I understand about the icons, natch, but I'm not talking about the e/a diving under the nose, I'm talking about following him, but you can't distinguish between the e/a and the ground textures - not for longer than perhaps 2-3 maybe 4 seconds, but that can be a long time ...

So I was wondering if they've found a way to make it stand out a bit better ( not asking for a glowing target, just want the object 200m away to stand out somewhat better from the ground 1000m away... ) - or is it just my eyes and monitor and no one else has noticed this ?

Thats true, but you can blend dot color with background on low res and left it black on high res. This will make dots less visible on lower resulotions.

Why isn’t it respectful to say that the dev team is very (several years) late with the making of the whether effect ?

Quite possibly it is your monitor. I had a CRT monitor once that made seeing enemies against the ground impossible. With LCD monitors it's better, for me.

Ok, it get ~6.5km at 1680*1050
-4.10
-Forgot to note alt, I think it was 8km, clouds off.

Because you are implying that you have a better idea of how they should allocate their time then they have.

Actually, we do have to have better visibility than in IL-2.
Those who have flown and took a seat in a real cockpit know that visibility and awareness is much better in real life than what we've experienced in IL-2.

I hope that we never experience again those invisible green planes that could just fly over a forest and never be seen and other similar cases.

Actually it would be very good if the amount of pixels used for a given aircraft at a given distance would scale with the resolution used. For example, up to 1280x1024 a fighter at 5km would be 2-pixel dot, but at 1920x1080 the same fighter at the same distance would be 10-pixel dot, etc (numbers arbitrary for example's sake).

You are partially right, however there are cases when it does make a difference. A lot depends on altitudes, relative positioning and closing speeds, so for example if there's two guys approaching each other head on at 500km/h an extra 2 or 5 km of spotting distance give you a better window of time in which to respond (or a worse one in which to be surprised).

I still remember one of my online kills with a Fw190A from a few years back on my 17" CRT monitor at 1280x1024, where i spotted a lone dot against the fog almost an entire map grid away (about 7-8km) at my 10 o'clock low. I set into a pursuit curve and a shallow dive, adjusted my course by observing the dot's movement and just waited to get close enough for identification before pulling the trigger. As it turned out i had flown an almost perfect curve and doing close to 700km/h by the point he was about to cross from left to right across my windscreen, i looked closer and identified it as a Pony and let him have it. It was very satisfying because it was a kill based solely on SA, speed and surprise done in a single firing pass.

I can't replicate that in my 22" LCD at 1680x1050 however. I tried some QMB missions with icons on to judge the difference and it seems the dots can be spotted a little while before the icons kick in, at a little more than 5.5 km, and that's against the sky. Against the ground they could be sneaking up on me just fine and making it to within 3km or less.

In any case, much will depend on how CoD will deal with making camouflage useful at long range while not having planes blend into the background at point blank like it used to happen with IL2 (the problem described by Sturm Williger).

Who knows, maybe we'll have sun glinting off the canopies and other reflections, or the LOD scaling will be so good and the aircraft standing out from the backgrounds that it won't be an issue at close range but the camo will still be effective at long range. Anyway, i trust they'll do their best to do a good job on this so i'm not terribly worried. Just the fact it will support widescreen resolutions right off the bat will improve things considerably, since it's built for them from the ground up and not "forced" to used them on an engine build for 1024x768 resolutions like IL2 is.

Finally in response to Royraiden, a monitor has a much smaller resolution than the human eye. There was in fact a challenge of spotting planes in real life too and yes, sometimes it's hard even for white or brightly painted airliners to spot each other. However, the superior resolution of the human eye will pick up on movement and can distinguish silhouettes at a much higher distance. Since we can't have that with a monitor, in order to simulate how it works in real life there must be a way to offset the disadvantage.

So, in reality it's hard to spot a single dot with no apparent motion but it's far easier to make out the plane's outline and identify it once you pick him up visually and at longer ranges. On our PCs it's the opposite due to hardware limitations, they give us long range spotting of the dots because they can't give us long range silhouette on a PC monitor.


Apart from spotting issues now,

Very interesting points, i'd love to see something like that.
Or if we can't have that on release, maybe a possibility to include a scripting language in the SDK for the community to implement similar functions on their own would be even better.

The problem with this approach is that not all 1920x1080 (insert whatever resolution) displays are the same size and thus it'll just move the advantage/disadvantage to another group of users.

If a system can be interrogated to ascertain the physical dimensions of the display along with the resolution or just the dot-pitch then a universal transparency/size could possibly be implemented, this would however be almost impossible for any users with projection displays as there is no way that I am aware of for the computer to know exactly how big the projection ends up.

I thought its the same nowdays. If airplane can be displayed in current res it is rendered as 3d model which occupies multiple pixels, as soon as model calculated screend size goes beyond 1 pixel it starts to be rendered as simple 1 pixel until it completely disappear

perhaps some questions will still be answered :)

- will the max startweight be calculated if you are loading your plane (espacially bombers) with fuel and bombs ?
a screenshot of the new armament screen in a next WIP update would be awesome btw ;)

- will CoD have its own "gameserver" included or will we still have to use 3.party tools like the Hyperlobby (that did a beautifull job i have to ad !!).



and just to add, wouldnt it be time to post these friday updates in the CoD forum of 1C and not here in the IL2 part anymore ;)

indeed, the "Red Band" as replacement of the "Ace of Spade" on the JG53 (all three groups) cowlings was ordered around end of July 1940. The Ace of Spade was reintroduced in 20.November 1940. Officially because of the 500. kill of the JG53, sure it helped that von Maltzahn took over the command from Crammon-Traubadel at 10.October 1940.........

the overpainting of the Swastika was only common in the III/JG53 for a time from august 1940 to fall 1940, after Hptm. Wilcke took over command. It was done to protest against the harsh words Göring had agaisnt his fighterpilots......
III/JG53 flew it's 109s without Swastikas with Red Band and (after 20.Nov) PikAs on its cowlings.

Read. The. Thread.

It seems that many people want more a weather simulation or a Sims than a flight simulator.
I for my self prefer a flight simulator, you know planes and such things ;)

Where now the horse and the rider? where is the horn that was blowing?
Where is the helm and the hauberk and the bright hair flowing?
Where is the hand on the harp-string, and the red fire glowing?
Where is the spring and the harvest and the tall corn growing?
They have passed like rain on the mountain, like a wind in the meadow;
The days have gone down in the West behind the hills into shadow.
Who shall gather the smoke of the dead wood burning?
Or behold the flowing years from the Sea returning?

Couldn't resist :-)

@pancake
I hope you don't expect Orcs and Hobbits in CoD. ;D

Regarding visibility distance, iv been fortunate enough to have tried rl mock dogfighting and tracking/seeing, even though u are suppose to know where they are, is much more difficult than many seem to think, even at close range (1-2 km).

Maby spotting ac in CoD will be somewhat easier due to dynamic lighting?

Red Bands JG53, my bad...

Yes, apologies to Luthier, just posted off the top of my head from memory. I've done a little bit of digging about said redband and the actual reasons why JG53 ditched the pik as logo but it seems to be open to various schools of thought. Still it does appear that the entire geschwader changed over to the redband, as Frankboy says, around the beginning of August. What's a bit more difficult to find out is when it disappeared. As early as September by some accounts when the unit commander was replaced and the pik as was reinstated. To add to the confusion the yellow nose had become an official Luftwaffe BOB colour scheme by September (I understand), and was taken up by JG 53, and which may have occured when the unit moved to the Pas de Calais to perform close fighter escort for bombing attacks on London. (Could the yellow nose have been to protect themselves from their own bomber's gunners?).
The first example of the red band to have been shot down over England was on August 16th 1940, so it seems the red band was short lived. I did see a couple of shots of half of a red band over a yellow nose, one upper cowling, one lower. I would guess it died a natural death and disappeared fairly rapidly after the beginning of September. For III/JG53, I have read that there were 109's still flying without swastikas on Nov 20th 1940. Swastikas were added apparently to the actual rudder and not the tail plane on some 109's of JG53 when it was reinstated, just to add to the confusion!
Still hand up to say my initial posting was wide of the mark...

hahaha!

Really :confused: thats funny.

:grin: kids these days :cool:

Actually people manning guns and vehicles could've been very fun with that 16 years and older mark on the box art, but my fantasy wanders off again, too bad I don't see 'em in the screenshots, I do hope we see something like in IL2 with men running out of their trucks and jumping away.

He's being sarcastic, thats all.

Thanks for all your answers.

Yet this one raises another two questions.

1. How will 3rd party developers know if the plane they want to bring to the game is already worked on either by 1C or another 3rd party developer?
2. You have said before that the 3rd party tools for the implementation of planes will be limited and simplified so will that always result in 3rd party developed planes that are less complex than the official 1C developed ones?

What does porked mean and flys like a tie fighter?

That it is without beef.....:rolleyes:

not kosher...

I would like to know more on these subjects myself as this position is somewhat contradictory with what I hd understood (from OM inputs) so far:

- OM would like to create a business around COD similar to what exists around FSx...
This means that the SDK and FM tools would need to be complete, otherwise what's the point?

- To be allowed online (that I translate by integrated in the official game/patch whatever) any third party work (at least the A/C) would need to be vetted by OM's team.
This would probably mean only this, vetting, no completion/modification error correction: I understand OM's team will not reproduce the Il2 problems there...

In any case this a policy matter, and some time (an the SDK) will probably pass before some final decisions are made in this domain, and this can always change later on...I would stay optimistic!

JV

PS Zorin you never told me if you were interested by the (french) magazine dedicated to the Nord Pacific?

its very simple, as i already said, the JG53 was officialy, by oerder (!), allowed to use the PikAs (instead of the Red Band) again from 20.Nov 1940 on. I could scan a picture out of Priens JG53 book about that, but im too lazy ;)
and yes, still after that date it was common in the III.Group to overpaint the Swastika. When this behaviour ended, i dont know.....

the yellow color was introduced for a faster IFF in the hassle of aircombat. That this had tow sides is obvious...... not only the germas were able to tell their freinds very fast, also the british thier foes :D
anyway, there were so many kinds of yellow markings during BoB......some pilots/units didnt have them at all ;)
actually, that makes skinning german fighters more interesting than RAF ones IMHO - more variants :D

the red band of JG53 and the yellow IFF markings where totaly independ things..............

About the BF-108.
Maybe we can somehow convince Mathias from Classic Hangar to make an addon to turn the 108 into a flyable plane.
He's working on it for FSX right now:

http://www.classics-hangar.de/phpBB3...&sd=a&start=40

And it looks bloody gorgeous.:shock:

http://www.classics-hangar.de/vorsch...8_panel_13.jpg

That looks really nice!

Looks good until he has to make a damage model for it too.

blimey:o

Luthier,

how goes the process of editing the dev videos and translating it?
Will you get it done til friday?

Yeah...It does..But this image looks way better than the in-game one !

:rolleyes:

Salute !

Has anyone else's ignore list been growing lately?

I trust these guys and I know there's no way they would put out a piece of crap. Ilya wouldn't be on here answering all of these questions like he is spending, more time than ever being as honest and forthright as possible. What more do people want? What isn't included will be added later in patches.

As Luthier said:

Someone who enjoyed Il-2 for many years should be very exited and curious for the new Sim. It will be an awesome start into the future of WWII air combat simulation. We should trust that Oleg´s Team will do the best possible - and improvents will be released time after time.

It is quite unfair to judge ClofDo (:grin:) without haven´t it played a single time.

So, such massive complaints are really strange. It is obvious, that the update threads like theese not only attract the fans of IL-2, but also the competitors and rivals of Maddox´ games, maybe trying to spoil our fun.

So, we should not be irritated ;)

Uhm, I'm not going to tell you what to feel or anything, but i want you to consider what you are saying here: you are telling him that you are "very very dissapointed" with CoD because they could'nt afford to send about a truckload of equipment from Moscow to Britain to record a real Merlin and Daimler-Benz engine, and that vehicle crew slipped their mind for the time being... You are infact so dissapointed by this that you don't want to buy CoD unless someone you trust says it's a killer sim...

The way I see this is: OK, they don't have a real Merlin/DB engine, BUT they recorded real engines of other planes and engineered the sound to be a stand-in for them. As far as i know, that seems to be the only way they could get their hands on the engine sounds of, say a Zero..or even a M163 Comet etc. etc.

So to me this is just as good as the real thing when you realize that they aren't just half-assing this by slapping the sounds of a lawnmower in there and then call it a Tiger Moth.. they have professional equipment and i'd assume that since they could have recorded the real thing if they had access, their sound engineer is most likely a professional too.

Besides, Luthier already said that the sound feels right, and I'll take his word for it.. You've been waiting for 5+ years? I would have assumed that you have seen these people's passion for what they do, so i would have thought that you could take his word too untill you could judge it for youself..Or do you consider 50-ish dollars or whatever your currency is, to be waaaay too much to pay for something that is supposed to be the successor of IL2 in every way when it gets off the ground?

And regarding Luthier's choice of words that you freaked out about...

would you please relax for a second, take a breath, and then try to think about the quality of the rest of the sim...They aren't LITERALLY going to just dump somebody into the driver's seats of the vehicles just to put something in'em..

and even if they weren't too good-looking...what do you care?? You're supposed to be zipping by at alittle more than 1m altitude AND you're going to be going alittle faster than walking-pace...atleast I choose to believe that you're supposed to be engaging COMBAT while in FLIGHT in this SIMulator..

I'll be using a ram on the door of my local gamestop if they aren't open at the very second they're supposed to:D

Can't wait to get the new incarnation of WW2 CFS's, and to actually take part in the "childhood" of it:)

sorry, if this somehow offends you, that was not the point of this, I simply got fed up with all the panic about the green, and the small pilots..and the wrong eye-color in the reflection of the pilot in instrument-glass in the cockpit..and tracers that look like starwars (which btw was made to look like WW2 AIRCOMBAT IN THE FIRST PLACE!!!) and all the other nitpicking people have had the spare time to bother the lead developers with in the updates..

*sigh* I guess what I'm trying to say is that I wish people would take the history of every game into account when thinking about CoD too..They almost without exception get patches and fixes to correct anything wrong with it, and in IL2's case it was also ADDED to the content by the patches

Just because there aren't INITIALLY going to be people manning every piece of equipment you now believe the whole thing is going to be a huge bust? It will get in there as long as we support them (buy this epic product). I would much rather have the highly detailed aircraft in a FLIGHT SIMULATOR. Than see a dude in a truck for 1/10th of 1 millisecond. Some of you seem to have gotten lost in the weeds, and forgot about the field. I know I come off as a white knight, but honestly some of the nitpicking, especially on things that the devs have said they will patch it in, is absurd.

Regarding the whole "dot" issue a few pages back I have a terrific solution that will require little effort on the devs parts. DON'T PLAY WITH PEOPLE THAT YOU THINK ARE BASICALLY CHEATING.

Yes, I am disappointed that there won't be people in every vehicle at launch. I do find it irksome to fly against people that are more worried about their kill death ratio or points than enjoying the spirit of the game. No initial dynamic weather hurts (that runs reasonably). I will miss dynamic campaigns, but none of that is tantamount to what all the included features will bring to the table.

Thank you Luthier for giving up part of your weekend to reveal some really cool stuff to us.

Hypernova let me tell you now, this will be a killer sim. The best in the world, in fact. So go out and buy it when it's ready and don't post things that will make you look silly next month.

Hypernova - have you heard the old saying about the 'best laid plans'?

Perfection probably was the goal, but reality unfortunately decided it would have to be delayed temporarily.

Rest assured that just about everyone with an interest in the game (and certainly, I'm sure, the devs) feels disappointed that it will initially be without some much sought-after features.

There is a commitment though that they will be added in time. So a degree of patience will be required.

Try not to take it so personally. The devs didn't didn't do it deliberately to spite you.

Two of the most famous aircraft in the world one with an instantly recognisable engine note , the other being one of my favorite engine sounds "db.600.series" the cost of audio equipment is under £500 and the rest is some polite airfield diplomacy , a favour or two and knowing how to place yourself via the conditions , the editing....childs play , but what do I know and its like you said , so what if a spit sounds like a skyvan. :grin:

Come on people, stop judging Developers updates by Marketing campaign standards :)

Hopefully Ubi will start to push this professionally, if they don't (Should probably have already started!) than that's when we should be complaining.. On the Ubi forum that is.

In fact, get over there now and start kicking off...

i think taht we owe a big thank you to luthier now as he tried to aswer dozens of questions.
THANK YOU! You and all the team

I didn't say i don't care what it sounds like at all, i said that i doubt they'll just record a lawnmower and call it a Tiger Moth..

and Luthier said that they had engineered the sounds of the engine of a russian (can't remember if it was a fighter) plane to sounds like the real thing..
it's not like the 109 is going to sound like a piper cub..atleast not as far as i can understand.. and just to clarify: the same goes for the spitfire..i doubt it'll sound like skyvan:P

oh, and
"We're still working on sounds. Engine and gun sounds are pretty good in my opinion, but a lot of people will take some time to get used to them because they're not what you expect, especially guns as heard from inside the cockpit. We got some funny bug reports about that from some beta testers.

You can hear outside noises, yes. As you should. We can argue this based both on memoirs and on scientific formulas."

and
"We couldn't record the real Merlin or a Daimler Benz or basically any real engine from BoB era due to a limited budget. There aren't any in Russia, and we couldn't fly out our sound engineer to the UK or Germany with all his equipment.

We do have the recordings of the real engines of course made with various Russian aircraft this summer. Using advanced SFX magic we transformed our samples to sound the way we needed."

doesn't really give me the impression that all you need is a laptop and a singstar-mic to record it in BINAURAL audio;)

IN my opinion teh sound will be good, i have never heard a merlin engine but i will be very enthusiastic that teh tried to put soem similar one, for teh budged they hav ethis is very nice job. I might understand that for some people this is an important thing but in order to see mor ethings added up, all will depend on game success, i hope it will

sounds were terrible in years after the first release
they got to be better
in cod
cant be worse

I hope you get hold of them mod tools :)

There are many engine recordings available for every airplane we are going to fly in CoD. No need to go anywhere just to make own recordings. I very much doubt engine sound will be an issue for serious complaints. It is less than 2 months until we will have our hands on this sim and everything we want to know and Luthier patiently answers now will be answered then. If you are unsure you want to buy the game, then wait for some days after the release and read the reviews before you decide. Really simple really.

I don't think you'll find any in Binaural audio?

I have no idea if you could "make" binaural by multisampling a regular recording or anything, but the video Oleg had in an update a while ago had BINAULAR AUDIO BETA or something like that in the name, so...

Yes

Fantastic!!

This will be great for doing screenshots too.

Lol , not trying to get your back up , im simply making a point of what you said , we are all more than a little how shall i say....worried about the mounting pile of things that are not going to be in the release , for me the sound side is very important it is over 50% of the game , and as an ex AAA moderator I would say that there is about 50 thousand potential buyers out there thinking the same thing , and they know what a spitfire sounds like.
I am optamistic that they will pull it off , but at this stage in the game no one is rushing to show off there audio creations I would say audio disapointment looms , and my game will have to be dubbed if I want to make a movie out of it , which is sad as the original game was broken so that the audio could be improved so why was sound not a priority this time round ? , dont make no sense to me.

Jafa.

This posting is the funniest I have read in a long time. Thanks for the laugh.

Hehe, I remember suggesting exactly that several years ago. Back when suggestions actually had a chance of making it into this sim ;)

Don't know if the original idea was mine, but I'm soo thrilled to see this getting into CoD. It will be revolutionary!

Back then I also suggested that people should be able to "fly along" with others, virtually, even in one-seaters, so they could learn by watching (and listening to their teacher via Teamspeak). Would be super cool.

Re "Both players run il2 In Those Resolutions - this is what I mean is that a player with a monitor number 2 has a much larger problem, for spoting enemy "dot"Because of pixel sizes in the monitor - unless he reduces the resolution, which creates its kind of a little paradox - we have the hardware to play at high resolution but reduce it in order to have an equal chance of spotting enemy (thiss happen online all time)
So the problem is that when an aircraft is far enough away that it is smaller than a single pixel on a low res monitor, that you still have to display a pixel, so the aircraft is shown as bigger than it should be. Solutions (I assume that the software knows what res the player is using, and can vary the display based on that):
1) if at the aircraft should start to be shown smaller than a pixel at distance X, and the aircraft should disappear from view at distance Y, then make it so the pixel stops being shown at X+Y / 2 (ie, between X & Y). That way the lower res monitor has an advantage from x to X+Y/2, and a disadvantage from X+Y/2 to Y.
or
2) for higher res monitors, at distance X, when the aircraft should be down to 1 pixel, actually show more than 1 pixel - it's not accurate, but it puts the high res monitor at an equal footing with the low res monitor, which is more imporant (and accuracy at that distance and size is a moot point, as it's nothing like real life whichever way you do it).

EDIT - I see others have made the same suggestion as point 2.

As I read these forums, I'm reminded of my first experiences with the Ubi-zoo way back at the start of all this (IL2 Sturmovik)...I don't remember if it was 2002 or 03, but I was so turned off by the negative banter that I didn't come back for 5 years (lol). I'm reminded of all the "know-it-all's" that didn't have time to answer my questions, and all the arrogant "sob's" that felt the game was a waste of time because of the porked ME109, or the 50cal's, or whatever...its a shame, it really is. I know that their are good people here but I just feel like I'm wasting my time reading most of this stuff...

I'm sorry for this little comment, and I promise not to flood the forums with my own negative observations, but I had to post something (or I might have smashed my computer_lol)...I have actually edited myself of three occasions, where I started to reply to "someones" asinine comment and stopped myself before hitting the "post" button...lol

Anyway...onwards and upwards !!!

yep. the fw190 is more exquisit yet!
http://www.screenshotartist.co.uk/im...90early_12.jpg

http://www.screenshotartist.co.uk/im...90early_09.jpg

http://www.screenshotartist.co.uk/im...90early_06.jpg

http://www.classics-hangar.de/phpBB3...php?f=14&t=307

Thanks for the update
 

Thanks,

I laughed at the Gap band you dropped the bomb on me song during the bomb run, awesome.


Thanks for the WIP statement.

And also the funny videos with the double youtube is great!



Guys remember the games out soon and they are working hard at it, as for making everything the way you want it, there has to be some compromise.

Regarding the posts saying feeling cheated or lied to, etc, don't judge the game until it comes out. I'll bet you if you have the system that matches the specs and a joystick, the IL-2 COD experience will be awesome.

I always wondered what happened if I ran into Il-2 way back in 2001 and now I get that chance.

Guys and gals, even if the game has low expectations in your standards, look at what Oleg n Luthier and everyone on their team, team d, has done to help make things better.

Don't be a product of today's convenience / cynicism society. Make the world a better place and smile & be thankful this game is being worked on by dedicated and intelligent people. Be the virtue of patience and wait, for it will be rewarding.

And if not, you can always return the game and go back to ROF or IL-2 1946, MS Flight, Red Baron 3D, Ace Combat 10 (or whatever they are at), or WOP. But I feel that this will not be the case.

Meh, I don't even have an ignore list - I read it all. It can be interesting, it can be laughable, but it's my choice to get worked up about it or not.
I may disagree with something someone says, but I don't have to post a rebuttal. I don't have any real flight experience, gaming programming experience, hell I don't even have some of the books some people clearly have. If the devs take umbrage at some of the stuff people post, it will be all our loss, but I'm sure the moderators are well aware of that.

I do find it hard to comprehend how people can feel cheated or somesuch because planned features aren't going to be in the initial release. I'm sure the devs wanted to have them as much or more because ... after all - THEY'RE the ones who planned to have them in the first place.
WE just have expectations - and why ? Because these same devs were kind enough to interact with their customers and tell us their plans. Now we castigate them when some plans haven't made it to fruition ? Sorry I just don't see the logic.
But this is just my opinion.

Hell, I remember getting the first IL2 ( pre-FB ). After flying EAW, it was just "WOW!"
And even then - how much better did it get ?
So I can't see the devs working on something new for 5+ years which is going to be rubbish, for all the features that didn't make the final ( initial ) cut. But that's just me using that pesky logic again.
Your opinion may differ. :)

What sort of outside noises? Other aircraft? Can you point to the memoirs and formulas? I would like to see the arguments that you can hear much that goes on outside the cockpit.

Perfect answer really.... :)

I would also add for all, that we can't track the size of pixel for the different physical size of monitors with the same resolution in pixels.
For example I have two monitors with the same pixel resolution at home... both full HD, however one is 13 inches of high end ligth weight carbon noterbook, but another is 24 inches standard monitor... Cheat? Definitely cheat speaking about size of the dot in this case ! :):)

I have modern video record where the sound of P-39 we may hear from another fighter from which this record was done. And it was done with the professional equipment but not with the light, small and simple camcoder that can record nothing really (most records on youtube are done exactly by camcoders with internal mics).... or by other words don't selectively working like it is with the system of Human ears + brain...

Another my own experinece in yak-52 flying near the Yak-18T... I was able to hear and to define the directions of outside flying plane flying some 30 menters near my plane... And I was in a helment that is very similar to WWII time...

Also, please tell me, can the bullet hit to the wing of the aircratf hear the pilot? If you will say me can, then I will put here the real measurement of the sound from the hit of bullet to the wing and the sound of fighter propeller (not the engine even!) on a distance of the 50 meters in decibels for comparison. Then you will tell me who is right :):):)

Hi Oleg...I'm just wondering about the level of detail we can expect to hear in the damage model? How much damage (and what kind of damage) can we expect to hear in the game? Will various kinds of engine damage be modeled (differently) in the sound engine...can we expect to hear a damaged piston? Or will the engine sounds indicate damage as the oil leaks out?

Thanks for your hard work...

Can propeller be damaged ? very big vibration... ? If the windows are damaged... what append ?

Tks so much for all the awnser, i was tired of all this post about the green colours of the field......

500quid?
You sure get some bad ass equipment for that.
What makes you think they will run the engine for free?
Just because it's a for a certain Oleg Maddox whos name is(most likely) completely unknown to the plane owner? And it's for a commercial purpose.
They will you $1800 just to put that microphone near their running BD6xx engine - and that probably doesn't even cover cost....
Please repeat for EACH engine.
Plus travel, accommodation, expenses.
You will top out $20k before you know.

Well, if you chase down every single plane on its own, MAYBE. But with a bit of planing ahead you only need to visit two air shows, record what you need on arrival or departure day to get the plane owners sole attention and you should be covered.

That way you only need to travel, ship your equipment and ensure it, twice.

I do believe that the name rings a bell and that owners, if approached in the right way, would love to donate the sound of their engines. At the end of the day, they are as much in love with them as Oleg is, so they are of a similar mind.

They have to pay their bills too.
Warbirds are a very expensive hobby - and there is no such thing as free lunch.

It is not like you ask them to do anything that they wouldn't have done anyway. Startup, priming, etc...

No - you just have to install all your gear in and around the plane, possibly go through a certain rev course...etcetcpp

I really don't think you can just stand next to the plane, put the mic as close as possible to engine and record some warm-up.

;)

For goodness sake, who would play the 13-inch thingy ....

Go play il2 on some closed pit serve at 1600x1200 - and I guarantee that after an hour you will be angry and frustrated to the max, because time and time again you will not be able to see that you're near an enemy who will about to shoot you down.

Please read THIS thread - its all about equal opportunities to spot the enemy!

Hello Oleg,

I would like to know if the rendering of the Map changes with the seasons(summer, autumn, winter,etc...).

I realize Oleg himself already answered this question very thoroughly... but I can't resist.

I have personally heard other aircraft passing by while I was in the air. This was in a small single-engine plane, wearing noise-cancellation headphones, and the other planes were two radial-engined warbirds passing by in formation about 100 yards away. And I'm a little hard of hearing too.

You're correct that you can't hear much detail about those other planes no matter how close they get, but it's certainly possible to hear if somebody's above and to the left, for example.

How many times and from how many people (including NOW the creator of the series) do you need to hear before you finally LISTEN?!

If it matters that much to you, then reduce your resolution!!

That's crazy talk:grin:

For thoose who is eager for details, here is Youss's (he is expirienced il2 pilot) first impressions from CoD:
http://www.sukhoi.ru/forum/showthread.php?t=66721

Use google translator please, as my english is not good enough to give you good translation of his exciting impressions, but hopefully I can clarify some things if google translator would be hard to understand.

Some features:
- "Press I button" doesnt start engine with "complex engine management on". Rotation starts and then stops very soon
- Bf-109 tends to roll during takeoff, no heavy yaw movements as in il2
- There is no runway as in IL2, there is just flat field surronded by hangars and other buildings. You can takeoff in any direction.
- lots of details on airfield makes it much easier to take of and landing as you feel speed better
- he was amazed with low altitude flight. Its feel of speed is much improved compared to IL2. Main thing is there is no flat surfaces. Whole ground is non flat, and his first thought was "how can I do emergency landing here?" He wasnt able to find any flat and big enough area.
- contacts visibility is very good if they are on same level as you. If you are above them you lost them immediately. Sea is very noisy because of waves and you cant see enemies. If contacts are above you they are blended with sky and its hard to find them again.
- on a high G (he did vertical loop) heads tends to move down and sight (aiming device) goes up on your screen, you have to correct your view direction.
- you need to turn on sight illumination, otherwise its hard to use it. Cabin lighting is amazing.
- bots behaviour is very diffrerent from IL2. He knows Il2 bots very well , but he wasnt able to shot down any one. They lowered from 4 km to sea level and still no one was heavily damaged
- he wasnt able to hit a spitfire with cannons, very very hard to aim. Guns fire slightly unsynchronously and BF-109 starts to yaw right and left. Hard to continue to fire for more than 2-4 rounds.
- even slight roll without proper work with pedals make airplane to slide and its your tracers start to drift away from sight center.
- smoke tracers are very very beautifull
- sound is amazing, huge "BAANG" on every cannon shot
- Airplane is very sluggish, stalls start immediately without any pre-stall shake
- on low speed airplane doesnt react on you controll. It seems that stall fighting is not possible anymore
- he wasnt able to hear spitfire on his 6. Once he saw a tracers he immediately did roll and jump into clouds
- once he jumped into clouds all windows become misted. When he goes from cloud it was hard to tell where is sky and where is ground, he had to wait some time whiled windows became unmisted
- he approached 2 spitfires on his way back. He missed in his first attack then he went up and after that he lost spitifires. He flew in that aread for a while but wasnt able to find them.
- airfield visibility on a shore is very good: big field surrounded with buildings
- use flaps you have to press "F" once and then hold it again until you satisfied with flaps angle
- he pressed "G"once to extend landing gear, but as it appeared later he failed with that
- there was no speed bar or other text on screen, neither for flaps nor for gears
- he landed without gears. Propeller was damaged and airplane was covered with cloud of dust once he stopped to slide
- after mission stats showed the Do-215 was shot down, 2 spitfires and one Bf-109. He had 3% fire accuracy for 1 spitfire and deliver 10% damage to him.
- His Bf-109 had 15% damage. There are no details how much of that damage came from enemies and how much from his langing or other wrong actions
- In "zoom view" you cant pan too much, just +- 20 degrees (maybe +- 30)

Thanks MoHax. Some very interesting (and exciting!) details there.

Don't worry about your translation - much better than Google ;)


---
"he wasnt able to hit a spitfire with cannons, very very hard to aim. Guns fire slightly unsynchronously and BF-109 starts to yaw right and left. Hard to continue to fire for more than 2-4 rounds."

Some people won't be happy! I can see the comments already :)

Most of monitors tooday are full hd 1920x1080 - reducing resolution down from its native one makes the image looking cra**y (in most cases) :(

@ MoHax:
Thanks for the link and for your translation of this very interesting thread!

Thx a lot MoHax !

Update from that thread:

- to extend gears you have to press "G" twice: one to make switch neutrall, and one to actually extend gears. Same for "F" for flaps: one to make switch neutrall and then hold it as long as you need.
- on full zoom view sight can go off screen due to head movement on high G
- there are two "zoom view" types. One simply moves camera closer to sight device, and another keeps camera where it was, but FOV becomes much narrower (real zoom).

Hi Luthier, this may have been covered before so if it has please ignore it.
Could you tell us if its Possible with Cliffs Of Dover to see damage on a ship after strafing, for example, is it possible whilst strafing a ship to maybe hit a magazine or orther explosives maybe even sink it if extremely lucky.

Many thanks.

Tree Luthier already commented on a similar question

Thanks for that, does that apply to strafing as well or just bomb hits?

Too bad you're not a real-life fighter pilot, because you'd be dead then, and we wouldn't have to listen to your whining.

Are you aware of the fact that the guy you are telling that he will be "angry and frustrated after playing an hour of Il-2" happens to be the one who made the sim for you, so you are actually able to fly it for half your life?

If you didn't have Il-2 you'd have no realistic combat air sim at all to bitch about. But obviously you'd find some other thing to whine about, probably gardening or basket-weaving.

Personally I think Oleg should fix the minimum resolution at 1280x1024 to get rid of most of this argument. Or make it a server setting if that's possible. That's the resolution I found began to cause dots to be more difficult to see and without splitting hairs its roughly the same physical size pixel on a typical size monitor as the now popular 1680x1050 or similar. 1900 gets more difficult I suppose but frankly, tough luck.

It's been years since lower resolution screens were available and who would want one in a modern game with it's more sophisticated graphics? Perhaps only those who need a false edge?

CoD will be a cutting edge game/simulation. You can't expect IL-2 or CoD to run well on a 1GHz single core pentium and over the years most people have found it necessary to upgrade their PC boxes just to be able to play even IL-2. Why not the monitor? What's the point of playing such great games if you dumb down 50% of the graphics?

If people are so passionate about their hobby they need to invest a little more in it and move on, it's not like it costs an arm and a leg, especially compared with a PC box upgrade. Otherwise, they are inevitably going to be left behind as the world of PC gaming moves on.

That wasn´t specified. But I think I can recall that it was stated long time ago that it would be possible to damage shipswith guns in CoD. We already have the feature to sink small ships with guns in Il2 so why shouldn´t they have it implanted it in CoD. Im optimistic in this regard.

The point stands, resolution is meaningless as there is no direct correlation between resolution and physical pixel size.

Lovely posting Hiro, thx!

And I can tell you it was a huge thrill back in 2001! - I followed Il-2 since the earliest screenies Oleg posted, and waiting for it was excruciating. Then, one fine day a gaming magazine came with a cd with the demo. THEN I had to borrow my brother's PC to even try it on a computer that could run it. And, then, the magic moment of sitting in the P-39 on a rainy Soviet airfield, about to take off and intercept a couple of Ju-88's.

After three failed take-off attempts (due to skidding, not gaining height, and slamming into the countryside because of torque) I was totally sweaty and giddy with excitement in the knowledge that finally a sim had arrived which approximated the feeling of WWII flight I had read so much about since early adolescence. Finally the time had come to kill the nazi enemy! - After which the Ju-88's unceremoniously dispatched me with a well-aimed burst from their rear gunners, of course. :)

If you are young and a student with lots of time on your side, then you are a lucky guy and I can only wish you a great coming-of-age with CoD. As a jaded older guy, with work and life digging into my gaming time, I can already feel now that it won't be the same as in 2001.

What saddens me is to read all the (obviously very young) whiners in this very forum. The ones that attract attention with rude criticism and then keep coming back and coming back and coming back for just one more inane worthless question again and again. It seems they feel absolutely no wonder and no excitement at soon being able to play a new-gen combat sim. Just incessant moaning over absolutely ridiculous little issues that only they themselves care about. Can I tell you a bigger problem than not having dynamic weather or a dynamic campaign or the right colour green fields or sufficient hedgerows or drivers at the wheels of ground vehicles at release? - Not having a combat flight sim at all! - And it is not as if it is some shabby Microsoft job in the offing. An obviously ground-breaking piece of programmiong is heading our way, so much is clear.

But, really, to be so young and then just be so overcome with anger and moaning and grief because of non-existent issues with a flight sim coming out... What gives? If they are not happy and bursting with excitement now, when will they ever be happy?

You don't get off that easily :)

How does the Spitfire landing compare with IL-2 please?

There will be no need to land your spitfire, 109s will do all the hard work for you, but please feel free to ask about bailing out procedures ;)

Well you 109 pilots would know all about bailing out ;)

Real Spits do tend to bounce a bit unless greased in. I've managed to land without bouncing many times but you've got to make sure your speed is close to a stall at the end of the flare. Any excess speed will get you airborn again.

Personally I think IL2 provides a very realistic touch down experience.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_3YuwerLCQ
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5TOTF9rdX2Y

I can give you one from personal experience. I was in a Lake Amphibian (a very noisy plane) with some excellent David Clarks (headsets) on and we had an F-18 on a low-level training route cross in front of us at the same altitude at a distance of half a mile. I heard him at the same time I saw him and it was loud. That said, that's the only time in 4,000 hours of flying that I heard something outside the airplane while airborne, but then I never made any gun runs on Heinkels and passing within fifty feet of them.

So yes, it's possible to hear things outside a plane in flight - but only really loud things.

luthier,

i know u have said distribution is up to the distributer, but surely you could raise concerns with UBI on behalf of your potential customers about the way this product is being rolled out in some parts of the world.

here in australia the UBI website directs you automatically to the AU region, where we are only able to buy CoD by download - no box or collectors' editions are being made available.

As you may have seen several people here have contacted UBI australia about this and have been told the product will not be shipped here.

the crime of it is the download does not take into account recent large rises in the price of the australian dollar, meaning the price we are being asked to pay for a download is almost equal to the cost of a boxed collectors' edition in europe. this is simply unfair.

the Il2 series has a large following in Australia, and I hope they will be treated properly.

:-D
like reading a book

Ah then you are familiar on a certain quote from that 1969 "Battle of Britain" movie, on a nice basket ball landing where the other pilots say to each other
"You can teach...*monkeys* to fly better than that! " :mrgreen:

It's not the bounce on landing that is a real problem when you're landing on non-airfield, it's the way the tailwheel will bounce madly on touching the ground, practically guaranteeing to dig your nose in :(
Heavier aircraft don't seem to have such a "bouncy" tail - I can land a 110 for example fairly easily on rough terrain, but single engines, almost never.
The main gear seems fine, but the tailwheel seems to have a jack-in-the-box built in.

Interesting , do you fly one ?