Daidalos Team's Room -QUESTIONS AND REQUESTS ONLY on IL2 Authorized Addons

[cmirko]

Originally Posted by Billfish

Please let me know if DT would be willing to look at this information.....Thanks for the work.

K2

sure, every piece of info, backed up by tests and/or hard data will be looked at , if you are more comfortable use the DT email...

cheers

[=FPS=Salsero]

Next 3 questions:

1. There is some mod which allows moving trains/ships etc in dogfight mode, are there any plans for the the official implementation of it?
2. Very popular request is to limit the information given on the plane types that are flown by the adversaries in dogfight, any plans to implement it?
3. Are there any plans for tight integration with a free server commander (FBD)?

Previous batch of questions:
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpos...&postcount=266

[csThor]

@ Salsero

I hope you don't mind when I give my personal opinion. At least on some of the questions, that is.

1.) Bf 109 G-4 - IMO not worth the workload since it is essentially the same as a G-2, just with FuG 16, larger wheels and a stronger main landing gear.
2.) Fw 190 D-11 - extremely rare late-war type, ATM there is more important work on existing types and historically relevant types to be done.
3.) Yak-1 Model 1942 - I agree. Should close a gap in the planeset.
4.) I have no idea if the engine can even handle such "Lego airfields", but I doubt it. My guess: don't hope for it.
5.) Regarding deactivated 3D features: No idea. This is one for the coders.
6.) Murmansk map - no idea. Don't think so, though.

[II/JG54_Emil]

As I posted in a thread here that the guns are not historically correct.

If I name true numbers from different reliably sources, will you consider correcting them?

[csThor]

We'll need a little more specific info on what you consider not correct.

[Red Dragon-DK]

I been asking if DT would do anything about the sound in the Sim?

Regarding the 109 G4. I deffently disargee. We need it more, than we need biplane. Why do DT think we need more biplane?

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthr...t=8815&page=32

[csThor]

Sound is an issue due to the way the engine works. The default sound isn't well liked, but it does some things very well and very subtly, which the soundmods apparently don't do at all (sense of speed etc). Plus we're not sure Oleg would agree with us taking a look at it.

On the G-4:

With nearly all the relevant 109s in game adding a version with only minor differences (not to say irrelevant in the sense of gameplay) to a version already in-game it's simply a question of effort vs gain. And here the gain is nearly nil. The biplanes present in 4.09 were made by 3rd Party Modellers and were ready to be included - and they were of special interest to those who made the Slovakia maps.

[mkubani]

Regarding Bf 109G-4, as explained by Thor, it is 99% the same plane as G-2. We could add it, but at the moment it is not on our priority list. You can substitute G-2 for G-4 without most players not even noticing the difference. But I doubt you can substitute a G-2 for any biplane or other plane that will come in 4.09 or next patches.

Changing sounds is a sensitive issue which is being discussed privately within our team. Nice sounds are not always the realistic sounds. We do have a member in our team who has first hand experience with WW2 plane sounds from the cockpit.

[II/JG54_Emil]

Originally Posted by csThor

We'll need a little more specific info on what you consider not correct.

Weapon correction concerning muzzle velocity, frequency, belting sequence.

The changes are in most cases minimal but should done.

Also concerning some load-outs.

[csThor]

@ Salsero

I'd say taking a hard look at the G-6 FM is the right way to go, since I think this one has issues that need to be solved. G-2 will have to be looked at, too, but isn't as questionable as the G-6.

@ Emil

I'll leave that to the coders. I'm too dumb for that.