Fulqrum Publishing Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official Fulqrum Publishing forum > Fulqrum Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik

IL-2 Sturmovik The famous combat flight simulator.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-01-2008, 02:01 PM
Tvrdi
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

we are not FS or CFS pussies to use clickable cockpits...we have to deal with other things....

Last edited by Tvrdi; 11-01-2008 at 02:03 PM.
  #2  
Old 11-01-2008, 03:28 PM
proton45's Avatar
proton45 proton45 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 651
Default

you know...I'm not "dead set" against clickable cockpits, but I don't see the point in spending the time to integrate that feature (now) when their are so many other thinks that would make the game better... FOR example: I would love it if the explosion you see "matches" what is blowing up. Gas explosions look different then ammo...black powder looks different then C4 in a wood building (or brick). Burning gas in an areoplane looks different in a "rubber bladder" then in a steal tank. Half a tank of gas explodes different then a full tank with a full bomb load. GP bombs explode different then incendiary, ect...
Attached Images
File Type: jpg junglenapal.jpg (26.3 KB, 29 views)
File Type: jpg WallFlame-1.jpg (826.5 KB, 34 views)

Last edited by proton45; 11-01-2008 at 03:34 PM. Reason: add images
  #3  
Old 11-06-2008, 01:44 PM
Baco Baco is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 24
Default

Oleg, with all due respect. If a "more complex" cockpit control or engine start is such a watse of time, why did you include take offs and landings or even an eject sequence for Il2 if its unnecesary. When you get shot down, it doesn´t matter if you eject or not, or whay take off at all, why did you give us the choice of taking off, (to make the feeling more inmersive) and yet you don´t want to give us the choice of transfering fuel from tank to tank, or select magnetos or turning on the bateries... we don´t need much, just a little more than in Il-2. Ususally setting the cockpit and doing stuff befor taking off sets the mood, the amience, to get in the role of a fighterpilot, not just a kid palying a "planes game".... Every new sim has more and more interactivity than previosu ones.. It feels that leaving the SOW series out of that trend like if you would still continue to do movies in Mono sound and not use stereo...and Sounf FX and that kind of thing...

Why not enchance the experience of being there for those who ant it?
  #4  
Old 11-06-2008, 02:01 PM
ECV56_LeChuck ECV56_LeChuck is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 102
Default

Agree with Baco
  #5  
Old 11-06-2008, 05:18 PM
Chivas Chivas is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,769
Default

I don't want a totally realistic start procedure, but mapping a couple of switches, fuel pump, and start button to a hotas or keyboard that must be set right for the engine to start creates a hightened immersion. Hearing the engine cranking over, and not being totally sure it will fire is an immersion factor that shouldn't be left out of SOW, especially in scramble situations.
  #6  
Old 11-06-2008, 06:33 PM
SlipBall's Avatar
SlipBall SlipBall is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: down Island, NY
Posts: 2,719
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chivas View Post
I don't want a totally realistic start procedure, but mapping a couple of switches, fuel pump, and start button to a hotas or keyboard that must be set right for the engine to start creates a hightened immersion. Hearing the engine cranking over, and not being totally sure it will fire is an immersion factor that shouldn't be left out of SOW, especially in scramble situations.


Yes I agree...also, I would love to have the engine a bit tempermental on the winter map's. I wonder if Oleg will have temperature affecting fluids
__________________



GigaByteBoard...64bit...FX 4300 3.8, G. Skill sniper 1866 32GB, EVGA GTX 660 ti 3gb, Raptor 64mb cache, Planar 120Hz 2ms, CH controls, Tir5
  #7  
Old 11-06-2008, 08:03 PM
ECV56_LeChuck ECV56_LeChuck is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 102
Default

Yeah... I think that all here agree with a simple engine start sequence, but a little more complex than in IL-2 with battery, fuel tank selector, maybe a primer, two or three more commands, and ready to go. PLEASE!!
  #8  
Old 11-07-2008, 07:38 AM
Bobb4 Bobb4 is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 553
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Baco View Post
Oleg, with all due respect. If a "more complex" cockpit control or engine start is such a watse of time, why did you include take offs and landings or even an eject sequence for Il2 if its unnecesary. When you get shot down, it doesn´t matter if you eject or not, or whay take off at all, why did you give us the choice of taking off, (to make the feeling more inmersive) and yet you don´t want to give us the choice of transfering fuel from tank to tank, or select magnetos or turning on the bateries... we don´t need much, just a little more than in Il-2. Ususally setting the cockpit and doing stuff befor taking off sets the mood, the amience, to get in the role of a fighterpilot, not just a kid palying a "planes game".... Every new sim has more and more interactivity than previosu ones.. It feels that leaving the SOW series out of that trend like if you would still continue to do movies in Mono sound and not use stereo...and Sounf FX and that kind of thing...

Why not enchance the experience of being there for those who ant it?


Obviously people have not read what Qleg has said on the matter.
Basically it is a compromise for the online community who would not enjoy spending ten to twenty minutes going through realistic starts up procedures.
Lock-on has all the bells and whistles, look what a great commercial hit that was.

He has already indicated it will be a bit more realistic.
But imagine flying in an HIII in WW2, you would spend 20 minutes on the ground as your squad slowly circles above until it is your turn to take-off.
You might enjoy it the first time you do it in single player but after a few months????

I am more interested in damage model and FM than bells and whistles.
"Wow look I spent ten minutes inflight transfering fuel from my damaged right wing tank to my central one..."

Things I would like to see is a gunner kill does not shut-down your rear guns for long in a large bomber in real life someone else would take over over time.
but an entire mission flown without a rear gunner because of one lucky burst is unrealistic.
Pilots should have the option of reassigning crew positions.
When all is said and done IL2 was a survey sim and so will SOW be. That requires some compromise.
  #9  
Old 11-07-2008, 11:19 AM
brando's Avatar
brando brando is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Devon UK
Posts: 451
Default

>>>"Basically it is a compromise for the online community who would not enjoy spending ten to twenty minutes going through realistic starts up procedures......"<<<

This is not correct. Ten or twenty minutes is way more than it took for a pilot to fire up his engine before a scramble for one simple reason - a pre-flight start-up and run-up had already been carried out by the ground crew. This was a customary procedure for all fighter planes that were placed on stand-by for immediate action, certainly in the RAF. In other words, the planes were already warmed up and required much less of a procedure than for a cold-start. Sometimes the pilot was involved in this morning preparation, but more likely it was carried out entirely by the fitter and the rigger. Often the pilot wasn't involved at all in the start-up.

A very good description is made by Geoffrey Wellum, a Spitfire pilot of 92 Squadron, in his book "First Light".

"........ the ringing phone still makes me jump. 'Squadron scramble base angels twelve.'
As one we all make a dive for the door..... I race for my Spitfire....I look and see my aeroplane now only a short distance away. The ground crew are starting up, the engine fires. There's my parachute hanging from the wingtip where I left it. I make a grab and begin to put it on. My rigger has already removed the starter plug and pulled the trolley clear. He climbs onto the starboard wing and waits by the cockpit. With my chute on I hobble round the trailing edge of the wing and up onto the walkway. With an agility that never ceases to amaze me, my fitter is out of the cockpit in a flash and putting his hand under my arm, almost lifting me into the cockpit
......."

Even a cold start is less complex than you suggest, due to the fact that the engine had already been run up and checked earlier. Here's a checklist, again taken from "First Light" from a flight that didn't involve a scramble

".... I fit my oxygen mask, R/T lead plugged in, also oxygen tube, that's OK. Release the Sutton harness lock and check the fuel gauges, full of course. Oxygen on and the needle flicks up to the full mark. Shouldn't need oxygen today but you never know. Elevator trim one degree nose heavy, full rudder bias, pitch full fine and controls free. A quick double check round. Everything looks good. Radiator shutter open, all right then, fuel on, ready for starting. Throttle open a little. Coolant temperature? Shows dead cold, OK so we will have to prime here. Give her six pumps on the Ki-Gas; I lean out of the cockpit.
'All clear?'
A thumbs up from the two stalwarts. 'Clear, sir.'
'Contact.'
'Contact, sir'
Mag switches on, press the starter button and booster coils at the same time and the starter engages with a metallic clang. The airscrew turns slowly, the engine fires, hesitates for just a second, kicks back and then starts with great puffs of smoke which momentarily engulf the cockpit. I adjust the throttle and the Merlin settles down and runs evenly as it warms up. The needle of the temperature gauge comes off the cold stop
.....

So you see that there is not much more pilot involvement in the starting procedure than in IL-2. The work of getting aircraft alive after an overnight rest is very much the ground crew's job and can't be put at the pilot's door, as much as you might want to fantasise about it.
Most of the procedures, like setting up elevator trim, applying full rudder bias, manipulating the throttle and mixture, opening the radiator shutter, are all available to the conscientious IL2 pilot before he takes off.

I also deplore the instant spawn, engine on, hurtling dash across the runway that defines much of the dogfighting arena scene - but I suggest that the careful pilot who wants to fly off fully under control and also return, having completed his mission, is already offered most of the pre-launch option.

Twenty minutes, or even ten, isn't in it.

B
__________________
Another home-built rig:
AMD FX 8350, liquid-cooled. Asus Sabretooth 990FX Rev 2.0 , 16 GB Mushkin Redline (DDR3-PC12800), Enermax 1000W PSU, MSI R9-280X 3GB GDDR5
2 X 128GB OCZ Vertex SSD, 1 x64GB Corsair SSD, 1x 500GB WD HDD.
CH Franken-Tripehound stick and throttle merged, CH Pro pedals. TrackIR 5 and Pro-clip. Windows 7 64bit Home Premium.
  #10  
Old 11-07-2008, 11:49 AM
Skarphol Skarphol is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Fjellhamar, Norway
Posts: 257
Default

Think of how cool it would be to see and cooperate with the AI groundcrew during that procedure! For online play I guess it might be higly unpopular because it is timeconsuming, but offline? Great immersion!

Skarphol
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 05:48 PM.


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