But does it matter what sound - engine will be used???
When the game, as already stated, will run under directx why shouldn't the sound?
I think this information is irrelevant as OM will use the technology HE thinks the best for his product.
So, who cares?
BoB:SoW will have the best technology that OM can use within his financial and time limitations.

Create your own thread and maybe someone will answer your questions.

Oleg, Luthier and others have answered a myriad of questions on this forums. Also, each Friday update gets placed as sticky until the next update is released.

One thing... Look at some recent game releases and realize that every thing Oleg divulges can come back to haunt him in another company's game. It is smart to hold alot of things back, especially if they are special attributes people will be excited to have.

To be honest, we are in the best place with IL2 we have been since the release of Forgotten Battles. The TD, and weekly updates along with plenty of responses from Oleg and Luthier.

DirectX Sound gets procesed internaly in the Windows Vista/7 Kernel, your Soundhardware can not do anything with it, you have to disable Soundhardware effects and Acceleration.
If you dont you will get Missing Sounds, Ambient volumes get mixed up, and you see a drop in FPS, stutters and even freezes and crashes.

OpenAL sound gets used by a lot of games that run DirectX 9, 10 or 11, A: because its cheaper to licence, B: it still gives full Soundhardware suport.

Dont see much point in starting my own topic on this subject if theres a dedicated topic for questions.
I would expect atleast someone from the 1C team to check in once in a while.

They check, and certainly take advantage of the nature of questions asked...they just choose not to answer some of them yet, for their own reasons we may not fathom, being short of the informations or limitations they have!
As Luthier recently stated, they know everything there is to know about how to make SoW great: they are not blind, they are not deaf...but OK, they are mute :-) Nothing to worry about methinks...

JV

Again on training section
 

Hi Oleg,

I have a great idea for training of beginners: a Tactical Advisor !!! Based on the enemy plane characteristics and on the situation (energy, relative position), an onscreen message will advise the trainee on the best behavior: spiral climb, turn, scissors, yo-yo, lead or lag pursuit ... you name it!

It should be easy to implement, as it is the same logic that an AI plane would adopt, but think to the insane impact on a beginners skill!!!! It would be supercool, wouldn'it????

Bye,
Insuber

the few requests I have are

1) please make realistic spitfire flight models and not what we have in IL2

the spitfire could not nor probably ever could out turn a 109 ,the leading edge slats gave the 109 a lower stall speed and the wing loading of a 109 is lower than a spitfire allowing for a smaller turn radius for the 109. Only pilot skill makes the difference(Len Deighton-- fighter .. a very good reference book)
if it wasn't for a small fuel load of the 109 the spitfires would have been toast in the Battle of Britain (Aviation history magazine)

2) please make the flight models mod proof allowing only official mods

3) have an effective checksum for online play

4)the British 20 mm cannon were unreliable and the pilots who had them wanted to go back to the 303's . what we have in Il2 is far from reality

So basically you are asking for a Spitfire that cannot out turn a 109 and to make sure it has no cannons?

Not hard to guess what side of the channel you will be flying from ;)


The Spitfire shouldn't have cannons anyway, certainly not at the beginning of the BoB but to say it cannot out turn a 109?

When? They had reliability problems to start with, they solved them later in the war.

Any simplistic statement about 'X' outturning 'Y' without stating the conditions is practically meaningless.

The majority of RAF kills in the Battle of Britain were scored by Hurricanes...

Need I go on?

I agree with the two posts immediately above mine.

Particularly the Spitfire had lower wing loading than the 109, just look at the wings, the wings of the Spitfire are much bigger, so for aircraft of more or less the same weight the loading is bound to be lower.

In "Luftwaffe Fighter Aces" by Mike Spick, on page 50 we have a table including many things, particularly:

Um , High and low wing loadings had bugger all to do with it, it was the spits ability to fly through most of the wing stall that gave its pilot the advantage at low and high speed and the cannon problems wernt fixed untill the feed and eject mechanisms were finally sorted out late 40\41, the 303 s were as a stop gap given an array of tips to make up for the lack of stopping power.