[REL] 4.11m Guide

[RegRag1977]

Originally Posted by Pursuivant

I'm not nearly so well-trained, but I've studied a lot about human physiology under stress and I agree that it would be reasonably easy to add factors such as fatigue and hypoxia to the game.

A very simple method of modeling fatigue loss would be a simple "Fatigue Points" score. Under stress, such as combat or high-g maneuvers, the pilot would lose points at a set rate. Likewise, he'd recover "Fatigue Points" at some other rate when he's not exercising hard or fighting for his life - basically, it's the human equivalent of engine heating and cooling.

If Fatigue Points go below a certain level, he can't do certain things, such as hold high G turns.

More technically, as the human body is stressed and lactic acid builds up in the muscles, muscle strength goes down. It's not exactly a exponential curve, but it comes pretty close.

Just compare typical leg press strength against forces exerted on the rudder pedal during a turn of X g's and divide by the exponential function to determine if the pilot can hold a turn of X g's. Pretty simple stuff to add to the sim; not much more complex than the "hit locations" and bleeding injuries which TD introduced with the 4.10 patch.

Likewise, it would be really easy to measure progressive hypoxia above 10k feet/3 km, or sudden hypoxia which occurs above 20k feet/12 km using simple functions. These factors have been extremely well studied.

That would indeed rock!

[Adhocrat]

Originally Posted by RegRag1977

I for one want this option for IL2 too, it may be counter intuitive as you say, but intuitivness is not what i am looking for in a WW2 sim. Using too many axis in the same time is just not realistic at all when it comes to WW2 air combat anyway: it is not a F1 racing sim, but a WW2 sim. I am all for such an option in IL2, along with pilot fatigue as described by Pursuivant.

Of course all this should come as difficulty options on the realism board, so that people that still want to play the old way can have their fun too

BTW guns jamming would be so nice too!

I remember being burned by Condor with this feature. In Condor, when you extend the landing gear, you can see the pilot figure take his right hand off the stick (leaving his left hand on his lap), and operate the undercarriage lever. In this time your joystick is inactive. Not exactly what you want when you're in a very steep final turn! When I flew real retractable-undercarriage gliders I was told to keep my right hand on the stick and use my left hand to operate the undercarriage. Usually it's operated by a lever on the right side of the cockpit which directly extends the single retractable wheel.

[LesniHU]

Originally Posted by Pershing

DS devicelink
"Dedicated server has additional readouts now. This is intended as interface for 3rd party
applications which want to read position of units in real time. Please see devicelink.txt for more
information.
This feature works on dedicated server only during network play and is released as
undocumented"

Am I right - insted of elemenating any posibility to use unathorized radar-software, DT is easing this? (sorry for my English)

No.
You will be able to use it: if you are playing single player game; if playing track; if you are running dedicated server
You will not be able to read such data from: any MP client (does not matter if you are connected to dedicated server or normal host); normal game running as multiplayer host

[FC99]

Originally Posted by JG27_PapaFly

Is there a chance you guys might introduce following changes in 4.13?

1) Pilot fatigue as a realism option. IL2 models stick forces, so calculating the amount of physical work a pilot puts into his flying should be feasible. Also high-g conditions require contraction of all muscles in pilot's legs, buttocks and abdomen, which should further drain his energy stores.

We are split on this matter, I tried simple fatigue model and I liked it but some DT members expressed some doubts about fatigue in game so this is something worth discussion which would include whole community, especially experienced RL pilots. ( They are split on this too as far as I know )

[Luno13]

I support the idea, but it really depends on how you fly the game. I like long patrols and I've flown multiple-hour sorties without time compression. Mentally, one is tired enough after that. One ends up making poor decisions and maneuvers lazily.

Fatigue modeling would really only affect those used to quick TnB action in sorties lasting under ten minutes. Furthermore, everyone is different, and applying the same fatigue model to every pilot might cause an uproar among those who believe they're stronger Physical fatigue relates to mental fatigue, and flying will tire you both ways, but it's not always the case in a computer game. Putting an alert mind (player) into a fatigued body (sim pilot) will probably just induce frustration.

But if it's an option, why not?

A hypoxia model would be cool, but it would require modeling of some O2 systems. Pilots had to check their masks for ice buildup and could squeeze the hoses to test if oxygen was flowing. In Il-2, none of the O2 guages are even functional, just static eye-candy. O2 systems would also need a DM, and this might be even more complicated in pressurized aircraft (the entire cockpit skin would need hit-points, I imagine).

In terms of latent stresses on pilots and aircraft, it's my opinion that it would be more important to see some effects of accumulated damage to airframes, engines, and weapons as well as random failures. With Dgen under revision, it would be great to see something like historical dates and theatres affecting probability of failure as well as how the plane is handled from mission to mission (ie G-force stress on airframe accumulates throughout a career). It won't be popular to everyone, but again, it could become an option.

One member posted a while ago, either here or in the Clod forum, that because aircraft performance could vary depending on manufacturing conditions, that aspects of performance such as top speed, G limit, maneuverability, etc should be randomly assigned to within about a 5% margin of accepted performance figures. One mission you could be flying a top-shape hot-rod, and the next you could be assigned to the squadron beater, and not really know how the plane will behave until you fly it. It could make things interesting and possibly change the scope of "this plane should always be better than the other" discussions.

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by FC99

We are split on this matter, I tried simple fatigue model and I liked it but some DT members expressed some doubts about fatigue in game

So, why not just have an option in the difficulty settings menu which allows you to turn pilot fatigue off?

Of course, I can see the skeptics point. A simple model for fatigue might not be realistic, since it doesn't take factors such as strength, physical conditioning, g-force on the body, and stress into account.

[HarryM]

It's probably a lot of work for something that a lot of people are not sure about, as opposed to univerally good things like improved AI, more planes, etc.

[Aviar]

I would only be in favor of a pilot fatigue feature if it also applied to the AI. It's bad enough the AI can fly on full power forever without overheating. We don't need any more 'cheats' for the AI.

Aviar

[Lagarto]

Originally Posted by Aviar

I would only be in favor of a pilot fatigue feature if it also applied to the AI. It's bad enough the AI can fly on full power forever without overheating. We don't need any more 'cheats' for the AI.

Couldn't agree more! AI's performance should also be limited by the blacking-out factor. It would finally put an end to these unrealistically violent, very high G maneuvers that AI is now capable of.

[ECV56_Guevara]

Hey DT this patch (4.11) got some features really incredible. Some of it wich I dreamed about. I remember when I get into the FMB world, posting in UBI asking for the static plane skin change n...no way, was the answer! today, will be possible. Thanks.

For the 4.12 is there a roadmap?
The features of Airborne radar and triggers are still in development? Can you tell us something more about it? Thanks a lot, and happy new year.