Could 4.10 Update lock the SFS files again and reunite the online community?

[II/JG54_Emil]

It would always depend on how "real" the stock model is.

There are countless examples in Il2 where stock is nonsense.
(Just yesterday I learned that the I-185 71 reverses its temperature when heating "up" strting at 110°C and going down to 20°C, which will prevent an overheat when radiators are closed.)

And it would be a pity if they were not corrected to RL as much as possible.

[csThor]

Problem, Emil, is that too many people think they were fed pure wisdom instead of milk as a baby and do consider themselves the only "expert" on the issue. This is why I have stomach cramps with modding in combat flight sims in general since there are several sets of tainted glasses (one LW-tainted, one USAAF-tainted, one RAF-tainted, ...).

[T}{OR]

I think this is going to be my last post in this thread as people obviously don't read what I write. And on top of it all Wikipedia is being listed as an reliable source.

Besides, I've gone OT enough as it is.

Originally Posted by csThor

Problem, Emil, is that too many people think they were fed pure wisdom instead of milk as a baby and do consider themselves the only "expert" on the issue. This is why I have stomach cramps with modding in combat flight sims in general since there are several sets of tainted glasses (one LW-tainted, one USAAF-tainted, one RAF-tainted, ...).

And to think that people say that picture is worth a thousand words, this is just the opposite of that...

[T}{OR]

Originally Posted by II/JG54_Emil

It would always depend on how "real" the stock model is.

There are countless examples in Il2 where stock is nonsense.
(Just yesterday I learned that the I-185 71 reverses its temperature when heating "up" strting at 110°C and going down to 20°C, which will prevent an overheat when radiators are closed.)

And it would be a pity if they were not corrected to RL as much as possible.

Be that as it may... It is a proven fact that people can't be trusted on matters like this. If you allow them to change parameters in order to fix small bugs like this - there is just no stopping them. Everyone will have their 'own little bug to fix', and the overall purpose of this would go a miss.

I sincerely hope that this option of locking the server to the certified content only will work like advertised and won't be possible to crack (will be frequently updated with every add-on).

I for one am willing to fly with minor imperfections and bugs as long as they aren't show stoppers. If the IL2 was to have its support prolonged by Oleg and his team, there weren't issues with Grumman, etc. - I am willing to believe that many of the bugs would have been squashed.

Same goes for SoW - these kind of bugs will be fixed with patches and are by no means an excuse to allow people to fiddle with FM when it compromises online gameplay.

[II/JG54_Emil]

Originally Posted by T}{OR

Be that as it may... It is a proven fact that people can't be trusted on matters like this.

This goes both ways, doesn´t it?

I don´t consider a superplane that can never overheat as a minor bug.
It´s a big bug when it comes to game-play.

Threre are plenty of other examples:

La-5 series using only later engines(charecteristics).

Weapons not having the power they should have:
MG151/20mm having only half its historical power.
8,65 hits/kill for a fighter and 55,7 hits/kill for a B-17.
Historically half the amount of bullets were needed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MG_151_cannon

etc., etc. etc.
(this isn´t about Luftwining btw. but about historical accuracy)

All this is changeable, but yet not being done.
It´s just a question of time until someone says I want it correct.

[swiss]

Originally Posted by II/JG54_Emil

There are countless examples in Il2 where stock is nonsense.
(Just yesterday I learned that the I-185 71 reverses its temperature when heating "up" strting at 110°C and going down to 20°C, which will prevent an overheat when radiators are closed.)

I always have to keep them closed, or wait till it overheats and then close them?

[II/JG54_Emil]

Originally Posted by swiss

I always have to keep them closed, or wait till it overheats and then close them?

Try it.

[I/ZG52_HaDeS]

T}{OR,
Obviously you don't know what you are talking about so indeed, any more posts are not needed.

There are many things in game that are not only "buggy", but wrong (intentionaly or not) , not only by comparison with the rest content of the game.

For example the pylons in Soviet fighters have Zero, yes 0, weight while the others have 150Kg of weight, even for a small rail.

So doesn't this "bother" you for "on-line" game?

The list is big enough but no need to go off topic.

[T}{OR]

Originally Posted by I/ZG52_HaDeS

T}{OR,
Obviously you don't know what you are talking about so indeed, any more posts are not needed.

There are many things in game that are not only "buggy", but wrong (intentionaly or not) , not only by comparison with the rest content of the game.

For example the pylons in Soviet fighters have Zero, yes 0, weight while the others have 150Kg of weight, even for a small rail.

So doesn't this "bother" you for "on-line" game?

The list is big enough but no need to go off topic.

For some it is easy to miss a forest because of a single tree. Every game will have bugs and mistakes, perfection is not possible. Bigger and more important things seem to elude you. IL2 came a long way from the original version, with all the changes and add-ons, stuff like that are fully understandable.

To answer your question - no, it doesn't bother me. As long as the guy I am shooting out of the sky has the same bug, inconsistency or just plain advantage of the wrongly modeled FM. I am not interested in speculating about the reasons why it is so - I couldn't care less.

Originally Posted by Blackdog_kt

I think it will be different to be honest.

Stock content will of course be locked and since SoW will be moddable, there will be less incentive to crack it and a clearer distinction between modder and cheater can be made: if the game has built in mod support and you don't need to crack anything to mod things into the game, it's safe to assume that any cracking done before the core engine's limits are exhausted is coming from malicious intent.
So, it will be easier to separate which is which, something that's very important as a lot of the IL2 mod controversy centered around the possibility of cheating in online play.

Apart from that however, mr Maddox has said many times that he hopes to create a 3rd party industry (freeware and payware) around SoW. So, how are people going to be able to release accurately modelled new flyable plane add-ons, if they can't make custom FM, DM and sounds?

Read my reply to Antoninus on the next page.

[I/ZG52_HaDeS]

[QUOTE=T}{OR;200550]For some it is easy to miss a forest because of a single tree.

Sometimes the trees are so many that obscure the whole forest.
[QUOTE]

Originally Posted by T}{OR

To answer your question - no, it doesn't bother me. As long as the guy I am shooting out of the sky has the same bug, inconsistency or just plain advantage of the wrongly modeled FM.

Thanks for revealing your way of thinking. Fortunately everything around us has been evolved because people were not thinking like your way.
So you don't care for a bug-free and accurate modelled sim. All you want is to boost your ego by "shooting out of the sky" someone who suffers the same bugs. Nice way of thinking
Hopefully SOW will differ from this and will be of best quality.

Originally Posted by T}{OR

I am not interested in speculating about the reasons why it is so - I couldn't care less.

No it does not bother me either. Not even the facts that the Soviet big bombs
have almost 4 times the destructive range of the rest or that the russian guns do 2-3 times more damage comparing with the same caliber guns of the rest.