4.11 General debugging

[IceFire]

Originally Posted by Ventura

SBD-3 default skin is the same regardless of year on Coral Sea Map (Haven't tried others).

The early 1942 versions had the red ball within the white star (as in the TBD-1 and F4F-3)

Something I'd very much like to see change in the future... SBD models served a great deal of the war. It'd be nice to see the markings change a bit as time goes on.

Actually there were four significant changes to markings and three basic camo schemes used. Might be nice to see all of these...but I dream big

[Uzin]

Does anybody tried to create or change missions for QMB in 4.11?
In my experience, you can build new QMB missions with a full editor - FMB only at the default maps, not at added ones, their name appears in QMB , but they can not run. Even at default maps, you cannot change QMB missions using new take off options - Pairs or Line, because in QMB the planes are wildly scattered around the airfield.
Did anybody mention this weird behaviour, please ?

[FC99]

Originally Posted by Uzin

Does anybody tried to create or change missions for QMB in 4.11?
In my experience, you can build new QMB missions with a full editor - FMB only at the default maps, not at added ones, their name appears in QMB , but they can not run. Even at default maps, you cannot change QMB missions using new take off options - Pairs or Line, because in QMB the planes are wildly scattered around the airfield.
Did anybody mention this weird behaviour, please ?

It is normal that you can't made missions for maps that are not included in 4.11. If you are using mods and they are installed correctly you should not have problems to create QMB missions for these maps and use them in your modded install.

As far as Line and Pair take off are concerned you have to understand that QMB have built in parser for mission templates( that's what you create in FMB). Actual mission,one you play after you hit "FLY" in QMB is combination of mission template and the settings read from QMB menus.

Problem for you is that parser doesn't know how to read new take off parameters. My only question is , is it really important to have this in QMB, you can play such missions as single missions, you can play them from FMB so is it justified to spend lot of time on tweaking QMB just for that or it would be better to spend that time on things that are more critical.

FC

[Uzin]

Originally Posted by FC99

It is normal that you can't made missions for maps that are not included in 4.11. If you are using mods and they are installed correctly you should not have problems to create QMB missions for these maps and use them in your modded install.

Missions made in FMB on newly added maps run well in FMB, but not in QMB.
New maps are, obviouly, installed correctly.

Originally Posted by FC99

As far as Line and Pair take off are concerned you have to understand that QMB have built in parser for mission templates( that's what you create in FMB). Actual mission,one you play after you hit "FLY" in QMB is combination of mission template and the settings read from QMB menus.

Problem for you is that parser doesn't know how to read new take off parameters. My only question is , is it really important to have this in QMB, you can play such missions as single missions, you can play them from FMB so is it justified to spend lot of time on tweaking QMB just for that or it would be better to spend that time on things that are more critical.
FC

I think QMB possibilities should be consistent with those of FMB, just my 2pence.

Another inconsistency, in FMB: with Normal option in take off you must, as earlier, position the waypoint which is next to the first one, away from the runway, while with new options - Pairs and Line - you must position that next waypoint over the runway, to its opposite end. Why not to remove this inconsisteny, please ?
Thank you for your time you devoted also to these small bugs on the beauty face of 4.11.

EDIT:
As an offliner, I am used to record my flights frequently. Anf I have never met so much wrong records, differring essentially from the situation that was in the flight, as now with 4.11+Hotfix .
I am sorry for being so negative, but I have seen better programming work as this.

[martinistripes]

I don't know if this is a game issue or AMD driver issue. But at the moment I can't apply any anti-aliasing without the ground textures flickering and becoming unstable.

This is with the Radeon HD 6990M and CCC 11.12.

[Tolwyn]

This is not an inconsistency.

Normal means you need to place the LIFT OFF point takeoff icon on the end of the runway.

The other options allow you the FLEXIBILITY off putting the takeoff icon where YOU want it to be, with the proceeding waypoint dictating the takeoff direction.

This is by design. Changing it will screw things up.

Originally Posted by Uzin

Another inconsistency, in FMB: with Normal option in take off you must, as earlier, position the waypoint which is next to the first one, away from the runway, while with new options - Pairs and Line - you must position that next waypoint over the runway, to its opposite end. Why not to remove this inconsisteny, please ?

[spdr109]

When placing takeoff waypoints, if you try to place more than one squadron on a runway

icon when using the “line” or “pairs” options, the squadrons spawn on top of one another

destroying all the aircraft in both squadrons. When using the “normal” option, additional

squadrons line up behind the previous ones as was done in previous game versions.

[Aviar]

Originally Posted by spdr109

When placing takeoff waypoints, if you try to place more than one squadron on a runway

icon when using the “line” or “pairs” options, the squadrons spawn on top of one another

destroying all the aircraft in both squadrons. When using the “normal” option, additional

squadrons line up behind the previous ones as was done in previous game versions.

When using 'Pairs' or 'Line', your flights will spawn exactly where you place the Takeoff waypoint. Check my attached screenshots to see an example of how to place the waypoints.

Aviar

[Uzin]

Originally Posted by Tolwyn

This is not an inconsistency.
.

There are three options in take off waypoint setting. In one of them you must place the waypoint on one end of the runway, while in two others - on the opposite end.
If you do not call this feature " inconsistency", it s, at least, user unfriendly, indicating that the programmer does not care of users.

[II/JG54_Emil]

I´m not sure if it has been mentioned or not, but there is no gear and no flap sound un dthe Focke Wulf 190 A4 versions(and probably others).