|
|
#581
11-01-2009, 12:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Emil,did you bothered to read between the lines in my post?
Also please remove the link leading to the site with unauthorised content,it's not appropriate posting it here. Thank you. Last edited by Bulgarian; 11-01-2009 at 12:17 PM. |
|
#582
11-01-2009, 01:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Yes I did.
Did you bother readig between my lines? Anyhow the invitation still stands especially if a constructive discussion comes out of it. I know you have a hard time with mods for some reason. And I do understand your reasons and would underline many of them. Yet still you(TD) have the chance to correct errors in the FMs DMs etc. and you did with some of them. I would appreciate if you took a closer look at what Kwiatek did and would at least consider his councel. I personally think he did a great great job there. The only problem is that his models aren´t standart. I would love to see all FMs to be as historical correct as possible. TD has the chance to do that finally. Thank you for your attention. |
|
#583
11-01-2009, 02:56 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Hello Emil,
if you and others at UP have any ideas and suggestions about this type of requests toward DT,please send your constructive ideas and request list to DT e-mail. And I'm sorry but I'll have to refuse your kind offer toward me to visit your boards and discuss,because I personally don't have neither the will or the physical time to do this. Best reguards, Bulgarian. |
|
#584
11-01-2009, 03:38 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
It may turn out there are some corrections that could be made to Il2 in many places, not just aircraft. You can suggest changes, but arguments are not the right way to go at it.
TD has plenty to do as it is with all the requests made on these boards. Rome was not built in a day, and for all the requests for changes I'd say it will take awhile. Also, priorities of TD are their own. If you want to argue, do that among yourselves somewhere else. Then after you refine all the details with adequate facts you might present them carefully in a posting. Do the research yourself, before you make claims and statements that are unsubstantial. Don't provide links either, do the research and prepare a decent written explanation corroborated by references. You will get alot further with that. TD doesn't have time to research your links and guestimates. Basically, if you do enough work to substantiate your claims and reference it well enough it would make sense for TD to look into it. Herein is a very good thing, the TD has the oversight and go ahead from Oleg and we have gotten a much needed upgrade to IL2. Have respect and appreciate that we have an interested group (TD) that has Oleg's approval and support. This is a very exceptional benefit to our community. |
|
#585
11-01-2009, 10:08 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
|
|
#586
11-01-2009, 10:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
AI during landing
I read somewhere that TD were looking into possible changes to the AI in the game, and I was wondering if there was any way of improving the AI of friendly a/c during landing ?
At the moment if I am No 2 and my flight of four are coming in to land , then No 3 and No 4 just follow me and can quite often crash instead of getting into the landing pattern. The only way I've found to get round this is to hit the Autopilot, and after my a/c starts following the landing pattern then 3 and 4 ignore me and start landing ( then I can switch Autopilot off ), but if I forget it can quite often result in a/c losses that should never happen. As a small expansion to this request, as in the above scenario if No 1 lands then No 2 becomes leader but cannot issue orders for 3 and 4 to "return to base". Likewise, if the leader is shot down during a mission, then the next numbered a/c becomes the new leader but can't issue any orders. Is there any way TD could come up with a fix for that ? As an offline flyer a fix for either or both of the above would be very welcome, but I have no idea whether it would be easy, difficult or even possible to do. Thanks for taking the time to read this. |
|
#587
11-02-2009, 08:06 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
(#1) 1st Wingleader - (#2) Wingman 1 (#3) 2nd Wingleader - (#4) Wingman 2 So instead of #2, the pilot who should become responsible for the flight, should be #3 instead. At least, thats what it would be like on german swarms - I'm not sure how it was at other nations. However, if it was different, then the whole issue would become more complicated. But I agree, its odd, like it is now. Not having any control or any influence on the behaviour of the other pilots in a flight is unrealistic. Aboput your other points I do not have a clue, I guess, somebody of our team should know better.
__________________
 ---------------------------------------------- For bugreports, help and support contact: daidalos.team@googlemail.com For modelers - The IL-2 standard modeling specifications: IL-Modeling Bible |
|
#588
11-02-2009, 10:01 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I'm not sure if yet requested: on screen display of value of flaps movement in degrees or percentages (degrees more logical but probably a lot of work - aircraft specific) if using an axis on a controller, like power or proppitch has. Somehow the words "combat flaps", "take-off" and "landing" don't show.
An axis for radiator flaps would be cool, same for mixture. I building my own HOTAS, believe me I have enough axis now  And again, would be nice if the option exists the external cams don't focus on men hanging in parachutes. I want to see the planes going down. Ever shot a C47 with the max amount of paratroopers?  Is cooling system damage actually modelled? In the bf109G2 manual there exists a valve to close and bypass a damaged wing cooling pod. Never looked at the gauges to see values dropping though, been flying radials too much. Keep up the good work, I was and am very impressed and happy with the patch! |
|
#589
11-02-2009, 07:30 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Beauie
TD, many thanks for the good work. I see this thread includes requests so here is one that has been on the minds of many of the Oceania based simmers:
The visibility from the Beaufighter Mk21 is seriously hampered by the omission of the rear observer position. This is the only aircraft I know of that has been officially released without a full complement of seats modeled. It always felt like half a plane. Fixing this omission would be greatly appreciated by many. For your consideration |
|
#590
11-03-2009, 12:46 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
After I posted I was just thinking the same thing that #2 shouldn't be second in comand anyway, and was going to make that my point in my next post, but you beat me to it  The whole promotion thing for the player seems a bit strange in IL2. In a German campaign for example, if the player starts at the lowest rank ( I usually do, as I like to work my way up the ranks ) it would be expected to start as #8 and as you improve move up to #4 or #2 but still as a wingman. Then after a couple of promotions, say to Leutnent, you would move to #7 with your own #8 wingman. However, in IL2 you will still be a wingman at the rank of Hauptman, which I doubt would ever have been the case in reality, and then at the next promotion you are suddenly in command of the whole schwarm ! If that could be fixed it would make a big difference to the immersion factor in an offline campaign. I know TD must be overwhelmed by suggestions, but if we don't ask then we won't get. I will say thanks in anticipation that you even consider it. |
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
