Official Fulqrum Publishing forum

Official Fulqrum Publishing forum (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/index.php)
-   IL-2 Sturmovik (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/forumdisplay.php?f=98)
-   -   Realism&Balance (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/showthread.php?t=6338)

MOH_Hirth 02-22-2009 02:47 PM

Realism&Balance
 
I have a sugestion to SOW and IL-2 too(4.09), auor comunity like realism, but we understand, this is a game for all people, so what 1C think about do 4/5 keys for FM/GUNs/velocity/aceleration, off course compatible only in same option, like is in settings on line.

"Balanced"
"Technical data Realistic"
"Uber LuftWaffe"
"Born in USA"

This can make a lot of fans very happy.

ElAurens 02-22-2009 03:09 PM

Never.

Gonna.

Happen.

Be.

Sure.

MOH_Hirth 02-22-2009 08:55 PM

Dont be so pessimist, is a true sugestion, a very important detail for all people really like IL-2 and SOW, they know sucess of game is listen sugestions, let joyces for your costumers.

Feathered_IV 02-23-2009 01:05 PM

SoW should be about realism.
Il-2 Birds of Prey can be about balance.

Asheshouse 02-23-2009 02:00 PM

But which version of reality should be adopted?

Thunderbolt56 02-23-2009 02:34 PM

Mine...

ElAurens 02-23-2009 04:34 PM

The only "realism" we can ever hope for is in the FMs and DMs to some extent.

You can never enforce the realism of say, US pilots being inexperienced and being shot down in droves by the Japanese in the first year or so of the war. Just as you cannot force late war "German" pilots to leave two thirds of their number on a server to stay on the ground to simulate lack of fuel, while the other third gets decimated in the air because they are teenage boys with less than 20 hours stick time in type.

It's like some US fan boys that say that some late war Japanese aircraft are overmodeled and want to restrict/ban that aircraft on a server, when what is overmodeled is the experience of those flying the J2M3, for example.

Re-creating historic outcomes with our little game is simply not possible, no matter how "accurate" the game/sim is.

;)

Chivas 02-23-2009 04:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Asheshouse (Post 67739)
But which version of reality should be adopted?

+1

C6_Krasno 02-23-2009 04:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElAurens (Post 67757)
The only "realism" we can ever hope for is in the FMs and DMs to some extent.

You can never enforce the realism of say, US pilots being inexperienced and being shot down in droves by the Japanese in the first year or so of the war. Just as you cannot force late war "German" pilots to leave two thirds of their number on a server to stay on the ground to simulate lack of fuel, while the other third gets decimated in the air because they are teenage boys with less than 20 hours stick time in type.

It's like some US fan boys that say that some late war Japanese aircraft are overmodeled and want to restrict/ban that aircraft on a server, when what is overmodeled is the experience of those flying the J2M3, for example.

Re-creating historic outcomes with our little game is simply not possible, no matter how "accurate" the game/sim is.

;)

It may be possible, but with a lot of AI, and few humans, so the outcome of the battles is hardly modified by the human input.

JoeA 02-23-2009 08:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chivas (Post 67758)
+1

+2

SlipBall 02-23-2009 09:23 PM

I agree that "The only "realism" we can ever hope for is in the FMs and DMs"...The aircraft should be as they were... also would be nice to have to manage them correctly. Ban the "I" start, switch that fuel tank boy! or pay the price.:)

Feathered_IV 02-24-2009 08:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SlipBall (Post 67781)
Ban the "I" start, switch that fuel tank boy! or pay the price.:)


And don't forget to go to oxygen, otherwise you won't live to tell the tale, I could of had him - If only I'd remembered to switch my guns to fire...

:-P

6S.Manu 02-24-2009 09:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Feathered_IV (Post 67826)
And don't forget to go to oxygen, otherwise you won't live to tell the tale, I could of had him - If only I'd remembered to switch my guns to fire...

:-P

What about the Revi bulb?

Feathered_IV 02-24-2009 10:58 AM

Left shift + right ctrl + alt + B

It's fairly awkward to change one of those... ;)

KG26_Alpha 02-24-2009 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Feathered_IV (Post 67837)

It's fairly awkward to change one of those... ;)



Left shift + right ctrl + alt + B+left arrow(unscrew)+right arrow(to screw in)

:grin:

SlipBall 02-24-2009 01:30 PM

1-Point to bulb with mouse

2-Rotate mouse slowly counter clockwise to remove the bulb, taking care not to damage or drop

3-reverse order to install new bulb with a clockwise motion-Caution! do not over tighten:-P

ElAurens 02-24-2009 05:01 PM

1- De select 'Gun Site Bulb Failure' in game options panel and enjoy the game.

;)

KG26_Alpha 02-24-2009 10:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElAurens (Post 67867)
1- De select 'Gun Site Bulb Failure' in game options panel and enjoy the game.

;)

You cant............ its a server option !!!

Night mission + random bulb failures .........

Unless you've installed the AAA torch/flashlight mod that works with TIR 20dof !!! :)

ElAurens 02-24-2009 10:52 PM

:lol:

Skoshi Tiger 02-25-2009 05:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KG26_Alpha (Post 67854)
Left shift + right ctrl + alt + B+left arrow(unscrew)+right arrow(to screw in)

:grin:

Remember <Ctrl> <G> <-> to remove flying gloves.

Snuff_Pidgeon 02-25-2009 05:36 AM

Dont forget delete key to empty underwear!

II/JG54_Emil 02-25-2009 02:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElAurens (Post 67757)
The only "realism" we can ever hope for is in the FMs and DMs to some extent.

You can never enforce the realism of say, US pilots being inexperienced and being shot down in droves by the Japanese in the first year or so of the war. Just as you cannot force late war "German" pilots to leave two thirds of their number on a server to stay on the ground to simulate lack of fuel, while the other third gets decimated in the air because they are teenage boys with less than 20 hours stick time in type.

It's like some US fan boys that say that some late war Japanese aircraft are overmodeled and want to restrict/ban that aircraft on a server, when what is overmodeled is the experience of those flying the J2M3, for example.

Re-creating historic outcomes with our little game is simply not possible, no matter how "accurate" the game/sim is.

;)

Well Oleg can
Quote:

Q: In what ways will the Messerschmitt E-3 outperform the Spitfire?

A: In B&Z tactic and in experience of German pilots in the beginning of Battle.
http://www.simhq.com/_air8/air_265c.html

I hold for him that he thought about AI when he said this.

Seriously, realism should and be onlyaffect the flight-model, damage-model and the gun-model.

One could think about whether one should only allow a certain relation between blue and red pilots depending on year of war, lets say late war years 2/3 red or so. But that might suck game-wise.

tagTaken2 02-25-2009 07:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by II/JG54_Emil (Post 67944)
One could think about whether one should only allow a certain relation between blue and red pilots depending on year of war, lets say late war years 2/3 red or so. But that might suck game-wise.

It would be an option, surely, to set skill levels/availability with campaign.

"Historical settings"- something new for everyone to whinge about :)

csThor 02-27-2009 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by II/JG54_Emil (Post 67944)
One could think about whether one should only allow a certain relation between blue and red pilots depending on year of war, lets say late war years 2/3 red or so. But that might suck game-wise.

The day a lousy script/server setting decides which side I should fly on is the day this particular server ends on my "can be heartily ignored" list. The only times when I flew red (or allied) online were during mission file and spawn tests. When the sides are uneven I simply stay offline ...

The better (and IMO only) alternative is to make heavy use of AI on DF servers - to populate those aircraft few people fly but which should be really prominent instead of the ever-present fighters: bombers, recon, ground-attack aircraft and transports. In such an environment side balacing is not an issue. Nuff said ...

Former_Older 03-05-2009 09:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ElAurens (Post 67662)
Never.

Gonna.

Happen.

Be.

Sure.

I agree with Terry

"Balance" is the antithesis of combat flight simulation. "Balance" is what makes historical accuracy worthless. "Balance" is the thing that ruins tactics. "Balance" has no place as a design philosophy in a simulation

SlipBall 03-05-2009 10:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Former_Older (Post 68970)
I agree with Terry

"Balance" is the antithesis of combat flight simulation. "Balance" is what makes historical accuracy worthless. "Balance" is the thing that ruins tactics. "Balance" has no place as a design philosophy in a simulation



Amen brother...amen

Insuber 03-06-2009 05:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by II/JG54_Emil (Post 67944)

One could think about whether one should only allow a certain relation between blue and red pilots depending on year of war, lets say late war years 2/3 red or so. But that might suck game-wise.

IMHO you cannot so simply apply the broad picture statistics to the local events going on in our small scale maps. Local air superiority can be achieved almost independently from the overall situation: the bases of war tactics indeed regard how to achieve a local superiority by using in the best way the available resources. In our servers, with some 30 or 40 planes and a couple of airports, forcing a local superiority by default would be both unfair and incorrect.

Imho,
Ins


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:11 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 Fulqrum Publishing. All rights reserved.