Daidalos Team's Room -QUESTIONS AND REQUESTS ONLY - For 4.11

[Fighterace]

Is the Birdcage F4U & F4U-4 Corsairs denied to be put into IL-2 1946 by Northrop Grumman?

[csThor]

Yes. At best we can give the Corsair Mk I a dedicated US paintjob and pretend it's a birdcage Corsair. More is not possible.

[Fighterace]

Originally Posted by csThor

Yes. At best we can give the Corsair Mk I a dedicated US paintjob and pretend it's a birdcage Corsair. More is not possible.

Ah ok thanks, I thought it could of been a possible project for TD but that's now nipped in the bud

[IceFire]

For those of you calling for high poly warships... I encourage you to arrange a dozen KGV's in a harbor in some sort of mooring formation like you might see in any major port. Then fly over that mass of ships.

Even my latest PC which can handle Battlefield 3 on Ultra... balks at this and my frame rate drops from 140+ to the mid 20s at times. Double the number of polys on a ship and do the same thing and I just can't see it happening. The game engine wasn't designed to handle it.

[Lagarto]

By the way, we could use some more variety of other surface vessels: more types and sizes of merchant ships, large troop transport, tugboat, self-propelled river barge and Asian sampan;
Another thing is to make the in-game rivers navigable - most of them look neither too narrow nor too shallow for that; is it feasible?

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by Lagarto

By the way, we could use some more variety of other surface vessels: more types and sizes of merchant ships, large troop transport, tugboat, self-propelled river barge and Asian sampan;

+1

I'd love to see more boats and small ships in the game. They were much more common prey for strike fighters and attack bombers.

A large troop transport would be sort of interesting, but the really big troop ships didn't usually get that close to enemy planes. Smaller troop transports would be welcome, though. I believe that there are some modded LSTs and other US transport ships.

Originally Posted by Lagarto

Another thing is to make the in-game rivers navigable - most of them look neither too narrow nor too shallow for that; is it feasible?

I believe that it's currently possible for rivers to be navigable. Actually, one of the issues with many maps is that the rivers are too wide.

[Lagarto]

Currently rivers are not navigable, unless they're as wide as Volga.
Recently I've been flying some south-east Asia scenarios and it struck me how dead the rivers look; in real life they would be teeming with water traffic. In his book "Into the Teeth of The Tiger" Donald Lopez wrote that they frequently flew interdiction missions against Japanese sampans, because due to scarcity of roads, rivers were main traffic routes.
Another thing is the odd color of the rivers in the PTO scenarios; I imagine they're more like muddy brown than cobalt blue.

[Asheshouse]

Originally Posted by IceFire

For those of you calling for high poly warships... I encourage you to arrange a dozen KGV's in a harbor in some sort of mooring formation like you might see in any major port. Then fly over that mass of ships.

Arranging 12 KGV's in harbour sounds a bit unrealistic. After all only five of the class were built.

At Pearl Harbour battleship row had seven BB's.
At Taranto there were 6 BB's.
In May 41 the British Mediterranean Fleet had 4 BB's and a CV operating out of Alexandria.
Operation Pedestal - 2 BB's and 4 CV's

The greatest impact on FPS is due to AA fire, not the ship model, but this can be tuned down in the Mission Builder.

Using the existing KGV model as a guide for future work seems reasonable to me.

Ashe

[IceFire]

Originally Posted by Asheshouse

Arranging 12 KGV's in harbour sounds a bit unrealistic. After all only five of the class were built.

At Pearl Harbour battleship row had seven BB's.
At Taranto there were 6 BB's.
In May 41 the British Mediterranean Fleet had 4 BB's and a CV operating out of Alexandria.
Operation Pedestal - 2 BB's and 4 CV's

The greatest impact on FPS is due to AA fire, not the ship model, but this can be tuned down in the Mission Builder.

Using the existing KGV model as a guide for future work seems reasonable to me.

Ashe

Fine... put 5 KGV's plus a dozen destroyers and support vessels FPS drops significantly on even the best systems.

AA fire is a big hit but the models themselves bottleneck the graphics system as well. Obviously as a mission builder you design around these kinds of limitations but it's unhelpful if the limits go up too far as they become prohibitively difficult to build enjoyable experiences for a wide variety of players. The KGV is finely detailed but I don't think, with the current engine limitations, there should be any huge bump in detail level above and beyond.

This is also why, for example, I don't model entire front lines worth of fighting in any of my campaigns. I saw someone do it once and I remember the slideshow that I experienced as a result.

[Loku]

Hi all i saw a post about mods i have made and i would like to explain some things about them:
P11F-modified stock P11c
RWD-10 build from scratch by me (~3200 poly) made for PAT aerobatic team.

PZL23B and PZL42 (~7000 poly) build by Fatman and Lucas for Targetware adopted by me.
R-XIII`s ( ~14000 polys) build by Empeck for FSX adopted by me.

I have permission from authors to use their models and they send me their orginal files to work with.

When i get them for adoption i had to made their internal structure no different than stock models to make them work in game ,so i have made LODs,caps,shadow,colisions boxes and hitboxes.Cockpits were also made to be functional.Knowing that polycount of those models is higher than game specs they are available as MODS only.Game seriously lack of polish planes so this was only way to get them in.

To make TD life easier(they already have things to do)dont ask them to include my mods into official patches.