A mod approval thought for 4.09 for the 1C team

[Kaptein_Damli]

Originally Posted by x__CRASH__x

I'm not sure if civil mod talk is taboo, but I wanted to air out a thought I had on the subject. I haven't downloaded or used any of the mods. But I don't disagree with them. I do worry about them going out of control and cheating will follow. So I had a thought.

From what I know, there have been some very good gains made with mods. They've put cockpits in some of the AI planes that would be fun to fly. They "corrected" a few things the modders believed to be wrong with the sim. They've upgraded the cockpit graphics of a few airplanes. And they've improved the sounds, from what I am told.

So, since the work is essentially done for these modifications, would it not be pretty easy for the 1C team to review the mods, evaluate their merits, incorporate them into a patch, and lock the game back up so no "nefarious", "questionsable" or downright "cheating" modifications make it into the game?

I essence, modders do the work and submit it to 1C who approves/disapproves it. Incorporates it in a patch, and releases it to the community. The community could even get involved voting on what mods they want included or left out.

What's the downside side? I only see positives. Improvements are made to an already fantastic, long standing game. 1C doesn't have to take much time away from their work on other projects. 1C keeps the IL-2 series locked up and hack free. The community is happy, and has new toys to play with.

Is there a downside?

I coundn´t be more agree! Look at the community around Lock On FC. Look at all the beautyful mods available. Some of the modders over there even got employed by ED to work on Black Shark! That´s the spirit. A mod for sound, 6DOF or even scenery mod only makes the original game looks better. I can´t understand why such mods improve cheating? Ie, you fly at Hyperlobby on a server and surely some user will not have Track Ir. Well, then you are "cheating" because the opposing opponent only uses his hatswitch! Cheating in Lock On FC is not a problem as far I know.

[tater]

To be fair, the notion that "No FM/weapon changes" went out the window with the Spit I is wrong. No weapon/FM changes on aircraft that a player with the stock game can see are permitted. If you changed the FM on the F4F-4, for example, and played online, you'd be a UFO since people with the stock game will see you in an F4F-4, because the F4F-4 exists in their game.

The Spit I is a NEW plane. It has a unique, new, plane slot. I couldn't fly the Spit I online because it would not exist on the server's spawn list since it does not take the place of an extant plane. No more do variant plane types replace the stock plane (with unchanged FM), but they now can be added as brand new planes. Only people with the same mod installed will ever see them.

That's why they waited til they could add entirely new planes to allow a new FM to be added.

tater

[uf_josse]

Agreed for the spit.... you can't fly it if not selected by host... so, it don't modified stock FM

Only prob is that this mod show where are the FM stored.for guys that did'nt knot it.... but, don't think a lot of guys can use this info and unpack FM..... so, don't think that will give too much modified FM for stock planes....

[Rama]

The problem is that "not too much" is allready too many to be acceptable for a fair online play...

In any case, no need to "talk too much" about it... everybody knows that online play is since some time allready open for UFO and "flying battleship"... so the only real question is to continue flying online in this context (accepting some "3rd type" encounters from time to time), or playing some other game while waiting for SoW.

[tater]

There are several FM changes I'd happily use offline. I have yet to find one.

[klem]

As one of the older group, let me start by saying that I am not jaded. Also I challenge the idea that the up and comings somehow have some kind of edge over the validity of FMs etc. What hasn't changed is how the aircraft actually flew. Some of the 'jaded' group probably actually know.

The main argument here has circled around modders (or hackers). They are called hackers because they have broken into, or hacked, the game code. I am against them for one simple reason, I don't know their credentials whereas Oleg at least tries to stay true to his.

I don't doubt that some of these guys are as keen as I am to achieve 'realism' but as I said, I don't know them, have no references for them and have no reason to believe they have got it any more right than Oleg. So I would rather it had been left alone because I wouldn't want it to become like CFS used to be (still is?) with ridiculous hacks, FMs etc. It became a joke.

I play this game for the best realism it can give me. The unavoidable truth is that the hackers, good and bad, will grow and the bad ones will destroy the game, not SOW, unless hacks are detected by the online servers and the players kicked off.

If the hackers want to run their own servers thats fine... but whose hacks? How chaotic is that going to become? Or how narrow a player base will it support if they implement "my hacks only" servers.

Roll on SOW:BoB. It will be just as exciting (challenging) using 8 (not 6 btw) .303s against 109Es (two reduced muzzle velocity cannons & m/c guns). Of course we RAF types will get our arses kicked by cannons and superior numbers. At least I hope so, because that's how it was. It isn't about having FUN dammit! It's about the experience!

The subsequent rollouts of 'Leaning towards France', 'North Africa', 'Burma' or whatever will keep our interest alive. And yes, I will still play late war IL2 until SOW gets that far.

And no, I'm not interested in naff 'I can't cope' wonder woman views, transparent frames, pink camouflage, uber death rays... bahhh, humbug..... crochety grumble..... I can get that kind of stuff in an Xbox, Playstation, hacked CFS or whatever.