Jump to content

No457_Stonehouse

Members
  • Content Count

    54
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by No457_Stonehouse

  1. Only really noticed this because I scrubbed a few missions looking for an intercept style one. If you have a large group of players having to reselect the same players before each mission is a bit clunky. I guess it will only strike you badly if you are scrubbing missions looking for a particular one at the moment but could be a pain even if just creating several missions in an evening for a largish group as it is easy to leave someone out by accident for instance and then force you have to regenerate a mission to include them possibly losing a mission that you really liked the look of. If possible perhaps for each campaign, keep track of the selected pilots from the prior mission flown and use them as defaults for the next? I think in an ideal world the right hand list would be already built for the next mission and the users in the right hand list to be also ticked. Then at worst I might have to add one or two new people or deselect someone in the right hand list. Unless I'm doing it wrong - at the moment you have to tick the users you want in the left list and then accept them to move them to the right and then either do a select all or tick each one. I think I recall someone already saying this but a go back to prior screen would be a handy addition to the mission user selection screen so you don't have to scrub the mission or create a new one just to navigate back. Anyway no bugs, just low priority quality of life stuff.
  2. Bit short of people in our group at present but have copied across a coop campaign for tempests and will give it a shot. May only get a few missions in a week though due to real life pressures
  3. My opinion only obviously but would make it an option rather than a default. The largest part of the charm of this generator is that you know your objective and everything else is a surprise. Just like real life...…..
  4. I think the main point in time was Stalingrad. I think the outcome of this series of battles was a major disaster for the Italian air force units and the survivors were withdrawn afterwards. So probably you are looking at around 1942-early 43 and the Stalingrad map. Searches for the two Gruppo and Stalingrad and Operation Saturn should bring up info for you. I don't have any specific info about air operations sorry. Perhaps there are Italian language references out there and people to translate for you but unfortunately that isn't me.
  5. Only thing close that comes to mind is I believe there were some USAAF shuttle raids that hit a target over on the Eastern side of Third Reich territory and overnighted on a Russian airbase and then did another raid the next day and landed back in England. I think I recall the Russian base was within our map set but can't be sure. I'll try to find the info when I have a sec or probably someone else can provide/confirm it quicker. As Frankyboy mentioned for the RAF/RAAF you'd need new maps. <edit> No I had misremembered. The airfields used were to the west of the Kuban map in Ukraine. However Allied command had planned to locate 3 full bomb groups in Soviet territory (but never did and discontinued the shuttle raids due to losses and attacks on the Ukrainian airfields) so I guess you could do hypothetical USAAF missions on Kuban without completely stretching the facts to breaking point.
  6. I think the taxiways and runways on concrete strips also got some treatment. Been looking around and some of the end results were pretty amazing (although probably beyond the scope of reskinning) https://twistedsifter.com/2012/01/camouflage-cali-hiding-air-bases-factories-plants-netting-wwii/ http://patrickbaty.co.uk/2011/10/05/wartime-camouflage-colours/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0fmTT61hqYw
  7. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Macchi_C.202#Eastern_Front_operations Look up 21 & 22 Gruppo. For sure there are better references than Wikipedia out there. But you are right in thinking it was limited operations. Most of their service was in North Africa and the defence of Sicily and Italy.
  8. I don't have any pictures really but articles/documents I've read suggest that the main method was extensive camouflage netting. I don't how you will achieve that look with a skin for the building however. Also temporary airfields used converted farm buildings (see pic in blog link) eg's of references https://falkeeins.blogspot.com/2016/12/luftwaffe-hangars-shelters-and-airfield.html http://www.ww2.dk/Airfields - Netherlands.pdf http://www.ww2.dk/Airfields - Belgium and Luxembourg.pdf pic https://il2freemodding.createaforum.com/place-holder/httpsi-postimg-ccmzccqj30martlesham-1944-zpsa79fae38-jpg/?message=518;PHPSESSID=3272541e5817cb9966614ce700845971
  9. Use it all the time (at least for smoke and search lights. I turned off the units spawning as it was mucking up my PWCG coop missions) and it works fine here.
  10. Yes it does but I found you need to be careful that only the host uses the mod and also you need to look for and update a line network = false to be network = true. See a post by me on the first page of the thread circa Feb 5. I included an example in attachment. If all players use the mod you'll grind things to a halt quickly as everyone causes smoke etc to be spawned. If everyone uses the mod and you don't use network = true then each player will see a different instance of smoke etc. We discovered that quickly because someone saying something like the "tank to the north of the big smoke" was of no use as the smoke only appeared in the right spot to the person generating it. If network = true and only the host uses the mod (ie spawns the effects) then everyone in the mission sees the same thing and performance is not an issue unless you go silly with the density of the effects.
  11. No457_Stonehouse

    The Sun

    Sorry LizLemon, I understand how to use JSGME etc without problem but I don't know the correct directory structure to use to create the mod folder for what you've supplied. eg I'm guessing it will be data\graphics\something Could you please advise? Thanks
  12. I think perhaps competitive co-op is as close as you can get at present. It will run as per a co-op mission though so participants would need to be in mission at the start etc. ie you won't get the dogfight mission functionality of join in progress and respawn etc.
  13. Quick question. If I have a custom graphics setup (eg modified ultra) via the menu will this new preset file override any of my settings? Thanks
  14. Think you'll find that 77SQD was RAAF. They converted to Meteors eventually. https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/C43751 http://www.adf-serials.com.au/2a68c.htm
  15. Link not happy - at least from my end. Comes up as missing download.
  16. Sorry I see the same thing. I finally got a spare 10 mins this evening to double check and it's the same in vanilla and effects mod on and obviously I haven't noticed how long the trails from the rounds continue on for. Maybe something for you to tweak? Anyway thanks for the new effects, very nice
  17. Hi Patrick, Trying to continue a co-op campaign and have copied over the campaign folder but the campaign entry on the initial PWCG screen is greyed out. Do I need to bring over additional files from the BosData folder as well? eg contents of User folder perhaps? Do I need anything else? Thanks
  18. Looks great thank you, a nice discovery for my Sunday fun. Just out of curiosity, would this convert to co-op? Something like this would be fantastic with a small group of friends.
  19. The effects look good but I think the changes might have impacted smoke trails from aircraft rounds being fired as well. I did a test quick mission in a Tempest and in the outside view on firing the smoke trails from the individual rounds seem to be lasting way too long. I'll try to give it another go later on vanilla v's this mod and check to be sure.
  20. We currently have a modified mkII sight which was only used on early Tempests. The mkIII projector sight was fitted to Tempests from approx. Feb 1944 and is the correct sight for Bodenplatte era aircraft. It would be good if the MkIII sight could be added as a modification as was done for the K14 and the P-51. See here for brief discussion
  21. Thanks Bert - I believe you have posted the pages I was seeing quotes from. In particular the point that the MkIII had only a single control ring (where we have 2) and that we have a ring and range bars whereas the MkIII had a ring and dot with two modes - one for ground attack and one for air. Then on page 161 where the comment is made regarding it's use in the Tempest. Other articles I have seen floating about talk about the puzzling fact that even though the Tempest was the best low-med alt fighter in the RAF late war it used the MkIII right through the war only getting the gyro sight shortly after it was all over while Spitfires and other aircraft got the gyro sights before the war finished. The anti dazzle shield shown in your pic was removable by the way and judging by pics it seems like it was often left off. This left off leaves the projector lens that makes up the top of the sight exposed and looks somewhat like the top of the sight we have in game which is why I wasn't sure about what we had. It seems very probable that we have the wrong sight for the Bodenplatte era Tempest. Someone I was flying with last night actually reckons if you move your view in cockpit forward and sort of look back you actually see a plate on the sight saying MkII. Hopefully there is enough data available for the MkIII to be offered as a modification as well as the later version of the Sabre engine before leaving early release or at least as a later patch. Hopefully the devs see this thread and consider it.
  22. I've been doing some reading and while I am not sure I think we have the modified mkII sight which was only on the early Tempests rather than the mkIII projector sights (it isn't gyro a sight) that were fitted to the series 2 Tempests by the time they were deployed to the Continent. If correct perhaps there should be a mkIII as a modification similar to the P-51 and the K14 if that was possible for the dev team to add? Main source of info for me has been quotes apparently taken from a book British Aircraft Armament Vol.2: Guns and Gunsights", by R Wallace Clarke but unfortunately I don't have access to a copy to check the source. Does anyone have any info either way?
  23. If this is already available I haven't seen it - It would be really great for immersion if you had the old IL2-46 ability or similar to nominate a code for each aircraft so that by using one skin with the squadron code plus the nominated code you ended up with each aircraft having the right squadron skin but a different aircraft letter. eg on skin for say RAAF 457 SQD with squadron code letters ZP and then each plane is allocated it's own code letter/number. So I might pick N and therefore my aircraft would appear in game as ZP-N. As far as I know, to do the same right now you would need to produce an individual custom skin for each aircraft which seems pretty inefficient and the alternative is the no-code default skins just showing nationality marks which lack the added realism of correct squadron skins. Luftwaffe and US aircraft would be more complicated I guess but it would still be great if it was possible.
×
×
  • Create New...