PC Gamer interview.

[Dano]

http://www.pcgamer.com/2011/02/08/il...ya-shevchenko/

[TheSwede]

I agree on the preferred sequel.

[HFC_Dolphin]

WOW, great interview with more information published

If Oleg or Ilya are reading I would like to ask about the use of radars.
In reality, the calculation of the height of the planes was not 100% sure and that's why British pilots used to fly at higher altitudes than what ground control told them (and all of this created lots of communications problems).

So, now in Cliffs, are the radars going to give precise information, or is there room for error in estimated altitude of enemies?

Edit: Dano replied to my question, but pointing to the interview, where you state that radars can give mistaken information.

[Royraiden]

Great!!

[Dano]

From the interview:

The radar can make mistakes, occasionally misidentify targets, or guide you to a wrong position.

Mods, apologies, just realised I posted this in the wrong place.

[HFC_Dolphin]

Originally Posted by Dano

From the interview:



Mods, apologies, just realised I posted this in the wrong place.

Thanks Dano, I missed this part

[blades96]

Only 22 people working on the game!! That is a shock.

What? The engine is called Cliffs of dover?

I thought the engine is still called IL-2 Sturmovik.


Then this game must be called. Cliffs of dover - Cliffs of dover, and the next one ...

[Sven]

Originally Posted by TheSwede

I agree on the preferred sequel.

I really hope so, that would be a very pleasant surprise if it would become true

[jt_medina]

Some highlights

PCG: Mitchell spent less time developing the Spitfire than you’ve spent developing this sim. What have been the most time-consuming elements of the design?

ILYA: Everything! 3D models, the flight model, the damage model, cockpit gauges, artificial intelligence, weather, maps… they’re all responsible for the long development time. We are a very small team (there’s only 22 of us) and we’re doing a huge team’s job. Check the credits for other games, and you’ll often see teams ten times the size working on games less complex than Cliffs of Dover. The general spirit of perfectionism – we’re trying to make the world’s best WWII flight sim – is what’s responsible for the game taking as long as it did.

PCG. What makes Cliffs of Dover’s flight model better than Il-2’s?

ILYA: Simple. The formulas process more variables and are therefore more precise. Il-2 was pretty darn close to the real thing, so the flight model in Cliffs of Dover doesn’t feel drastically new. You will see the most differences at low speeds and in adverse conditions such as stalls and spins. Basically, in Il-2 we calculated simpler physics at fewer points around the aircraft. In Cliffs of Dover, we look at more parameters in more places. In reality this means a codebase that’s many times larger. Our engine model alone is over 20 times the size of that of Il-2.

PCG: I’m bounced by a Bf 109 and my Spitfire takes a few cannon rounds to the wing and engine. What damage may have been caused?

ILYA: Whoa. Lots of things can happen. To put things into perspective, we have over 10 times the number of damageable components that Il-2 had. A wing of a Spitfire has a few dozen things that can be damaged: the wing surface itself, control surfaces and control lines, spars and internal structure, landing gear struts, wheel, locks, and other components, the hydraulic system, brake lines, oil cooler, the flap, flap piston, a pneumatic hose driving it, three machine guns with associated lines, ammo boxes, and so on.

So depending on where your rounds hit, any number of those items could get damaged or destroyed, with expected results. A round could fly right through leaving just two insignificant holes in the skin, it could hit a spar and detach the whole wing, it could detonate the ammo box and destroy the entire plane – or a million other possible combinations.

OLEG: And there’s no difference between flyable and AI aircraft in terms of complexity for damage modelling.

PCG: Will radar installations play any role beyond providing targets for the Luftwaffe?

ILYA: Yes. Radar plays an active role in spotting and tracking enemy planes, and guiding interceptors to them. The radar can make mistakes, occasionally misidentify targets, or guide you to a wrong position. It can also help you navigate back home. When flying for the RAF you’ll be hearing radar operators a lot, and probably even get used to having awesome situational awareness beyond visual range.

OLEG: There is even some attempt to simulate antenna pattern.

I can't wait...