Friday 2010-07-23 Dev. update and Discussions
 

Folks,

Today is very small update (5 shots).
Luthier is in USA at the moment (urgent need). And I'm still in vacation.
Because of vacation I'll be absent next two weeks probably without Internet access.
Ilya (Luthier) will post updates next two weeks, if he will be able.

Anyway, there is something new to show:

nice air war scenes :-)

Nice tracers!! but must be nice see it in "real motion"... will we have a video soon?

Third post ...Yeah:cool:
Ok, I give in, whats the new bit ?

Thanks man! ;)

Thank you Oleg!

Nice pics!!

Love the smoke coming from the right-most plane in the last screenie. Looks exactly the way it should IMHO.

Great also to see the Taifun, tho I guess it won't be flyable.

Totally sweet Oleg, best shots yet. Enjoy your vacation. I pray Luthier's trip goes well.

Good level of damage! this mid He111 "aleron" looks nice! and this hurry is near of "half" plane... ;) Very good shots...
Thanks Oleg!

seems the game is quiet ready because you are doing "that much" vacation.
It's very disappointing to be lured with video thoughts of luthier and then getting a few shots without anything new in it.
These effects have to be shown by video. They look bad in a screenshot

oleg, thanks for the update !

the shredded hurricane looks very detailed (first picture), it will be a pleasure to try and land damaged aircraft like that with their altered flight models

the aircraft in flames in the 2e shot look very spectacular :)

have a good holiday !

nice tidbits
 

It's coming along. Maybe Oleg is taking two weeks vacation because things are coming together a bit more quickly now as release nears? The pressure is on Luthier now, boys!!
Flyby out

Give the guy a break already, you ingrate. He's away because of some sort of emergency.

Hello Oleg!

beautiful shots as always! I like the Bf 108 which was a beautiful aircraft!

Concerning the shot 2, I believe the transition flame/smoke is not really correct and that the red part of the flames are much too transparent: the fuel/oil/dope flames are much brighter light emitters than anything in their environments and their brightness obliterate the view whatever is just behind them. Flames never feel visually transparent (they are really, but your eyes will react to their brightness and could not discriminate any light coming across it if the said light is enormously less bright)
The flame shots of last week or the one before were better from this standpoint.

The smoke itself should at first either be impenetrable if a lot of oil/dope is involved (bad combustion = thick smoke), or can be quite transparent in case of pure fuel smoke (many stills and movies show fuel flames very bright and almost smokeless, this being due to extremely rapid vaporisation of fuel with speed/shell explosion and ensuing excellent combustion...usually some smoke appears quickly afterwards due to other components beginning burning)

Concerning shot 5, I see the tracers are there, but why do we have to see them as dashes like we are watching a movie?
The dashes appear because during the time the shutter of the camera is open the moving bright point that is the tracer goes a certain distance which depends only on the shutter open time and the bullet speed (this is a way to calculate the speed!); however in a simulation we are using directly our eyes which only see the bright points going away, like anybody having fired tracer rounds with a gun or a machine gun could assess!
This reminds me of the "camera" light reflection effects in Il2...we are so much used to watch WWII or any event for that matter across a camera that we forgot that the camera introduces artifacts and that the real world does not exactly appear that way to our eyes :-)
I would like to see only bright points for tracers...the "fin du fin" would be to be not able to see tracers from anywhere in front 180° of the bullet position, and more and more bright as you see them closer to their trajectory in the aft 180°...this being absolute real world behavior (the optics laws being what they are) the immersion would make a big leap forward...but I could understand simple bright points for the sake of simplicity!

JVM

Thanks Oleg.

Concerning shot 5, I see the tracers are there, but why do we have to see them as dashes like we are watching a movie?
The dashes appear because during the time the shutter of the camera is open the moving bright point that is the tracer goes a certain distance which depends only on the shutter open time and the bullet speed (this is a way to calculate the speed!); however in a simulation we are using directly our eyes which only see the bright points going away, like anybody having fired tracer rounds with a gun or a machine gun could assess!
This reminds me of the "camera" light reflection effects in Il2...we are so much used to watch WWII or any event for that matter across a camera that we forgot that the camera introduces artifacts and that the real world does not exactly appear that way to our eyes
I would like to see only bright points for tracers...the "fin du fin" would be to be not able to see tracers from anywhere in front 180° of the bullet position, and more and more bright as you see them closer to their trajectory in the aft 180°...this being absolute real world behavior (the optics laws being what they are) the immersion would make a big leap forward...but I could accept simple bright points for the sake of simplicity!

I wouldnt presume to lecture Oleg on camera optics and real world visual effects..... hes rather an expert on those subjects.... I would assume a screen shot is to all intents a "photo" hence the emulation of shutter speed on tracers, prop blur etc ........ I think it looks great ... well done Oleg and team ....

Well done Team !!!

Thanks..the damage looks great

Looking even better every time you show us something.
Thanks

That depends on the percentage of tracers in the amo, cadence and bullet speed.
I have seen machine gun and flab salvos from a >45° angle that appeared rather like a freakin' red laser beam - with a few interrupts.
You are right if you say the shallower the angle of the observer, the less blurry but dot like they appear.

Fire: I agree here, I just checked the pics of the Concorde crash in Paris.


BTT:

Great pics, thanks.

Well I think it looks excellent, but then I am capable of remembering that this is a game on a computer, unlike many contributors to this forum.

Thanks for the update, Oleg.

Great shots Oleg, thanks:grin:

One small observation - on a speeding plane I'd expect the flame to be more streamlined, hugging the wing surface and trailing out behind. I'm referring to the fiery bursts above the wing surface in the second shot. This probably wouldn't be as noticeable in a video though.

Very nice fire effects. It looks really hot.

Have a great holiday.

Cheers

I think it's difficult to make constructive criticisms of details like fire and tracers when the only evidence is a frozen moment in an ongoing action. The true extent of the visual accuracy will only be apparent when the game is on the hard drive of your own machine, and I'm willing to bet that the final effects will be several leaps beyond the already stunning ten-year-old sim that most of us know so well.

I don't even worry too much about the opening version of BoB which we are all looking forward to. As a constant 'flier' since Sturmovik became available I've always felt well-supported by the fact that updates, add-ons and corrections have been plentiful. Oleg Maddox and his team have proved their willingness to improve the sim in line with technological improvements in computing many times over - as well as keeping the game available to people with less than leading-edge PCs. This alone is a great achievement.

I'm really looking forward to jumping into Storm of War. I'll leave nit-picking until I have the finished article in my hand and I've tasted action.

Thanks for the updates Oleg, and I hope you return to us refreshed and raring to go.

<S>

Brando

@kgwanchos

I am not lecturing Oleg, I do not have this pretention...I explain for the people who are not aware of these aspects...the tracer issue was already there in Il2...the screen shot is not taken using a camera and should show the tracer for the dots they are, nothing else...but this is only my opinion!

@swiss

I agree but do not forget they were less tracers in WWII than nowadays (presumably tracers were more expensive?) and the rates of fire were also lower so the tracers were more clearly separated! Did you see this tracer firing directly IRL, without a camera intermediary?
At altitude you should not be able (or barely) to see tracers if fired toward you from in front of you (almost no light scattering compared to lower atmospheric layers close to the ground). In Il2 you see tracers from 10 km away like they were fireworks!

I understand however there may be compelling reasons to not being completely faithful to reality on this subject, but I prefer pointing it out now than after the game release..you never know!

Thanks for the update.
One note though: I guess explosions/fires are not final, right?
They don't look that good yet. Too red maybe? I don't know what seems wrong to me, but I think you should work more on them.

Once again, thanks!

Edit: Just saw that other guys mentioned fires as well.

The age old tracers debate :)

So long as they are useful to me as a simulator pilot I'm not going to complain too much. I hope everyone remembers that tracers look like lasers because we all saw StarWars at some point or another and StarWars is based on World War II air combat videos. Real laser beams travel at the speed of light in a continuous stream rather than defined pulses like a tracer (but unlike StarWars).

The pictures themselves look great. I think it's sometimes silly to complain about the visuals of an explosion until it's seen in motion. Often the various frames of an animation have an overall effect that cannot be seen from a single frame.

Thanks Oleg!

Amazing as always. Wishing you good luck in the final efforts of finishing!

S!

Gunny

This will be the greatest simulation- EVER!
 

Enjoy your vacation Oleg!

I hope Luthier is OK.

Great work!

IRL?

Yes, with my own eyes, no camera or night vision device.

Of course not.
Well I guess, in fact i cant tell - I've never been in this position I really never want to... ;)

My 45° agrees are based on 0° when directly behind/gunner sight.


Of course, but since we have no recon maps or radio contact to ground units, this is our only way of recon.



Check out Babylon 5.

This thing isn't out yet? http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v6...tstageleft.gif

A question, who can tell me please what are those four shining spots in the first picture?
Reflected light from He-111? Then from the body or the canopy?
I feel a little odd, I mean if it came from the body, the shining spots should be bigger than that have been shown, shouldn't they? Or if it came from the canopy, then where are their bodies? Vanished in the blue sky, because of their camouflage? Or they are just navigation lights? In a daytime in a white colour?
Those four shining spots really look a little odd for me at such a distance in the picture, just like four UFOs...

Well said Brando - I couldn't have put it any better!!

Oh dear
 

So many experts here!

Shouldn't the fire look like this....?

Those tracers they don't look right.....

I hope that this is not the finished product terrain, it doesn't look right.....

Even though it is usually specified that the updates are work in progress!

Well you guys have got plenty of choice in the cutting edge WW2 combat sim market to choose from, why not just vote with your feet and go and play the one of your choice, you know, the one that has got everything spot on.

Or how about all you experts build your own sim and publish a weekly update for us to take a look at? I am sure Oleg would give you a few pointers.

Leave the guys alone to get on with their work. I am just totally happy to see the progress and knowing that at some stage we will all be able to play this. Isn't that enough for you people?

Anyway, I got some drums to play.

"Look, I made a flight sim, here's some pics for you" (picture shows the most detailed model of Hawker Hurricane and He 111 ever modelled on a playable sim with very detailed damage).
Response: "Nonono, the fire looks bad, tracers too and oh man you gotta not release this with those crappy ground textures, so awful..."

Ehh...?:rolleyes:

Brando and the post I quoted have a point. I really can't see any other WWII flight sims this realistic and detailed in the near future, than this one. Yes, the fire may NOT be 100% correct, the groud textures may NOT be perfect etc. But, still it's WIP, as has been said 364757436 times already. Have a nice vacation Oleg, and do not worry, we are not THAT inpatient yet. Indeed, not yet.:-P

tracers:
http://i970.photobucket.com/albums/a...ow-tracers.jpg
maybe i need to see the video of the new tracers. anyway, are better than 1st tracers:-P
some tracers machine gun real life
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bx5aR...layer_embedded
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HCbDvc8-9g8

That's the point, they're not in real life, they're on film and that affects how they look.

Ah, Babylon5...watched the full set 15 times and not bored yet...

The tracers in photo 3 and 5 do look abit cartoonish, especially the closer they are to the shooter.

Nice pics, looks like its coming on good.

Thanks, Drumtastic. That's pretty much what I was going to say.

Oleg - ignore the know-it-alls! Personally I feel privileged just to be able to see these WOP updates. Thank you!

This. The pictures look excellent once again and I especially love the battle damage with the torn cloth. Awesome detail.

On tracers....didn't different countries use different tracers? I've never seen it modeled in a game that I can remember (did not play IL2 so can't comment there), but gun camera footage from German planes tends to show "smoke trails" on the tracers.

Here is a cool quote from 5ad.org:

"It was a common practice on fighter planes to load every 5th found with a tracer round to aid in aiming. That was a mistake. The tracers had different ballistics so (at long range) if your tracers were hitting the target, 80% of your rounds were missing. Worse yet, the tracers instantly told your enemy he was under fire and from which direction. Worst of all was the practice of loading a string of tracers at the end of the belt to tell you that you were out of ammo. That was definitely not something you wanted to tell the enemy. Units that stopped using tracers saw their success rate nearly double and their loss rate go down."

I'm not sure how one would lead another aircraft without tracers though, I know I couldn't lol.

Pie in the sky here, but one thing that would be a great addition in the sim is the option to load out and sight your guns to your own preference. I know some pilots wanted all of their bullets to pass through a single point at a given distance while others wanted a spread. Others used a combination. They also ran combinations of tracer, AP, and incendiary ronuds.

Anyway, GREAT photos, can't wait!

Splitter

This. The pictures look excellent once again and I especially love the battle damage with the torn cloth. Awesome detail.

On tracers....didn't different countries use different tracers? I've never seen it modeled in a game that I can remember (did not play IL2 so can't comment there), but gun camera footage from German planes tends to show "smoke trails" on the tracers.

Here is a cool quote from 5ad.org:

"It was a common practice on fighter planes to load every 5th found with a tracer round to aid in aiming. That was a mistake. The tracers had different ballistics so (at long range) if your tracers were hitting the target, 80% of your rounds were missing. Worse yet, the tracers instantly told your enemy he was under fire and from which direction. Worst of all was the practice of loading a string of tracers at the end of the belt to tell you that you were out of ammo. That was definitely not something you wanted to tell the enemy. Units that stopped using tracers saw their success rate nearly double and their loss rate go down."

I'm not sure how one would lead another aircraft without tracers though, I know I couldn't lol.

Pie in the sky here, but one thing that would be a great addition in the sim is the option to load out and sight your guns to your own preference. I know some pilots wanted all of their bullets to pass through a single point at a given distance while others wanted a spread. Others used a combination. They also ran combinations of tracer, AP, and incendiary ronuds.

Anyway, GREAT photos, can't wait!

Splitter

Best wishes to Luthier. I hope your coming back to the states isn't because of anything tremendously serious. I know it doesn't matter in the big scheme, but I'll think good thoughts.

Oleg, Dammit man. You're on VACATION. Screw us!!!!!! You should be tanning and spending valuable time with family.

That said. Thanks Oleg.

It's WIP - I bet this is just a basic tracer-test and colors are added later.

I can imagine they look rather nice in motion and even better: They vanish gradually! :grin:

Il-2 have´s diferent color tracers according to country and ammo since the original IL-2 release.
Green tracers from I-16 and I-15 have been an issue because they do look too much like taken from Star Wars. But nobody researched seriously if they look and are realistic, only judge if they like it or not, like here.
Still, tracers should be judged only from ingame video, not by screenshots, they can be very deceiving on an screenshot. And also they look very diferent when saw from a distance (like small lines moving fast) or from behind when you fire them (like dots), but it seems most people do not realize that.
Also, if tracers give away your position and all that, its another subject, they were used and were an standar part of the ammo loadout, so they should be there. Even if some pilots or squadron preferred not to use them. Or else provide data that the real policy of the RAF or Lufftwaffe was to not use tracers.

That's because this is a computer game, so the effect needs to be simulated. If you move a dot across a screen that updates 60x a second you will never achieve quite the same effect. In reality, however, our eyes don't see things in discrete steps, so fast moving lights are blurred.

Oh and GOA_Potenz, that's just plain rude btw.

Thanks for the shots Oleg, very good of you seeing as you are on vacation and should be taking a break from work! Remember, you can't please all the people all of the time! :)

on the note of tracers, if you've ever fired a heavy machine gun loaded with tracers (i have), they do indeed look like streaks to the human eye

the old ww2 clips dont do them justice they look different on camera than they do to the human eye, due to the way film captures light vs the way the human eye captures it

even when you just try to capture a picture of it the tracers dont appear as long in the picture as they do when you see them in person

you see long streaks this is because the bullets are moving so fast the bright lights will appear long and 'burn' the image into your cornea, although during bright light in the day the effect is alot more subdued, if there is heavy cloud cover out covering the sun or if its dusk / dawn the tracers will look alot longer and brighter, tracers never look like an individual point of light to the eye, sometimes on camera they will as there is time in between frames and the image is captured in frames wheras the eye captures it in continuous motion, they look like streaks, even when they bounce of rocks and stuff they look like cool "L" or "v" or "w" (if they skip) shapes, it would be cool if at night the images from the tracers would temporarily leave streaks on your screen as they will irl at night the light leaves streaks in your eyes like a camera flash will

Damage effects are awesome; tracer is mediocre, smoke and fire are crapper than I thought. Will I be flamed for saying this (no pun intended)? Yes, probably. Do I care? No.
Seriously, the smoke here looks worse than current Il-2 and much worse than RoF.
But that damage is just incredible. Hopefully all of the effects will be severely re-worked.

Why post for us to share our critique and ignore it? What a waste of time that'd be.

ufo's over 111's
 

Flak exploding I think (watch from close -up we can see some far-away flak smudges)

If what you have been seeing in the updates in the last few weeks looks to you like IL-2, then there is no hope for you ;)

The updates we have seen so far look many times better than IL2 IMHO! I've been playing IL2 since it was first released and I believe SoW will be a quantum leap forward in aerial combat sims when it is eventually on our machines.

I should had wrote small streaks then, instead of points. From behind that streaks from a tracer look shorter that from the side, motter of angle point of view. Bottom of the line, you are right.

Tracers, because of their speed, look like streaks when they are close and bright dots when they are further away.
It is hard to say what these tracers look like "in game" but I do think that they will look a lot better in motion.
I like how Oleg has the tracers slowly "fading" as they get further away to give the illusion of distance BUT tracers stay brightly lit during the entire time they burn.
Who is to say anything about it now as this is all work in progress anyway.
I can't wait to see a movie of what they look like and
I can't wait to see what the ricochets look like :)

thanks very much for good looking shots
enjoy the vacation
and luither enjoy the usa visit :grin:

The smoke looks like Il-2, the sky looks like Il-2, the clouds (when not lit to show the individual particles) look like Il-2 so I can see what he's saying. Of course, I can see all these features being haveily tweaked, but it's not really 2010 standard. I have full faith in the team, but we need to see this in video form to get a real grasp of it.
But really I can see so many things that are similar to Il-2; smoke and fire that just don't look right (I have seen lots of WW2 guncam footage, a fair amount in colour, and the smoke doesn't look like this, and the fire in the hurricane pic just looks odd) so really I can see that certain features are like they have been regurgetated from Il-2. Take the tracer, the tracer from the .303's that I've seen in guncam videos has had smoke-trails behind the burning tracer. This looks a bit like Il-2's lasers...

But really people take these comments too seriously; they are just small aspects of the game, and it'd be pages of essays to concentrate on each individual amazing aspect.

Err... The closest thing we have to 2010 standard for flightsims is Lock-on Flaming Cliffs 2 and Rise of Flight - not a very large sample.

Just have faith. It will appear over-saturated - because that is what Oleg does. It will come out with a few details looking a bit like Il-2 - because the project is being rushed a little. It will be astounding - because that is what Oleg does. Finally, it will be developed further (by Oleg or 3rd parties).

So, yes, I take your comments far too seriously (especially as the tracers last week were dots and now they've become lines). Very silly of my really.

IL-2 was done very well, to the point that we all still fly it. I really don't expect SOW to look that much different from what was very much, near perfection. It certainly will look better in the end, just stop the critique of every up-date, and say thank you for a change of pace.:)

I rather guess these are placeholders for the smokepuffs from bullets penetrating the aircraft skin, just like the ones present in IL2.

I see some of you here are really acting like the "vilage idiot" with your rude coments. Is because of this kind of morons, Oleg stoped being directly involved with the IL-2 community. I think you guys need to have a good look in the mirror and stay away from this forum for a while. You are not helping one bit.:evil:

Remember how the original IL-2 development shots looked like?

http://www.combatsim.com/memb123/htm/jan99/IL-2.htm
http://www.combatsim.com/memb123/htm/jan99/IL-2b.htm

Totally different than the actual release ;)

Right words.

I like your explanation...I had forgotten of the retinal persistence consequences!

JV

I'd love to see videos too but the screenshots are showing more and more cool stuff! Sure, there are things that need tweaking and I'm sure they will be tweaked. Off course it's good with CONSTRUCTIVE criticism, but whining and rudeness, perhaps not as much...

Also, for every unhappy poster I bet there's 10 (100?) that likes what they see but won't comment but simply move on. I know, I've done it often enough... Trying to redeem that now! :)

I'm really excited at the level of detail of the aircrew and I sure hope we'll see a video of that soon!

Hey everybody, greetings from sunny jetlagged California!

Our tracers are perfect. End of discussion.

We can finetune thickness - color - transparency - luminosity, but in theory ours are the most perfect true to life tracers ever modeled anywhere. Tracers in real life look like that, like straight dashes of uniform thickness. There's a spot at the tail end of a bullet that emits plasma. It doesn't fade out towards the end. It doesn't get thinner. It doesn't wiggle. Sperm-style tracers you're used to from other video games are Hollywood.

We have that emitter that draws out a line of specific length based on tracer speed and "exposure". The tracer shots you see were not taken in pause, because in pause our tracer turns into a dot - those mysterious white dots in the first shot are stopped tracers in pause.


Our fire and smoke are extremely WIP. Everyone hates them here even more than you guys hate them. Calm down and trust us a little bit.


Finally, the surprise from last week is failing to materialize. We were going to release some PSDs to give the skin makers an early start, and maybe even team up with you guys to make some historical skins or something. But we hit a little snag because, as it turns out, you can't very well make skins with just a PSD, and we can't very well release our plane models with the skins. We need to figure this out, hopefully very soon.

Thanks for the explanation on the tracers. That sounds positively great in terms of how they are being done. If I understand correctly the part about the exposure has to do with lighting conditions at the time? So tracers will appear differently at night or under a cloud as opposed to in direct sunlight? Sounds interesting in my head anyways :)

Couldn't agree more. Let's not forget that IL-2 is almost 9 years old! And graphically still puts many new games to shame.

That's maybe true but why don't you think further.
With the graphics we have seen in the last updates, how can these "put many new games to shame" in 2020.

I would say, the graphics of SoW BoB are nearly ok for 2010/2011 but not for much longer.

Don't always compare to the previous game. Compare it to what is standard.

The "previous game" [IL-2] IS the standard. When SoW is released IT will be the standard. Before IL-2 was released CFS-2 WAS the standard. But only by comparison. It still puzzles me that with the resources and talent at Microsoft they can't even hope to compete with a relatively small team from Russia.

I do not mean comparing it to only one game that contains some of all aspects but to the several parts (graphic, sound, physics) of other games that built the new standard where they are better than others.

I would really like to know how many people are working on SoW BoB

It is like so many things when people have too much money. Money isn't ever the most important ingredient... it's committment.

Think about all the very excellent development systems, like Foxpro,dbase,etc. that were bought out by companies with the big bucks.

Foxpro is the only one left, but MSFT hasn't done anything with it compared to when it was in the hands of the original developers. Foxpro was hot, and the developers were always doing new things. I just read where MSFT will not support it past 2015. Kinda sounds like the death bells to me.

Same with the MSFT combat flight series. They had a winner in CFS2 that was the benchmark sim. I remember when Sim-outhouse and netwings had enormous numbers of users for CFS2 and the IL2 had a squeaky little corner on the site (no users).

CFS2 was the big dog until MSFT hired the ferrets from Red Baron to update the sim. What a debaucle. They tried to rework the sim and screwed the pooch. If they had just improved what they had it would have still been a contender as a favorite. The very best mission builder tools of any WW2 combat sims, the CFS2 and Jane's ww2 FIGHTERS.

Even today the CFS2 has the best mission builder.

I am hoping BOB SOW could very well take us into a new era of mission builders. Two very most important tools for Offline users are the mission builder and high standards of AI performance.

Correct!
And we all know that everything is still WiP and we just add our point of view, based on what we see.

We are all sure that final release won't fail us. We trust in Oleg & Co!!!

Great to read this Ilya (especially the part about fire and smoke ;-))!

With regards to the skins, I guess that there's no hurry, since you'll see thousands of skins coming the moment people will be able to model them through the game (some beta or even the final release).
No need to worry about this ;-)

I agree totally about the builder tool's in those sims, It's very important to get it right in SOW...I can't wait to see what we got, I'm sure that we will pleased

Oleg, Ilya, thanks for the updates!

Hope Oleg is resting up so he can travel to U.K. to show SoW here:
http://www.flightsimulatorshow.com/

!! :D

now that would be the place to show off SOW :)...and im going too .

Wow guys- the damage modelling is looking brilliant. The internal structure of the Hurricane is shown in exquisite detail- i'm very keen to see what effect such damage has on the flying characteristics. I assume it will be critical to keep the airspeed down to decrease the risk of more canvas peeling off and control cables gradually being stretched to breaking point?
These graphics are already so far ahead of Il2- the potential for future development looks extraordinary.
One question about the fires- i realise they are WIP, but will they be true light objects, able to cast highlights on objects and create shadows?
I am imagining being able to create evening/low light scenes with dramatic lighting effects being created by a burning plane and the flames illuminating the pilot and other objects around them.

Hey! Quit looking at the forum and get the hell back to vacation! (that way you can get the hell back to work) and have fun! That's an order soldier!

yeah it's hard to tell if it's tracers in the distance (evenly spaced) or glints off aircraft. I don't think all three planes would glint at the same time so maybe it's tracers.

It'd be cool if you could see occasional glints from distant aircraft if you happen to be looking in the right direction. IRL unless your eye is focused at correct distance air craft in the air are hard to spot. Glints would help greatly in this regard. I'd like it to be an occasional glint rather than a constant glow as in the screenshot though.

Yet you write that after you wrote the post above it. :rolleyes:

This is the greatest thing I have heard in some time.
Will this sort of "motion blur" be used for other objects as well.
I was always wondering if BoB would have bullets frozen in mid flight during a pause.
You guys are right on top of it :)

It's just an excellent place to burn money elsewhere needed - even if some your potential customers are there, the related sales will never make up for it.

my$.02

the spots are paused tracers

@ Oleg or Luthier

Do the bullet casings seen in the fith image damage other planes when hitting them?

SoW will put new standards in sim industry.

Graphics in engine based on real physics laws comparing to most other games in the world, that claimed themselves ultrarealistic.
Graphics optimized for the great amount of AI units operating in air and on the ground sea on a large square....

Graphics in engine is scalable from space to the ground and looks everywhere perfect... probably no one engine can performs these conditions for that day. And we should remember that it is flight sim, but not the other genre game!


Aircarft, ground units - you can't see more precise in any other game now and probably in future. You may see with more polygons and more greater size of textures.... and thinking then it looks better, but it will be wrong opinion....because all these models are not precise.... and mimics real just in some part... I don't count other things that NOBODY MODELING....or doing it wrong or replacing by wrong methods advertithing then that it is right and user then thinking the same, if he isn't experienced in real laws of physics, etc...


Also, from the beginning the first sim is a base for the following series
with additions of new features... using experience of own IL-2 and others , including suggestions of players, real pilots from around the world...


In Flight sims Il-2 is still world standard for the combat flight sims. Standard with engine which is in modification even now.
Standards of Il-2 we may see in many-many other new games that wer coming more later. Ideas that were in Il-2 now using a lot of developers....

Still Il-2 offers so much that no one can offer really for these that love WWII aaviation.
And repeat it for others would be really too hard if really possible.


Still all new developers try to compare own producs with Il-2.... and then anyway users in most cases come back to Il-2....


I try to keep silence about what we will offer with the release and then after.... Becasue our ideas, my personal ideas a lot of others simply copying.... Even some time copy my speeches with users.... however I'm speaking to users on the same level and never tell that I'm (or we) a star(s)....

We simply doing our work.

Ilya, as american, can traslate my thoughs better...
I'm in vacation.

Stop (Profanity will get you banned) stirring :rolleyes:

different does not always mean better
i hope you two can never get in the sow code :evil:

Oleg, I have great respect for you , and great trust SOW will be above and beyond all expectations.

CHEERS!!! No hurry, and enjoy your vacation.

AF

I hope you're right Oleg and Luthier that SoW BoB will be perfect, I'll take you by your words.

Anyway a video of effects would be great to see.

+1

And hat goes off for your patience to comment on these forums over and over and over again to calm the most neurotic feature critics down that 'it's still WIP and will be a jaw dropper when released' even though you have to do it with almost every release of new shots.

I find your lack of faith disturbing. The success and long life of IL2 was based on quality that re-defined the genre combined with continuous development and I would be surprised if this time around the team would just release some quick & dirty one for the hell of it. Ofcourse it won't be perfect as none of the sims ever are with our puny CPU resources to simulate just a fraction of attributes affecting the universe but it for sure will be a quantum leap of what we've seen so far.

Oleg & Co

Great update! I am among the mostly silent majority who eagerly waits until Friday to see the updates, but rarely posts. I've been around a long time, and remember well the beta version of IL-2 Sturmovik that was sent by Blue Byte (this was before Ubi took over) to me for review. The game in that form was better than any WW2 Flight Sim I had ever played, and it only got better. I expect, and have faith :) that SOW will be just as ground breaking.

Thanks again, and enjoy your time off.

PVT.Roger

You are all doing a terrific job, Oleg.
I know I'm not the only one that thinks that Storm of War will put to shame every other air combat simulator out there, just like IL2 did back in its day (it's still the best thing out there in my humble opinion).

Enjoy your vacations and keep up the good work!

Oleg and Luthier, thanks for the updates and the comments, despite you being both on travel. It's much appreciated. It all looks and sounds great -- I am sure SoW BoB will be a combat sim masterpiece.

i post again.


Do the bullet cases damage other planes by hitting them?

Oleg and Luthier

Thx, looking good and will look even better when finished, as we all know.


That u where planing to release skins templates is/where indeed a big supries, and im not even a skinner. Even though it didnt work out that way i prefere to read beween the lines and smile at what that means looking at the big picture. ;)

S!

Thanks for the update. Read thru the thread and it cleared up some things. Lot of WIP there but also if you look closer, a LOT more is there to be discovered. Enjoy the vacation Oleg and waiting for the next week's update :)

Abbeville Boy. You should keep that comment to yourself. Potenz and others have made excellent work on improving IL-2 effects and those new ones are far better than originals, period. Without Team Daidalos/Oleg IL2 would be dead as it has not offered anything new in years..Now it still does with official updates. Have a nice weekend.

Why? Should they? Did they? What kind of damage? Do you have proof?

Other than possible take a chip out of a wood prop, I can only think of jammed cowl flaps, or maybe reduce cooling(because they block the radiator).




A *ping* sound when they hit your aircraft would be quite cool though.

I doubt that.


They have a very low mass.

The chance that they have an effect in real life are so minimal, that I doubt they have modeled it in a simulation.

S!

Swiss, hitting a shell case at speeds above 300km/h can make more damage than just a ping ;) If you drive a car at 80km/h and a small piece of rock hits your window or paint job there is usually some damage. And we talk about smaller pieces and less speed. So I would figure flying through a cloud of shell casings is not very desireable. But again modeling this..hmm..not adding anything to the sim.

but when a whole load of shell castings hits the prop i think that has a huge effect on it.

If the cases are from your wingman, the have pretty much the same, if you hit your enemy's during a head on - well...

Don't know.
If they indeed caused damage there would be reports about it.
Are there? :confused:

Stop thinking and bring proof, otherwise STFU.

BTW: "Castings" would really cause some bad ass damage, lol.