Patch 4.10 - Development Updates by Daidalos Team

[=BLW=Pablo]

hello guys
S! Daidalos Team

i have another question

as you can see here
http://ultrapack.il2war.com/index.php/topic,1758.0.html

I did the FW-190 A8/A9, without the rack of bombs.



would be possible to create a new option for loudout FW's A8 and A9?
we could call lightened loudout (field mod)

the 3d modeling work is done.
and I would be happy to donate to you if they have interest.

sorry my bad english

[ben_wh]

As we know, there are a lot of talented modders out there who have been developing new planes, maps and other content for the sim. However as pointed out by TD, some of these do not adhere to the standard used for other content currently in-game (e.g. polygon counts, FM)

My questions are:
1) Is there a set of published 'specs' for modders to follow for developing new content? (plane, map, FX, sound, etc.)

2) Is there an established process for modders to submit their content to TD for assessment to be included in official patch? Normally, a spec sheet would accompany the submitted content with key info (e.g. polygon count) to reflect compliance with standard specs.

This way the community can benefit from the products of the creative energy from modders, and TD can maintain control on the quality of content going into official patches, while TD members can focus on core improvement areas in their plan.

Quite possibly such process is already in place but then I do not have visibility into the inner workings of the patch development process. Just curious.

Cheers,

[JG53Frankyboy]

a small one:
would it be possible to set the existend "Blenheim-Singapore"-skin as the default one for the Blenheim Mk.IV for ALL maps except the Finnlandmaps please ?
This little plane is a so important plane in early campaigns - the finnish skin looks mostly ugly in the MTO, Malaya, Burma, Normandie ......................... and to set it manually not always helps (and is often annyoing............. )

because of the comming SoW:BOB to ask for a flyable one is sure out of possibilty - unfortunatly - as i said, a often forgotten, but so important bomber in early war scenarios.

[daidalos.team]

The specs for 3D modelling are generally known and quite clear. They have been put together by 3rd party modellers several years ago while they were submitting planes directly to Maddox Games. They have been even posted on several mod community sites. Unfortunately there are very few modelers who have the patience to follow and stick to them.

In general we are open to cooperation with serious and dedicated modellers, progammers and texture artists who can get the job done within specified/agreed parameters. We are looking for those who are able to create complex modelling or programming usually from scratch rather than modifying existing IL-2 content.

1. The first step is to contact us via email: daidalos.team@gmail.com We have already communicated this before.

2. Then we do a technical evaluation and give our honest feedback to the author on his project. If we recognize a perspective development, we offer our further cooperation.

3. Then we provide our remote support/tutorials through our private development forum where we can discuss technical stuff only.

That's how it is working right now and it is quite productive.

Originally Posted by ben_wh

As we know, there are a lot of talented modders out there who have been developing new planes, maps and other content for the sim. However as pointed out by TD, some of these do not adhere to the standard used for other content currently in-game (e.g. polygon counts, FM)

My questions are:
1) Is there a set of published 'specs' for modders to follow for developing new content? (plane, map, FX, sound, etc.)

2) Is there an established process for modders to submit their content to TD for assessment to be included in official patch? Normally, a spec sheet would accompany the submitted content with key info (e.g. polygon count) to reflect compliance with standard specs.

This way the community can benefit from the products of the creative energy from modders, and TD can maintain control on the quality of content going into official patches, while TD members can focus on core improvement areas in their plan.

Quite possibly such process is already in place but then I do not have visibility into the inner workings of the patch development process. Just curious.

Cheers,

[Viking]

That's how it is working right now and it is quite productive"

Ohhh! Do I love that statment?

Khun Viking

[SG2_Wasy]

update today?

[Sita]

Originally Posted by SG2_Wasy

update today?

+1

[daidalos.team]

Update posted.

[FrankB]

Hallo Team.Daidalos!

Looking at your ambitious schedule of releasing 4.10 in early April, I would like to ask whether you have started the release process already?

It is not an easy task to put all the bits together and we all remember how 4.09 was delayed several times due to the last minute bugs. Is it still the case that you need someone from MG guys to compile stuff for you?

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

Originally Posted by FrankB

Hallo Team.Daidalos!

Looking at your ambitious schedule of releasing 4.10 in early April, I would like to ask whether you have started the release process already?

Thats not clear to answer. Generally all our doings aim for the release.
But while a few things are already done and working, others are still in progress. We have all the time a working copy ready, featuring the finished projects, which increases as work goes on. What you mean, will really happen as soon as the last content issue is considered as ready and only the search for bugs and shortcomings is left to do.

It is not an easy task to put all the bits together and we all remember how 4.09 was delayed several times due to the last minute bugs. Is it still the case that you need someone from MG guys to compile stuff for you?

Honestly, this isn't sorted out 100% yet. Hopefully we will have this on our hands in the end.