PDA

View Full Version : Patch 4.10 - Development Updates by Daidalos Team



Pages : [1] 2

daidalos.team
01-16-2010, 09:42 AM
Dear IL-2 fans,

Since the release of patch 4.09, Daidalos Team has been working on the next official patch 4.10. We have done a substantial progress already and we would like to start showing you our latest development and gradually revealing the content of the patch until its release.

All the official updates for patch 4.10 are going to be shown in this first post, please use the rest of the thread for comments and questions.

We would like to emphasize that everything we are showing here has WIP status and is not a finished yet. Please take it into account.

Thank you.

Daidalos Team

4.10 Patch Overview - updated weekly
- all listed planning and content is subject to change by DT or 1C/MG

http://img188.imageshack.us/img188/942/2010042200.th.jpg (http://img188.imageshack.us/i/2010042200.jpg/)

*** For High-Res videos, please go to Mission4Today.com ***

Development Update - 2010-05-28

Well yes... today is Friday! As we are quite busy, we didn't manage to prepare an update for yesterday.
Nethertheless we would like to show you something - RE.2000 cockpit in finalisation status (WIP):

http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/3953/re2kcp01.th.jpg (http://img9.imageshack.us/i/re2kcp01.jpg/)

http://img266.imageshack.us/img266/7263/re2kcp02.th.jpg (http://img266.imageshack.us/i/re2kcp02.jpg/)

http://img294.imageshack.us/img294/1435/re2kcp03.th.jpg (http://img294.imageshack.us/i/re2kcp03.jpg/)

http://img69.imageshack.us/img69/4648/re2kcp04.th.jpg (http://img69.imageshack.us/i/re2kcp04.jpg/)

http://img180.imageshack.us/img180/3144/re2kcp05.th.jpg (http://img180.imageshack.us/i/re2kcp05.jpg/)

Thanks!


Development Update - 2010-05-20

Dear IL-2 fans. We would like to inform that after several months of negotiations with Oleg, Ilya and MG/1C management, our team has signed a non-exclusive license agreement. Basically this agreement will give Team Daidalos full access to all assets related to the sim, but our work still remains non-commercial. Most important assets for us now is the SFS tools so that we can build the patch independently and don't need to sacrifice MG team's precious time. Also this will speed up the releasing process, since we can do a new build ourselves if we find bugs from release candidate build.

This past month we have been learning the use the new tools which has taken some time. Also we had to build up a proper codebase for the tools and overall adjust our ways of working. So please have patience and excuse us for the delay. We still do this for free as a hobby and not from 9 to 5 and probably everyone has had less time to give to TD than they wanted to give. Good news is that we don't have any major bugs open. Just some integration work left, finishing some WIP default skins, adjusting some small things and testing that we didn't break anything.

Video for today doesn't have any single theme, but it's more like random picks of things not shown on video before. Enjoy!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NOyQHjkjhHY

Development Update - 2010-04-22

Our work and testing of patch 4.10 continues. There is no need to have any concerns about the patch. It will be released when it is finished. We are aware of our delay and we will communicate our release date to public when we are ready. For now, please stay patient. Thank you for your support.

Today, we would like to show you 2 new AI bombers.

Do 217 - AI - internal DT development

Do 217 will carry Fritz X and Hs 293. Default skin is still WIP.

http://img408.imageshack.us/img408/3184/2010042201.th.jpg (http://img408.imageshack.us/i/2010042201.jpg/)

http://img541.imageshack.us/img541/3878/2010042202.th.jpg (http://img541.imageshack.us/i/2010042202.jpg/)

http://img717.imageshack.us/img717/6865/2010042203.th.jpg (http://img717.imageshack.us/i/2010042203.jpg/)

http://img406.imageshack.us/img406/2492/2010042204.th.jpg (http://img406.imageshack.us/i/2010042204.jpg/)


Cant Z.1007 - AI - external 3rd party development with DT modelling support

An example of a well built model within DT specifications and with our direct modelling support. The modeller has received a detailed feedback from one of our experienced modellers, learned new modelling techniques and reworked the 3D model. Now, the is ready to be included in the patch. Well done model and skin, thank you!

http://img217.imageshack.us/img217/326/2010042205.th.jpg (http://img217.imageshack.us/i/2010042205.jpg/)

http://img156.imageshack.us/img156/4839/2010042206.th.jpg (http://img156.imageshack.us/i/2010042206.jpg/)

http://img443.imageshack.us/img443/9923/2010042207.th.jpg (http://img443.imageshack.us/i/2010042207.jpg/)

http://img717.imageshack.us/img717/4014/2010042208.th.jpg (http://img717.imageshack.us/i/2010042208.jpg/)

http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/910/2010042209l.th.jpg (http://img101.imageshack.us/i/2010042209l.jpg/)

http://img94.imageshack.us/img94/1878/2010042210.th.jpg (http://img94.imageshack.us/i/2010042210.jpg/)

Development Update - 2010-04-09

Testing & bug fixing continues, so not much news this week either. But we can try to capture on video some of the things we test which haven't been yet introduced. This weeks video is about circling torpedos and Ju-88 variants.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...ture=player_embedded (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pe6ovQPyiuk&feature=player_embedded)

Torpedos:

The "Motobomba FFF" was a circular running torpedo, designed for Regia Aeronautica by Freri, Filpa and Fiore (hence the name FFF), designed to be dropped from high altitude on enemy harbours or amidst enemy convoys.

This bomb was adopted by Regia Aeronautica, but used in very small numbers (large stores of unused bombs were found still in 1978!) but was adopted in large number an employed with success by the Luftwaffe, under the name LT 350.

This bomb was dropped from high altitude (from 500 to 4000m). It had a first small "pilot" parachute to stabilize the speed around 100m/s. At an altitude of about 130 m, a larger parachute opened. Once in water, the bomb had a circular - spiral trajectory, it run at slow speed (22 Km/h) for about 15 to 30 minutes.

Another similar torpedo we have done is the Russian torpedo 45-36??-? (45-36AV-A) which was based on submarine torpedo 45-36. Functionality is much like Motobomba FFF, but range is only 4 km with 39 knots speed.

Ju-88 variants:

Existing Ju-88 A-4 has gone through a small facelift and we've also included two new variants. A-17 & A-4/Torp.

Changes include texture mapping fixes so now it's easier to dress up nicely. Cpt_Farrel is doing great new default skins for all variants (still slightly WIP in the video). Damage model has been improved and some bugs have been fix. Also few of the holes in cockpits have been fixed. Both new torpedo variants have ToKG (torpedo-kommandogerät) installed which was introduced already earlier. Also they have a binocular view for better spotting of ships. This helps with determing ships AoB and speed which are fed to the ToKG.

Development Update - 2010-04-01

We are still very busy finalizing and testing patch content, so only simple Hs-129 video this thursday. Don't mind the bad camera work. Video was made in big hurry.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfvTrPWiHE8

This video shows some of the new & updated loadout options and details of the cockpit. External cannons/MGs have their own indicator lights that show if the weapon is ready to fire. Bombs have indicator lights also. Cockpit of B-3 variant with BK7.5 cannon has some minor differences, including a own ammo counter for BK7.5. The cannon can also be dropped (causes score penalty) since the B-3 flies very badly with one engine & BK7.5. Even the BK7.5 creates lots of drag and weights a lot, it also increases the stability of the plane, since it's acting like big vertical stabilizer. Drag, weight & stability changes noticeably when the cannon is dropped.

Development Update - 2010-03-18

First we would like to communicate 2 things:

1. We are entering the beta phase of the 4.10 patch, so we will reduce the quantity of development updates and focus on the testing of the patch.
2. We are in a time delay and will will inform you about the new patch release date and update the schedule accordingly.

And some more planes to come in 4.10:

Reggiane Re.2002 (internal DT development)
AI for now.

http://img401.imageshack.us/img401/670/2010031801.th.jpg (http://img401.imageshack.us/i/2010031801.jpg/)

Fairey Fulmar (external development)
AI for now.

http://img524.imageshack.us/img524/5922/2010031803.th.jpg (http://img524.imageshack.us/i/2010031803.jpg/)

Fairey Swordfish (external development)
AI for now.

http://img717.imageshack.us/img717/8163/2010031802.th.jpg (http://img717.imageshack.us/i/2010031802.jpg/)

Development Update - 2010-03-11

Multi-Crew option on dogfight servers

One of the main advantages of coop mission mode over dogfight servers is the ability for human players to man together the multi-crew planes. We are about to change this. The following video demonstrates work that is currently being undertaken to bring multi-crew option to dedicated/dogfight online games. This feature is still in development but if the testing is successful and we don't find any major issue, we are aiming to release it in patch 4.10. More info to come...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TXN7CqgmKY0


Increased DM of bridges + winter version

Rework of bridges includes:

1) Fixed a bug which caused misses up to 100m to register as direct hits

2) Increased toughness of bridges. Rail and Highway bridge types will most likely be immune
to anything smaller than SC250 kg bombs as historical evidence suggests. Still WIP.

3) While we were at it, we added support for bridge winter skins on winter maps and retextured summer skins.


http://img690.imageshack.us/img690/5869/2010031104.th.jpg (http://img690.imageshack.us/i/2010031104.jpg/)

http://img706.imageshack.us/img706/8562/2010031101.th.jpg (http://img706.imageshack.us/i/2010031101.jpg/)

http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/172/2010031102s.th.jpg (http://img534.imageshack.us/i/2010031102s.jpg/)

http://img697.imageshack.us/img697/8328/2010031103.th.jpg (http://img697.imageshack.us/i/2010031103.jpg/)


Development Update - 2010-03-04

Structural G Limits & Multiple Joystick Profiles (internal DT development)

At present all aircraft in IL2 have a single fixed Structural G limit of +13G. It only really becomes an issue with aircraft with exceptionally light elevators such as the P51. Pull more than +13G and you loose your wings. The real life situation is a little more complicated. Real aircraft are designed with an Ultimate load and In Service design load. Both are for a defined configuration and weight.

The in Service load is the typical G available to the pilot. As long as this the G is not exceeded then no aircraft damage will occur. Exceed the In service G limit then damage of varying degrees may occur .. like bent airframes etc. Exceed the Ultimate load then severe damage will occur typically resulting in structural failure ... like wings coming off etc.Typically a safety factor of 1.5 is used. So an Fighter aeroplane with a design In service G limit of say +8G will have an Ultimate load of +12G. As external stores and or weight is increased above the design weight both G limits reduce accordingly. Reduce weight (by dropping bombs or burning fuel etc) and your G limits increase. Bomber and Transport aircraft have G limits much lower than fighters.
So if you abuse the limits you damage the aircraft. Once damaged then its structural integrity is reduced so the ultimate load reduces as well. In other words keep bending the airframe and you will eventually weaken it to the point that very little extra G is required to induce structural failure. A bent airframe wont perform as well either.

The DT team have now simulated this for the first time in IL2. Each aircraft has been given a unique Structural G profile for Ultimate load, In service limit, and dynamic Weight based limits . In addition this is dynamically modified with its own G induced damage profile. The basic Design Ultimate load configuration and weight has been defined as Default load + 100% Fuel. The actual Ultimate design load has been based on Historical values where they are known and guesstimation where they are not known. In broad brush terms for fighters have an Ultimate design load of +12G with an In service limit of +8G. Lets abbreviate this to 8G/12G

How does this work in game ? You take your stock standard Fighter MK 1 with Default armament +100% Fuel your limits are +8G/+12G. You add 2 x 500lbs bombs. your limits now reduce to 5G/8G. So prior to the target you need to be a little more careful with your aeroplane. Lets say pre target you pull + 6G, you have exceeded the In service limit, you will hear a damage sound cue and suffer a slight aerodynamic penalty. In addition your G limits have now reduced to say 4G/6G. (Bust these again and further aerodynamic penalties and further reductions will apply). You progress to the target and release your bombs. Since the weight is reduced your limits will increase but since you already bent the airframe you wont get back your original limits. You might then get say +6G/+9G. As you can see if you keep abusing the limits you will end with a very weakened airframe.

In the case of heavy bombers G limits will prevent any real aerobatic manoeuvers. You will still be able to evade quite well but you wont be able to BFM with aeroplanes like the A20 anymore. Bombers will be just that: Bombers. G limits will be applicable to AI planes as well and they will fly in a more realistic way too.

Is G displayed? Unless the aircraft in game is equipped with a G meter then no. So you will need to re think how you fly. Random snatches particularly at high speeds are going to hurt .... just as they do in real life. You will need to be aware of Corner speeds because any time you are faster than Corner speed you run the risk of an Over G event. (We are yet to finalise the display side of things)

Coupled with this is a new Joystick module that allows the player to save and store up to 4 different stick sensitivity routines. These can all be adjusted or loaded in the arming screen. So once you have selected your aeroplane type you can select your customised stick profile.

We understand that such an important development in the sim's FM needs a thorough testing. We are cooperating with a group of real life pilots who are doing a fantastic job testing this new core feature with us. Salute!

Tester 1
14,500hrs flying Command Ratings on the following types
PA28,C172,Winjeel, Macchi MB326,MirageIII,F18,Boeing 767,Boeing 747-400,A330,A380
*Was Fighter Combat Instructor on Mirage III and F18 , now A380 Captain)

Tester 2
7000hrs rated on the following types:
CAP-10,C182,PA28,C152,BE76,Boeing 737,Boeing 767,A380
(Has full aerobatic rating now First Officer on A380)

Tester 3
Unknown number of hours very knowledgeable Private pilot.

Tester 4
Unknown number of hours. (Former Military test pilot with ratings on more aircraft than one could ever dream of, and a Graduate of the Empire test pilots School (ETPS).


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qBjYuwhjnE



The Slot map by Team Pacific (3rd party development)

An important addition to Pacific war scenario.

http://img200.imageshack.us/img200/7923/201003001.th.jpg (http://img200.imageshack.us/i/201003001.jpg/)

http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/8989/201003003.th.jpg (http://img18.imageshack.us/i/201003003.jpg/)

http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/1605/201003002.th.jpg (http://img90.imageshack.us/i/201003002.jpg/)

Development Update - 2010-02-25

Only one video this week due to real life commitments. A bit more on AI vs. AI visibility.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nGKtVW1gL9c


Development Update - 2010-02-18

Re2000 cockpit WIP

http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/8041/render3jg.jpg


New QMB options

First of all QMB is now expanded to 3 windows. First one is same old standard one with just a few changes.

http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/7536/0000dc.th.jpg (http://img18.imageshack.us/i/0000dc.jpg/)

It can be seen on picture that there is a new window "Plane List". Users can chose between 4 different plane lists: Standard,Alphabetical,Custom1,Custom2

http://img130.imageshack.us/img130/4366/0002gd.th.jpg (http://img130.imageshack.us/i/0002gd.jpg/)

That way user don't have to scroll through the huge list, he can simply make a list with his favorite planes only and easily set up his QMB missions. For example next picture show Custom list with American and Japanese planes only, ideal for PTO fans.

http://img696.imageshack.us/img696/4007/grab00009.th.jpg (http://img696.imageshack.us/i/grab00009.jpg/)

Another novelty is FMB button for quick access to FMB. In 4.10 users will be able to add new maps and missions to QMB. Unlike in old QMB in new one there is no limits in number of missions of same type for map. If there are more than one mission than QMB pick one randomly. That way you can have plenty of variety in QMB missions.

Lets see next page.
http://img194.imageshack.us/img194/1712/0004fx.th.jpg (http://img194.imageshack.us/i/0004fx.jpg/)

As you can see number of flights is doubled in 4.10, having 32 vs. 32 fights is lot of fun or maybe 1 vs. 32 http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif)
http://img98.imageshack.us/img98/7623/grab01.th.jpg (http://img98.imageshack.us/i/grab01.jpg/)http://img697.imageshack.us/img697/3517/grab00.th.jpg (http://img697.imageshack.us/i/grab00.jpg/)

That didn't turn out too good but in 1 vs. 4 things were little bit better so we can check another new feature,Stats page.

http://img718.imageshack.us/img718/4391/grab02.th.jpg (http://img718.imageshack.us/i/grab02.jpg/)

That's it for today's update, keep in mind that QMB is still WIP and there will be more surprises in final release.


For older DT development updates – please scroll down to page 2.


Thank you. Daidalos Team

Metatron_123
01-16-2010, 09:49 AM
You know, I tried out Wings of Prey and the gameplay still leaves much to be desired... So Il-2 still easily reigns supreme in the aerial WW2 arena in my books, and thus this new patch is more than welcome news.

That Hs 129 cockpit looks great.

I have a suspicion... That a Reggiane Re-2001 is out there... Please say it's so...

SeaFireLIV
01-16-2010, 10:51 AM
4.10!! Wow. I chose the right flight sim this decade. this must be one of the most longest served games I`ve ever seen. Unlike the farce that`s Empire total war.

BOBwov does a good job of it too.

But will you guys attempt any AI improvements for Offline users, you always forget us! If you need suggestions I have a few simple ones i could tell you right now.

Bremspropeller
01-16-2010, 11:03 AM
Wow, thanks for the heads-up!

That fine 129 really raises hopes for an improved Ju 88 model... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

JG52Uther
01-16-2010, 11:08 AM
Brilliant! Thanks guys. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

JtD
01-16-2010, 11:17 AM
Great news! I was starting to get concerned by the lack of news about 4.10, but it seems you all were busy doing useful things! Nice new planes, I think the Hs will definitely be an interesting addition to the game. Keep going!

The FMB features are GREAT! Thanks for implementing them.

Any news regarding fixes to old flight models, has Oleg given a green light?

FatCat_99
01-16-2010, 11:42 AM
Originally posted by SeaFireLIV:
But will you guys attempt any AI improvements for Offline users, you always forget us! If you need suggestions I have a few simple ones i could tell you right now.
This is just a first update, we can't show everything at once http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif. AI is one of the things where we plan major changes, don't worry.


Originally posted by JtD:
Any news regarding fixes to old flight models, has Oleg given a green light?
Go ahead, every suggestion must be acompanied with good documentation though. In fact I would start FW performance thread myself but Gaston scared a s..t out of me. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

FC

csThor
01-16-2010, 11:47 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif (@ FatCat)

SeaFireLIV
01-16-2010, 11:49 AM
Originally posted by FatCat_99:

This is just a first update, we can't show everything at once http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif. AI is one of the things where we plan major changes, don't worry.



Excellent news. Thankyou! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

TheGrunch
01-16-2010, 01:09 PM
I feel like a ten-year-old on a sugar high. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Wildnoob
01-16-2010, 01:59 PM
TD, there's already work in progress to add new flyable Japanese aircraft?

fhirai
01-16-2010, 02:00 PM
Wow! Great news!
really looking forward to new updates! Thanks!

ytareh
01-16-2010, 03:04 PM
Thanks guys ,nice surprise.

Bearcat99
01-16-2010, 03:22 PM
Made a sticky............. Thanks for the great work guys..

GBrutus
01-16-2010, 03:24 PM
Crikey, that Hs 129 looks awesome. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

EJGrOst_Caspar
01-16-2010, 04:12 PM
@Wildnoob: yes, but for 4.10 I fear, they will fall short. Just stay on line. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

Wildnoob
01-16-2010, 05:26 PM
Originally posted by EJGrOst_Caspar:
@Wildnoob: yes, but for 4.10 I fear, they will fall short. Just stay on line. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/inlove.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/metal.gif

thefruitbat
01-16-2010, 05:52 PM
You guys rock, big time.

very pleased to hear about the ai, as well as fmb upgrades. Is there any news on the possibility of triggers in the fmb?

all in all, 2010 is looking good http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Jure_502
01-17-2010, 03:28 AM
Two words: THANK YOU! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

Gibbage1
01-17-2010, 03:35 AM
I hope to GOD the Bk37 has proper AP ammo in it, not the stupid HE ammo its loaded with now. It makes flying the Hs-129 useless vs tanks. You need to load up the Mk-101 to do any tank busting!

Ba5tard5word
01-17-2010, 04:04 AM
Hmm, cool! Good to hear that more work is still being done, I was afraid 4.09m would be the last gasp of Il-2 support but looks like work will be done for years to come!



But will you guys attempt any AI improvements for Offline users, you always forget us!

UP 2.0's AI is pretty great, you might want to check it out until the new TD updates.

DuxCorvan
01-17-2010, 04:07 AM
You guys are making me doubt my sexual orientation. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/inlove.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif http://media.ubi.com/us/forum_images/gf-glomp.gif
I want to make sweet love to you.

JtD
01-17-2010, 05:27 AM
Originally posted by FatCat_99:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JtD:
Any news regarding fixes to old flight models, has Oleg given a green light?
Go ahead, every suggestion must be acompanied with good documentation though. In fact I would start FW performance thread myself but Gaston scared a s..t out of me. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

FC </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I've sent you a PM. If that's not the best way to do it, tell me the best way. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif It's good to know you guys can look into it!

Wildnoob
01-17-2010, 08:22 AM
TD, if you need some reference to modelate Japanese pits. I have many issues of the highly acclaimed Japanese Maru Mechanic series of books. Altough in Japanese, they contain a lot of unique pictures and color drawings.

Just PM me if this material is needed.

Blindman-
01-17-2010, 12:48 PM
<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">SUGGESTON/REQUEST</span>

Two years ago I started a thread with the suggestion/request (I thought Oleg was still listening to our forum) to add the following additional “OPTIONS” to the difficulty settings toggle list for single player and coop missions:

Join/Restart During Mission (like DogFight maps allow)
Have new planes available or Refuel/Rearm/Repair at friendly airfields (like Zuti’s Moving Dogfight Server MOD)

Now even though these settings would only be optional (optional is the key word here) my request was met with much negative response and so I forgot about it. Then when Zuti came out with his MOD a few months back, which does a great job of changing DF maps to allow coop features and also has the R/R/R option, we finally had something like my requests. It is worth noting that the negative response that I encountered on these message boards two years ago are now nowhere to be found; in fact Zuti’s MOD is all the rave and now many coops are using Zuti’s MDS MOD as an alternative to the standard coop option. This tells me that there is a huge audience out there that would appreciate this type of change/addition to the game/sim. For many of us Zuti’s MOD has breathed new life into this game and so I very strongly recommend and request that these types of features be added in an official patch.

Romanator21
01-17-2010, 01:25 PM
Great news, and looking forward to it! The Hs-129 is just beautiful, and such an improvement! FMB perks are just what mission builders need. Thanks Team.

Treetop64
01-17-2010, 03:00 PM
Originally posted by DuxCorvan:
You guys are making me doubt my sexual orientation. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/inlove.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif http://media.ubi.com/us/forum_images/gf-glomp.gif
I want to make sweet love to you.

LOL! The work these guys at Daidalos are doing does make one feel all warm and fuzzy inside. Look at us: a bunch of enabled IL-2 crackheads... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

Between:
A. IL-2 with DCG and EnjoyR DGen campaigns, and...

B. SH-4 with Real Fleet Boat, Run Silent-Run Deep, and Operation Mosun, along with a fabulous playable Admiral Graf Spee, and...

C. FSX with an additional 55GB of scenery and mesh files, along with a handful of great payware aircraft...

...it's a bit of a miracle that I still have a girlfriend! Definitely marrying material.

sledgehammer2
01-17-2010, 03:37 PM
This is great news. On the subject of QMB - is there any chance we might get a few more Pacific maps in there? Or even some maps like Normandy or the Ardennes? AI work is great news too. Thanks.

Sledgehammer2

DKoor
01-17-2010, 04:11 PM
Nice... more cannon fodder for fighters...

Joke aside - great news! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

M_Gunz
01-18-2010, 11:15 AM
Best news all year! LOL! If not for 4.09m it would be best news in a few years!

Treetop64
01-19-2010, 11:35 AM
Originally posted by FatCat_99:

"AI is one of the things where we plan major changes, don't worry".

FC

Those are the thirteen best words I've read in these forums in years. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

Urufu_Shinjiro
01-19-2010, 03:49 PM
What I really want to know about is multi-throttle support. I think this will be a big game changer and one of the biggest shortcomings of il2 all these years. Can you tell us anything about htis?

RAAF_Furball
01-19-2010, 05:44 PM
<span class="ev_code_YELLOW">
This is indeed, fantastic news!

We're all very much appreciative of getting updates to this fantastic game (sorry, simulator) that help mend the rifts and sort the confusion in the community created by "those things we won't mention".

Thank you for your work.
</span>

kahunamon
01-20-2010, 10:27 AM
I would gladly pay an annual upgrade fee for such great support for this simulation to support the development team.

daidalos.team
01-21-2010, 07:02 AM
OLDER DEVELOPMENT UPDATES BY DAIDALOS TEAM:

Development Update - 2010-02-04

New ship damage
This video shows some visual enhancements in naval warfare. This is still WIP and all of the new effects and 3d models are just placeholders.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xO42TA8xMPg


Torpedo-Kommandogerät
This device is like simplified torpedo data computer found from subs. Better explanation is embedded in the video.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dKFbIFu4v6o



Development Update - 2010-01-28

AI Improvements - AI visibility change

The following video demonstrates one of the new AI features our team is currently working on. In patch 4.10 players (as well as friendly AI units) will be able to hide in clouds from enemy AI. With the new AI model, AI‘s visual ability will be similar to the one of human's.

In today‘s demo video we have AAA-vs-Aircraft pair but similar method will be used for other AI units, with optimized code for each type of unit.

We are confident that with new AI improvements, players will be able to use more advanced tactics in fight with/against AI - many things you have read about in WWII pilots memoirs will now work in this sim too. All in all, we want to give a clear message to AI: "Beware of the Hu(n)man in the Sun!". http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6sx4W9z9MXQ

Multi-throttle/radiator/prop pitch control

This is another frequently requested feature by many virtual IL-2 pilots. Our plan is to introduce multi-throttle/radiator/prop pitch control setup via standard IL-2 interface.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=odGem2rvebo

New guided weapons

In patch 4.10 we also plan to introduce some more guided weapons: German Fritz-X, Hs 293, US Razon & Bat which:

- can be aimed & dropped like normal bombs
- can be guided like X-4 missile with bombsight keys (except the Bat)
- can be used by human and AI


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IryQHLG4ySA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rt0LtUzHa9I

Environmental changes

In the upcoming patch we intend to change several environmental conditions in order to set the proper scenario for the radio navigation (4.10), radar and nightfighters (4.11). Today we are going to show you the colour change for high altitude sky.

That is all for this week. We appreciate your comments and feedback. Thank you.


http://img691.imageshack.us/img691/3108/dt2010012801.th.jpg (http://img691.imageshack.us/i/dt2010012801.jpg/)

http://img31.imageshack.us/img31/2268/dt2010012802.th.jpg (http://img31.imageshack.us/i/dt2010012802.jpg/)

Development Update - 2010-01-21

Navigation improvements

One thing that has been requested often is improved navigation. The whole art of navigation in it's all forms is very complicated subject, but radio navigation is one small part that we decided to concentrate on. Currently the balance between playability and realism is such that the waypoints in mission act as sort of radio beacons and repeater compass has a needle that points towards the "beacons". This obviously has two issues. The "virtual beacons" can be located in too favorable and unrealistic positions such as middle of ocean or deep within enemy territory. Also most of the repeater compasses work like radio compasses which they didn't do in real life. Programmable waypoints for aircraft would be post-WW2 technology.

Here's Team Daidalos' solution for this matter:

Non-directional beacon object (NDB):
New stationary radio beacon object that can be placed on map. If any of these are present on map, all navigation instruments work only with beacons and not with waypoints anymore. waypoints are still there as usual (for AI), but they are just abstract points on map and compasses don't know anything about these. Old missions work as usual, since they don't have the new beacon objects.

Each beacon is given an unique two letter ID and also the friendly beacon icons & IDs are always visible in map, since their positions are known. Pilot will have two new keys. Next Beacon & Prev Beacon. These are used to tune radio to selected beacon frequency (based on ID). Beacon will broadcast it's ID as Morse code once in minute so pilot can hear if he is tuned to correct beacon. Also pilot can hear a static (chirring) background noise when beacon is transmitting constantly, but there is no modulated signal. Cone of silence is also included, so pilot knows when he has flown directly over the beacon.

Meacon object (masking beacon):
Meacons were trick to render beacons less usable for the enemy. Meacon basically captures enemy beacon signal and re-radiates the same signal from different location. Therefore confusing the enemy trying to use it's own beacons for navigating. This is a stationary object like the NDB.

ZB/YE "Hayrake" directional beacon:
The ZB/YE system that allied used was one way of finding a way back home to own aircraft carrier. ZB beign the receiver in plane and YE the rotating directional beacon installed to allied aircraft carriers. This device broadcast a different letter of the (Morse code) alphabet every thirty degrees as it rotated. These letters could be picked up by the ZB receiver in a plane as it moved into the radio signal range. From the letter heard the pilot could determine a bearing to the ship. In the corner of each pilot's plotting board was a compass rose. When preparing flight data before starting a mission, the pilot filled in each slice of the pie with letters designated for the YE that day.

In game this works as following way. Root of the orders menu (tab) includes details of all friendly "hayrake" carriers. For example

Lexington CV2 ID: FC Code: EWQ / KPT / VXZ / ADJ

Pilot will use again the Next Beacon & Prev Beacon keys to tune the radio to certain frequency (based on ID). If player would tune his radio to listen this CV2, he would hear Morse code about twice in a minute as the carrier's "hayrake" antenna rotates at 2 RPM and sending the signal. Code after the carrier name is the Morse code pattern that the YE sends to different directions. Each letter in code represents 30 dec segment starting from 0 dec. For example carrier transmits K to 90-120 dec. So pilot hears K (dash dot dash), the carrier is at bearing 270-300. Code is randomly generated, but still same for all online players.

IJN carriers have normal NDBs, since Zeros & Val have fixed D/F-loops and homing indicators. Acccording to our current knowledge, Axis didn't have similar system in use.

YG shore based "Hayrake":
YG was simplified version of the YE which was used on land. This is a stationary ground object like the NDB that can be placed on ground and is always visible in map with ID. Functionality is same as with YE, except the code is fixed and same for all beacons. Carrier's YE code was changed daily in order to protect the carrier in case enemy would have found out the code.

Lorenz blind landing beacon:
This is similar stationary object like the NDB beacon. It must be placed certain way at airports in order to work correctly. Again pilot user the Next Beacon & Prev Beacon keys to tune to correct frequency. Aircrafts approaching the runway in dark or bad weather would tune their radios to the broadcast frequency and listen for the signal. If they heard a series of dots, they knew they were off the runway centerline to the left (the dot-sector) and had to turn to the right to line up with the runway. If they were off to the right, they would hear a series of dashes instead (the dash-sector), and turned left. Key to the easy operation of the system was an area in the middle where the two signals overlapped, where the dots of the one signal "filled in" the dashes of the other, resulting in a steady tone known as the equi-signal. By adjusting their path until they heard the equi-signal, the pilot could align their aircraft with the runway for landing.

Two small marker beacons were also used with Lorenz, one 300 m off the end of runway, the HEZ, and another 3 km away, the VEZ, modulated at 1700 and 700 Hz, respectively. These signals were broadcast directly upward, and would be heard briefly as the aircraft flew over them. To approach the runway, the aircraft would fly to a published altitude and then use the main directional signals to line up with the runway and started flying toward it. When they flew over the VEZ they would start descending on a standard glide slope, continuing to land or abort at the HEZ depending on whether or not they could see the runway.

Many Luftwaffe planes have a combined blind landing & homing gauge AFN-1 or AFN-2 to show a visual indication of the Lorenz beam & markers. There are made fully functional with Lorenz blind landing beacon.

Lorenz blind landing beacon (internal DT development)

http://img714.imageshack.us/img714/2485/dt2010012101.th.jpg (http://img714.imageshack.us/i/dt2010012101.jpg/)

Realistic navigation instruments difficulty option:
Currently there are several navigational instruments in game which give too much information for player. For example the standard Luftwaffe & US repeater compasses work like radio compass. Pointing towards next waypoint or NDB. In real life these instruments didn't have any D/F (direction finding) ability. In order to have this, the plane needs a D/F-loop antenna.

Team Daidalos added a new difficulty option to enable more realistic navigation instruments. This is what happens when it's turned on:

-All repeater compasses stop working as radio compass.

-Manually heading indicators in repeater compasses are adjustable with two new keys. In LW compass this is the circular compass rose while the plane icon indicates magnetic heading. In US compass this is the fork like heading indicator which previously was pointing to waypoint.

-AFN-1 & AFN-2 gauges in Luftwaffe planes are operational in their homing mode indicating when plane if flying towards/away from beacon. The limitation of fixed D/F-loop antenna is included, so that it only measures signal strength, but cannot know it plane is flying straight towards beacon or away from it. Also AFN range needle is working. Some level of radio signal attenuation is modelled, so that the signal gets weaker/stronger based on distance, alt, sun and landmasses between transmitter & receiver.

-Similar gauges in other planes are working also as expected.

-In Russian planes these instruments are disabled IF the plane doesn't have D/F-loop. Acccording to our current knowledge, many russian fighters had an option to install direction finding eqipment, but they didn't have these installed.

-Planes that have a real radio compass (rotating D/F-loop), such as B-25, Bf-110, Ju-88, Beaufighter, etc. have their radio compass working as expected. Indicating relative bearing to selected NDB.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ljgmXx07R8

We are going to provide a higher quality version of the following video later this week, Youtube has compressed the original video and too many details have been lost.

I-15bis as flyable (internal DT development, textures with external cooperation)

http://img194.imageshack.us/img194/6593/dt2010012102.th.jpg (http://img194.imageshack.us/i/dt2010012102.jpg/)

http://img651.imageshack.us/img651/2594/dt2010012103.th.jpg (http://img651.imageshack.us/i/dt2010012103.jpg/)

CW-21 as flyable (3D model unfinished from PF development, textures upgrade and implementation by DT)

http://img651.imageshack.us/img651/8827/dt2010012104.th.jpg (http://img651.imageshack.us/i/dt2010012104.jpg/)

http://img85.imageshack.us/img85/5071/dt2010012105.th.jpg (http://img85.imageshack.us/i/dt2010012105.jpg/)

http://img651.imageshack.us/img651/4131/dt2010012106.th.jpg (http://img651.imageshack.us/i/dt2010012106.jpg/)

Development Update - 2010-01-16

New FMB features - more to come... (internal DT dev.)
Polikarpov R-5 - AI only - 4000 polygons (internal DT dev.)
Henschel Hs 129 - flyable with historical cockpit (internal DT dev.)
Henschel Hs 129 - upgrade of original 3D model + new weapons + new skin - 4500 polygons (internal DT dev.)

Videos:
http://www.youtube.com/user/DaidalosTeam

Screenshots:
http://img695.imageshack.us/g/dt20100116content.jpg/

Development Update - 2010-02-12


IL2 4.10 MDS - Moving dogfight server

Developed independently by one of DT members with remote support of our team.

Some might know/use this already but for those that are unfamiliar with it, MDS (Moving Dogfight Server) is meant to enrich players online experiences. Originally, IL2 Dedicated Server does not provide usage of AI controlled units. Only cooperative game mode gives you that. But MDS changes this. And adds few extra things. To sum it up:

- add AI controlled units to your missions
- set up simple or advanced Fog of War conditions for your briefing and minimap screens
- limit your plane setups on your home bases (plane numbers, plane loadouts)
- limit selectable countries on your home bases
- ream, refuel and repair your aircraft
- disable ability for players to hit refly button and force them to fly with their head, instead with their ...
- manage your HUD scoring texts
- capture your home bases and specify planes, their loadouts and country options depending on the capturing army
- place home base on a moving carrier and take off from it
- more stuff...

For a couple of features, see provided movies.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vT_e2XoCuuo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yflznGqypyc



More loadout options for Bf 109s

Bf-109F-2:
MG151/20 Nose Cannon (field mod)
1xSC250
4xSC50
1xType D drotank

Bf-109F-4:
1xSC250
4xSC50
1xType D droptank
2xMG151/15 Gunpods

Bf-109G-6:
U4/R3: Mk108 + Droptank
2xWfrGr21
2xWfrGr21 + Droptank

Bf-109G-6Late
U4/R3: Mk108 + Droptank
2xWfrGr21
2xWfrGr21 + Droptank (R3)

Bf-109G-6/AS:
U4R3: Mk108 + Droptank

Bf-109G-14:
MG151/20 Nose Cannon
U4: Mk108 Nose Cannon
U4/R3: Mk108 + Droptank

Bf-109G-10:
MG151/20 Nose Cannon
U4: Mk108 Nose Cannon
U4/R3: Mk108 + Droptank

http://img695.imageshack.us/img695/7449/dt2010021201.th.jpg (http://img695.imageshack.us/i/dt2010021201.jpg/)

http://img402.imageshack.us/img402/9440/dt2010021202.th.jpg (http://img402.imageshack.us/i/dt2010021202.jpg/)

http://img693.imageshack.us/img693/8463/dt2010021203.th.jpg (http://img693.imageshack.us/i/dt2010021203.jpg/)



Henschel Hs 129 - external & cockpit

We are close to finish the cockpit and external model upgrade for this interesting plane. In order to be able to model the cockpit as accurate as possible, one of our member was fortunate enough to spend 6 hours with Mr. Martin Mednis and his Hs 129 cockpit restoration. We have been able to receive first hand data and make several important improvements to our cockpit model. We would like to thank Mr. Mednis for sharing his Hs 129 treasures with us.

Current external model with WIP default skin by Capt. Farrel:

http://img534.imageshack.us/img534/860/dt2010021204.th.jpg (http://img534.imageshack.us/i/dt2010021204.jpg/)

http://img709.imageshack.us/img709/6498/dt2010021205.th.jpg (http://img709.imageshack.us/i/dt2010021205.jpg/)

http://img641.imageshack.us/img641/2461/dt2010021206.th.jpg (http://img641.imageshack.us/i/dt2010021206.jpg/)


Cockpit (WIP):

http://img99.imageshack.us/img99/7943/dt2010021207.th.jpg (http://img99.imageshack.us/i/dt2010021207.jpg/)

http://img18.imageshack.us/img18/2186/dt2010021208.th.jpg (http://img18.imageshack.us/i/dt2010021208.jpg/)

http://img707.imageshack.us/img707/7827/dt2010021209.th.jpg (http://img707.imageshack.us/i/dt2010021209.jpg/)


Few highlights from Mr. Mednis restoration shop:

http://img687.imageshack.us/img687/401/dt2010021210.th.jpg (http://img687.imageshack.us/i/dt2010021210.jpg/)

http://img21.imageshack.us/img21/5557/dt2010021211.th.jpg (http://img21.imageshack.us/i/dt2010021211.jpg/)

http://img651.imageshack.us/img651/2818/dt2010021212.th.jpg (http://img651.imageshack.us/i/dt2010021212.jpg/)

http://img521.imageshack.us/img521/97/dt2010021213.th.jpg (http://img521.imageshack.us/i/dt2010021213.jpg/)

thefruitbat
01-21-2010, 07:33 AM
All i can say is wow http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

this is another excellent addition, the news just keeps on getting better!

AndyJWest
01-21-2010, 08:11 AM
Ooh, Ooh Ooooooooooooh! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

Realistic Radio Navigation! I wasn't expecting that. This will add a whole new dimension to the game. Lots of new stuff to learn. Thanks TD. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

I'm going to have to crack out FSX to practice all this NDB stuff, and maybe learn Morse code too!

I think the I-15bis and CW-21 were already announced, but they will be welcome additions to the stable. (Or in the case of the I-15, if it is like it's sucessor, the marginally unstable http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif).

What with TD and 1C:Maddox making so many announcements, at the moment it's like having two birthdays a weeek.

BigC208
01-21-2010, 08:56 AM
Realistic navigation.... That's going to ratchet up the pucker factor. At night in bad weather trying to get back your ME110 to base after a nightfighter mission. Lots of guys got killed beacause of navigation errors or low weather. I have an IFR ticket and can't wait to see if I got what it takes for WWII IFR flying.

Wildnoob
01-21-2010, 09:21 AM
Originally posted by DuxCorvan:
You guys are making me doubt my sexual orientation. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/inlove.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif http://media.ubi.com/us/forum_images/gf-glomp.gif
I want to make sweet love to you.

Same here. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

megalopsuche
01-21-2010, 01:19 PM
Instead of more obscure, small production biplanes I would like to see:

F4U-4
P-47N
Do 17/217
Ju 188

Thanks for the updates.

Romanator21
01-21-2010, 06:47 PM
I am positively excited for the new radio navigation options! Truly wondrous that this is even possible in the game engine!

I have to ask though, if night will become darker? The landing approach system would not be useful as in the current state of the game, I can see everything at night. It seems that it is darker in your video, but I would like to be sure. I wonder if overcast conditions will also be handled differently.

With this incredible advance in navigation possibilities, I was wondering if someday we could see a virtual plotter which we can place on the map briefing screen (by drawing points and vectors with the mouse) along with wind information at the current airfield (direction and velocity) This way I can plan my flight by dead reckoning with my E-6B computer.

I am excited for the new planes as well! They may not have been numerically significant, but are still very important and I am glad to see them nonetheless.

Viikate_
01-22-2010, 01:04 AM
Originally posted by Romanator21:
I have to ask though, if night will become darker? The landing approach system would not be useful as in the current state of the game, I can see everything at night. It seems that it is darker in your video, but I would like to be sure.

Nights can be lot darker in our development version. It's depending of the moonlight (phase of moon) and season and map of course.

In that video I couldn't see the runway at all when I hit the Lorenz beam inner marker which is 300m away from the runway threshold. At that point I should be able to see it since Lorenz doesn't provide glide path information. So I quickly asked the ground control to switch on the runway lights.

Better pilot would have been able to bring down the plane without any runway lights. Radio altimeter in Bf-110 helps a lot.

Conditions were 02:00 AM, no moonlight, blind/rain weather. Without Lorenz, I would have not even found the runway.

Romanator21
01-22-2010, 01:50 AM
Good to hear that the phases will change! Again, really excited for this! My last request to you guys would be a manual http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif

Fiberbot
01-22-2010, 06:08 AM
This is great news. I am very excited! Thank you TD!!! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_razz.gif

Urufu_Shinjiro
01-22-2010, 09:51 AM
Sorry to be a bother, but is there any word on multi-throttle support? If it's reserved for a future update then by all means save it for then, I'm just intensely interested in this feature.

DIRTY-MAC
01-22-2010, 10:19 AM
Wow what an icredible job you have done guys! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

And a flyable CW-21B! I have been waiting for that for a long long time. Wohoo! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/partyhat.gif

Thanks Daidalos!

AndyJWest
01-22-2010, 11:06 AM
Nights can be lot darker in our development version

Um, If you are going to do that, can I make a suggestion: arrange for the brightness of on-screen text (speedbar etc) and the map to be reduced a bit at night. In a 'dark' situation they produce so much glare that you may lose what little outside view you have.

Anyway, keep up the good work. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Ba5tard5word
01-22-2010, 02:28 PM
What I would really like from the Il-2 crew:

- A patch that makes Il-2 run well on multi-core processors

- New .dll's for Nvidia GTX cards to improve coastlines


These would probably be really hard to do but multi-core support especially would be great since we are in 2010 after all...

Romanator21
01-23-2010, 01:42 AM
That would mean new engine from scratch. I don't think we're going to see this in Il-2. And if we ever do, SoW will be out first http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Ba5tard5word
01-23-2010, 06:15 PM
Yeah I know, but I can still dream. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Don_X
01-24-2010, 08:01 AM
Originally posted by Viikate_:


Nights can be lot darker in our development version. It's depending of the moonlight (phase of moon) and season and map of course.



Will you be correcting the orientation of the moon? I noted that it appears in "telescope view" in the stock game.(ie mirrored and inverted)

I did do a mod for this @AAA

http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f18/Don_X/FI/Il2moon.jpg

http://i44.photobucket.com/albums/f18/Don_X/FI/MOONFINAL17.jpg

Great stuff coming guys - looking forward to new nav systems.

thefruitbat
01-24-2010, 01:47 PM
Team D, is there any possibility of any new dll's being released, for newer nvidia GTX cards.

At the moment by the best dll's avaiable by far for these cards are the 02.27.08 dll's which give massivly better aa settings on the coastlines, without jaggies unlike all other dll's with land geometry set to 3, except for in the early mornings, where there this happens,

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y290/thefruitbat1/grab0000-19.jpg

Many people would be happy, as i've seen this issue of what dll's are best to use across many of the il2 forums.

cheers fruitbat

SUPERAEREO
01-24-2010, 04:30 PM
OMG, been away from this forum (and alas from online play, for various unfortunate reasons) for ages but this is great news!!!

One question: I have seen the AI video on YouTube and I was wondering if anyone in the team has thought about correcting the issue with hitting your own airframe with your defensive guns.

This was virtually impossible on all turret-equipped Allied aircraft due to the use of disjunctors that stopped any machine gun pointed at the airframe from firing, and on many other Allied and Axis aircraft equipped with manually operated guns the field of fire was restricted by physical stops or shaped guards (this would not apply to Scarff-type rings).

The current situation is highly unrealistic and I am sure a solution could be found.

Many, many thanks for your continued efforts and for reading the above.


Flavio

Beirut
01-26-2010, 04:09 PM
Sweet. I've been away from IL2 for a long time and it's great to see things still happening.

I think it's time to re-install. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

(My God, I just realized I've been here for eight-years. Not bad.)

DKoor
01-27-2010, 10:42 AM
While re-reading this thread, I noticed there will be some upgrades to Ai... great news... this will make a big impact to gameplay both online/offline.
BTW if I may suggest a thing.

Please, someday, pork the gunners and flak to a realistic degree.

FatCat_99
01-27-2010, 02:43 PM
Originally posted by DKoor:
While re-reading this thread, I noticed there will be some upgrades to Ai... great news... this will make a big impact to gameplay both online/offline.
BTW if I may suggest a thing.

Please, someday, pork the gunners and flak to a realistic degree.
Tomorrow is "update day", don't miss it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

FC

thefruitbat
01-27-2010, 03:16 PM
looking forward to tomorrow http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

daidalos.team
01-28-2010, 09:49 AM
It's tomorrow. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Please reload first page.

TheGrunch
01-28-2010, 10:12 AM
Awesome!

thefruitbat
01-28-2010, 10:43 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

so happy about the sky colour change at alt, no more dark blue world!

Great news about being able to hide in the clouds, and coming out of the sun, thank you sooooo much http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

any word on ai gunners on bombers?

Romanator21
01-28-2010, 11:39 AM
Sweet update, thanks DT!

stiboo2
01-28-2010, 12:02 PM
Looking forward very much to all these things, and a huge thankyou to all at Daidalos.

But remember Sow:BoB is out in 30-40 weeks and as soon as that happens IL2 will die a slow glorious death as players migrate to the next generation sim over time...So Daidalos Team whatever you are doing - do it this year...

PanzerAce
01-28-2010, 03:38 PM
Guided bombs.....I'm going to have some fuuuuuuuuuuuuuun with aircraft carriers now :P


Are they going to be added to the Fw-200 loadouts as well *crosses fingers*

SUPERAEREO
01-29-2010, 03:22 AM
With all due respect, I am not 100% convinced about the colour change at altitude in 4.10, since the colour of the sky at altitude does look pretty dark and it gets darker and darker looking up to the zenith.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/95/Skyshot.jpg

See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sky

and

View from Everest (http://www.panoramas.dk/Fullscreen2/Full22.html)


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

bracknell1989
01-29-2010, 04:01 AM
I'm glad that the AI is being looked at. One of the most annoying things I find with AI is when I'm leading the flight and number 2 or 3 sees the enemy before I do due to fog or cloud or poor eye site. What would be great is if they called out the position of the bandit and waited for the order to attack rather than just cutting across me without a word!

Also if formations are approaching head on but we have an altitude advantage the AI will dive down for a head on attack which strips the advantage. Please if this could be fixed it would really improve my game play experience!

The changes regarding the AI & clouds is great news. It'll be good to be able to hide under the clouds to prevent being bounced and sneak under for ground attack missions and running away into afterwards. An update for the AI ground attack procedure would be great too!

Flight_boy1990
01-29-2010, 05:52 AM
Originally posted by SUPERAEREO:
With all due respect, I am not 100% convinced about the colour change at altitude in 4.10, since the colour of the sky at altitude does look pretty dark and it gets darker and darker looking up to the zenith.

The colour of the sky depends on many factors.The time,the location,the season,etc...Of course and the altitude.
But in summer time,at noon,at around 10 000 meters over Western/Central/Eastern europe,it looks like this:

http://img532.imageshack.us/img532/5656/20039120307007327211242.jpg (http://img532.imageshack.us/i/20039120307007327211242.jpg/)

http://img23.imageshack.us/img23/6093/20039120307011327311242.jpg (http://img23.imageshack.us/i/20039120307011327311242.jpg/)

Which is exactly the change that is coming with 4.10.

SUPERAEREO
01-29-2010, 05:58 AM
Thank you for the precisation, Flight_boy1990.

And thank you again for the hard work.

Feathered_IV
01-30-2010, 08:21 PM
One of the greatest obstacles in anti-ship ops in offline play is the very limited way that AI wingmen respond (or rather don't respond) to attack orders. One must fly almost right up to a ship before AI planes will obey the order to attack. They will then stooge about within range of flak, most getting shot down before organising themselves for a bomb or torpedo run. The results are always disappointing, and far from realistic.

Could DT take a look at this limiting feature of the game? If AI units could be given an attack-ships order at more realistic ranges, they would have time to position themselves in a more convincing and advantageous manner.

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/halo.gif

DIRTY-MAC
01-31-2010, 07:23 AM
Is it possible to see a clip of the CW-21B in action in the next update? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

FatCat_99
01-31-2010, 06:53 PM
Originally posted by Feathered_IV:
One of the greatest obstacles in anti-ship ops in offline play is the very limited way that AI wingmen respond (or rather don't respond) What they do depend a lot on mission maker and on when you give them command to attack. I tried one simple mission and I managed to get them to drop bombs almost simultaneously as me. Almost is due to their much better aim if what I have done can be called aiming at all http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

I have a mission and track, so if you want to take a look PM me.

FC

wheelsup_cavu
02-01-2010, 01:07 AM
Good stuff, http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif Looking forward to this Patch. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif


Wheels

DuxCorvan
02-01-2010, 12:51 PM
Now that you've changed sky colors at altitude, could you do something with terrain? The higher you go, it should look more and more desaturated with tan terrains looking grey and green fields quite blueish, with a degraded palette as you look through thick atmosphere. Those intense greens and browns look unrealistic when above 10000 ft.

Feathered_IV
02-01-2010, 04:27 PM
Originally posted by FatCat_99:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Feathered_IV:
One of the greatest obstacles in anti-ship ops in offline play is the very limited way that AI wingmen respond (or rather don't respond) What they do depend a lot on mission maker and on when you give them command to attack. I tried one simple mission and I managed to get them to drop bombs almost simultaneously as me. Almost is due to their much better aim if what I have done can be called aiming at all http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

I have a mission and track, so if you want to take a look PM me.

FC </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thanks for the reply FC. Much appreciated!

I had expected that in real life a flight leader could spot a ship from several kilometres away and easily order his flight to attack without them refusing to do so.

I always find that in making an attack, I must stay at a medium airspeed on the run-in to avoid having the AI planes break formation - risking death by flak at the same time. The whole way in I would be giving them the order to attack ships. They reply that they are unable, right up to the point that I am passing the first ships in the area. At which point, they will suddenly respond, break in every direction, jettison their bombs or make an ineffectual bomb or torpedo run.

I don't doubt that you have devised some personal workaround for avoiding the worst of this poor AI behavior. But a fix would be most welcome. If not in Il-2, then certainly in SoW.

DKoor
02-02-2010, 04:02 PM
I look forward to the Daidalos updates more than SoW updates.
The work you guys do on our old workhorse of a sim is amazing.

RAAF_Furball
02-02-2010, 05:52 PM
Originally posted by DKoor:
I look forward to the Daidalos updates more than SoW updates.
The work you guys do on our old workhorse of a sim is amazing. <span class="ev_code_YELLOW">hear, hear</span>

larschance
02-04-2010, 09:53 AM
Good work D Team. When the time comes Will you consider issuing a complete IL2 DVD set to v4.10 for those of us without broadband. Or is that too costly.

daidalos.team
02-04-2010, 05:14 PM
New update, first page.
Sorry for the delay. There was some confusion about the dev update.

Romanator21
02-04-2010, 08:21 PM
Nice update. Debris from the ships look great. Will this include oil slicks?

Concerning the multi-throttle support: It seems the radiator will have + and - control rather than having to press R repeatedly. Is this correct? I was also wondering if it was possible to adjust the mixture on aircraft with auto mixture (In the same way that I can change the pitch manually on the Fw-190)?

Wildnoob
02-05-2010, 05:38 AM
Amazing!

Is there any plans about put ship gunners out of action when hitting their stations?

FatCat_99
02-05-2010, 06:55 AM
Originally posted by Romanator21:
Nice update. Debris from the ships look great. Will this include oil slicks?

Concerning the multi-throttle support: It seems the radiator will have + and - control rather than having to press R repeatedly. Is this correct?
Watch video again , maybe you can spot something, especially after the first flare is fired http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

IIRC radiator in video was on a slider.

FC

JtD
02-05-2010, 07:53 AM
I'm looking forward to the I-15bis!

koivis
02-05-2010, 11:27 AM
A Ju-88 with torpedos and a proper torpedo sight! Too much good stuff to list...

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

Viikate_
02-05-2010, 12:08 PM
Originally posted by koivis:
A Ju-88 with torpedos and a proper torpedo sight! Too much good stuff to list...

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

Well, it's not exactly torpedo sight. The Ju-88 has standard Revi and ToKG is basically like simplified torpedo data computer that is used in subs.

Romanator21
02-05-2010, 01:13 PM
Watch video again , maybe you can spot something, especially after the first flare is fired Wink

IIRC radiator in video was on a slider.

Thanks for pointing that out, I was too busy looking at the pretty Arado pontoon plane to notice. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Radiator control sounds nice, thanks.

Any word on manual/auto toggle for mixture? It's not very critical, but I was wondering if it was doable. Are customizable HUD logs in the plans for the future as well?

EDIT: I might as well just tack this in hereas it just came to mind: I have noticed that many planes have an issue with the variometer that shows a slight descent even when parked on the ground. Is this a bug, and if so, can it be fixed?

EDIT2: This just occurred to me in HL today. Would it be possible in full-switch Coops or campaigns to be able to use external views after crashing or landing?

Thanks again for the update and for the excellent work!

Erkki_M
02-09-2010, 10:56 PM
Originally posted by Romanator21:
EDIT2: This just occurred to me in HL today. Would it be possible in full-switch Coops or campaigns to be able to use external views after crashing or landing?

better yet, make it possible for even player-hosts in addition to dedicated servers to have autokick for anyone who'se plane crashes/who has 30sec since bailout/something to prevent ghosting...! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/partyhat.gif

Wildnoob
02-10-2010, 01:57 PM
I'd like to make a sugestion for coops as well. In the multi-crew mode the bombardier is only controllable by the pilot. What about give it a independent position, witch also would serve to give a navigator and nose gunner to the aircraft?

For navigation improvements, allow the player to do marcations in the map would be very interesting.

RamsteinUSA
02-11-2010, 01:49 AM
if you fly in a real plane and go up to above 15,000 feet and way above,, the sky becomes extremely bright, not dark, unless you go into space.. something IL-2 will never have to worry about..



Originally posted by SUPERAEREO:
With all due respect, I am not 100% convinced about the colour change at altitude in 4.10, since the colour of the sky at altitude does look pretty dark and it gets darker and darker looking up to the zenith.

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/95/Skyshot.jpg

See:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sky

and

View from Everest (http://www.panoramas.dk/Fullscreen2/Full22.html)


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

PanzerAce
02-11-2010, 03:00 AM
Originally posted by RamsteinUSA:
if you fly in a real plane and go up to above 15,000 feet and way above,, the sky becomes extremely bright, not dark, unless you go into space.. something IL-2 will never have to worry about..

You've obviously never seen the competitions to see who's gotten the highest, have you http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

SUPERAEREO
02-11-2010, 10:54 AM
What about USAAF bomber formations routinely flying at 7000 meters..?

Romanator21
02-11-2010, 11:21 AM
The way Il-2 models the high altitude "darkness" is lame anyway. It's just a cap of blue without a transition. The change looks better in this regard.

Jumoschwanz
02-11-2010, 12:21 PM
I had a lot of fun in the past putting a bunch of B-17s up at 7-8000 meters alt in the QMB and trying to shoot them down with a fighter, I was trying to simulate what the german pilot had to do over his home country later in WWII.

It is pretty with all the con-trails and tracers, and it is tough because IL2 was just not designed for high altitude flying, the aircraft get slower at a lot of altitudes they are supposed to get faster at.

I am sure that in some old thread Oleg said this sim was optimized for low-altitude because it was originally supposed to replicate the Eastern front conflict, supporting and shooting down the IL2 Sturmovik like Hartmann etc. spent their careers doing. And it works great at low to medium altitudes doesn't it?

Thanks much to Daidalos Team for their continuing efforts with IL2 sturmovik. They seem to be very prolific, and with any luck before long their work will make mods moot and the whole community can get together under one roof again.

Wildnoob
02-12-2010, 08:09 AM
TD, could you check this article about the top speed of the A6M2:

http://www.j-aircraft.com/rese...zero_performance.htm (http://www.j-aircraft.com/research/rdunn/zeroperformance/zero_performance.htm)

What about a fix for the Hellcat and Ki-84 speeds?

Data about the Hellcat's wrong speed was already posted here several times. Also, it should have 400 rpg. The Ki-84 top speed is far higher than historical. The 687 km/h were only obtained in post war trials with 140 octane. The top speed should be 624 km/h.

daidalos.team
02-12-2010, 12:30 PM
Update posted on first page.

Romanator21
02-12-2010, 12:38 PM
UMMMMM....

WOWOWOWOWOWOWOWOWOWOOWWOOWOWO!~!!!!111!!!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif http://media.ubi.com/us/forum_images/gf-glomp.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/inlove.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

Romanator21
02-12-2010, 12:51 PM
Ok, now that I've regained my composure, let me just say OMG THANK YOU!!!!!11!!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/metal.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/partyhat.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

Wildnoob
02-12-2010, 01:35 PM
Originally posted by Romanator21:
UMMMMM....

WOWOWOWOWOWOWOWOWOWOOWWOOWOWO!~!!!!111!!!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif http://media.ubi.com/us/forum_images/gf-glomp.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/inlove.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_eek.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

+1

MAGNIFIC!

JtD
02-12-2010, 03:37 PM
This is some great news, really! The MDF alone will be a huge addition to the online gaming experience. I do hope it runs stable and bug free by the time it is released, afaik there were/are some troubles with it.
I don't think I'll miss the time when every tank I shot at was dead already. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

It's also cool to get the MG151/20 for the late war 109's. Did the F-4, except for one special plane, ever get the MG151 gondolas installed?

Agamemnon22
02-12-2010, 07:38 PM
I don't come on here much any more, but just wanted to tip my hat to you guys. Doing an awesome job with the game http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

csThor
02-12-2010, 11:39 PM
Originally posted by JtD:
Did the F-4, except for one special plane, ever get the MG151 gondolas installed?

Yes, starting in summer 1942 such sets were delivered to the units engaged in "Case Blue". Black Cross - Red Star volume 3 has photos of such aircraft in service with JG 52.

wheelsup_cavu
02-13-2010, 02:00 AM
Cool Update. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif


Wheels

JtD
02-13-2010, 02:34 AM
Originally posted by csThor:

Yes, starting in summer 1942 such sets were delivered to the units engaged in "Case Blue". Black Cross - Red Star volume 3 has photos of such aircraft in service with JG 52.

Thanks for the info, so it was a late invention. That explains it, looking into documents in the main 109F-4 era I could not find anything. JG 52 apparently upgraded to 109G-2 in July 1942, so it was just for a couple of months.
But I did find a loadout of 96xSD2, was that used in the field and would it be something to add? Would it make sense to have an early and a late 109F-4 with different boost permissions?

csThor
02-13-2010, 03:08 AM
Would require a totally new bomb rack since the SD-2 were dropped individually. Not sure if it's of high enough priority to even consider.

EDIT: The use of the gondolas is also known from JG 3 (which soldiered on in its F-4 for much longer). Heinrich Graf von Einsiedel mentioned flying a Bf 109 F-4/R1 over Stalingrad.

JtD
02-13-2010, 05:55 AM
The bomb rack probably not worth the effort. Personally, I might use it once for the fun of it and then get back to the general purpose bombs.

Thanks for the info on 109F-4 in JG-3. Could have looked that up myself, but only went so far as to check the one JG you had mentioned. There are also a couple of pictures in Ospreys JG52 book.

csThor
02-13-2010, 08:19 AM
Einsiedel remembered a mission flying as wingman of Major Ewald (the Gruppenkommandeur, there was no love lost between the two of them) and Ewald told him to shoot up a force-landed soviet fighter 'cause Einsiedel was flying a gunboat (and since Einsiedel was captured before JG 3 got Gustavs it has to be a F-4/R1) - while a lot of soviet light AAA was shooting at them. Einsiedel then sarcastically asked "Wouldn't you rather, Herr Major?" (source: Black Cross - Red Star 3) http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

Bremspropeller
02-13-2010, 05:54 PM
Thor, is there any way to get the 190A-4,5 and 6 their dedicated jabo-versions (maybe even jabo-rei) in a dedicated slot each?

Would be nice to have the plane with it's specific armor and performance-data, and being able to bomb it up for any mission-requirement.

Plus, the reworked cowligs of some mod-planes would be a nice add-on http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

That would certainly spice-up the mid-war low-level arena http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

K_Freddie
02-15-2010, 03:27 PM
DT = http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Erkki_M
02-16-2010, 11:40 PM
I asked about this in the yellow forums too some time ago, but lets have it here too.

The Jakovlev series is extremely used aircraft series in the game; though most dogfight servers concentrate either on the "air Quake" or West Front scenarios, online wars(ie. the AFW which has ~30 missions a day of usually 8 vs 8 players and ADW that has the max amount, or 80, players for multiple hours every day) are typically east front focused. In at least 3/4 of the maps the Jak-1, Jak-7 and Jak-9 series form a big or even most part of the Allied fighters.

However these aircraft dont have their fuel gauges(in the wings, outside cockpit) modelled at all! The Jak-9 series has a warning light, but only Jakovlevs with a proper, working(and in-cockpit) fuel gauge are Jak-9U and Jak-3, which typically show up in two last maps only, and in bigger numbers only in Berlin 45... As mission flight times(unless one gets shot down) are usually around 45-50min and Jaks, apart of 9D and T, dont have too big fuel tanks, this is sometimes even a major issue when flying the series, as you might run out of fuel even if you had taken the performance-affecting 100% load... Out-of cockpit gauges have been modelled in many planes, at least He-111 and Me-110, and I dont see how it could not be possible with the Jak series.

Some information there:

http://vvs.hobbyvista.com/Rese...FuelGauges/index.php (http://vvs.hobbyvista.com/Research/Yakovlev/FuelGauges/index.php)

DT, could it be possible in 4.11 or 4.12? Since SOW BOB is coming there wont be much East Front stuff coming in next few years anyways...

Ba5tard5word
02-17-2010, 02:21 PM
Something I would like is for the new QMB scramble to let you set the distance for incoming enemy planes.

I'm not sure if anyone else has suggested this or if there is a way to do it. If I am in command of a flight of planes and enemy fighters are inbound, sometimes the enemy fighters spawn very close to my base and immediately shoot up my wingmen on the ground. Then other times they will spawn further off and won't do that. I really like doing QMB scrambles for practice gunnery but I don't like having my entire flight blown up half the time, it would be nice to have the option to set the enemy fighters further back.

AndyJWest
02-17-2010, 03:52 PM
Originally posted by Ba5tard5word:
Something I would like is for the new QMB scramble to let you set the distance for incoming enemy planes.

I'm not sure if anyone else has suggested this or if there is a way to do it. If I am in command of a flight of planes and enemy fighters are inbound, sometimes the enemy fighters spawn very close to my base and immediately shoot up my wingmen on the ground. Then other times they will spawn further off and won't do that. I really like doing QMB scrambles for practice gunnery but I don't like having my entire flight blown up half the time, it would be nice to have the option to set the enemy fighters further back.

Id have to agree. On some maps, if you set up a scramble against bombers, they can be bombing the airfield before you even get off the ground.

thefruitbat
02-17-2010, 04:24 PM
This is one thing i've not really understood. In fatcats original QMB mod you could make your own qmb missions, which i do, and you can set the scramble missions up as much as you want, and on any map you want, but when it was implemented into 4.09 this feature was not.

i have my suspicions as to why, but it was a great feature, and is why i still use a qmb mod, rather than the version supplied in 4.09.

Romanator21
02-17-2010, 04:42 PM
Out-of cockpit gauges have been modelled in many planes, at least He-111 and Me-110, and I dont see how it could not be possible with the Jak series.

The problem with this is lack of 6 DOF. If the gauges were modeled, they would not be in the line of sight for the current position of the camera.

I propose using a shift seat function similar to that in the Corsair, Wildcat and Zero that moves the player camera up in the seat, or which moves to the side in the Fokker. In the Yak, it could move to one side or the other to show the gauges. Press the key once to look to the left, press again to return to the center. Press again to look to the right, and press again to return the center (This seems it would be simpler than programming left and right views as separate keys).

However, it might lead to an unfair advantage to players in other planes without this greater freedom of movement.

I've noticed a thread on the Spitfire. I am assuming that some existing FMs are going to be looked at. What do you guys currently have on the slate for other planes? (not a complaint)

Also, I noticed an excellent high quality WIP for the Il-4. Is this work planned for 4.11-4.13?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFUoDp9di5Y

daidalos.team
02-18-2010, 11:56 AM
Update posted on first page.

JtD
02-18-2010, 12:42 PM
This are some neat improvements for the QMB. (Just make sure it remains Q.) http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Regarding the stats, will there be "streak" entries? Will there be "rtb %"? And, the combination of both, the "rtb streak"?

Online you get a lot of pointless K/D stuff, but the essential, the safe return to base, often gets overlooked.

AndyJWest
02-18-2010, 12:48 PM
Nice. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

I like the stats window, though I'm sure it will provide a whole new topic for forum arguments...

X32Wright
02-21-2010, 12:30 AM
What about the torpedo carrying version of the FW-190? R14 and the R-15 which were glider bombs. Thers also the Fw 190 F-8/U2 and Fw 190 F-8/U3. They were official Luftwaffe designations and were used late in the war.

Isn't this a matter of just using the existing bomb rack but lengthening the tail wheel?

Bremspropeller
02-21-2010, 06:22 AM
They weren't used in combat.

What really is more crucial is getting the existing F-8's loadoud corrcted.

Another option of actally presetting the dropping-sequence of the bombs would be nice.

Like "Wing-bombs first" or "fuselage-bombs first".

Bearcat99
02-21-2010, 06:47 PM
That is fantastic!!

One thing about the stats page.. could there possibly be a way coming perhaps to implement something similar in a coop or a DF.. say like when you leave you hit escape once and the stats page pops up.. then hit escape again and you get the normal screen that pops up when you hit escape in an online mission.. and in the case of an online mission it could all be simplified.. sort of like the old Sturmolog screen used to be.

Also with that in mind would it be difficult to implement more than one way of scoring.. For instance as it is now at the end of a coop you see each individuals name & points.. but would it be possible to use a similar type of screen to the Sturmolog one but only showing team stats as in number of objects destroyed per team instead of individual points.. and speaking of points.. will there be a change to the points system currently being used?

T_O_A_D
02-22-2010, 08:23 AM
Great work guys!


This off angle shot, is there a slight hint of 6dof coming in 4.10?

http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/8041/render3jg.jpg

EJGrOst_Caspar
02-22-2010, 09:00 AM
This off angle shot, is there a slight hint of 6dof coming in 4.10?

http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/8041/render3jg.jpg

Hell no! Its just a stupid render in 3DSmax.
At least from the model site... it would be possible.
But this pic indeed tells you nothing more than that there is a Re2000 cockpit in work.

Messaschnitzel
02-22-2010, 12:51 PM
Originally posted by EJGrOst_Caspar:
But this pic indeed tells you nothing more than that there is a Re2000 cockpit in work.

Wow, great news! I was hoping that it would get it's own cockpit and canopy at some point down the line! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Viikate_
02-23-2010, 01:19 AM
Wing fuel gauges for Yaks is surely something we can try out how it works. Has anyone tested if they would be visible without 6DoF? Paint a red dot to skin where the gauge is supposed to be and check if it's visible.

T_O_A_D
02-23-2010, 08:55 AM
Originally posted by EJGrOst_Caspar:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
This off angle shot, is there a slight hint of 6dof coming in 4.10?

http://img13.imageshack.us/img13/8041/render3jg.jpg

Hell no! Its just a stupid render in 3DSmax.
At least from the model site... it would be possible.
But this pic indeed tells you nothing more than that there is a Re2000 cockpit in work. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Ok I understand the pic is not a hint.

So does the "hell no" mean no 6dof as well.

Or is 6dof something still in the possibilities?

thefruitbat
02-23-2010, 12:03 PM
lifted from the banana forum, posted by fatcat,



Il2 is old game and whatever we do will not make it up to modern standards in terms of graphics. On the other hand changes in graphics can take a lot of PC power and consequence is that we wouldn't be able to add some other features.

With all of that in mind it should be easier to understand why we are focused more on adding improvements in other departments.

We have tested 6DOF but it is questionable if we will implement it. There is too many problems with it and in most cases it is not possible to have acceptable 6DOF without 3d changes in cockpits. To be clear, we are not against 6DOF, in fact we would love to implement it but we will not do it if it is not done properly.

FC

AndyJWest
02-23-2010, 12:46 PM
Originally posted by Viikate_:
Wing fuel gauges for Yaks is surely something we can try out how it works. Has anyone tested if they would be visible without 6DoF? Paint a red dot to skin where the gauge is supposed to be and check if it's visible.

Unfortunately not, by the look of it - Yak-1B:
http://i958.photobucket.com/albums/ae65/ajv00987k/il2fb2010-02-2319-37-22-01.jpg
http://i958.photobucket.com/albums/ae65/ajv00987k/il2fb2010-02-2319-37-51-95.jpg

I'm assuming the inner circles on the wings are the fuel gauges, and that they are in the right place on the void skin. They'd have to be a lot further out to be visible, and at that distance, they'd be difficult to read anyway.

One alternative would be to add an optional 'non-historical' fuel gauge, configured in the same way as the Fokker DXX1 gunsights were.

JtD
02-24-2010, 12:12 AM
Maybe a "raise seat" function where you instead lean to the left or right.

JG52Karaya-X
02-24-2010, 04:04 AM
Could you guys have a look at the blast radii of all general purpose bombs ingame? There is a very big discrepancy between bombs of the same tonnage but of different nationality.

An example:

Most of the FAB bombs have twice the blast radius of their German, British, US,... counterpart (for example FAB1000 vs SC1000 vs 2000lbs)

But there's also the Japanese bombs which seem overpowered and some of the smaller ones (50 & 100kg Italian, Czech,... bombs)

AndyJWest
02-24-2010, 12:55 PM
Originally posted by JtD:
Maybe a "raise seat" function where you instead lean to the left or right.

Nope, that won't work either. Using mod 6DoF, you can't see the gauges at full up and sideways movement. I'm beginning to wonder if the gauges are misplaced on the skin - I can't imagine real-life pilots would appreciate having to open the canopy and lean out to read fuel levels, but from the look of it, they'd need to.

Does anyone have a decent 3-view and/or photos to confirm the gauge positioning?

Falcke
02-25-2010, 08:17 AM
Just put a fuel gauge on the cockpit side. It shouldn't be very hard to implement, and it's much more realistic then not being able to see your fuel status at all.

JtD
02-25-2010, 08:52 AM
Originally posted by AndyJWest:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JtD:
Maybe a "raise seat" function where you instead lean to the left or right.

Nope, that won't work either. Using mod 6DoF, you can't see the gauges at full up and sideways movement. I'm beginning to wonder if the gauges are misplaced on the skin - I can't imagine real-life pilots would appreciate having to open the canopy and lean out to read fuel levels, but from the look of it, they'd need to.

Does anyone have a decent 3-view and/or photos to confirm the gauge positioning? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Maybe 6DOF is not good enough.

daidalos.team
02-25-2010, 04:16 PM
Just a small update tonight guys. Enjoy the video on AI vs. AI visibility.

JtD
02-25-2010, 10:18 PM
Just small, but still nice. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Does this also mean that the AI won't see things that are behind or below it, or would that be completely different matter?

FatCat_99
02-26-2010, 11:41 AM
Originally posted by JtD:
Does this also mean that the AI won't see things that are behind or below it, or would that be completely different matter? That's different problem, it is not a problem to make blind spots, problem is in making that efficiently. It is very easy to kill FPS with overdone AI.

FC

Boosher
03-01-2010, 02:36 PM
Um, guys, I'm pretty sure those aren't fuel gauges. Much more likely that those are the caps for the fuel tanks.

JtD
03-02-2010, 09:08 AM
Just a guide for modellers, but still good info. (http://vvs.hobbyvista.com/Research/Yakovlev/FuelGauges/index.php)

Erkki_M
03-02-2010, 11:56 PM
Originally posted by Boosher:
Um, guys, I'm pretty sure those aren't fuel gauges. Much more likely that those are the caps for the fuel tanks.

There are both, see JtD's link, the same one I posted a few pages back.

Any 6DOFer here could test how much the camera position should be rised for the gauges to be visible(IF they are now in the correct place), if only small raise is needed, the TD could do that(like they did with MC200s). Jaks already have a near-360 degree cockpit panorama vision anyways, so it would not give Jak pilots any "unfair" advantages they wouldnt already have imho...

AndyJWest
03-03-2010, 11:00 AM
Any 6DOFer here could test how much the camera position should be rised for the gauges to be visible(IF they are now in the correct place), if only small raise is needed, the TD could do that(like they did with MC200s). Jaks already have a near-360 degree cockpit panorama vision anyways, so it would not give Jak pilots any "unfair" advantages they wouldnt already have imho...

AS I said in my earlier posting, they aren't visible at the limits of mod 6DoF. It seems to me that the pilot would need to have his nose almost up against the canopy to see them.

With regard to 'unfair advantage', don't forget that early Yaks didn't have bubble canopies. I'd think the best compromise would be an optional 'non-historical' cockpit fuel gauge.

Erkki_M
03-03-2010, 11:33 AM
Originally posted by AndyJWest:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Any 6DOFer here could test how much the camera position should be rised for the gauges to be visible(IF they are now in the correct place), if only small raise is needed, the TD could do that(like they did with MC200s). Jaks already have a near-360 degree cockpit panorama vision anyways, so it would not give Jak pilots any "unfair" advantages they wouldnt already have imho...

AS I said in my earlier posting, they aren't visible at the limits of mod 6DoF. It seems to me that the pilot would need to have his nose almost up against the canopy to see them.

With regard to 'unfair advantage', don't forget that early Yaks didn't have bubble canopies. I'd think the best compromise would be an optional 'non-historical' cockpit fuel gauge. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I know they dont, but even the early Jaks nevertheless have pretty good cockpit visibility.

That they arent visible even with 6DOF... Is kind of weird, Jak's cockpit isnt too big, and its a small aircraft...

Jak-9U: http://www.flygplan.info/images/yak_9.jpg

Jak-3: http://www.btinternet.com/~lee_mail/Yak3-1.jpg (http://www.btinternet.com/%7Elee_mail/Yak3-1.jpg)

Theres possibly something seriously wrong with the Jak's cockpit. Anyone has WOP or AHII, just for some comparison? I'll eat my shorts if the pilot cant see the gauges sitting there:

AndyJWest
03-03-2010, 03:06 PM
Theres possibly something seriously wrong with the Jak's cockpit. Anyone has WOP or AHII, just for some comparison? I'll eat my shorts if the pilot cant see the gauges sitting there:

Obviously whether the gauges are visible are not will depend on the limits of viewpoint movement - I'm using the mouse-operated 6DOF_LookAround, rather than 6DOF_Tracker, but hopefully the limits are the same. The range isn't great, but then it shouldn't be - you are supposed to be strapped tightly in, not rattling around loose in the cockpit.

As I said, with your nose up against the canopy, you will probably see them, but it must have been awkward.

EDIT -----
To give an idea how far out they would need to go to be visible:
http://i958.photobucket.com/albums/ae65/ajv00987k/il2fb2010-03-0322-16-36-46.jpg
http://i958.photobucket.com/albums/ae65/ajv00987k/il2fb2010-03-0322-16-01-81.jpg
The red circle is the gauge position on the void.

As you can see from the 2nd screenshot, you could move your head a little further in real life without having to open the canopy, but you would have to have loose seatbelts to see the gauges I'd have thought.

daidalos.team
03-04-2010, 05:25 PM
Update posted.

Romanator21
03-04-2010, 05:36 PM
Solomon islands http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Great news! G-limits sound very cool. Will damage caused by enemy fire be included in these calculations? By how much will this new feature affect computer performance? Great update! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

JtD
03-04-2010, 10:57 PM
Yes, two great additions. Will the slot map come with a bunch of Japanese cruisers and the Kongo class battleships? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

The g load model, so to speak, sounds very nice.

waffen-79
03-05-2010, 09:41 AM
Excellent Additions TD! your making this SIM more AWESOME

I have just one question, Will the existing traks work?

thefruitbat
03-05-2010, 12:05 PM
i'm looking forward to around easterish http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

Aviar
03-05-2010, 05:14 PM
Even in 4.09 we can see the AI performing questionable maneuvers (that a human pilot would not or could not ever pull off) with no apparent penalty to the pilot nor the plane.

I was wondering about these new structural G-limits for flyable planes. This will place more restraints on human players. I'm fine with that, but my concern is about the AI.

My question for Team Daidalos is this. How will these new G-limits affect the AI? Will they be subject to the same limits as human players?

While we are on the subject of AI, I wanted to ask one more question that has been a concern since day one. It's well documented that the AI can cruise on 100% throttle and boost endlessly without penalty of engine overheat/damage. Will this ever be addressed?


Aviar

danjama
03-06-2010, 03:43 AM
I'm actually excited that there will be a stats page!

Skunk_438RCAF
03-06-2010, 05:12 AM
Wow I had no idea that the Slot was even being considered for inclusion.

Feathered_IV
03-06-2010, 05:26 AM
Maybe not. Thrud said a few weeks back that he was halting work on the New Guinea map to follow something to do with the Slot (presumably official inclusion). A few days ago he reported that he was back onto the PNG map because the Slot thing, "didn't pan out".

Aviar
03-06-2010, 09:55 PM
I actually got an answer (in the 'other' forum) from a Daidalos Team member to the second question in my last post.

My question was:

"While we are on the subject of AI, I wanted to ask one more question that has been a concern since day one. It's well documented that the AI can cruise on 100% throttle and boost endlessly without penalty of engine overheat/damage. Will this ever be addressed?'

The answer from the DT member:

"We can change that but is that really necessary?"


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sadeyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sadeyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sadeyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sadeyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sadeyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sadeyes.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/sadeyes.gif


Aviar

mortoma
03-08-2010, 01:51 AM
The new G limiting should be deselectable in case people don't like it. Of course online it would have to be set by server but offline it should be able to be turned on or off. Possibly a 'Realistic G Forces' switch in the difficulty page like there is a 'Realistic Gunnery' or 'Stalls & Spins" now!! This would be vastly preferable in the case of new players especially.

Erkki_M
03-09-2010, 02:07 AM
Originally posted by mortoma:
The new G limiting should be deselectable in case people don't like it. Of course online it would have to be set by server but offline it should be able to be turned on or off. Possibly a 'Realistic G Forces' switch in the difficulty page like there is a 'Realistic Gunnery' or 'Stalls & Spins" now!! This would be vastly preferable in the case of new players especially.

Another could be more toggles for icons, such as full, half range planetypes only and 1/4 range numbers only etc. Would make serverside icons toggling much quicker, and not everyone wants to edit the conf.ini.

CzechTexan
03-10-2010, 07:35 PM
Another thing that has always bugged me about the A/I planes is that they crash into mountains like flies drawn to flypaper.

It's like they don't even react to a mountain staring them straight in the face. And don't even try to get them to land on an airfield surrounded by mountains. Every one of them will crash in the same place.

Can't this be fixed?

daidalos.team
03-11-2010, 02:30 PM
As every week, update posted on first page.

Thank you for your comments and input. We do read and consider them even if we don't reply all the time.

JtD
03-11-2010, 10:17 PM
Neat, decent bridges.

Guess immune to small bombs is a bit over the top, I've seen bridges with holes in it caused by small bombs. Usually took 5 minutes to repair. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

JG52Karaya-X
03-12-2010, 02:30 AM
But if it took only 5 minutes to repair then I guess it hardly scratched it ^^

Great stuff and great work yet again! This is going to be an awesome patch.

Wildnoob
03-12-2010, 07:01 AM
Very nice TD!

Are you considerating give the bombardier an independent position?

TheGrunch
03-12-2010, 11:48 PM
Originally posted by Wildnoob:
Very nice TD!

Are you considerating give the bombardier an independent position?
Yeah, I'd be interested to know about that as well, that'd be awesome online on comms.

FatCat_99
03-13-2010, 03:09 AM
Originally posted by JtD:
Neat, decent bridges.

Guess immune to small bombs is a bit over the top, I've seen bridges with holes in it caused by small bombs. Usually took 5 minutes to repair. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
We have researched it thoroughly, I guess that I entered the list of potential terrorists judging by the number of times I ended up on USA government sites searching for forbidden content http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

FC

JtD
03-14-2010, 12:00 AM
Hehe, I felt the same when I was looking up historical explosives.

Smaller bombs will not damage a solid bridge structurally, they'll just scratch the surface. They may eventually render the bridge useless, but will hardly make it collapse. And there's also the difficulty of landing a direct hit. I think the British Tallboy and Grandslam bombs were designed with bridges in mind, I know that they were used against them as a preferred loadout. For a reason. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

K_Freddie
03-17-2010, 03:19 PM
Originally posted by FatCat_99:
We have researched it thoroughly, I guess that I entered the list of potential terrorists judging by the number of times I ended up on USA government sites searching for forbidden content http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif FC
Don't worry.. anything outside the US/UK are probably terrorists by now... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

KnightsKross
03-17-2010, 05:16 PM
Will IL2 FB play on windows 7? Is there a patch for this? Thanks

Tooz_69GIAP
03-18-2010, 09:00 PM
It does play on windows 7

EJGrOst_Caspar
03-19-2010, 03:20 AM
IL-2 up to v4.09 is already running on Win7.

If it doesn't at yours... its not a problem of the game.

JtD
03-19-2010, 08:43 AM
That mini P-47 aka Re.2002 looks promising!

Good luck with testing all these new features.

koivis
03-20-2010, 07:09 AM
Wow... this could be as well called 4.5 or even 5.0, so much new and exciting stuff coming!

I http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif @ TD

Eagle1_Division
03-21-2010, 04:22 PM
O... M... Freakin' G!
This is absolutely amazing!
I've just watched all the videos and the most amazing IMO is the radio navigation. It takes the game to a whole new level, I've never seen anything that comes close to matching in any sim. As awesome as it is with dynamic weather and such, SoW had better have something comparable or I'll find it very hard to buy just the western front in 1940 when IL-2 offers Eastern, western, pacific, african, and anything you can make a map for from late 1930's to late 1940's and possibly even mid 1950's. But if SoW is modable...

Is the Lorenz blind landing beacon going to be on carriers? If not, is there any way to put it on carriers?

Treetop64
03-24-2010, 03:54 PM
It's amazing the amount of work these D-guys are doing. Improvements to the AI air-to-air evasive behavior would have been enough to satisfy me (e.g. getting rid of those annoying, endless, inverted negative-G barrel rolls at vet and ace levels; the negative-G pullouts from a dive [WTF?!], etc...).

A real heartfelt Thanks to the guys at Daidalos! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/clap.gif

B_O_L_T
03-29-2010, 12:17 AM
I would honestly pay for a patch that removed the artificial ai boost that has plagued this games single player campaigns since the start, it makes single player boring and frankly pointless; having to fly everywhere on auto to avoid overheating. I would dearly love to take off, fly in formation, engage the enemy and return to base without ever activating the damn autopilot.

That for me really tore the heart out of single player IL2, knowing the ai were not bound by the same constraints as player controlled airframes. While some mission designers setup cruise speeds in missions to work round this flaw, it still renders the dynamic campaign useless for a number of people who would like to fly manually, unless you play as flight leader all the time and it also renders some single player matchups impossibly unrealistic.

Seriously DT devs, if you could do this or even offer an option to toggle it off, I know a number of pilots that would return to IL2 single player or co op in a heartbeat.

Tooz_69GIAP
03-29-2010, 11:44 AM
According to the timetable posted on page 1, 4.10 development should end at the end of March/start of April - are you still on track for this? The AI visibility change is eagerly awaited by a few of my squad mates after a rather disasterous mission involving AAA!!

Wildnoob
03-30-2010, 03:19 PM
Any possibility of be able to adjust the gunsight reticle?

Wildnoob
03-30-2010, 03:30 PM
Also, any plans for the P-36 and Morane?

JG52Karaya-X
04-01-2010, 11:14 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...jOKtc3C4&feature=sub (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfvTrPWiHE8&playnext_from=TL&videos=h_DjOKtc3C4&feature=sub)

Holy cow, this aircraft is going to be awesome!

EJGrOst_Caspar
04-01-2010, 02:43 PM
Originally posted by Tooz_69GIAP:
According to the timetable posted on page 1, 4.10 development should end at the end of March/start of April - are you still on track for this?

Ahm... no. We delay. No new date set yet. But we are in testing phase now.

EJGrOst_Caspar
04-01-2010, 02:43 PM
Originally posted by Wildnoob:
Also, any plans for the P-36 and Morane?

Maybe. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Wildnoob
04-01-2010, 06:19 PM
Originally posted by EJGrOst_Caspar:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Wildnoob:
Also, any plans for the P-36 and Morane?

Maybe. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

They would be very nice, especially for the Finnish front.

Tooz_69GIAP
04-02-2010, 06:30 AM
Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...jOKtc3C4&feature=sub (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfvTrPWiHE8&playnext_from=TL&videos=h_DjOKtc3C4&feature=sub)

Holy cow, this aircraft is going to be awesome!

That's a really nice touch with the BK-7.5 that it can be jettisoned like a drop tank! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

larschance
04-02-2010, 08:35 AM
The flyable P36 would be great as it flew in several air forces. Similarly is there any chance a D520 could be created as this type flew with the ADL Vichy FAFL Bulgarian Italian and German AFs.

TinyTim
04-02-2010, 08:39 AM
Originally posted by Tooz_69GIAP:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JG52Karaya-X:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...jOKtc3C4&feature=sub (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MfvTrPWiHE8&playnext_from=TL&videos=h_DjOKtc3C4&feature=sub)

Holy cow, this aircraft is going to be awesome!

That's a really nice touch with the BK-7.5 that it can be jettisoned like a drop tank! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Could it be done so in reality? I've read somewhere (can't remember where) that it couldn't be, due to a rotary feeding mechanism or something like that.

Viikate_
04-02-2010, 01:52 PM
Ammo feeding drum stays inside the fuselage when BK7.5 is dropped.

http://www.cockpitinstrumente....3%20-%207.5%20BK.pdf (http://www.cockpitinstrumente.de/archiv/Dokumente/ABC/h/Henschel/Hs%20192/Hs%20129%20B3%20-%207.5%20BK.pdf)

Viikate_
04-02-2010, 03:45 PM
Originally posted by Eagle1_Division:
Is the Lorenz blind landing beacon going to be on carriers? If not, is there any way to put it on carriers?

I have not seen any claims that this kind of blind landing system would have been installed to carrier. Lorenz system is more like blind approach system. Pilot needs to see the runway when he is over the inner marker. It doesn't give you the glide path, so using it with carrier would be pretty dangerous.

Lorenz is more like four-course radio range (A-N radio range) with only two directions, plus two marker beacons. And how you would install those marker beacons on carrier? Tow few fishing boats behind the carrier http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/88.gif

bracknell1989
04-02-2010, 05:10 PM
I've just been watching this video;
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ozEjf_ibAYM&NR=1

Will any of that be implemented? It looks pretty good to me!

Amagi
04-03-2010, 03:50 AM
Fulmars and Swordfish and I-15bis and proper bridges and a Slot map... yet another IL-2 patch, just incredible, thanks.

Has the team got any plans to add further ships? Even if the American ships might be difficult, there's the Japanese fleet and Royal Navy..? If there's anyone busy with this, do they need any help?

Also, of all the issues that have appeared over the years, the P-40 model with its peculiar dihedral always seemed one of the worst to me, a serious detriment to the IL-2 experience whenever it appeared in the air- any chance of a fix?

Tooz_69GIAP
04-03-2010, 04:47 AM
Originally posted by Amagi:Also, of all the issues that have appeared over the years, the P-40 model with its peculiar dihedral always seemed one of the worst to me, a serious detriment to the IL-2 experience whenever it appeared in the air- any chance of a fix?

That doesn't sound likely as it would require a complete rebuild of the 3D model I would have thought.

GH_Klingstroem
04-03-2010, 06:37 AM
What about making nights ALOT darker so there is actually a need for radio navigation? I work as an airline pilot and let me tell you when its dark out there its DARK!! No way to tell where ground starts and sky ends when u look towards where the horizon should be... That would also make use of proper radar for night fighters!!

Best regards

TinyTim
04-03-2010, 06:38 AM
Originally posted by Viikate_:
Ammo feeding drum stays inside the fuselage when BK7.5 is dropped.

http://www.cockpitinstrumente....3%20-%207.5%20BK.pdf (http://www.cockpitinstrumente.de/archiv/Dokumente/ABC/h/Henschel/Hs%20192/Hs%20129%20B3%20-%207.5%20BK.pdf)

Thanks for claring this up Viikate, despite my utterly rusty German I managed to decipher the ability to jettison the cannon. I truly admire the professionalism of Team Daidalos! You guys are doing an incredible job. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

h009291
04-03-2010, 10:47 AM
Originally posted by GH_Klingstroem:
What about making nights ALOT darker so there is actually a need for radio navigation? I work as an airline pilot and let me tell you when its dark out there its DARK!! No way to tell where ground starts and sky ends when u look towards where the horizon should be... That would also make use of proper radar for night fighters!!

Best regards

Good point, but the main reason is this is a combat Sim and not a flight Sim. The majority want to jump into combat, not fly around in the dark.

Romanator21
04-03-2010, 12:56 PM
The majority want to jump into combat, not fly around in the dark.

How many DF servers take place at night? None that I'm aware of. This will add a new dimension of playability, not detract from the existing.

Patchman123
04-03-2010, 02:32 PM
Can you please add an LSO (Landing Signal Officer) to the game of IL-2 Sturmovik 1946?

Carrier operations would be useless without them, because they guide in aircraft to land on carrier to do this direction and that direction, while waving two paddles on the carrier deck.

The LSO was very important and still is important to carrier operations. I am tired of crashing my plane in to the deck. I want to know if I am going too fast for example . 3 hours ago

The LSO was a guy who waved two paddles on the deck of a Royal Navy or US Navy carrier.
The Japanese had a flashing light LSO system that guided them in like modern day LSO systems, but had a guy with a red flag guide them in.
Landings are suicide without an LSO guiding planes in. He should be added to the game, IL-2 Sturmovik for greater accuracy during landings.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZQ9pS1b4R4
The landings are difficult on a carrier, an LSO would make them a hell of a lot easier and less risky and dangerous, if you know what I mean. An LSO would prevent serious damage to the airplane and prevent it from crashing into the deck, when otherwise they would have.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mStCZ17uJvM
The guy waving the paddles is the LSO. LSOs are necessary to carrier landings and not having one is dumb in my opinion.

Just imagine if this guy had an LSO.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1N-KyYyzLU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_0I-XZmP7I

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsfGtdEx18Q
Carrier landing with a Corsair fighter aircraft.
Again, LSO is the guy with the paddles.

Wildnoob
04-03-2010, 11:42 PM
Originally posted by GH_Klingstroem:
What about making nights ALOT darker so there is actually a need for radio navigation? I work as an airline pilot and let me tell you when its dark out there its DARK!! No way to tell where ground starts and sky ends when u look towards where the horizon should be... That would also make use of proper radar for night fighters!!

Best regards

Take a look at end of this (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9ljgmXx07R8&feature=related) video.

AndyJWest
04-04-2010, 12:11 AM
Originally posted by Patchman123:
Can you please add an LSO (Landing Signal Officer) to the game of IL-2 Sturmovik 1946?

Carrier operations would be useless without them, because they guide in aircraft to land on carrier to do this direction and that direction, while waving two paddles on the carrier deck.

The LSO was very important and still is important to carrier operations. I am tired of crashing my plane in to the deck. I want to know if I am going too fast for example . 3 hours ago

The LSO was a guy who waved two paddles on the deck of a Royal Navy or US Navy carrier.
The Japanese had a flashing light LSO system that guided them in like modern day LSO systems, but had a guy with a red flag guide them in.
Landings are suicide without an LSO guiding planes in. He should be added to the game, IL-2 Sturmovik for greater accuracy during landings.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vZQ9pS1b4R4
The landings are difficult on a carrier, an LSO would make them a hell of a lot easier and less risky and dangerous, if you know what I mean. An LSO would prevent serious damage to the airplane and prevent it from crashing into the deck, when otherwise they would have.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mStCZ17uJvM
The guy waving the paddles is the LSO. LSOs are necessary to carrier landings and not having one is dumb in my opinion.

Just imagine if this guy had an LSO.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t1N-KyYyzLU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U_0I-XZmP7I

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsfGtdEx18Q
Carrier landing with a Corsair fighter aircraft.
Again, LSO is the guy with the paddles.

Any 'LSO' in IL-2 would be a few pixels high, at most. Do you think this would really help? I doubt whether they had much idea of your approach speed either - that is what instruments are for. Landing on a carrier in IL-2 is difficult, as in real life. The difference is you have the chance to try again if you get it wrong. There aren't any magic solutions to this, just practice. I used to mess up most of my carrier landings, now I only mess up some of them. Keep trying...

RamsteinUSA
04-05-2010, 04:23 PM
The LSO in CFS2 was good, he needs a new job http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif)

TheGrunch
04-06-2010, 01:43 PM
Originally posted by Tooz_69GIAP
That doesn't sound likely as it would require a complete rebuild of the 3D model I would have thought.
I would have thought it would be a five-minute job at most. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif The part that would take the longest would be importing it into 3dsmax.
It really is a weird model, as well, very off in many of the proportions.

daidalos.team
04-09-2010, 01:50 PM
Update posted on the first page.

JtD
04-10-2010, 04:44 AM
Never before heard about these circling torpedoes...but it's not April 1st anymore. Does anyone know a good link to a site describing the weapon?

The Ju-88 torpedo bomber(s) will also be a nice addition. Thanks!

larschance
04-10-2010, 11:52 AM
The WW2 Italian circling torpedo was only ever tried during the Pedestal convoy attacks in August 1942. A good idea in theory but a failure in practice. No ship was ever sunk by this method which entailed the aircraft dropping the torpedo ahead of the convoy so that the latter sailed into its ever decreasing circle. The aircraft used was the S84 successor to the S79. This trimotor bomber was under powered, slower and was less manouevrable than the S79 which came to replace it back on squadron strength! The crews disliked the S84 unlike the S79 which they loved. The S79 as far as I am aware never used the circling torpedo.

daidalos.team
04-14-2010, 05:47 AM
More on Motobomba here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motobomba

runyan99
04-14-2010, 09:02 AM
Is it possible to add Ground Effect? It's a big flaw in the flight model.

AndyJWest
04-14-2010, 10:04 AM
Originally posted by runyan99:
Is it possible to add Ground Effect? It's a big flaw in the flight model.
Seeing as you will only be in a situation where this would have any noticeable consequences for a few seconds at takeoff and landing, I'd hardly call it a 'big flaw'.

runyan99
04-14-2010, 07:55 PM
Well, I am a student pilot, landing real airplanes now, and landing is no small thing in a sim or in real life. The lack of ground effect is a big flaw in my view, as it makes landings very hard in terms of impact with the ground. These planes come down like rocks.

In a model that usually does feel a lot like real airplane handling, the physics hole on landing that is the lack of ground effect seems large now. I view it as the flaw in the gem. In fact, it has been a noticable adjustment in my personal transition from sim pilot to real pilot.

AndyJWest
04-14-2010, 09:54 PM
You may well be right, runyan, though I've always thought that the problem with IL-2 landings wasn't so much hard initial impacts, but the subsequent bounce - aircraft are usually fitted with shock absorbers, not just springs. I've done a bit of Googling to see if I can find out more about ground effect, but can't seem to find anything definitive - it seems possible though that the effect might be more pronounced in a lightly-loaded GA aircraft than a classic WWII warbird. It seems that ground effect isn't always beneficial either - you can take off at a speed lower than you can climb away from it, which can be embarrassing when you meet an obstacle on the ground...

MD_Titus
04-15-2010, 11:31 AM
Originally posted by runyan99:
Well, I am a student pilot, landing real airplanes now, and landing is no small thing in a sim or in real life. The lack of ground effect is a big flaw in my view, as it makes landings very hard in terms of impact with the ground. These planes come down like rocks.

In a model that usually does feel a lot like real airplane handling, the physics hole on landing that is the lack of ground effect seems large now. I view it as the flaw in the gem. In fact, it has been a noticable adjustment in my personal transition from sim pilot to real pilot.

with practice they come down like feathers.

Romanator21
04-15-2010, 12:16 PM
Very bouncy feathers.

I think modeling ground effect would be great, and enhance realism, but I don't think it's possible in this old engine. But it looks like DT can do anything. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Shockwave74
04-16-2010, 04:15 AM
If the AI stopped being Uber, i would reinstall IL2 1946 and patch from 1.0 to the ultimate version.

However... if it isn't, it's no big deal.

Black_Ops7
04-16-2010, 10:52 AM
How about ivibe support?
http://www.ivibe.com/

The creator tried to get in contact with oleg a long time ago.

can Daidalos team give info to graig from ivibe to have native support for il2?

MD_Titus
04-17-2010, 09:27 AM
Originally posted by Shockwave74:
If the AI stopped being Uber, i would reinstall IL2 1946 and patch from 1.0 to the ultimate version.

However... if it isn't, it's no big deal.

being utterly unable to pull lead on a turning target is so far from uber it's laughable.

Treetop64
04-17-2010, 09:55 AM
Originally posted by runyan99:
Well, I am a student pilot, landing real airplanes now, and landing is no small thing in a sim or in real life. The lack of ground effect is a big flaw in my view, as it makes landings very hard in terms of impact with the ground. These planes come down like rocks.

In a model that usually does feel a lot like real airplane handling, the physics hole on landing that is the lack of ground effect seems large now. I view it as the flaw in the gem. In fact, it has been a noticable adjustment in my personal transition from sim pilot to real pilot.

I agree. However, how a plane "comes down" depends very much on on the plane type itself, how much "bring back" weight it's carrying, and the pilot behind the stick/yoke.

C150s, C172s, and even the C210s tend to want to stay off the runway, which, of course, if you're doing things right, that's how they should mostly behave. In training, these things are always light; the tanks are almost never full, and it's just you and one other person up front, and no kids and luggage in the back.

I've never flown a warbird, but I would imagine that, unless it's almost completely devoid of any fuel and ammo, and has an anorexic pilot at the controls, the crate will want to reunite with the earth with a bit more zeal during the pattern than your typical trainer.

Besides, I don't think there's any sort of headwind modeled in IL-2, so you're coming in a bit more hot than you would if there was a 12-18 kt wind trying to push you off into the T-hangars... Of all the years I've enjoyed IL-2, out of a million landings, never once have I had to crab in. In this sim, once you've trimmed, you're headed exactly to where your nose is pointed, 100% of the time...

I'm almost certain that each of us land planes the wrong way most of the time in IL-2, anyways. You're more mindful of what you're doing in RL, hence that "transition" you mention.

runyan99
04-17-2010, 10:58 PM
You bring up the other glaring discrepancy, which is there is no wind in IL-2. For dogfights, maybe it doesn't matter because it is a level playing field for both sides, but for takeoffs, landings, and cross country flights, wind matters. As you say, landing into a headwind would probably help in the sim.

I'd be shocked and disappointed if we don't get both wind and ground effect in SoW.

AndyJWest
04-18-2010, 05:51 AM
Originally posted by runyan99:
You bring up the other glaring discrepancy, which is there is no wind in IL-2. For dogfights, maybe it doesn't matter because it is a level playing field for both sides, but for takeoffs, landings, and cross country flights, wind matters. As you say, landing into a headwind would probably help in the sim.

I'd be shocked and disappointed if we don't get both wind and ground effect in SoW.

Why do people keep insisting there is no wind in IL-2? Set the more severe weather conditions in the QMB and try it. I suspect that these conditions are rarely used online, or in static missions, due to problems with aircraft weathercocking into wind before takeoff etc, but they are there, and a handful to deal with.

As for ground effect, I think we need a reliable source of information on its actual significance in WWII aircraft first. Adding it to IL-2 would probably not be a trivial exercise if done properly.

Viikate_
04-18-2010, 07:31 AM
Actually the ground effect IS already in the sim. Try taking Ju-88 for example, trim it perfectly for level flight at 100m, then bring it as low as you can over flat surface (water or runway for example). Plane needs some down elevator to maintain level flight, because GE is increasing the lift.

I removed the GE from code and tested some planes that I'm most familiar with. Totally different world! I wrecked big bombers like Ju-88 ALWAYS in landings http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif. So that extra little lift that current GE gives is very important. When I put the GE back, I could do nice landings with Ju-88 again.

However the current GE implementation could be improved. It's too weak for bigger planes and starts to kick in too low.

AndyJWest
04-18-2010, 06:00 PM
To avoid hijacking this thread, further discussion of ground effect here: http://forums.ubi.com/eve/foru...3110283/m/3121062458 (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/3121062458)

Wildnoob
04-18-2010, 06:33 PM
Some Japanese planes have incorrect cockpit colors. They can be fixed?

DKoor
04-20-2010, 04:31 PM
Originally posted by Wildnoob:
Some Japanese planes have incorrect cockpit colors. They can be fixed? While I guess you are correct, I think the primary effort should be put onto more serious stuff... like correcting 109 & P-38 elevator http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif.

Hawgdog
04-21-2010, 05:11 AM
Originally posted by AndyJWest:


Why do people keep insisting there is no wind in IL-2? Set the more severe weather conditions in the QMB and try it.

+1, theres wind alright.
Any of the more severe weather settings will have you spinning in circles or doing a nose plant right as you get going. Or severely buffeting around as you're close to the dirt.

thefruitbat
04-21-2010, 09:03 AM
Originally posted by runyan99:
You bring up the other glaring discrepancy, which is there is no wind in IL-2. For dogfights, maybe it doesn't matter because it is a level playing field for both sides, but for takeoffs, landings, and cross country flights, wind matters. As you say, landing into a headwind would probably help in the sim.

I'd be shocked and disappointed if we don't get both wind and ground effect in SoW.

of course theres wind in il2, it depends on what weather setting you use http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

note the IAS of my plane on a static carrier, and note the headings,

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y290/thefruitbat1/2104201014-57-41.jpg

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y290/thefruitbat1/2104201014-56-45.jpg

its actually great fun trying to land on a carrier in a 30kph crosswind, really have to crab it in.

AndyJWest
04-21-2010, 09:49 AM
its actually great fun trying to land on a carrier in a 30kph crosswind, really have to crab it in.

Have you tried it in a Swordfish, fruitbat?

You could also try landing one on a carrier going flat out into a headwind - you will catch up with it eventually. A Storch in the same situation can be landed vertically. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

Black_Ops7
04-21-2010, 01:01 PM
will team Daidalos integrate wide screen resolutions from the menu so no config editing is needed?

will a future patch offer a larger FOV for widescreen users so we don't have to use the FOV changer?

DKoor
04-21-2010, 03:16 PM
So... is the patch out yethttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif?

Pleeeeasee.... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

Wildnoob
04-21-2010, 04:53 PM
Originally posted by DKoor:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Wildnoob:
Some Japanese planes have incorrect cockpit colors. They can be fixed? While I guess you are correct, I think the primary effort should be put onto more serious stuff... like correcting 109 & P-38 elevator http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Surely DKoor. But I guess a cockpit repainting is a very simple task. Could be done even by third party persons if achieved TD quality standard.

Romanator21
04-21-2010, 06:20 PM
Some aircraft have already been repainted by modders. The K-61 for instance is changed from blue to khaki without changing anything else (instrument panels, paint chips). I imagine it would simply be a matter of using select tools and color curves in Gimp.

B_O_L_T
04-22-2010, 01:42 PM
Originally posted by MD_Titus:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Shockwave74:
If the AI stopped being Uber, i would reinstall IL2 1946 and patch from 1.0 to the ultimate version.

However... if it isn't, it's no big deal.

being utterly unable to pull lead on a turning target is so far from uber it's laughable. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's a problem with the ai flight routines (weak ai routines are the reason the ai is boosted in the first place). What shockwave is referring to is the artificial performance boost given to the ai and auto pilot, their stall speed is significantly lower, they cannot over heat their engines, have greater speed in any given aircraft, better turn performance, better climb rate, never run out of fuel, and more.

Ultimately, it can result in some very unbalanced situations that historically could not happen, and completely destroys immersion for some players. I guess it depends how much you enjoy flying a variety of different planes from differing nations at different times of the war. If you only play with aircraft that had a significant advantage anyway, it is hardly noticeable.

Another of the problems with this boost, is its affect on the ability to fly from take off to landing without engaging autopilot as part of a flight. Because the ai in the players flight get boosted too, it becomes impossible to take off and keep formation without overheating and wrecking your engine inside 10 minutes. The only ways around it are to lead the flight yourself, so the ai remain in formation with the player(completely removes the possibility to start at the lowest rank and develop through a campaign gaining promotions), engage the autopilot to do the flying for you on ingress and egress(making the whole exercise of flying the entire mission yourself impossible), or only play missions and campaigns designed with cruise speeds and altitudes designed to overcome the limitations this boosting presents .

For many who want an "historically accurate simulation" the artificial ai boost can completely wreck immersion in many sp campaigns.

daidalos.team
04-22-2010, 02:20 PM
Update posted on the first page.

Wildnoob
04-22-2010, 02:53 PM
Very nice!

An AI G3M will be very nice too.

BTW, I hope so much for a flyable Ki-21. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/winky.gif

Romanator21
04-22-2010, 04:23 PM
Do-217 is sorely missed! There are just not enough late war German bombers. The Cant Z.1007 is very nice too! Thanks!

Tooz_69GIAP
04-22-2010, 04:38 PM
I love the Italian bombers!! Are there plans to make these flyable later, or will they remain AI?

TinyTim
04-22-2010, 07:18 PM
Do-217 and Cant Z.1007?!?

I'm in heaven. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

Need a drink.

koivis
04-23-2010, 02:27 AM
Wow! Finally a LW bomber suited for late-war missions. And by the way, the long-wing K-2 version is IMHO the coolest twin-engine medium bomber ever made. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_cool.gif

I'm in heaven too!

Metatron_123
04-23-2010, 08:05 AM
This is going to be an epic patch. I love how you cover lots of different areas on many different levels, without neglecting the famous, or obscure machines. Good work!

ILikePortillos
04-23-2010, 09:59 AM
Wow! Thanks guys! This is wonderful news! Not only is this the premier flight combat sim on the market, and one of the best of all time, but it's also has some of the best support I've ever experienced. Please take any whining lightly, as some people take so much for granted that they lose perspective, and their suggestions come accross as demands. You should be proud of everything you've accomplished to make this sim a benchmark in the industry. Cheers!

Now for my question/suggestion. . .

I've always wanted to be able to generate a mission in QMB, save it, open it with FMB to make some tweaks, and save it to my coop folder, so that I could fly the mission with my buddy. It looks like we may be able to do this now? Am I correct? Will we be able to create coop missions in QMB?

Again, thanks for your attention to detail. The new G-Force considerations are a subtantial improvement to an already excellent product.

JtD
04-23-2010, 10:22 AM
Thanks for the update and the inclusion of two more great planes!

DKoor
04-23-2010, 10:33 AM
I.am.speachless.

Do-(2)17 was among the most anticipated & wanted planes on my list.

This is an EPIC patch!

Team Daidalos deserves a special place in every flight simmer heart http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif ...

wheelsup_cavu
04-23-2010, 12:04 PM
Great update. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


Wheels

Zippleback
04-26-2010, 07:08 AM
Dear Daidalos Team,

If I have missed this I apologize in advance, but I was wondering if any changes would be made to the Tempest?

I believe there is a MOD that makes the rear view more appealing and I would like to know if this (or something similar) might be on a future release?

Thank you.

ILikePortillos
04-27-2010, 08:05 AM
Here are just a few more considerations that are admittedly low priority, but of possible interest for consideration.

The in-game VOIP functionality is woefully inadequate. I realize that most people use other existing solutions such as TeamSpeak. Personally, my friends use Skype. Is there any intention to upgrade the game's VOIP capabilities, removing the requirement to utilize 3rd party solutions? I don't know how easy or difficult it would be, but if it could be done, it might just make things that much easier for everyone. And it would allow the host to have a record of voice communication with their tracks. It could also add to the ambience, by utilizing static and crackle and whatnot. You could even employ something where multiple occupant aircraft could have an open channel, while a push-to-talk button would be required for communication with other aircraft and Ground Control. I realize I might be the only one interested in this, but it's worth a mention I think.

Another question may just be something that is outside the scope of the sim, but has anyone given any thought to the idea of controlling surface units? Maybe you could model the Control Room of a Destroyer or something? Man the various guns? Even take part in a naval battle? Again, this might be out of scope, but worth a note.

Lastly, would it be possible to add a signal man for aircraft carriers? Someone to guide you in with the paddles?

If none of these are addressed, it will still be the best air combat sim I've ever purchased. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

Black_Ops7
04-27-2010, 02:49 PM
Originally posted by Black_Ops7:
will team Daidalos integrate wide screen resolutions from the menu so no config editing is needed?

will a future patch offer a larger FOV for widescreen users so we don't have to use the FOV changer?

beside this, is it also possible that daidalos patch this function in: to move the ingame map to an 2nd or 3rd monitor ?

TinyTim
04-28-2010, 04:55 AM
It would be great if the antishipping Do 217K you guys are working on, also had an option to carry 4 torpedoes:

http://www.shrani.si/f/4/gf/4u8DaYWa/do217k-1-lt-f5.jpg

Wildnoob
04-28-2010, 09:41 AM
TD, if is only a code change, our Ki-27 trottle movement is incorrect.

From Japanese Aircraft Interiors 1940-1945:

http://img9.imageshack.us/img9/7355/456kk.jpg

DKoor
04-28-2010, 01:51 PM
Originally posted by TinyTim:
It would be great if the antishipping Do 217K you guys are working on, also had an option to carry 4 torpedoes:

http://www.shrani.si/f/4/gf/4u8DaYWa/do217k-1-lt-f5.jpg

Jesus... this is the ship annihilation weapon... this thing can sink anything except the most toughest ones who are also extremely lucky http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif .

Great addition to the sim in every way!

Zippleback
04-29-2010, 06:11 AM
Dear Team Daidalos,

Any answer to my previous question?

"I believe there is a MOD that makes the rear view more appealing and I would like to know if this (or something similar) might be on a future release?"

Frankthetank36
05-03-2010, 11:54 AM
I personally would love to see more flyable naval bombers, specifically making the Kate and Jill flyable, and adding an SB2C Helldiver, TBD Devastator, and D4Y, and possibly a B7A and Barracuda. Would be nice if the torpedoes had limits on the speed and altitude from which they can be dropped as well.

Wildnoob
05-03-2010, 12:14 PM
Originally posted by Frankthetank36:
I personally would love to see more flyable naval bombers, specifically making the Kate and Jill flyable, and adding an SB2C Helldiver, TBD Devastator, and D4Y, and possibly a B7A and Barracuda. Would be nice if the torpedoes had limits on the speed and altitude from which they can be dropped as well.

That's what I most wait.

It only not happen yet because the Grumman aircraft issue. The Japanese torpedo planes will not have a counterpart

TD, any word about overcome the problem?

Frankthetank36
05-03-2010, 12:50 PM
^That's where the Devastator comes in. We already have 2 AI Japanese torpedo bombers to 1 American torp plane, so we can still have both the B5N and B6N on the Japanese side to the TBD on the American side. Granted, the Devastator was crap compared to the Kate (let alone the Jill), but still better than what we have now.

DKoor
05-03-2010, 12:53 PM
More ****, more fun http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif...

Don't you just love flying for a few hours searching for Japanese fleet only to be taken out by flak when you get near? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Nothing in this sim doesn't get more frustrating than flying slow & crappy torpedo bomber http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif .

Crimsonpride
05-03-2010, 04:43 PM
Looks like a lot of LW stuff in the works. What about the VVS? or USAF?

So far all looks great.

Erkki_M
05-03-2010, 11:25 PM
Originally posted by Crimsonpride:
Looks like a lot of LW stuff in the works. What about the VVS? or USAF?

So far all looks great.

TD is giving us exactly whats needed, imho - there are Allied mediums and heavies are already well presented(though, cockpits to heavies would be nice, and early war western allied bombers Wellington, Maryland and Baltimore are still needed, but not that important), what game misses are all non-SM.79 Italian bombers and post-BoB German bombers(actually, even those that took part to it). Germans didnt fight through the war with old He-111s...

I sure would like to see the B-26, but A20C does the same role fairly well.

p-11.cAce
05-04-2010, 02:02 PM
beside this, is it also possible that daidalos patch this function in: to move the ingame map to an 2nd or 3rd monitor?

+1 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

That would be really nice.

Wildnoob
05-04-2010, 05:12 PM
What I would love to see was the possibility of do marcations on the map.

DKoor
05-05-2010, 06:21 AM
I would like... to see patch as soon as possible thanks http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif .

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif

Jumoschwanz
05-05-2010, 08:43 AM
I would be happy with nothing but continued improvements to the flight and weapons models.

Not that I think they are bad at all, but maybe if it just says they are all made good and accurate in the readme, there might be that much less whining and crying over them in the forum by morons that are not smart enough to figure how to fly and shoot.

DKoor
05-07-2010, 01:51 AM
Originally posted by Jumoschwanz:
I would be happy with nothing but continued improvements to the flight and weapons models.

Not that I think they are bad at all, but maybe if it just says they are all made good and accurate in the readme, there might be that much less whining and crying over them in the forum by morons that are not smart enough to figure how to fly and shoot.

I tend to agree... also am especially looking forward to improved DM department which is IMO more impaired in the game compared to the FM. If I may put it this way (because I still think they are both pretty good, excellent even if we take into consideration that after roughly 10 years there still isn't a better thing outhere http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif ).

Quite unbelievable when you think about it.

bracknell1989
05-08-2010, 07:27 AM
I also agree with Jumoschwanz however I would love to see more realistic take offs for the offline users. Having the aircraft sitting in a row on the runway with their engines off looks rather daft. I pity the ground crew having to push all twelve of them into position!

Being able to take off in formation as a flight or would be great.

Fo

Frankthetank36
05-08-2010, 03:47 PM
^What would REALLY be nice is if the AI wingmen didn't take like 5 minutes to start their engines and take off. Either players should have to go through checklists and take forever to take off or the AI should be able to keep up with the players.