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.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 03-28-2011, 10:50 PM
IceFire IceFire is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,879
Default

Mailman... the markings, if you recall, were horrible in 4.09 and there was no date system to determine them. Yes they did change along with most other markings that were not of the paint on variety. Everything from the Russian, German, RAF and USAAF/USMC/USN markings changed.

Obviously the details of the changes aren't quite right as the dates are a little off on the marking usage and indeed the Torch markings are very specific to the African operations and were removed very soon after that operation was finished.

You're only seeing the markings as they are on the Corsair Mark I (or other planes) because it's using the "Default" bitmap on top of the skin style that most aircraft in IL-2 use. Most American aircraft use the painted on variety which is distinct and used only in a few places outside of the American aircraft. Since the Corsair Mark I was intended to be marked up with Royal Navy markings and not American ones is the reason for the problems.

Ultimately three points to make:

1) The Solomons map has nothing to do with this discussion. So far as I know the maps themselves do not determine markings except for overall theater markings where applicable (there is Pacific, Europe Winter and Europe Summer to the best of my knowledge).

2) The new US default markings are a huge improvement but the dates for introduction and theater specifics are wrong or only narrowly applicable.

3) It'd be REALLY nice to have a separate entry for the F4U-1 or if not, at least a USN/USMC specific skin that could be applied when those are specified that would feature the painted on marking type.
__________________
Find my missions and much more at Mission4Today.com
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 03-29-2011, 01:47 AM
-)-MAILMAN- -)-MAILMAN- is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Maine/United States
Posts: 52
Default

I was not commenting on the quality of the markings. The quality is great much better than previous versions, but as you stated the time frame for the markings is obviously wrong. Also desert camouflage is assigned to maps of North Africa and most of the Pacific Maps at least in previous versions so this could explain the choice of Torch insignia. There is no separate Pacific or Jungle camouflage setting as part of the game which could help.

Although the 4.09m versions of the US insignia for the Corsair Mk I were of less quality than with the 4.10.1 versions the 4.09m version did attempt to accurately display the proper insignia for the Corsair Mk I (P-400 & P-39N as USAAF) when selecting USN/USMC for the country. Maybe the powers to be in a future patch could change which markings display for the this aircraft based on time frame.

My intent was to bring up the problem so that the powers to be might look at the issue.

Can I take for instance the Dec 42 Solomons map (to accurately reflect the actually airfields of February 1943) and put the date of Jan 44 to get the six position blue circle and star insignia for USMC?
__________________
-)-MAILMAN-

Last edited by -)-MAILMAN-; 03-29-2011 at 01:51 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 03-29-2011, 07:30 AM
EJGr.Ost_Caspar EJGr.Ost_Caspar is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 939
Default

Isn't 'USN markings on RAF Corsairs' wrong at all? I don't get it.


EDIT: ah, reading in that other thread, I understand now: you want in fact a F4U-1 and so you were going for a compromise, using the Corsair MK.I. And you are complaining about the historical inaccuracy of your compromise.
Well, a decent F4U-1 default skin for USN could indeed help to make your compromise looking less like a compromise.
__________________

----------------------------------------------
For bugreports, help and support contact:
daidalos.team@googlemail.com

For modelers - The IL-2 standard modeling specifications:
IL-Modeling Bible

Last edited by EJGr.Ost_Caspar; 03-29-2011 at 07:41 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 03-30-2011, 12:25 AM
-)-MAILMAN- -)-MAILMAN- is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Maine/United States
Posts: 52
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by EJGr.Ost_Caspar View Post
Isn't 'USN markings on RAF Corsairs' wrong at all? I don't get it.


EDIT: ah, reading in that other thread, I understand now: you want in fact a F4U-1 and so you were going for a compromise, using the Corsair MK.I. And you are complaining about the historical inaccuracy of your compromise.
Well, a decent F4U-1 default skin for USN could indeed help to make your compromise looking less like a compromise.
I have plenty of USN and USMC skins for the F4U-1/Corsair Mk I. I am actually complaining about the historical accuracy of the USN/USMC markings not the actual skin. The problem is that when you choose to "turn markings on" in the quick mission builder while on the arming screen; the picture changes and shows the correct USN/USMC markings, but then when you click on fly and the mission loads the incorrect insignia appears on the airplane when looking from the cockpit depending on the time-frame of the mission. This also occurs in the FMB. The '42 USN/USMC markings in the game never existed for the F4U-1 nor did the USN/USMC markings for '43 in the game for the F4U-1. The '44 markings in the game are correct for early 1943 only for the F4U-1 Corsair not 1944. By 1944 the F4U-1 was wearing the same late war makings, "stars and bars", as the rest of the US Corsairs.
__________________
-)-MAILMAN-
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 03-30-2011, 06:29 AM
csThor csThor is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: somewhere in Germany
Posts: 1,213
Default

The problem is that the stars & bars emblem is not possible in realistic dimensions with the marking system. That would require a rectangle with greather width than height ... and we have a square. This is also the reason dedicated US skins are available for certain types - the later insignia is on them in accurate dimensions.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 03-30-2011, 11:19 PM
-)-MAILMAN- -)-MAILMAN- is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Maine/United States
Posts: 52
Default

Well I don't pretend to know how the national insignia is applied to a particular skin when you turn markings on. In other words I don't know the mechanics of making it happen.

I do know that in 4.09m and earlier versions the blue circle and white star appeared when you turned "markings on" and was historically correct. This was more correct than what we have in the latest version and maybe we should go back to this.

With 4.10.1 three different national markings appear depending what the date of the mission. The '42 & '43 markings are not historically correct and never appeared on the airplane.

The fact that replies and explanations have been written is appreciated and I hope a solution to this problem get found and implemented.
__________________
-)-MAILMAN-

Last edited by -)-MAILMAN-; 03-30-2011 at 11:31 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 03-31-2011, 12:39 AM
IceFire IceFire is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,879
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by -)-MAILMAN- View Post
Well I don't pretend to know how the national insignia is applied to a particular skin when you turn markings on. In other words I don't know the mechanics of making it happen.

I do know that in 4.09m and earlier versions the blue circle and white star appeared when you turned "markings on" and was historically correct. This was more correct than what we have in the latest version and maybe we should go back to this.

With 4.10.1 three different national markings appear depending what the date of the mission. The '42 & '43 markings are not historically correct and never appeared on the airplane.

The fact that replies and explanations have been written is appreciated and I hope a solution to this problem get found and implemented.
You mean you liked the bright blue emblem with the white star that extended outside of the roundel? Yeah that was accurate
__________________
Find my missions and much more at Mission4Today.com
Reply With Quote
Reply


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 06:50 PM.


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