the terrain is drawn by a child", we can now pinpoint the strong and weak points. It's very detailed topography-wise with a big draw distance, but not shown with high-res textures which makes the trees stand out too much due to the detail mismatch, plus the varying detail settings applied make it hard to judge it from different altitudes. Amazing it took so many people so long to reach such a simple conclusion, but like a folk saying goes in my country "where a lot of roosters crow, it takes longer for the sun to rise" :grin:

As for the clouds, you guys make the mistake of focusing only on cumulus ones. There's several different types with more subtypes and even more combinations among them and if you can "read" them, it can tell you things about the air flow in the area.

The only thing cumulus tells you is that there's rising air nearby, mostly thermals in which gliders can fly. And for the record, there are infact clouds with a rounded bottom if you know where to look for them ;)

Right on, I come here to discuss the sim and aircraft, I get the sense that some folks on here should take a break from this forum and wait until the sim comes out.

I'd like to know if flying through clouds will affect the weathering model of the planes. I mean, will we see the planes glisten with water after flying through a rain-cloud (do all clouds carry some form of precipitation?) and if so, if the plane had bits flaking off, would this cause them to stick to the surface? The cloud part of this question is purely coincidental; I am not some clouds nut! :o Also, I doubt what I have said will be able to feature, but the aspect I'm focusing on is the effect of flying through clouds and also the limitations of the weathering system.

Did Oleg ever answer whether the terrain would be affected by the weather? I'd love to fly a sortie when the sky is clear and return to a saturated airfield (with the grass visibly darker due to the rain).

Also, if you're flying a bomber, can the crew vomit? A bit of an odd question, I know, but I am sure that I read somewhere that due to seating arrangement in some bombers, the chaps could be in for a rough ride if violent manoevures were taken. Certainly this could affect the mission, say if a gunner was sick. It could be part of the animation too.

Ok I would like to withdraw my comment about the terrain looking like its been painted by a child, i guess it was a bit harsh, if that as upset any of the devs then i apologise.

;) Well, I'd say that was the right thing to do. Well done ;)

Now can we please all just get along?

http://images.icanhascheezburger.com...6052988426.jpg

That would not be needed: when you are flying trough water laden clouds your A/C is not really glistening 1) because most of the water is running fast 2) because you need some specular reflection to see glistening and in a cloud that would be more like diffuse, and not that much.
The same would go for flying across rain out of the clouds (no not all clouds have rain in them, far from it...but if the temperature is right most of them will have some ice in it, and this is where the fun begins (and sometimes, ends fast enough).

Now like you say it would be quite formidable to see rain and its effects rendered; what do we need:

- rain as showers seen from afar: the kind of whitish diffuse "bands" falling down the clouds (in this case cumulus, especially for you!)
- rain as British drizzle, on the ground:
1) loss of visibility a bit like haze except that the sky will be in many nuances of gray, depending of cloud thickness and regularity
2) a certain increase in color saturation (the "wet landscape" effect) which will be really visible mainly if sunlight comes back: otherwise the lack of light typical of rainy days will not make it as obvious but it should be there (no dusty film everywhere when it rains!)
3) puddles in the proper places, and if possible some falling water from roofs or A/C surfaces...
4) glistening of surfaces like wings, roofs, cars, etc to represent the water layer
4) at close range a representation of more or less driving rain
- rain in the air
1) loss of visibility if out of the clouds
2) increase in ambient noise
3) some representation of fast running rivulets on front glass and lateral glass (for a computer screen it will resemble white/gray 1 or 2 pixel segments all over the lateral and front surfaces, changing position and length randomly
4) The BoP representation of rain is grossly overdone: rain is water, not glycerin, and not all clouds have rain...

All of that is technically quite possible I think, but is linked to weather representation, and may have an impact on the FPS...

And we did not talk about snow yet (granted, during BoB we can live without it)

JV

I would be very surprised if we saw such subtle effects in the initial release but you never know, every week there is an update I just get the sneakin suspission that Oleg and team are holding back on the goodies, I think what we are shown is just enough and not too much as to give anything away to any possible competition , he has on a few ocasions of late hinted that what is coming will blow us away and im inclined to beleive that , will we see intricacies such as wet grass glistening , wing icing , wake in the clouds tubulance and so on in the initial release I think not , but hey ... my fingers are crossed;)


Ill ignor the puke question for now, but ill be shure to ask my dad later:grin:

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpos...&postcount=384

The pictures of translucent instrument faces on the HUD amuse me.

It is beyond me why the instruments are so big, real instrument views and have the mounting screw attachment brackets.

The instruments should be able to be placed anywhere on the screen, resized, with adjustable translucence and colors with no mounting screws. Then of course we could use some ability to create some highlight points on the instruments...i.e., mark for overspeed, mark for low fuel, low ammunition, no oil pressure,etc. or what about programmable idot lights that would come on at certain pre-set or range pre-set.

THe full real players naturally will want the old dull authentic instrument faces...placed on their wonderwoman views. Gotta get that full real feel. LOL

Then of course, it will be done as the developer wants it. LOL

5) Rainbows :grin:

Thanks for the answers.

JVM, how about when the A/C is static...? The effect in WoP/BoP is overdone (I can see what you mean now) but when the A/C is static the rain will have an effect. I was at Hawkinge at the weekend, unfortunately it rained, but I got to see the (repro) Hurricanes outside get wet. It was quite a sight I must say. ;)

It yet amazes me how inane the discourse can be here. Try the f****ing ignore button. It works for me. I sure as hell hope that Oleg and Luthier try it, it will cut down on their stress around here immensely.

Can we drop that subject?

I think they just wanted to create a look more suited to the time period in question for the instruments, as the IL2 no-cockpit instruments are too modern-looking.

I'd seen that picture when it was first released but seeing it again now got me thinking. Since it's been said that they will be resizable and able to be repositioned on the screen, it reminds me of the "panel" system in the MS flight sims. I fly FSX on a friend's PC every now and then and while i always use the virtual cockpit, in many cases of flying complex aircraft in MSFS there are either 2d pop-up panels or custom camera angles to assist with keeping everything into view. I don't think full switch servers would use 2d panels as it would permit players to keep an eye on both the instruments and the outside world during combat, which defeats the puprose of properly simulating a pilot's workload with the advanced systems modelling.

However, having the ability to define pre-set camera views in the full cockpit view would be useful and probably be used by full switch players, as it doesn't let you see the gauges while looking outside the cockpit the way 2d pop-up panels do. In fact, these views actually limit situational awareness as they usually consist of views fully zoomed in over a particular console or set of instruments. Their advantage comes from not having to bend your neck all over the place to pan to the right place with TrackIR, or fiddling with all sorts of keyboard controls, while still having the drawback of reduced SA to balance it out.

Of course nobody would fly the plane from such a view, but they are very useful for utility stuff and secondary controls. For example, i'm flying through clouds so i want to turn on my formation lights, check the outside temperature and possibly turn on the de-icing equipment. One way to do it is to pan with TrackIR or keyboard/joystick hats, then zoom in. The other way would be to save a pre-set of custom views for each aircraft (i think RoF does this too), so i could set them up once, map them to the numeric keypad and they'd be aircraft specific.

Cockpits are different and the cockpit side consoles would not be at the same coordinates for each aircraft, but with aircraft specific views (possibly saved as a coordinate set in the aircraft's .ini file or something similar) the problem could be overcome. This way, i could map keypad 4 to a close up of the left cockpit console and keypad 6 to a close up of the right cockpit console for all planes. I'd also add keypad 8 as the zoomed-in gunsight view, keypad 5 as the center/default view and keypad 2 as the zoomed-in instrument panel view. Then maybe they could work like IL2, where we can change from pan to snap views. In this way, you could take a quick look at your instruments by choosing snap views and pressing keypad 2 (the view reverts back to normal when you release the key), or you could choose pan views and press keypad 2 to fly by instruments for extended periods of time (the view doesn't revert back to default after releasing the key), for example when flying in bad weather.

I don't know how the view system will be in SoW, but i trust they've made several improvements. I think the one i described is a good mix of what's possible in RoF, IL2 and FSX and gives a wide range of possibilities without becoming so easy that it would clarify as a separate difficulty option. In fact, 2d pop-up instruments could be tied to wonder woman view in a common difficutly setting, while custom in-cockpit camera angles could function in conjunction with the closed cockpit view and we'd be set.

What do you guys think?

That's nice but do you know where this is? We've also lost a lot of woodland since 1940

You welsh should be used to it by now ;)

You are absolutely right...when static you should see plain drops and occasional rivulets...

Now I do not know if how far OM will be willing to push toward realism, and certainly not when...lot of food for future updates/patches!

+1 to that last comment. I am confident that even if the release of SoW doesn't contain everything that Oleg would have wanted, the game will be able to expand (amazingly so) via patches ;)

I don't know how the view system will be in SoW, but i trust they've made several improvements. I think the one i described is a good mix of what's possible in RoF, IL2 and FSX and gives a wide range of possibilities without becoming so easy that it would clarify as a separate difficulty option. In fact, 2d pop-up instruments could be tied to wonder woman view in a common difficutly setting, while custom in-cockpit camera angles could function in conjunction with the closed cockpit view and we'd be set.

What do you guys think?[/QUOTE]


Hi Blackdog,
Thats sounds like a sound plan to me... Let me see if I got you right though. A predefined set of views for any or all relevant instruments - assigned to user defined button...

That doesn't sound too difficult to achieve... May I suggest a simpler (Hopefully) solution?

My issue with incockpit view is that when I look down to view instruments,
I normally have to also zoom in as well to clearly read them. This is because I usually have the widest possible incockpit view (90Deg) on so I can have the most Sit awareness as poss. thats why wonderview is so nice cause it totally eliminates that problem. SO in my mind, it needs a 2 stage solution.

1. Custom snap to view of the instrument panel AND,
2. Custom zoom function coupled with snap view...

So my recommendation is to be able to create a series of custom cameras.
For eg. I use my mouse to find the right angle I want and THEN zoom into desired distance from said instrument/s with the mouse scroll and hit the "Make custom camera" button which I can assign to either number keypad 2 or maybe the Joystick hat.

I hope I am making sense...

I am hoping Oleg has already thought of stuff like this, cause these kind of improvements (GamePlay), for me, is a million times more important than having silly freakin' flat bottomed clouds.

Also, having custom in cockpit cameras can serve another vital function.
And that is to be able to widen the Max FOV from 90Deg to 105Deg, which
would really really REALLY add to the Sit Awareness and give you a much greater sense of space and bring it all little closer to human peripheral vision.

Thank you by the way for your warm welcome... Its a shame no one else could give me an opinion about the semi transparent cockpit, it seems most people want to talk about clouds.

Maybe I'll try and create an example of what I mean and put it up so other can understand what I mean...

The only difference between those from Wales and those from Glaaaacester is that we wear wellies when chasing sheep.

And you can never ever get used to the clouds in the UK. To paraphrase what Clostermann said US pilots used to say - "If you get lost oer Europe just look for the biggest blackest cloud and that goddamn island will be right beneath it."

Thinking about it, if sheep aren't modelled correctly I'll have a hissy fit.

Hood

Not wanting to necessarily resurrect the cloud debate, but here's a Catalina in typical British cloudscape, plus a few shots I took at 5.45pm tonight over another famous English river estuary.
Whoops! The cat is sideways, sorry.

Great pictures. Looking back at the previous updates, I think the really high clouds could do with some work too... :-P

Semi transparent cockpits
 

Right, onto the real reason I wanted to post. This posting thing is pretty new to me so please excuse any babbling...

I have one development question / wish / request that has always been on my mind, and I have never come across anyone else asking about it... So here it is

Full cockpit vs Wonderview:- In IL-2 there is either Full cockpit or gunsight and sky. Nothing inbetween. It would be so good if there was a third option.

To Oleg- Will/can there be a player defined option to set the in-cockpit view at 65% (or so) opacity, to make it semi-transparent?
So pilots can still have more "sky" but also can have the feeling that they are still flying in a beautifully rendered fighter plane?

The cockpit opacity settings would be amazing to have... No longer will we have to choose between dynamic gameplay (Wonderview) and immersion (In cockpit)... We could have both.

Not too sure what the technical implications of this request is but I had to ask anyway.

Please give me feedback guys, I am interested to know your opinions on this request...



HERE IS AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT...


Please give me some opinions and feedback.

I think that this is an excellent idea. Your pictures are great; the last one would be great for me. I don't know if I'd use it all the time, but I think it's a really neat concept. I know it's been talked of before, but I can't remember Oleg commenting on it. I'm sure it could implemented in the future...

Unfortunately I have to say I dislike it. But that is my opinion.

Far better and simpler to do would be IMO to just disable the 'wonderwoman' view, and keep the external view of your own plane on. This is something I have been requesting for IL2 ages ago...

Having cockpit always forced on and without the help of the F6 command (in IL2) would help with the transition to the locked pit servers for rookie pilots.

They were made on the flight to London. Some shortly before the landing in Stansted.

This must be remodeled. The sky is too dark! :P Maybe you can fix this in 41.11?

Thanks for feedback Thor and Phil-Ed...
Thor- I am not sure I understand your answer though, do you mean to say that we should only have full cockpit or external views? or am I getting it wrong all wrong...

If I am correct, how would that be helping people transition into full cockpit?

Sorry but I can't see why a simulation needs a feature like this. Flying around like this will just lead to bad habits and folk will never learn to operate with an engine in the way. I think it would be better in Over-G fighters or something like that.

People will be asking to see through clouds and hills next.

Just my opinion of course.;)

Actually, that's exactly what i meant initially. I didn't mean pre-defined cameras mapped to custom keys, but custom cameras mapped to custom keys just like the ones you describe.

Example:

Let's say i fly a twin engined bomber on full difficulty settings. I use the default view from the pilot's seat in wide mode when flying. However, i need to be able to see the engine instruments from time to time and these are on the co-pilots or even the flight engineer's panel.
I move my camera so that it looks at the appropriate panel via keyboard commands, mouse or TrackIR, set the preferred amount of zoom, pick numkey6 as the key to assign it to (starboard cockpit panel, so i map it to numkey6 because it's on the right of the numeric keypad) press and hold the "save view button" and then press the key to which i want to map the view. So, if the "save view button" is control, i press ctrl+numkey6 and the view is saved to that key.

Now, whenever i want to check the instruments i simply press numkey6. If i want the view to remain there, i set it up as a "sticky" view, if i want the view to revert back to default when i release the key, i set it up as a snap view. Or alternatively, a single press of the numkey equals a snap view but a shift+numkey equals a sticky view.

I hope i cleared it up :grin:

Also, good work on the screenshots presenting your idea. I still wouldn't use it but i believe it's useful on the grand scale of things. It would help people gradually transition from no-cockpit view to higher difficulty settings, instead of having to do it in one go.

Personally speaking (!!!!) I used to use the Wonder Woman view all the time with great success, then decided to try it the realistic way. I couldn't hit a thing after turning the cockpit on...now I'm having to re-learn how to: yaw in order to see the enemy in front; dip and turn in order to keep him in my sight; anticipate where he is when out of sight; predict where he is when he's 'behind' the dashboard; predict where to aim/shoot based on the latter.
The WW view is unrealistic very many more ways than are obvious.

It's an excellent idea in my opinion, but I also have a feeling that it's been asked whether this was possible before, and the answer came back in the negative.

Certainly when playing on-line, I like to go on the servers that allow 'no cockpit view', but it's a bit disorientating when using TrackIR.
The 'ghosted' cockpit would be a real boon in these situations, and as you say, still gives you a view of all the gorgeous cockpit detail.

Offline I don't think it's quite so necessary, and in IL2, the AI aren't so 'I'.
Of course, we've no idea how 'I' the AI is in SoW.
Great demo shots by the way.:grin:

Actually, I was deliberately hunting for flat bottoms.
Perhaps you were thinking of Kentish girls?:rolleyes::grin:

I don't like it (the transparent view), but also I don't think is a good idea have the cockpit always forced on, people builds cockpits and if you can't disable it in the game doesn't seem a good idea to me...

Alberto

That's bad habit.
I had the steepest learning curve when switched to full real.

Try it.
:grin:

It's funny I've been flying full real for years. When a subject like this comes up I think who will care but Spit VS 109s isn't the only server in Hyperlobby is it.

Rather than a see through cockpit, if you want continuous target tracking, then a simpler option would be to allow the target icons to continue tracking inside the cockpit. This way you would know where the targets are. Perhaps have a target dot with the icon as well so you can line up your deflection shot.

I don't know why people fly Wonder Woman view but I'm guessing if they had the above they might stick to cockpit on settings?

All three. :) No cockpit, cockpit with externals and wonder woman on / off, and full pit. ... wait a minute - thats four. :)


My reply to matsher should explain what I thought.

Yeah, I know you to be right. Most of the closed cockpit stuff on HL seem to need a variety of erm, well, mods though. I have standard v4.09 and the old AAA 1.2.
All seem to be having problems with invisible planes and other anomalies.
I'm not sure I can be bothered getting UP, just to get shot down by an invisible plane whether cockpit is on or off.

Any suggestions for which servers to go for?

But all of that is another reason to look forward to SoW.
I promise I'll always fly full real when that comes along.
Anything else would be a waste!:grin:

You should always fly with full real, maybe with speed bar but no icons and and always cockpit enabled, no external views

1. Get UP 2.01
2. Get IL serverlibrary - enables mods automatically

3. invisible planes: happens(on some servers) if ppl decide to pick a different country than default.
Good thing: invisible planes can't cause any damage. You'll hear the noise but no damage.

4. SoV, KV13, BoB(currently down), Warclouds, Spitvs109Mod

:grin:heheh
I think the type of Cumulus is clear in your picture. The only issue is that it proves that there are so many types of this cloud it would be murder to model it in the sim.
I think this is what Oleg and co experienced with the trees, so they opted to go the route of speed-tree. There are a few 3rd party cloud-applications which I think could be used to great advantage in SoW, but we'll see ;)
those pictures you posted are beautiful though.

On the transparent cockpit issue.

Its not everyones job here to make sure new players play the game the "right" way, it is however Olegs job to make sure as many "newbies" as possible buys SoW and more importantly, sticks with it.