SoW: Battle for Moscow and other Igromir news

[Freycinet]

Originally Posted by Luffe

I hope so.

Anyway, that map reminded me that we haven't seen any forrested areas 'up close' in SOW.
I hope they are not managed the same way as Il2s 'pancake' forrests.

Have anyone spotted anything about this in the vids from Igromir?

Luffe, the "pancake" forests you disparage were an absolutely brilliant programming solution to a problem that, up till Il-2, hadn't been solved by any flight sim: how to show a forest cover of large extension. Oleg solved this with four layers of semi-transparent textures that gave an exceptionally good illusion of a forest of 3D trees from just a few hundred meters up.

I think you probably weren't around playing flight sims in 2001 when Il-2 came out, but the graphics blew everything else out of the water back then. And the particular solution for forests is still a very clever one.

You have to know something about programming and system resources to understand why flight sims look the way they do. A handful of teenage kids in this forum haven't got a clue, but most have an idea...

[MD_Titus]

Originally Posted by philip.ed

I've never hidden my age; it doesn't take from my intelligence.
I mean it never stopped Oleg from accepting my information on RAF flight-kit for SoW.

Seriously, just grow up. I make one comment saying that, from my perspective, the smoke looked wrong (as no guncam footage has ever shown it on that level) and you all get your knickers in a twist.

ahhh love the arrogance. your exam scores are just that, exam scores. well done. *golfclap*

no one cares.

godwin's law. been a while since we saw it being invoked.

as for

Rebuking someone because they can't spell is like singling out minorities.

oh lol. i mean there's so much wrong with this i can't actually be bothered to start on it. you got yourself into a hole with the hitler comment, stop digging. it just makes you look foolish.

you make a series of comments where you say the game looks poor and you hope this is an early beta as it looks awful, near constantly in fact. you only ever add in the proviso of "in my opinion" or "appears to me" after about 4-5 pages of getting ripped into for a comment that categorically states something is awful or wrong... for someone who prides themselves on their grammar school education and being intelligent, you sure do make your points in such a way as to render 90% of your posts pointless. i'd be asking for my money back, because simply assuming yourself to be in the right, rather than voicing an opinion, is quite a critical error when passing judgement, and an approach i'd expect to be hammered out of you at grammar school. however we then come back to arrogance, and no amount of expensive education can hammer that out. in fact it can all too often entrench it.

oh, and way to go to the gutter with "remind yourself what a woman really is".

[kedrednael]

Originally Posted by Feuerfalke

@ kedrednael:
Nice video. Note, though, that not the bullets cause the smoke. What causes the smoke is the burning tracer.

You can see this effect in IL2 as well: If you 50s or 303s at the ground or water, you will see a lot more impact than tracers with smoke. It's the same in these videos.
And knowing that, you might remember it's still WIP and that it's highly doubtful Oleg modeled something in IL2 that he suddenly forgets when making SoW. So IMHO this discussion can end here.

I know you can't see the bullets flying etc.
But I was reffering to the gun smoke comming out of the wings of the planes when firing, when I showed the ki46 firing with the smoke behind them philipeed said: "can a .303 be compared to a point .50?" I think he thought that if a smaller caliber bullet is fired there is a lot less smoke comming from the wings.
But in the last vid you can see the P51's firing and there is also a lot of smoke comming from their wings (P51 fire .303 rounds don't they?).

[MD_Titus]

Originally Posted by kedrednael

at 10:45 you can see some ki46's or something shooting, the guns generate a lot of smoke, the only difference with the smoke in SOW is that the smoke lasts longer in real life.

overmodelled, clearly!

6x.50 against 8x.303... probably going to be comparable amount of smoke, i'd guess.

Originally Posted by philip.ed

My point is that bigotry comments like that is what leads to people like Hitler. ....
can't see what it is that cannoysyou so much and ....

1. correcting people on spelling and grammar isn't bigotry phil. really isn't.

2. lol

[MD_Titus]

Originally Posted by kedrednael

I know you can't see the bullets flying etc.
But I was reffering to the gun smoke comming out of the wings of the planes when firing, when I showed the ki46 firing with the smoke behind them philipeed said: "can a .303 be compared to a point .50?" I think he thought that if a smaller caliber bullet is fired there is a lot less smoke comming from the wings.
But in the last vid you can see the P51's firing and there is also a lot of smoke comming from their wings (P51 fire .303 rounds don't they?).

nah, that's not a ki-46, it's a p-51 at 10.45 i'd say, and they have three .50 cals per wing.

[Foo'bar]

This discussion is getting out of control wake me up when there's something new about topic.

[Luffe]

Originally Posted by Freycinet

Luffe, the "pancake" forests you disparage were an absolutely brilliant programming solution to a problem that, up till Il-2, hadn't been solved by any flight sim: how to show a forest cover of large extension. Oleg solved this with four layers of semi-transparent textures that gave an exceptionally good illusion of a forest of 3D trees from just a few hundred meters up.

I think you probably weren't around playing flight sims in 2001 when Il-2 came out, but the graphics blew everything else out of the water back then. And the particular solution for forests is still a very clever one.

You have to know something about programming and system resources to understand why flight sims look the way they do. A handful of teenage kids in this forum haven't got a clue, but most have an idea...

Whoa, lighten up. I realize they were made that way to save resources, and they look great from altitude. At ground level they are nearly invisible though, as I'm sure many mudmovers can tell you.
I just hope that a different solution has been found for SOW.

I really don't understand your attitude.
It must really be torture for you to read through the posts on this forum.

why do you people have to argue about how and what other people say?
Can't you just discuss about SoW?

[MD_Titus]

i doubt it was the mis-spelling that was felt to render it pointless phil, but if you want to stick to that line of argument to try and validate earlier, possibly unwise, comparisons then knock yourself out.

and the best way of supporting yourself?

jockstraps ftw.

Originally Posted by philip.ed

Serously Nearmiss; this guy is way out of line. I am partially dyslexic.

as that's the case then i retract my "lol". however it isn't based on bigotry, i just find any arguments based on mis-spelling quite absurd and ludicrous.

[MD_Titus]

mine has a juke box and lights. it pwns.