1C Home   |   Register   |   Today Posts   |   Members   |   UserCP   |   Calendar   |   Search   |   FAQ

Go Back   Official 1C Company forum > 1C Publishing > IL-2 Sturmovik > Daidalos Team discussions

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #51  
Old 07-09-2019, 01:40 AM
Pursuivant Pursuivant is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 1,439
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sita View Post
it's interesting and complicated moment ... i tottaly agree that is not right and will be good to make true fuel system ...
Getting truly realistic coolant, fuel, hydraulic, or oil system damage modeling would be a huge hassle. You'd essentially have to figure out tank volume and geometry for every compartment within every tank, then create real-time liquid flow models based on factors like viscosity, pressure, temperature, flow rates, gravity, and acceleration/deceleration. Then, you'd have to model things like fuel, oil, and hydraulic lines, pumps, and joints, figure out what each bit of the system does and what goes wrong if it breaks, and create suitable damage results.

I'd settle for:

(a) A system where there is the possibility of just losing part of your fuel rather than all of it. Possibly "roll the dice again" if you take another hit to the same tank or if you do something radical which might cause you to lose more fuel, like a maneuver which seriously stresses the airframe.

(b) A quasi-random system where fuel leaks only start if you change your angle of flight by some large amount from the direction you were traveling in when you were hit. For example, if you've hit in level flight, the fuel tank might only begin to leak if you go into a steep climb or dive.

(c) A button you can push to (maybe) slow or stop the fuel leak, which represents things like pumping fuel to different tanks or shutting off fuel flow to a particular tank. Just like fire extinguishers for engines don't actually model fire suppressant extinguishing the fire, you can "hand wave" this sort of damage control.

(d) Modeling hydraulic systems for aircraft that had them and where hydraulic failure had a serious effect on flight performance (hydraulic-powered or hydraulic-boosted flight controls or control surfaces) rather than just less important systems like making the landing gears go up or down. Not so much modeling pumping hydraulic fluid through pipes, just a system to model the fact that you can lose it to damage, and its loss can cause problems.

(e) Likewise, some aircraft had notably flammable hydraulic fluid. In such cases, hydraulic reservoirs should be modeled as well.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 07-09-2019, 04:06 PM
Fhechene Fhechene is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 42
Default

Female voices for 586th, 587th, and 588th Aviation Regiments
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 07-09-2019, 04:41 PM
Treetop64's Avatar
Treetop64 Treetop64 is offline
What the heck...?
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Redwood City, California
Posts: 511
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sita View Post
it's interesting and complicated moment ... i tottaly agree that is not right and will be good to make true fuel system ... but it's very hard to do ... even on il2 level .... i mean ... just imagine ... most of planes have more than two fuel tanks ... not every tank on external model have collision - hit box .. plus in that case need make working tank selector plus gauges in pit must indicate right fuel level .. and at that moment multiply it on all flyable planes ..

i must say that i with pleasure will fly on that kind plane with working fuel system .. but its a huge work ..
How about modeling complete electrical and hydraulic systems for each flyable while you're at it!

I keed.

Figured that fixing the fuel tanks would probably be a whole lot more involved than what might normally be, since fuel burn on external tanks has already been addressed (thx for that, btw).

I'm guessing then that all aircraft in the sim currently have just one fuel tank modeled, either sealed or non-sealed? Like you said, fixing that would mean modelling multiple tanks and placing them at their correct datum for each aircraft, gauging each tank, modeling connections and pumps, cockpit valves. Re-writing the .exe to support all the changes, etc...

Yeah, that is a lot.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 07-09-2019, 05:22 PM
Sita Sita is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 875
Default

in case of il2 i'm not sure that conections between tanks and pump can be done, and i'm not sure that it have sense in il2 case ...
make corect numbers of tanks and right placing for huge numbers of plane it's already very difficult task ..
__________________
work hard, fly fast

Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 07-28-2019, 01:24 AM
Jack_Aubrey Jack_Aubrey is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 37
Default

We could have a revision of the device link allowing all get command in multiplayer?
At least the true information that will allow to have proper instrumentation and lights on DIY devices.
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 07-28-2019, 07:41 PM
Marabekm Marabekm is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 215
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fhechene View Post
Female voices for 586th, 587th, and 588th Aviation Regiments
Have a look on mission4today and else where. There are a few good female voicepacks out there you can download and put them in the appropriate Speech folder. However, I don't think you can currently put it for specific squadrons.
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 07-29-2019, 10:52 PM
Fhechene Fhechene is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 42
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marabekm View Post
Have a look on mission4today and else where. There are a few good female voicepacks out there you can download and put them in the appropriate Speech folder. However, I don't think you can currently put it for specific squadrons.
Yes, I've heard of those. What I've gathered is that you would need to add another nationality (say, NH, for Nachthexen) and provide that nationality with their own voice. It would be the same as the Polish-Soviet PLM's, PLZ's and PLS's. They are part of the Soviet Air Force but as they are assigned Polish nationality, they speak Polish (I wouldn't be mad if TD also changed the nationalities of the Foreign Squadrons from RAF and French Air Force)

Thanks, BTW!
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 08-09-2019, 09:08 AM
Marabekm Marabekm is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: USA
Posts: 215
Default

In my opinion, perhaps it would be best to work on the theaters of war that haven't received an updated game. For the Eastern Front and Western Front in Europe there are now all the Battle of _____ games now with much updated aircraft and gameplay. However, IL2 1946 remains the latest game version for us interested in the Mediterranean/North African and Pacific theaters! (With the small exception of the Macchi in Battle of Stalingrad?

So I'm not saying I would ignore the European side of things in IL2:1946, but maybe put a little more emphasis on the other theaters for the guys who have no other options.

That being said, my wishlist:
Italian and Royal Navy ships
Italian and British ground objects
Flyable Swordfish and Blenheim
Ba. 65
Vichy France Army option, and the Dewotine 520

Japanese cruisers
Flyable TBD-1 Devastator
D3A2 Val
A6M2-22 Zero
F1M2 Pete

Will I ever see all of these? Probably not. But... One can wish!!
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 08-11-2019, 06:49 AM
Volksfürsorge Volksfürsorge is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 34
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marabekm View Post
In my opinion, perhaps it would be best to work on the theaters of war that haven't received an updated game. For the Eastern Front and Western Front in Europe there are now all the Battle of _____ games now with much updated aircraft and gameplay. However, IL2 1946 remains the latest game version for us interested in the Mediterranean/North African and Pacific theaters! (With the small exception of the Macchi in Battle of Stalingrad?

So I'm not saying I would ignore the European side of things in IL2:1946, but maybe put a little more emphasis on the other theaters for the guys who have no other options.

That being said, my wishlist:
Italian and Royal Navy ships
Italian and British ground objects
Flyable Swordfish and Blenheim
Ba. 65
Vichy France Army option, and the Dewotine 520

Japanese cruisers
Flyable TBD-1 Devastator
D3A2 Val
A6M2-22 Zero
F1M2 Pete

Will I ever see all of these? Probably not. But... One can wish!!
Future efforts should go in all directions! Il2 1946 is still the best.
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 08-27-2019, 08:14 AM
Music Music is offline
Approved Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 101
Default

A few questions and suggestions:

Why do so few planes have full trim, they almost all have ele and rudder trim, I-16 has no ele, but thats the only one I can think of. But so many don't have aileron trim. Is that historically correct, to keep the pilots from setting it up and falling asleep in a 3 hour flight?

Is it my bad flying, or is the F6F a concrete pig, it does not climb, and for the Best the Navy had, a Zero Killer, it does not have the maneuverability or acceleration one would expect.

Did the P-39 really flat spin so easily? And was there no way to get it out of one, dropping the flaps and gear does nothing, and no matter how close you can get to stabilizing it, it never breaks out of that flat spin. I can't even see how you could bail from it when it's doing that, the door instead of a top opening would make it almost impossible to get away from the plane before it swung around and broke your back.

Were the Russian planes really that bad, The only one that can compete with a German fighter is the La, and it has no chance against a Spitfire. At least when I am flying one. And so few bullets, 400. And to back that up a bit, there are a few maps on th AleXserver that only have Russian for Red planes, and most guys take the p-39. And when there are a whole lot of Allied planes from all nations on a map, almost no one takes the Russian fighters. the il-2 is popular because it has a tail gunner and is tough. You are more likely to see some one flying the I-153 than the later planes, even if the models go up to 1945.

Suggestions for features:

Losing F6 when a enemy plane enters a cloud: when you pad lock in side the pit, if the plane stays behind the cockpit cage long enough you lose the lock, can the same be done for the F6 and clouds.

I like using the clouds as a defense when playing on line, and F6'ing the guy chasing you makes that a even better tactic because it's not to hard to find them when leaving the cloud, But when chasing some one into a cloud, you can tell which way they are going if you can see the outline of your plane. and of course, you know exactly where they are as soon as you break out of the clouds. This suggestion is more for realism.

this one is going to get a lot of flack: Can you make it so that you can't fire your guns unless in the Pit. Seems to be a lot of guys have learned to fly from out side ala third person video game, they can see where their tracers are going from that vantage when turning tight and just hose the sky until they get the angle right. At least it seems that way, I can't prove that's what is happening, (and it does not matter, we all have that ability so it's not a advantage per say) but it is the only explanation for some of the times I have been shot down, (and thats a lot), when definitely invisible to some one sitting inside a cockpit. And it allows them to fly unrealistically because they don't know they are going to black out or that the plane is having tremors from G forces. You kind of know someone is flying like that when you pass head on at 300Kmph and they seem to turn on a dime, and some how catch up to you even if you just flew straight at top speed.

I'd also like to see servers kick people for turning on wingtip smoke, it (the server) announces it, but no one seems to care. Oleg trying to get the 13 year old girl crowd.

Of course, all would be selectable options in difficulty or Server setting, the game as is does not need to change unless the player/server wants these options.

Zero problems with 4.14.1 in the functions I use regularly. ** only thing I can think of is if you move artillery in FMB, they stay at the height th they were originally set, so if you move a position down a slope a bit, you need to drop all the artillery as a separate move.

(I see the Hs129 can jettison their cannon, don't know if that's new, never noticed until i had them (A.I.) attacking a base in my soon to be Famous "Almost All Maps OnLine Mission Pack" http://www.mediafire.com/file/p0omf7...gfight.7z/file 704kb, and one did it when it was all flacked up from aaa. I added a few new maps, the Battle of Moscow and BoDonbass, and the Arctic circle one).

Cheers! Ypa!

Last edited by Music; 08-29-2019 at 01:21 AM. Reason: And it allows them to fly unrealistically because...... LINE
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 03:19 PM.

Based on a design by: Miner Skinz.com

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2007 1C Company. All rights reserved.