Mods discussion, links, etc
 

I see Nearmiss has posted a sticky saying that discussion of mods is now permitted on this forum. Can I take it that it is ok to post links to the mod sites themselves? If so, another sticky with the leading ones (Ultrapack, SAS etc) would be useful.

As Nearmiss says, we shouldn't misuse this so can I make a personal request that everyone tries to avoid negative comments on mod pack FMs etc, and on all the other issues that have led to so much acrimony. Regardless of past issues, 'Classic' IL-2 modding is here to stay, and shows real signs of reaching a more stable and consistent state. Cliffs of Dover seems to have been designed right from the start to be more 'open', so the difference between 'stock' and 'mods' becomes largely an online server issue, rather than anything more fundamental. I think all this suggests that we can put past debates behind us, and work towards producing better sims.

I guess, they are just too lazy to divide this topic between IL-2 and CoD. A bad choise IMHO.

Nothing lazy about it.

There is a sticky thread saying the same thing on the BOB COD and the IL2 Sturmovik forums respectively.

----------------------------------

At this point there is no restriction on links, which may change.

----------------------------------

Abuses--- well, we don't at this point know how creative abusers can be.

So, this is a wait and observe thing.

Ok, lets start with a couple of obvious links:

UltraPack: http://ultrapack.il2war.com/index.php
The most popular online mod pack - some rather large downloads, and they are just about to release version 3.0, so you may do better to wait for that, rather than downloading the current version.

SAS: http://www.sas1946.com/main/index.php
The site of chouce for the majority of modders, these days. They have their own Modactivator for custom mod setups - preferable if you only want to install a few mods, or like to tinker.

Both sites expect you to have at least at some technical competence regarding computers, and SAS can be a bit snappy at newcomers asking questions that have already been answered - search first. And don't spam the forums with requests to make this or that mod, or asking 'when it will be ready' - the answer is always going to be 'when it is done'.

Even if you aren't actually interested in installing mods yourself, I'd take a look at some of the things that SAS have done - helicopters, post-war jets etc. Most of their current mods will be going into the new UltraPack version too.

Well,I will post some videos of very violent modding,quite revolutionary.Thought most of those mods are nearly senseless for a WWII sim.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iJnRx...rec_grec_index

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

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7-bia...eature=related

I just never get it

The dramatic music and no aircraft sounds.

Sorry, but all the drama I get on the Tele...is beyond my saturation level.

Great ! Here is a link to Claymore's rework of 3D and cockpits of the Fw190s.

They should be implemented in UP3.0 I think.

External 3D :

http://www.checksix-forums.com/showthread.php?t=161614

Cockpits :

http://www.checksix-forums.com/showthread.php?t=156711

You'll like the details he put in all the aircrafts ! With nearly everything working inside ! I'm amazed at what he did.

This is wonderful, I think this is one of the ways to close the gap between the communities.

I think most people want mods, if implemented correctly. Everyone here's happy with the mods that were included with 4.09/4.10, they were just being called mods until absorbed in the official patches.

Imagine everyone working together to create a unified package with the least amount of bugs, solidifying IL2's name for the many years to come. This could be a great way of advertising CoD as well, if people see how dedicated and professional modding is done on this platform. It could even attract new technologies for upgrading the IL2 engine that were unknown in the past. And it's not going to harm CoD, because that's the future. If 1C embraces all the talent that currently works on IL2, for sure the talent will stay for CoD!

I can dream, can I? :-)

And let us not forget HSFX

HSFX -> More geared for SEOW
UP (contains content from SAS, HSFX) -> More geared for public dogfight servers

oh... we are now allowed by gOD to talk about mods...


pfff...

BTW,I saw the planes and etc at SAS and many looked great!
Are they going to be included?

Here is the current list of mods scheduled to be included in UP 3.0:

http://ultrapack.il2war.com/index.php/topic,3892.0.html

Aviar

That UP link does not work for me. Try this one:

http://ultrapack.il2war.com/index.php

Aviar

Thankyou 1C for allowing MOD disussion here. I know this issue has been a controversial one. I believe that the overwhelming majority of mod-makers only intend to enhance & improve the wonderful IL-2 Sturmovik game. There are now many fine mods that improve the game immersion even further. What was a WW2 combat flight simulator is now a WW1, WW2, Korean War, Vietnam War simulator.

+1! Smart decision, more brains, more improvements, ideias...

Does this mean that TD are going to stop changing the codes just to throw a spanner in the works of the modders? I had heard that 4.11 was especially aiming to do this.
Of course I could be imagining it all....it just seems that way sometimes... :cool:

UP 3.0 is going to be amazing ! Graf Zepelin and Peter Strasser CV ! Plus new IJN light CV !

Ar196 torp !

I can already imagine alternate history scenario with IJN and KM together in the Pacific fighting against Anglo-american CV task forces ! SOOO GREAT !

And +1 with fabianfred : PLEASE make 4.11 compatible with other mod packs so we can just enjoy the best of both world ! It would be so great and would avoid Mod makers to stay in older version to continue their dev.

I agree. The huge list of servers on hyperlobby (most sparsely populated or totally empty) and with incompatible requirements (4.09 or 4.10.1, HSFX 5 with or without expert mode, UP2.01 with or without MDS, etc.) is a pain in the whatchamacallit. There's even a server still running 4.08! Constantly switching folders or executables for the right server is no fun at all. And with the release of UP 3.0 it will only get worse until all 2.01 servers have switched.

Instead of widening the canyon, I vote for a more "holistic approach" and hopefully one day we'll have a true unified package, even if it means bending Oleg's rules. For example: let's loosen the polygon/texture size restriction for cockpits and models. We're almost halfway 2012 and shouldn't bother with the fps on ancient systems. In the future, if someone's upset he can't enjoy the the high frame rates of the previous patch he might as well buy a new videocard or CPU. Hardware is cheaper than ever.

Fantasy repaints and frankenstuff = lame!

I really don't understand all the fuzz about mod packs.
Only real benefit is the different sound IMHO.

1. Maps
2. effects
3. sounds

make for alot of improvements

Actually, it looks as if UltraPack has already decided to split from DT. This is what StG77_HaDeS posted on the UP site:

"UP 3.0 and any future ones will be incompatible with TD's version of game. It is possible to include any interested features and/or planes but not everything like we did in 4.10.1m
The reason behind this is that we don't have the required time to re-write and/or update our addons each time TD wants to break compatibility with the "mods".
And the biggest reason is that UP will have features like AI triggers, the Jet Era, sniper gunners advanced fix, dynamic weather, more advanced Flight Model and advanced Radar (possibly with doppler effect) in the future, etc... Things that TD's version of game doesn't have and possibly never will. Even if this will be possible it will require years, just remember how it took to release the 4.10m, buggy (around 100 serious bugs) and without many features that has been announced.
And, as i say, the choice is yours. You can play whatever version you like, "stock", UP or any other pack."


http://ultrapack.il2war.com/index.ph...,3898.105.html


Aviar

hi all i can not find a MODS FOLDER in 4.10.1:( i have seen it before in 4.09

Of course it is only the imagination of a few paranoid guys, because it is simply not true. Thats just a bad talking. :evil:
If we change something on the code or the game anyway, it is for our own development reasons only and I find it really irritating, that anyone might get angry about it. :(

Which hopefully means, that they stop to include DT's work without any asking. I'd really like to see them going their own way. :rolleyes:

And as Aviar posted, it makes sense.

Even I was against soundmods but recently with HSFX 5 it seems that the Tiger sound mod really is a step forward, original sound cannot compete in any way anymore, and I refuse to accept the old. I posted a great idea and some people agree with me, that a folder with custom sounds to be parsed by the system, could be a nice alternative for anyone who wants compatibility online and still enjoy the sounds they want. Never any reaction to it. "Can't be done" doesn't exist, it's all about the effort. Never forget why the game was hacked in the first place. And "we" are not interested in Oleg's personal preference, he once wrote he very much liked the sounds as they were, well ... that's all fine and dandy, but it doesn't explain the energy that has been put in to replace them all. Almost every aspect of IL2 has evolved since 2001, but the last real change with the sounds occurred with the introduction of Forgotten Battles, 2003. And the game was hacked in 2006. And all this time it "seems" both Maddox Games and TD never wanted to listen to the community. Wouldn't be nice if the sound system got an overhaul for a change? If people want to hear Star Wars lasers or maybe the knights who say NI instead of guns, it's their preference. Create a folder where people can dump their own samples and if there aren't any, you hear stock. Couldn't affect online if done properly.

I don't agree with your statement but I don't have the time left to elaborate right now. TD's work is as much important as the work done by other teams/modders. I very much respect your work as I do the things done by other people. "We" don't want two different games, "we" want the best of all. Communication is the key, and I feel 1C/Maddox Games finally has given us a way to close the gap. Wouldn't it be nice if everyone puts away past differences and see the broader picture?

Unfortunately the picture is much broader than you think. No time to eloborate either.

Do you think this will make mods more probably to be incorporated into IL2 patches?

I think any past bad feelings should be dropped if we want this thread to work

anyway .. I want WWI aircraft in IL-2 engine .. know it can be done effectively because Oleg told me so :cool:

I *know* it would breath some fresh air into the sim, would be popular with 1000s of pilots .. there is some work being done at SAS .. just trying to get interest going where ever I can ;)

Former ( and the few current ) Red Baron 3D players would love it, many came into IL-2 over the last 2 years hoping WWI in IL-2 would get done, and there are many in RoF displeased with some gameplay values .. there isn't even a good way to score games in RoF !

The shitty franken-stuff; models, stolen from other games; dubious FM changes; Grummann-related stuff (no matter how high quality it is); non-WWII related stuff, etc. - definitely NOT.

As for the high quality models, well thought and well designed code changes, well documented and well tested FM changes, quality maps and other high quality stuff - anyone could add this before without a problem by contacting DT and will be able do this in future.

So, basically, the changes in rules of this forum have nothing to do with DT or 1C:MG vision of the further game development.

You do have a very strong point there, SaQson. All the material should at least fit the minimum quality standard. The nice B24 cockpit is pleasing to see but horrible when you switch on the instrument lights. The B17 cockpit has a lot of the textures missing. Most four-engined planes have and no (working) gauges for engines 3 & 4, a lot of gunner positions are borrowed from the B25, etc.

And of course NG related stuff is always out of the question.

Amazing what people read when they genuinely want to believe someone's out for their fur. Gotta love that paranoia. :roll:

Look, I don't give a damn about what you do in your freetime. But it was you who read a lot of things into SaQSon's statement, none of which are real except in your overly active imagination (although I know where the thought comes from - and I find that highly amusing). All he did was to outline (again) the basic rules for cooperation with TD, which have been there since TD became active BTW, except that he didn't bother with diplomacy. But that should not surprise anyone.

Le0ne, frankly I really do not believe, I give a sh.t about you, or Hades (whomever that is) or your lame opinions.

That was clearly a personal oppinion of SaQSon.

EDIT: A typical one. :D

I am for honesty and truth. Even if it hurts. :rolleyes:

...and why not?...why not make IL2 1956?...or IL2 1966?...or even IL2 1916?...

The truth is that, all the available IL-2 ModPacks give an unfinished/experimental/buggy/hobby/arcade feeling to IL-2. And this becomes more apparent the more you play them.

There isn't a single ModPack out there, that is conservative, that acts "like" an official patch. Improving/adding only what is really needed and only with very HQ stuff.

Instead all the ModPacks have loads of unnecessary changes that mess up the game and destroy the good old IL-2 feeling that we are all used to, while also introducing rookie bugs and incompatibilities.

I think that if there was a more serious patch-like-modpack, the situation would be better. But there is not.

However, I must tell the truth, there is some great and very polished mod content out there, that is a shame it is not official. But imo they are the exception and minority.

Because, a) there are lots of stuff still left out for the WWII; b) no one yet did a good enough (at least, comparable to the existing WWII subjects) simulation for the jet engines and avionics, sub- and supersonic FM, helicopter FM and so on. Who's going to do that? DT? Doubt it. Plus, how many planes for this era available ATM? One or two? What about ground units for the period? And so on. Without all that the 1956-66 planes are out of place in the IL-2 game.

Same questions, as above, plus there is already ROF, which is much better, then anything, modders or DT can suggest in this area.

This place is already hot. Just a few minutes after birth already 41 post. Better have thick skin.

Here's a simple solution! If you don't want it don't download it! :D UP, HSFX breathed a new life into this game, before TD was set up I believe, If somebody wants to make a mod about 1966 let them, don't like it don't get it and don't complain that it exists in the first place. UP is pretty well polished and doesnt at all feel like an arcade experience

Absolutely. Who says, they can not? If someone wants 1956, or 1966, or 2366 martian frankenstein invasion - the can have it all in their mods. But not in the official add-on. That's the point of this discussion.

look .. UP 2.01 and it's switchers allow 4.09m , 4.10m (rarely used now of course) and 4.101 .. I updated to 4.10 then 4.101 through the UP updater .. it was painless

yes, most servers are empty .. so what ? .. most of the ACTIVE dogfight servers are either 2.01 (with or without Zuti MDS 1.13 ) or 4.101 ..same with coop..

4.101 is great .. UP 2.01 is great .. both have things about them that are different ..

why fight or argue ? .. UP 2.01 has a 4.09m base .. so much credit goes to TD or UP 2.01 could not be what it is .. UP 3.0 will need to have ability to switch, with JSGME, to 4.101 .. because that is what the players want .. not having to switch between 2 or more installs to play online

you can argue that UP is inaccurate or incomplete in some respects .. you can argue that 4.101 is inaccurate in perhaps fewer respects and definitely that it does not have the variety / number of plane types or easy to enable options

1C was not perfect, TD is not perfect, the sim IL-2 1946 is not perfect .. TD, UP and SAS and smaller mod groups are all trying to improve IL-2 1946 with feedback from the players .. ( AAS is a joke, the guy running that does not even fly IL-2 and is developing a WWI sim based on Virtual Simulator / hangsim engine )

The game is made better by all of you .. rather than argue over who is *better* .. recognize the good contributions each group has made and be happy the options are for each to play the version(s) they want to play .. they are not mutually exclusive

In my opinion, it is not a problem to have choice between different mod packs (DT, UP, SAS, etc...) since all are realised under SFS format and, at this level, a pack has not an advantage with regard to the other.
So, choice between one pack with regard to others will be done by the content and by the quality of it. I think, this kind of competition is very clean and, at least, the choice (the "winner") will be done by users. We are very closed to basic situations of real life and for me, it is a good point.

And since there are many and enough competitioners out there, DT could maybe take care of improving the core of the game and bring it to 2011 game standarts(Multicore, 4GB+ RAM, etc.).

This would be a sort of coorperation that would benefit the entire comunity.

Well, they're not alone. Remember Flakiten's flares ? And that's not the only one case.

Me too, see above. :)

Great idea, Emil.
In my opinion, it is probably more difficult as adding new maps, new planes, change an "0" by an "O" for button file, change some java class to add rew effect, etc..
But since we have developpers in front of us and not simple irresponsible modders, these points will increase significantly FB in a good direction...

???

After reading some of the earlier posts I think I must post an apology for having spent the morning acting as an "irresponsible modder". I'm sorry this is all I have to show for it.

http://i239.photobucket.com/albums/f.../image13-2.jpg

List, please. Otherwise - you are a liar.

Sorry but this is absurd.

Modders just mod on top of the official stock game. Have they asked permission to Oleg and 1C to do so? well, no.

Why? Because it was supposed to be an action of love towards the game, not vandalism (as some seem to see it). All this of course without any aim of profit. Also to mod is just a customization of the game. Everybody takes for granted and knows the stock game is what allows MODS to exist (let us put aside the guys that everywhere exist and like to just stirr conflict, those shouldn't count in this discussion).

So my question is: are you modders or are you the official game? Begging for permissions reminds me some petty modders. I understand the wish of a respectfull use (most reasonable people does follow such use).

In any case, if you are official, you are BEYOND and ABOVE that discourse. You are the CORE of IL2 and as such, you'll be probably modded as were other parts of the game. If you see it as disrespect, I think you are on the wrong track.

Don't worry. Waiting for some PM's with answers to my questions.

DT has licensing permissions with IL2 developer to make changes throughout the entire IL2 application source code. That means DT updates in every situation I am aware have also made changes in the programming, not just applying some new aircraft, object or editing some other graphic elements.

The DT updated versions should be looked upon as the CORE IL2 application, because core changes are usually part of the updates. Therefore, other 3rd party mods should be installed after DT updates and configured accordingly.

Applying mods directly to the IL2 1946 pre-DT updates might work and may never be a problem, that is dependent upon the type of mod I suggest.

It is important to understand the above distinction, and not to look on the TD as just another mod.

In practical terms... TD updated versions of IL2 are the IL2 application.

Nice, very nice. I congratulate you on a great looking project!

I am glad we agree, that is exactly what I mean :)

OK, Nearmiss, I understand your definition between you and modders, but it is just definition and not what is done on FB...

Modding is not limited to change aircraft, maps, effects but also modding change IL2 core by adding/modifying new java class and sometimes new dlls... I suppose, as an example, that adding triggers, AI visibility,… are done by this way.

For me, distinctions are not so evident and in any case, do not reflect present situation.

I don't disagree with what you are saying, because there are competent mod programmers.

I'm saying for best course of action to avoid issues the TD versions are the authorized licensed versions. That always provides a starting basis that will have consistency as updating progresses.

I wouldn't dispute other mod programmers ability to work with the core programming. I'm just saying for good communication and less problems in working with modified versions of the original IL2 the TD is licensed by developer to work with core (no one else is, that I know of).

If users stick with TD updated versions as core then 3rd party modifications would work appropriately, if the 3rd party developers make sure their mods work with the respective authorized updated versions of IL2 (*TD updated versions).

It would be terrible for users to try to work around all the different modified versions of Il2 that would be available otherwise.

There has to be some basis for the core application that is maintained consistently and competently as IL2 is updated and modified, which was the original developer's reasoning for licensing permissions to TD.

The TD isn't compensated for their work, and I'm sure if a core or update code change by a non-TD member shares his/her work it would be scrutinized by TD and applied to updates.

No one or group of persons has a corner on good ideas... just not possible.

IDK if IL2 engine can be hacked (that's a strong,nearly perjorative word here,sorry) to the point that Mach 1 and 2 jets,heat and radar seeking missiles and countermeasures can be implemented on the game without making all of them cheesy.

Great model!I hope it can be used by TD,as I saw some awesome Graf Zeppelin and Aquila models in SAS that could make it's way to 4.11?:rolleyes:

And I know what is "no way" to be ingame.

So, you say, you put forth an acquisition on public without having any proof, but a foul rumor? How nice of you...

Sorry, but in game models, textures, or program code is an intellectual property of it's developers, or respective copyright owners. Distributing them, or portions of them in a projects, other, then original one without original copyright owner permission is illegal in EU, North America and most of the CIS countries (at least).
1C might had reasons not to pursue the violators, DT might have reasons to do so.

I am a little bit surprised by the logic and the purpose:
1) a new topic on 1C forum is open to discuss mod,
2) after 4 or 5 pages, we are at level of menace ...

?????
Strange to go in this way since 1C do nothing about this and DT also after 4.09 and 4.10 versions. Strange to go in this way since up to now new releases are free and put international pursuit for something which is free is not very understandable. Except if next versions will be done as payed addons for example.
This kind of menace is not done to continue to discuss about mods on 1C forum nor, for modders, to collaborate with DT.

It's something you will get used.If you open a polemic thread here,someone comes trolling and then in retaliation,a second person comes beating everyone.

Oh, how mature :rolleyes:

Grow up!

You talk like all those dick-lawyer heads that have made so much harm to this world. :mad:

Mods are not like stealing intellectual property because:

1) they are installed on the same game they come from
2) they do not generate any profit except for the original makers of the game since it sells more
3) they are just a customization of the game, which ONLY works on those PCs that have the LEGITIMATE STOCK game already installed. They are NOT a standalone thing.

Also, may I add that "intelectual property" is a very VERY suspicious entity. You may have contributed original work, OK, I agree, and you should certainly be recognized for it in a fair way... now you did so by using a LOT of knowledge given by human culture, which is NOT of YOUR property. How dare you now claiming 100% property on intellectual products? Highly offensive pretension.

Some highly egoistic companies have genetically modified corn to then claim property over it, when corn was develloped by mesoamerican cultures thousands of years ago. Now these very same people that developped the corn FOR FREE have to pay to a private company for something a stupid lawyer claims they own? Criminal and shamefull attitude if you ask me.

I am really sad to see you are showing a similar attitude.

Talking to yourself? That's a bad sign.

Absolutely correct. Until you do it, using genuine developments (which are: built by you 3D models, painted by you textures, designed by you program code, etc.). You can also distribute freely this mods and it would be absolutely legal.

But, if you take someone's else development (3D models, textures, program code, etc.), from another game, or another mod for the same game and distribute it as your own creation, without original author (or copyright owner) permission - now this is copyright infringement, is not legal and can be pursued by original copyright owner with any available legal means.
This stands up, even if you used only a portion of someone's else work without authorization from this person.

Profitability is irrelevant to the matter.

No, you may not.

:confused: ... what are you waiting for to do it then ...??

:rolleyes: ... on what grounds would you do it ? ... loss of profit ...???

... does the contract you (still ??) have with 1C entitle you to do so ...???

Can't you just admit once and for all that the modders that greatly revamped OUR (because we BOUGHT it) beloved sim and allowed it to still be alive 10 years after it was released are by no way the ennemies of IL2-46, on the contrary ...!!

Reading other people's posts usually helps to avoid being confused.

Theft of property, copyright infringement.

Contract with 1C is irrelevant to the matter in discussion. If you have no idea what is being discussed, why you join the discussion in the first place?

I'll try to get things clear (once again) for the people, who don't care to understand what is it all about through reading other people messages.

DT has nothing against mods for the IL-2 game. DT does not care, if people want to produce their own mod packs. UNTIL this mod packs do not contain models, textures, or program code portions, designed by DT and included into those mod packs without DT's permission.

Certain persons in the mod community, however, openly declare, they will include components, created by DT into their mod packs and do not feel themselves obliged to ask the permission.
DT will not tolerate such happenings.
That is all I am talking about.

... I see SaQSoN, you are a smart guy, and me and others are dumb ones that understand nothing ...

You are right at least for one thing, it is sunday and I am not going to waste my time anylonger arguing with you ... :grin:

Two totally different types of mod are described here. The jets, released as the IL2 1956 Pack are superbly made authentic models with extensive new coding to make the various systems work. I cant comment on the accuracy of the FM and weapons performance but I know that the creators went into great detail to try and achieve a high level of realism. However this is clearly well after the WWII era so probably not likely to be adopted by TD, even if the originators requested it to be.

The "Graf Zeppelin" and "Aquila" carriers are not authentic new models. They are simply repaints of the existing Illustrious carrier. Certainly very well done repaints but only paint mods nevertheless. Paint Mods have existed for IL2 aircraft for a long time prior to the modding breakthroughs but no one ever expected them to be incorporated into the core game. Why should that change now? There is always a lot of interest in these carriers for "what if" type scenarios but you need to remember that they were never even close to being operational. They mainly contributed to the Allied war effort by tying up material and resources which would otherwise have been used for other things. It would be more useful to have more carriers (and other ships) which actually saw operational use. -- HMS Eagle, HMS Ark Royal, HMS Furious, HMS Hermes, to name just a few.

The counter argument is that 1C saw fit to label a repainted KGV as an IJN and USN BB so why not include repaints for other vessels. In my view it would be wrong to compound the original mistake. Its maybe about time that those USN and IJN generic ships were replaced with something more appropriate.

I would be interested in knowing the historical limits TD would put on new models.
I guess the Korean era is out, but would they consider the Spanish Civil War period to be in?

1930-1946. Also, all Grumman-related projects (including ships) are out, even if they fit the timescale.

I don't think, anyone would be against SCW subjects.

I'm not an expert on the Grumman corporate history.

Does that mean a restriction on including warships built at the Newport News ShipBuilding Yards only, or were other ship yards included in the agreement.

Note: I realise that Yorktown, Enterprise and Hornet were all built at Newport News :(

This means, all ships built, or designed by companies, which at some point become part of the N-G corp. So, if a certain ship class was designed and first laid at, say, Newport News and then it's sister-ship was built at some other factory, not owned by N-G, the sister ship is still under the restriction. If it was otherwise - then probably, not. But still, DT was asked to keep away from all US ships. :(

Yet there are a load of Japanese ship you could work on.

Officially there are no IJN Cruisers in game etc.

Well that leaves no room for manoeuvre at all. --- at least officially. ;-)

At the risk of being quickly shot down - cause I'm no copyright lawyer.

I understand the legal position in the US to be along these lines:

For works published between 1923 and 1963, provided they were published with a copyright notice, the works had copyright protection for a term of 28 years. At the end of the 28 year period an extension of an additional 67 years could be requested, a total of 95 years.

If there was no copyright notice on the original work then they immediately became public domain.
If no extension was requested then they became public domain after the initial 28 years.

Plans of USS Yorktown held by HNSA (Historic Naval Ships Assoc) prepared by Newport News Ship Building Co are not copyright marked, therefore appear to be Public Domain.

Either way after 2041 all work produced up to 1946 becomes Public Domain, so not long to wait. :-)

For any of the early BB's originally built in WWI the 95 years has already lapsed.

We can discuss days and days on the subject without finding any compromises. One thing that DT can do to improve the game and without conflicts with external "moders", since tools are available and capacity also, is to update graphic engine and proc engine (multicore proc, sli,...).
This will be a big step forward and I am sure all FB community will recognize your leadership in this domain.
For the remaining, I am convinced that, all around the world, there are enough moders able to handle Java/C++ programing language, 3D, flight dynamics and knowing
enought about IL2 structure to improve, in these domains, this game.
At the end, all users will be satisfied and happy to have a game at 2011 standards. Moreover, each parts will work in a domain without interference with the other part.

I totally agree with you Hans Burger, that would just be great to have an updated graphics engine and multicore capability, and also the possibility to increase the number of slots available for map makers ... :grin:

Nobody needs a war between the DT and the modding communities, on the contrary ...

I can hardly imagine what IL2/46 could be if both "camps" worked in the same direction ...

The IL2 sturmovik - Forgotten Battles source code was hacked.

Third party mod programmers have taken liberties with intellectual property and violated all manner of laws in the process.

The TD made arrangements with Oleg to license the source code. The improvements in IL2 we enjoy from TD are what resulted. Someone had to "take charge" or the mods "hodge-podge" would eventually make IL2 a mess.

We did experience that when mods were first released. There were conflicts and issues constantly between different mods as they were applied to the IL2. Anyone that used mods can describe examples.
It wasnt' a nightmare, but it was close to insanity.

The purpose for licensing with TD was in part to insure stability in IL2 further development.

Mod programmers have the source code, afterall it's hacked. The mod programmers can do as they will with the code in so many words.

If Mod programmers go it alone, which they can do since they have the source. They can develop independently from the TD. If they ignore the core, which is updated by TD it will mean there will be a degradation of the core base for IL2 Sturmovik. This will over time make updates and mods a nuisance. There will be all kinds of issues between mods and the IL2.

The TD has made improvements in the core of the application and usually does some type of improvement with each update release. If mod developers will continue to use TD updates as a basis for applying their mods the consistency of IL2 can be preserved.

I am not apart of the TD, nor am I affiliated with them in any way. Like everyone else that appreciates the IL2-FB I want it to remain a good success.

We need the TD, and it was a smart move to preserve the integrity of IL2-FB by licensing a community minded group of programmers. TD is cooperative and open to suggestions, as we all know.

A team like TD can ad new members and members can drop out, but the integrity of the IL2 core programming can be maintained.

Several attempts to unify mod programmers have been tried, and success was dubious. Yes, there are a few successes, but will they have the staying power?

I'm not knocking anyone or group of mod consolidators by any means. IMO, Every mod developer can hold a place, if we just embrace one development group for maintaing IL2 core integrity as it is updated.

Well that's an interesting point, but the problem is not in how much NG claims are legitimate. As far as I understood from what Ilya and other people from 1C told me, 1C, back in PF days, was forced to make a contract with NG, under which 1C obliges to pay a certain amount of money for inclusion of any NG-related subject.
So, even if suddenly the copyrights will be stripped from NG, 1C still will be restricted under this contract.

This is what I know about it. I may be wrong though, since I never saw this document and have no idea what is in it actually. Nevertheless, there was clear and strict order from Ilya and earlier by Maddox, that DT should not touch any US ships, or NG related planes and cockpits.

And the Martin stuff?Why it can't be used ingame?Is it part of them now too?

And IDK why all that fuzz about the modders.If wasn't because of them,IL2 would be still on 4.08 and probably already loosing part of its fans.It gave the old good IL2 a second youth.I know that there are modders that take DT work and label as theirs,the ones that does s... work and maybe even some that used the code in the early days to cheat,but labeling modders as criminals is exaggerating a lot,isn't it?

No sht! Really?! :eek:

I don't know about Martin history, but it seems to me, that they do not have any relation to NG. This should be researched separately. However, I didn't see any official statement that Martin products are restricted like the NG ones.

And why do you suddenly think, someone labels all modders as criminals? :eek:

PS I'd rather separate the discussion of DT issues and DT-related work from mods discussion and do all DT-related talks in the respective forum section. I kind of feel uncomfortable by hijacking this thread from poor modders. :D

We never labelled modders as criminals.
Most of us started as modders.
I was a modders and a noob 3D modeller, still I am, and the guys of the team helped me to grow in my skill, released my model in their patch and finally accepted me in the group.
Still we have a 3rd party forum were "modders" can cooperate with us making features for the patch .....
Some of my best friends are modders.
Why the hell I should be against them?


Aracno
TD 3d modeller and, as member of an online squad, happy user of one great modpack (dont ask wich one).

Yeah, mod packs are so lame. All you get are:

1) All planes flyable, albeit many with "borrowed" cockpits and gunner stations.

2) Scads of new maps.

3) New variants of existing planes - some quite well researched.

4) Complete historical loadouts for existing planes.

5) Small fixes to mistakes on stock planes.

6) Loads of new planes - some with new 3D models, DM and FM. Yeah, some are "frankenplanes" but even then, they're often quite well done.

7) Lots of new ground objects.

8) Corrections to AI which fix "sniper gunners" and engines which never overheat.

9) Improvements to AI which make enemy planes tougher, more aggressive opponents.

10) Additions to AI which allow you to control up to wing-sized formations of bombers and give additional commands to wingmen.

11) Additions to AI which allow forward observers, target marking, ground controlled radar.

12) Better default skins.

13) Lots of little corrections to things which 1C was too busy/lazy to fix over the years. Like better sounds, better smoke and fire effects, better ground textures and corrections to dumb mistakes in FM coding well before the "official" fixes.

Basically, modders are telling 1C and DT where they want the sim to go and are taking steps to make it go there. If mods were junk nobody would use them.

If DT is smart, they would do what computer security companies do - recruit the best hackers to work for the "good guys." In this case, recruit the better modders onto their team, or ask to use their mods.

Also, DT's web presence has been minimal, to say the least. You guys need to communicate better, and not just on inherently "mod unfriendly" sites like this one. Set up a web page that lists formal requirements for mods (i.e., polygon counts, areas that are off limits) and tutorials on how to add objects, planes, ships, etc. to the game. Maybe have an "official" TD presence on mod forums to steer promising modders towards contributing to official patches. Basically, encourage people to work through DT and to build stuff that is up to official standards.

I didn't know that DT had its own multinational legal team. Anyhow, I wish them best of luck.

SaQSoN

With respect sir, you are mistaken regarding copyright, intellectual property regarding game mods, at least regarding USA law

In USA, to sue you must show monetary damages, so while if anyone were to take 1C or UbiSoft copyright material and resell it without permission, 1C and Ubisoft would certainly be damaged .. if anyone were to distribute the core game and it's files, even for free, that would indeed be theft and damage 1C and Ubisoft

Mods as distributed, do not work without the player having a copy of IL-2 1946, presumably legally purchased .. if anything, an argument could be made that many more copies of IL-2 1946 have been sold because of mods, than if the game had not been cracked and modded

If game mods could be stopped through legal process, then why did not 1C - UbiSoft do so at the first chance ? ..

I will tell you why .. because this issue has existed since at least 1996, and no software company to my knowledge, much less a PC game company, has successfully sued to prevent distribution of mods or additions to a software. Since Half Life was modded to become CounterStrike, quite a few Game companies have encouraged modding and distributed the tools to do so, because it increases sales and can sometimes allow the company to acquire new content inexpensively and increase sales .. sometimes those mods become a *new* game like CounterStrike

TD does not own the rights to IL-2 1946 .. UbiSoft and 1C do .. if you have not been properly compensated for your work .. you can not sue modders over it .. in fact ...

I find it odd that TD claims it gains no compensation from 1C - UbiSoft for their work, that would likely be against labor laws in all 50 states in USA

I presume you get permission for any unique user content added "officially" to IL-2 1946, any unique textures, 3d models .. anything .. and permission from any user created hacking tools you may have used .. because not to do so would clearly be a violation of those authors' copyright

And while I'm not giving a legal opinion, I have protected authors' rights in another flight sim / game, and have lead 2 mod groups that dealt with IP rights of flight sim / game rights holders ..

I both greatly respect developers rights and software user / modder rights , so please don't misunderstand .. I greatly respect 1C and TD and the work you have done that is IL-2 1946 today

However I can say with complete confidence that TD would get nowhere attempting legal action against mod groups for adding or changing content of IL-2 1946, and to make threats accomplishes nothing except alienating most of those that read this forum

I am not, BTW, an IL-2 modder, however as a player of the game, I find your attitude objectionable, despite greatly enjoying the work TD has done for the game.

I also find it objectionable that the UP 2.01 splash screen does not included the TD logo .. 4.09m includes your work, and I always believe full credit should be given in any compiled work, and thanks given to all authors' work in readme files

Thank you for your advise. We are not concerned about 1C or Ubi-soft financial losses due to piracy. And this is not a topic of this discussion. May be, you should read my posts more carefully to find out what it is about.

Because no one, including 1C, Ubisoft, or DT doesn't care about mod existence. Obviously, this is the reason why no one would do anything to stop them. I can not even imagine, what a crazy idea makes you think, DT wants to destroy unofficial modding. :confused:

TD does not work for 1C, and is not it's subcontractor.

You don't have to presume that. Everything, that is added into official add-ons, produced by DT, is added with permission from the respective authors. There was a small misunderstanding with author of flares, which has been settled long ago.
All tools, DT is using, are either created by DT members, or licensed from 1C.
Any person, that may tell you different story - is a deliberate liar.

And we know, there are certain people in the "unofficial mod community" who spread this lies with only aim to discredit DT's hard work. I wouldn't be surprised, if this is the same people, who did stole our work before and threaten to do that in the future.

I could go through each of your points and explain in detail, why each of them is lame. But I will not. Because a) I know, that if not you, then most of the mod users will not listen to any reasons, so it would be a pure waste of time and effort; b) I respect your preferences and your desire to use mods - in no way I will try to prevent you from having and using them.

I just say, that all that lame stuff will never get into the official add-ons. That's all. At the same time DT is happy to cooperate with people, who produce really high quality stuff and are willing to include it into DT releases.
The IL-4 cockpit, shown in one of the DT updates, is a good example of such cooperation. You may also ask Sita (one of the SB cockpit authors) on this forum: I bet, he would have a lot's of good words for us.

Perhaps is time for a little IL-2 history lesson, because many new players probably have no idea how the sim was developed. I've seen many people saying that 1C MG did stupid thing by not utilizing the works of modders and not making the IL-2 moddable in the first place. Well little do they know that there was a long period of so called 3rd party development. Sort of "legal modding". It started right after the very first IL-2 was released. Here is little blast from the past:

http://replay.web.archive.org/200211...il2center.com/
http://replay.web.archive.org/200112...il2center.com/
http://replay.web.archive.org/200211...il2center.com/

Anyone could make a reservation of some plane for himself and model it according to the sim specs. If it was done properly and sent to MG, it appeared later in some free patch or commercial add-on. If it was in add-on, the modeller got paid for his work.

My estimation is that probably half of the currently existing plane external & cockpit 3D models were made by the community members. The "first generation of modders". Called 3rd party members back then. The whole initial idea of TD was to gather these 3rd party guys back together and continue the old style quality development and ask some of the most talented modders to join.

This means that TD has many guys that were these old 3rd party guys and these guys have created just huge amount of 3D content for this sim. Planes, cockpits, ships, ground objects and even maps. I find it always pretty funny when some modder speaks crap about TD without realizing that is was some guy in TD who actually made his own mod possible.

Without the 3rd party guys (including several TD guys) there would be about 50% less raw materials for the "new" mod planes and lot less ships & ground objects, etc. So I think that it is pretty big middle finger aimed towards the old 3rd party guys if the 3rd party efforts are ignored and mods are raised on pedistal because they have made hundreds of "new" planes (from which the most of are variants of the existing planes). It takes 5 minutes to put wrong cockpit to old AI planes. It takes easily 6 months to model a historically correct pit.

I would even say that 4.09 & 4.10 was pretty much nothing compared to the full efforts of 3rd party. But at least TD is trying to maintain the same standards set by the best 3rd party work such as Tempest & Gladiator. Which means that TD won't put wrong cockpits to AI planes to make it flyable or release CR.42 as Hs 123, etc.

Bottom line: Thanks to the 3rd party efforts long before any modding, IL-2 now has huge amount of raw material that modders can recycle as new planes and use as objects in their maps. And not a single mod has ever given credits to a 3rd party guy who made the mod possible in the first place. These guys are all mentioned in readme files, but the average modder just doesn't care.

I much prefer to be passive observer but I have a simple question: why do you, TD members, argue here, in MODS section? Don't you have your own section one forum above this one? Make your statements there and leave this forum for mods discussion. But I guess that some of you just need your voices heard, no matter what. And argue till your fingers bleed. What a shame. Instead of being a true beacon for the IL2 community, you are here just to stir things up, it would seem.

If you are so much better than modders, this does not show that. I know why the TD was ORIGINALLY started and I am 200% sure that it was not for this purpose. Some of you might know, some of you know for sure. Not what your mission statement is NOW, what it was AT THE BEGINNING. Some members on your team surely have the knowledge, but their attitude... in a lot of eyes it just hurts you. And promotion of paid projects... absurd. Perhaps the best way for you guys to go would be paid add-ons. It would make you so desirable money and would also bring you much desired legal advantage.

And for the conclusion, I would like to ask something of you, TD. I read in your forum here that the old RRR thing was brought up once more. While some of your members are telling community that it was left out because it was flawed and was missing for that reason and others were arguing that it was arcade(ish) (while refly is so much more realistic...), would you do me one last favor and not include it at all? Since that is your opinion about it. The catch here is, naturally, that you can implement it on your own, sure. But then again, modders can also implement what you do on their own also. A nice loop. Specially since coding is such a wonderful world where one thing can be done on so many different ways.

Thank you.

confirm ... from the DT we get a lot of support, advice and materials! and clearly see a desire to cooperate with us and help us)

@|ZUTI|:

It has been asked if mod will get into official patches. The given answer clearly states what kind of material will never be in. You can like it or not. You can still mod your game.

Promotion of paid projects? Where?

RRR? Again, where?

[QUOTE=SaQSoN;283630Nevertheless, there was clear and strict order from Ilya and earlier by Maddox, that DT should not touch any US ships, or NG related planes and cockpits.[/QUOTE]

So, what does this leave on the table? Is it possible to mod the smaller or older U.S. ships that weren't built by NG corporate precursors.

Personally, I don't really care about the big capital ships. I'd like to see more smaller, cargo and coastal craft which made up the bulk of the various national fleets and which accounted for most of the shipping sunk during the war.

If I'm flying a strike fighter/light bomber over the Bay of Biscay, Port Moresby or Norway, I'm going to stay the heck away from anything with serious guns on it and try to take out something that will sink if it takes a single torpedo or bomb hit, like a coastal steamer or frigate.

There is no doubt that a more varied cargo/steamer fleet would be welcomed by most players, provided the models are made according to specs and do not violate any copyright.

Sorry, but you're a bit incoherent there. :-P Or to use someone's favourite words, you're a "deliberate liar".

Parts used from stock game is always credited GLOBALLY as coming from the stock game (so more precise credits are to be found in the corresponding readmes).

That is NOT omiting credits. Now if a particular modeller or coder desires a bit more personal attention, they are fully free to go to modding sites and ask for such more precise-explicit credits be there for a particular reutilization of their excellent work.

If you don't, means you're a grown up person that undertsands the way crediting is done via referring the user to stock readmes. Otherwise you're a child that doesn't go there to ask more personalized crediting but yet go in tears here about it.

I'm not saying that all the mods out there are flawless, but some of them are very good. Technically, they might not be up to the standard that
TD/1C expects, but they're "good enough." More importantly, they point the way to where a large portion of the IL2 community wants to go. If DT is smart, they'll run to catch up.

Of course. I wouldn't want it any other way.

But I also get very skeptical about arguments that 1C/DT add-ons are flawless, while all mods are dreck. There's a continuum of mods from lousy to great.

Likewise, there are also plenty of places where 1C's work has been shoddy and modders have fixed it. Cases in point: the screwed up dihedral on the Hawk 81/P-40B and the messed up length of the P-51D (which, in turn, screwed up CG and made the plane fly strangely). Fans of the game were complaining about those problems for years and 1C did nothing. After the game was cracked, within a year modders fixed those problems.

In a few places, modders have even fixed DT's mistakes, although DT has been much better about quickly releasing patches to fix bugs.

DT should go out of its way to recruit the more talented modders. Not necessarily add them to the team, but supervise them as "outside contractors." For the less talented guys with good ideas, DT should contact them and say, "can we use your idea" and do the work yourselves.

There should also be formal standards set and tutorials to help modders get up to DT standards. Currently, there's no way to do that.

Yes, you guys occasionally recruit folks like Sita, but it seems like you ignore or alienate lots of other talented modders. There are a lot of sensitive egos in the IL2 modding world, but everyone shares a passion for the game. Obviously, you can't work with the guys who are taking the game in directions which are off-limits (e.g., Korea, high poly cockpits), but that still leaves lots of folks who could be allies if you just approached them correctly.

Being a bit friendlier and using a bit more diplomacy would help everyone (including me). :)

There is a lot of cooperation between DT and modders, much more than you can imagine. It is just not publicized on forums. ;)

Good to hear it. But, what I'm saying is publicize it more!

You guys need a website or something like it, with tutorials, restrictions, a "wishlist" of add-ons, and ideas on how folks can help.

Actually that is the kind of things we, IL2 lovers, want to hear :)

Not arrogant or threatening posts like Mr SQN.

Friendly goes better for everybody always (and same sort of things I've said in modding forums to those few that keep throwing rocks at TD)

Thank you for showing the right way.

If I were to take someone's car, I would make sure to ask owner's permission FIRST. I would not just take it and send a thank you note LATER.
As far as I know "stock" Il2 content (in whole and in parts) is not released with a priori permission to be modified and re-distributed as part of another "application".

There is no such thing, as "good enough". It is either fits technical requirements and "political" restrictions (like NG issue), or not.

From the point of "fitting official requirements" view, one could divide all mods into 3 category:

1. Those that don't even close (90% of all).
2. Those that almost fit.
3. Those, that fit exactly.

In the category Nr1 goes all the franken-stuff. No exceptions.
The category Nr3 mostly consists from mods, that are being developed by people in close cooperation with DT (like IL-4 and SB cockpits, Ki-44 by JapanCat, Ki-45 by Kashiide, etc.). All those authors either contacted DT themselves, or were approached by DT members and agree to work in cooperation with us.
The category Nr2 are mods, made by really talented people without any help from outside. Often those mods have small flaws, that can be relatively easy fixed. In most cases, DT members approach authors of this mods and suggest cooperation. If the author agrees to include his creation in the oficial add-on, we ask him to fix the problems. If the authors agrees, his work automatically goes into cat.Nr3.
But, unfortunately, some authors of this high quality mods either do not want their creations in official add-on, or do not want to make the said modifications to their work. In this case, such mods are left out as well.

Being skeptical is your right. No one would argue with you about it.

When something seems to you, it doesn't mean, it is how it actually is.

And what exactly would be this "correct approach"?

We see it exactly, as we do: a person is being politely asked, if he/she wants his/her creation to be added into official ad-on. Basically, there is only 2 possible replies: yes, or no. If the reply is "no", then well, we go away. Why should we bother this person any longer, after all?

Most of the modders don't even bother with the "thank you note", no matter, what someone tries to imply here. So why we should be gentle or polite with them?

For official add-on - nothing, which looks like actual USN ship, or called like it. Which mean, we can make some generic looking WWII battleship, or destroyer, or whatever and call it "generic US battleship", or "generic US destroyer", etc. But we can not add anything, that looks close enough to the real thing.

As for the smaller generic vessels, well, what Gitano said.