Fresh stuff from sukhoi.ru (Discussion)

[conio]

Originally Posted by BlackSix

No, the problem is not financial or programming. I can not tell more.

Thanks BlackSix,

Does this problem include the risk of further development being completely cancelled or is it for sure, just a temporal problem?

[BlackSix]

Originally Posted by conio

Thanks BlackSix,

Does this problem include the risk of further development being completely cancelled or is it for sure, just a temporal problem?

A temporal problem.

[Trumper]

Black six ,your English is excellent all your postings are appreciated.

[Sutts]

I sincerely hope it's not more blood sucking lawyers demanding payment for use of wartime designs - paid for by the people I might add.

It really sucks that we'll never see a full complement of aircraft and ships in a Pacific campaign for this very reason. A real disgrace.


I'd like to add my appreciation for your input BlackSix, it really makes a difference to the mood of the forum.

[JG52Krupi]

Have to agree, thanks BlackSix.

[Dano]

Originally Posted by BlackSix

A temporal problem.

Always good to hear, any benchmarks on performance yet?

[335th_GRAthos]

Originally Posted by JG52Krupi

Have to agree, thanks BlackSix.

+1

[Peril]

Originally Posted by jimbop

I mustn't understand this properly... surely there were hundreds of pages of debate and records dredged up etc during late IL-2 development - is there still not broad consensus of what the model windows should be? If not I doubt there ever will be.

Jimbop, I can say 100% from experience that not everyone will agree on an end result from a FM build. Your last comment is correct, there will 'never' be a 100% agreement on which data to use. If I dig up data for an A6M that has it at 358mph @ 15000ft, and also data that shows a test of the same plane as 325mph on the day of testing, which is correct?

Just one example of the quandary.

Of course if you aim to only use calculated data, it's equally a problem. You can't win the data source argument, only do your best to ensure it's 'consistent' criteria data, and that all aircraft are treated equally and with parity. The coffee table books most often used as a source of data by newer sim users looking to help, are a constant source of aggravation for those who have studded the topic for many years and invested lots of money buying original source material. There will always be arguments over this plane verses that based on stories, books, and even opinions.

My only advise, and the way I tackle it, is to gather as much original data, then use this as your basis for determining performance. It should be original source data but more so you need to understand aerodynamics, research any differences in the data, to understand why any variations exist so you are better armed to make a judgement call of which data is more likely accurate. Yes, unfortunately it required lots of study and experience to be able to do a good job in building FMs, and many 'sim builders' don't have the background or the spare time to do justice to this area.

I remain hopeful that some of the hard core FM guys that stalk these places can offer their help and vast collections of data and experience to what is most often (understandably) an under financed (in time and money) aspect of any commercial simulation.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If they ever release the core engine for us to build a game around, I'm first on board to build a Pacific Simulation. I have a few mates that may also be interested in working for nothing just to battle over the pacific.

IL2-BOP (Battle Over the Pacific)


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hang in there BlackSix, you're doing a great job, I know how hard it is to manage a community of passionate people

[Ataros]

Originally Posted by 41Sqn_Banks

The missing bridges and roads through cities are the biggest problem right know for a dynamic campaign because the ground units can't reach certain areas of a map.

I witnessed this issue in naryv's examples and hc-wolf's missions when run on Repka servers and I think the best solution is to respawn the groundgroup 500 m. further on the way to their next waypoint if it is stuck for 3-5 minutes and not in combat. Just an idea.

[ATAG_Bliss]

Originally Posted by Ataros

I witnessed this issue in naryv's examples and hc-wolf's missions when run on Repka servers and I think the best solution is to respawn the groundgroup 500 m. further on the way to their next waypoint if it is stuck for 3-5 minutes and not in combat. Just an idea.

Has anyone gotten spline roads to load in the -server environment yet? I think the disappearance of some of the ground objects/bridges/land marks between SP/FMB and the dedicated server exist because of the spline road problem we have in the dedicated world.

@BlackSix,

Thanks for taking the time to answer many people's questions here. It is much appreciated!

I have several suggestions, but I'll leave the more complex out for now. My suggestion is to have a server sided option that makes players not able to leave their aircraft unless landed/crashed/died/bailed out. (Similar to what we had in the old IL2, via the "refly" button). Currently an online player can hit escape and simply spawn into a new plane any time he/she wishes, even in the middle of combat. This is annoying to say the least.

Thanks!