4.13 development update discussion and feedback

[Pursuivant]

Originally Posted by Fighterace

Who would be interested in buying the old IL-2 franchise?

I have no idea. It depends on the price and who the fans are. Obviously, anyone who buys it would have to love the game rather than make a quick buck off of it. It also depends on what the restrictions on the sale would be.

[Buster_Dee]

I just wrote a post longer than yours. Luckily, it was not longer than the DEL key.

[Asheshouse]

For me, most of the visuals in IL-2 are great, given the limitations of lack of dynamic lighting and self shadowing. Some of the later maps like Slovakia and later mod maps really show what can be done in landscaping terms within the limits of the game engine.

Having done a little map building work in the past the greatest flaw to me is the inability to make roads and railways follow true curves. This just looks plain wrong even from a distance.

Other lesser issues include inability to represent small rivers (and streams), lack of proper modelling of river banks, rail cuttings and embankments etc and consequently the unrealistic appearance of bridges which all have steep approach ramps rather than blending into the surrounding land.

-- and while I'm on a role, all bridges and therefore rivers having to be fixed at sea level.

[KG26_Alpha]

Yea local weather would be cool too

But !!

Isn't it still the only game having collision damage with bridges, buildings and trees ?

[majorfailure]

Originally Posted by KG26_Alpha

Yea local weather would be cool too

But !!

Isn't it still the only game having collision damage with bridges, buildings and TREES ?

...that you can't really see from the side. I really sometimes wish there were no collision model with those trees.

[Buster_Dee]

That would all be on my list.

Ah, those trees are one of my fondest memories. I was flying with 242 at the time, and there was a Squad who generally gave us a shellacking. One meet, we outnumbered them and thought we actually had a chance. They stayed out of sight 'til we ran out of gas, then they bombed our airfield as the last guy (our CO) was landing. I tried to take off again from the apron.

All I got for my troubles was a mouth full of those trees.

[Sup_Bigans]

Great work guys!

I don't know if I'm late. Anyway may you also add this italian fighter?
http://www.sas1946.com/main/index.ph...c,37239.0.html

Thank you

[Ibis]

[QUOTE=Asheshouse;707827]For me, most of the visuals in IL-2 are great,

Having done a little map building work in the past the greatest flaw to me is the inability to make roads and railways follow true curves.
---------------------------------------

There are curved roads here:
http://www.sas1946.com/main/index.ph...,39938.24.html

in Bee's Rabaul. Scroll down.
cheers,
Ibis.

[Asheshouse]

I am aware of Bee's excellent map. --- I even get a mention in the credits

What Bee has done provides a good visual mod but loses the stock game functionality of road and rail, like auto placement when map building and auto tracking of the route by vehicles when mission building.

What may be needed is similar to what is in Clod, in that road and rail appear to be defined by freeform splines which then control the placement of road/rail plates and also control the vehicle movement, but that would require some serious coding input.

[TexasJG]

After doing much searching, and not understanding the inherent limitation of placing height of objects until finding this post at SAS.
Yes, this would be greatly appreciated to have the option to place height for all objects, as case in point,
On the MTO map, at a certain desert castle, it would be really nice to mount small AA artillery on top of the castle wall towers. Would also make it possible to build ship yards as proper (ships in dry dock).
Maybe something Daidalos Team could/would look into?

For reference;

From SAS "in COD game there is the ability to choose the elevation of all objects, in Il2 there is this ability for only some smoke .
it would be very useful for example placing DCA on roofs or tops of some bunkers or prevent static objects to "sink" into some scenery
the particularity of these smokes can't be expanded to all objects?"

and reply by SAS~Malone

"but i think we are meaning more objects like AA weapons, and such.
that height solution of KB's is only good for static objects, from the Objects list in FMB.
it doesn't work the same, say, for a stationary aircraft, or artillery, etc.
those FMB objects also require a separate object entry for each different height, so it's not all that practical.
if we could elevate all objects as we can with the smoke objects, simply with the mouse, it would really be great. "

Reference also from SAS
FMB Tutorial 06 - Advanced Objects Tips