Jump to content

eastriverman

Members
  • Content Count

    44
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

16 Good

About eastriverman

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. HiHo PhunkaeG, you are asking a very justified question. Being a great fan of flight simulations and a dedicated modeler as well, one of my first actions in the good old days of Red Baron 3D was to create personal skins because it was quite easy and the results looked quite good for that time. And therefore, it was fun. In Great battles things are a bit different. The graphical quality of a good skin is of another world but I found creating a skin to be a complicated, error-prone, time consuming, and annoying process. So, the guys & girls able to go through that and donating these pieces of art to the community are my heroes. However, I'm not that heroic, since creating skins with the tools at hand is not fun at all. So, to come back to your question, it's surprising that it wasn't asked much earlier. It should be possible to create a tool that can you can use like a model builder. It should work basically like a CAD program where you have already a complete 3D model of an airplane and than you can pick, move, and rotate any part or goup of parts and paint them like you want, including surface textures. That's bacially what a model builder does when he paints his models. Actually, one could use a CAD program to do this if the 3D-models were in a common CAD-format like AutoCAD. The tricky part would then be to transfer the painted 3D model into a DDS which is ready to use. This completeley eliminates the annoying process of painting in 2D and with little idea how this will look in 3D. Having such a tool would surely give the painter's community a tremendous kick. And to pay for such a fantastic tool is at least for me not a problem at all. best regards eastriverman
  2. Hi Aliocha, thanks for your remarks which I agree to. Perhaps there is a little misunderstanding about why I mentioned those details. I've read many publications about the two biggest catastrophies of mankind in the 20th century, namely the first and second world war. Having lost a lot of my relatives in WW2 and truly believing in the wisdom of the ancient greek statement "if you do not learn from history you are doomed to repeat history" I always wanted to understand the failures in politics that lead to these wars and how this escalated during the wars itself. Unfortunately, on top of being the most horrifying war of all times, WW2 also was a propaganda war which makes the work of historians pretty diffcult. Many propaganda legends, created by any of the countries that participated in WW2, found their way into history books. Regarding the war between Nazi germany and soviet Russia, any publication before 1991 should be read with a critical mind and this true for russian AND german publications as well. It was russian president Gorbatchev who opened die russian WW2 military archives for researchers from foreign countries in 1991 and they turned out to be a treasure chest. Especially many details of the history of operation citadel turned out to be "legends" spread by russians and germans as well. For example the german excuses for their failure: "It was all Hitler's fault" and "the russians knew all the details of citadel from a high-ranking german traitor months before the battle" . In short: Bullshit. The reason why I like Töppels book so much is that it is to my knowledge the most recent one about this topic and because Töppel simply made a proper job by acting like a good reporter who verifies every fact in his story by at least two independent sources. This is reflected in his book by many hundred references to original sources. And there's another reason: I hate propaganda, it's evil lying 😬 Though being a german, Töppel provides a neutral picture of the course of the battles with sometimes surprising insights. It turned out that the russian defenders not only fought with great bravery but sometimes also showed excellent tactical skills while some german commanders were pretty incompetent. Of course, the big picture remains unchanged. Barbarossa was the brainchild of racist psychopaths suffering from megalomania and was doomed to be a failure right from the start in spite of the initial success in 1941. The should have learned from the failures of Napolean and the swedish king......... Talking about bibles: A bible about "Barbarossa" written with the some detail and accuracy like Töppel's book will have 10.000 or more pages and that's not going to happen. I admit, after reading Töppel's book, my expectations for the Prokhorovka mission in the Koursk campaign were probably too high. Knowing that now, I managed to "loose" and to proceed in the campaign, Huraaah 😀 Sadly, my problems with the missions in the other campaigns persist. best regards eastriverman
  3. Greetings Steini and all the tankers around, when I read Tigre's "answer" I really thought I was "in the wrong movie" and found that it wasn't worth any answer. Fact is that I appreciate the work of mission/campaign builders as much as the other members in this forum. Actually, I liked his campaigns and his latest campaign "panzerdivision" shows a major impovement in mission design compared to the missions in the preceding campaigns which were already pretty good. So, from my side I assume a major misunderstanding due to language problems. May the past rest in peace and let's look into the future without anger. Meanwhile I found at least a solution for the problem with the Prokhorovka mission and my findings might be interesting for those who are interested in the history of the Kursk campaign: Tigre's history lesson about Prokhorovka is based on myths created in several books written by russian authors during the 1960s. However, recent historical research based on original sources (war diaries, after-Battle reports, loss reports etc.), taken from german as well from russian archives, create a complete different picture. Here is a link to a talk about Prokhorovka given by a professional historian: The talk is in german but that guy also wrote a book of which several translations are available: https://www.amazon.de/Kursk-1943-Weltkriegs-Schlachten-Weltgeschichte-ebook/dp/B07JN4RJMJ/ref=sr_1_1?__mk_de_DE=ÅMÅŽÕÑ&dchild=1&keywords=roman+töppel+kursk+deutsch&qid=1587152159&sr=8-1 https://www.amazon.de/Koursk-1943-bataille-Seconde-mondiale/dp/2262071217/ref=sr_1_fkmr0_1?__mk_de_DE=ÅMÅŽÕÑ&dchild=1&keywords=roman+töppel+kursk+french&qid=1587152135&sr=8-1-fkmr0 https://www.amazon.de/Kursk-1943-Greatest-Military-History/dp/1912390035 In Short: Prokhorovka was a disaster for the russians. After 196 of their tanks were completely destroyed and another 200 immobilized with different degrees of damage, they had to withdraw from the battlefield. The germans lost only 5 tanks and among them was not a single Tiger. Prokhorovka was by no means decisive for the final outcome of operation citadel. It was the soviet counterattack aimed at the city of Orel (operation Kutusov) that forced the germans to disrupt their attacks and to fight a series of defensive battles. Found the book to be very informative, full of valuable detail info, good stuff. If Tigre's campaign is meant to be a historical accurate recreation of the tank actions during the Kursk campaign, can the Prokhorovka mission then be changed to end with a german victory? Until this happens I will do my best to loose the mission in order to proceed in the campaign 😀 best regards eastriverman
  4. Greetings, tankers! I'd like to ask for some help with 3 of the scripted campaigns published here, namely the Causcase, the Belgorod, and the Koursk43 campaign. First, without looking into the campaign files, it was hard to understand the mission objectives with the german localization of the game, since there are only mission briefings in english and french. The *.ger mission briefings were not in german but in french. I made copies of the *.eng files in another folder, renaming them to *.ger and copied these files back to the campaign folder. In the same way I generated a "info.locale=ger.txt" file in the campaign folder. Though the mission objectives were now somewhat more understandable I got stuck in all of the 3 campaigns at different points. Caucase: In mission 2 the goal is to destroy all tanks and anti-tank guns in the area of "refinery A". I did so and found out that there was a "hidden" trigger for a second part in the mission. The second Tiger stops in the first part and only when I drive nearby it moves further to the center of the refinery to the vicinity of the crane. This triggers the appearance of two additional ZIS-3 guns and some machine guns. After destroying these targets the area is "clean" but the mission does not end. Also, another "reunion" with the second tiger does not trigger the end of the mission. I searched the whole area several times for hidden stragglers but found nothing. So, any clue for me how to get out of this? Belgorod: In mission 5 one has to report to the commander at the crossing first who then orders us to accompain some T4s to seal a breakthrough of soviet tank forces. The T4s advance blindly and run into the russians at a hill crest being blasted by soviet T-34s. Next time I managed to get ahead of the T4s and blasted the soviets instead. Together with the remaining T4s I advance to a road crossing after wiping off the map some fleeing T-34s. The T4s stop then at the fork of the roadroad where the mission path (red line) ends. Again, the mission does not end though the whole map is empty. No enemies, no villages, no bridges, and no town of Belgorod. So, what I am expected to do here in order to finish successfully? BTW: There's another glitch in the mission. Though I'm absolutely sure that I was shooting only at soviet tanks, at some point of the battle I'm always confronted with a message saying that I get a penalty for firing at friendly units. Koursk43: In mission 3 (Prokhorovka) the goal is pretty simple. Destroy hordes of soviet tanks which attack in several waves. With a lot of training I managed to destroy ALL of the attackers with the help of the friendly AI tank force. Here, too, the mission does not end after that. And that's not due to too many losses. So, what's wrong here? All of the above campaigns were made by the same author, but that doesn't seem to be the problem since the newest versions of Narwa43 and Prokhorovka campaigns from the same author work fine. A big "thank you" in advance for any help given. best regards eastriverman
  5. Download links are dead (404 error) .........
  6. Greetings! Only a simple question: While looking through the list of keyboard commands I found no special command forusing/unusing bonoculars. So, how to use them? best regards eastriverman
  7. What we learn from this is, that the more you go into detail the more complicated things become. For example, bullet drop due to gravity is larger at sea level than it is on top of Mount Everest (probably illegal to fire a shot there). But even on sea level bullet drop is smaller at the equator than it is at north or south pole since earth's shape is not that of an ideal sphere.... And then earth is not made from a homogeneous material. There are regions with different density of matter. Guess what that means for the value of earth's gravity constant g. Actually, there are g-mappings giving you the exact value of g at different places. Do you know if this is taken into account in military ballistics, especially long range shooting like heavy artillery? It's a miracle that we hit anything at all 😀
  8. Yes. The Coriolis force is a so-called pseudo force present only in an accelerated reference system. For example, the centrifugal force is a pseudo force, too. Where Coriolis force matters is aerial navigation. If you set a straight course from a starting point to a target, the earth with your target point will rotate underneath your straight flight path and you will miss your target if you don't take this into account. Wonder if this is simulated in GB, too......
  9. Well, we talk here about P-38 fighter bomber squadrons and they were active in ETO until the end of the war. But to talk of BOBP: In my BOBP career it's January 28th 1945 and I never saw a single P-38 though the main map (headquarter) says that there are six P-38 squadrons (401,402,428,430, and 485) based at Florennes airbase on that very day. I flew there the same day and look for P-38s on the way, but none were there. Ariving at the airfield , there were 11 P-38s and some P-47 on the ground. With target markers on, none of them was marked as a target. Nothing on the airfield was marked as target! No AA, no resistance, the whole airfield appeared to be a dud. Infuriated about the cowardice of these P-38 jockeys I gunned the s**t out of them and flattened all of the P-38s on the ground. Made a movie about that, too. So then, another thorough disappointment in this career. Alone for this I hope the war will be over soon ....... best eastriverman
  10. Well, for a proper ballistic calculation all the forces that affect the bullet have to be taken into account: 1. gravity. This force is responsible for the bullet drop. On earth's surface it's almost constant. Going up it becomes smaller following a law of inverse squared distance. 2. Drag/friction. This force slows the bullet down and therefore adds to the bullet drop. The details are described in the post of <unreasonable>. Since v is the bullet's speed relative to the medium (air), wind will change this speed and should affect the drop. Not mentioned by <unreasonable> is the effect that drag becomes smaller towards larger altitudes due to the thinner air. This can be understood easily since there's not drag at all in vacuum/space. But this not crucial for "surface ballistics". 3. Coriolis force. This does not affect bullet drop but snipers know about its importance in long range precision shooting . In reality wind can be neglected if you follow the advice of Erich Hartmann, germany's WW II top fighter ace: If you think you are close enough for a shot, get closer! He suggested to open fire at 100 meters. Here, the target is huge, making a miss almost impossible and the bullet speed is still high, resulting in higher kinetic energy and a higher destructive power. best regards eastriverman
  11. Cheers Jaegermeister! That's nice for you but there's a bit of a misunderstanding. I'm on the side of evil Darth Vader and I'm looking for P-38s to shoot down.😀 In my career, only P-47s appear as fighter bombers and in rare cases Spitfires, too. I never ever saw a single P-38 on the whole map though I searched for them thoroughly!! I agree with you that there should be swarms of fork tailed devils everywhere because ground attack was their prime task in tactical air war in ETO. But there are so many bugs in BOBP that I shouldn't be too suprised about that. I want those cowards to come out and play best eastriverman Yep, that's exactly what experienced also. Probably you are a collector, too. Not only collecting medals and promotions but also a complete set of kills including every type of enemy plane which s on the map
  12. I'm with you! Things have become worse which is pretty obvious when comparing Great Battles with another spawn within the Sturmovik universe, let's say RoF. In RoF, the planes of any squadron present on the map, no matter if AI or player's squadron, have skins with historically correct makings of these squadrons. There are even aces present which you can duel with and their planes have individual markings. Cool! In GB none of that. All planes only have a a single dull camouflage paint job (winter/summer in BoS, BoM, Bok; bare metal in BoBP) and national insignia, no squadron markings, no aces no individual markings. Dull and boring... In RoF, all ground objects present in the quick missions are also present in career mode and they are "attackable". This especially incudes moving trains AND ships! In GB some ground objects are missing, especially ships and trains. Though, that's not completely correct: In BoM, BoS, BoK trains and ships are completely missing, but in BOBP you have some fighter bomber missions against stationary trains in urban areas (german side, don't know about allied side). In RoF, as a commanding officer you are allowed to fly a "lone wolf mission" at your own will after the duty missions of that day are completed and on that mission you can act as you like. Adds a little bit of freedom. In GB...........guess what. In RoF, the AI occaisonally showed a glimpse of intelligence. For example, sometimes just after lifting off the airfield for a mission, I found myself in the middle of an attack on my airfield. That evolved into a thrilling encounter in which I had to fight hard to keep my digital pilot avatar alive. Never saw something even close to that in GB. May it be helpful to ask the people who made RoF how they did it and put it into GB? Maybe.... I also noticed a fading quality in the GB careers. In BoS and BoM the phases of the battles were introduced by animated cutscenes with underlying audio text. Not groundbraking, but ok for me In BoK only bad animations, no audio, only some dull lines of text displayed. Finally, in BOPB there are no cutscenes at all but a lot of bugs which are known since months but still not fixed. You remember this bug where AI pilots stand upright in the canopies instead of sitting in them? It's still there, just saw it yesterday. There are more serious bug, real show stoppers, that can ruin your pilot career. I found one myself but did not report it. Why should I when it's not fixed anyway? Though, don't ask me why, I'm still a faithful fan. I even bought the Normandy content without having seen even a single piece of artwork. However, believe me this, I'm afraid asking myself what I can expect from Normandy Battles. All of the above is not big news. It's pretty much identical to the verdict of game testers from numerous computer game magazines who made reviews of the first IL-2 and it's reincarnations. All of them were highly impressed by the graphics and and the realism of any technical detail but they were much less impressed by the singleplayer experience offered by the game. It's all about presentation and longterm motivation. That's what makes an outstanding game.The recipes to reach that goal are simple and well-known, but not realised here. On the other hand, there are always two sides and, strangely enough, I can understand the developers, too. They are passionate, engaged, hard working and very talented people which created an amazingly complex piece of software. Unfortunately, compared to the blockbuster games from the big studios like electronic arts or UBIsoft, selling in the millions, there is only a small market for flightsims. Bugfixing is then a tedious but also a neccessary task. However, it makes only those people happy who already bought the game but it does not generate income. Therefore, since the develeopers have to make a living from what they are doing, they have to publish new content. New content introduces new bugs. With limited manpower this creates conflicts. There's simply no time at all to fix the new bugs and the known ones as well and to improve the singleplayer part of the game and, and,..... So, what now? Game over? As a single buyer I can cannot do much more to financially support the developers because I already bought pretty much every content ever offered since the first IL-2. But what about the community? It's fantastic! So many helpful and talented people which put a lot of time and effort into the improvement of the game and they are faithful fans. I suppose they are willing and capable to support the developers in many ways with the improvements. There are skinners , mission builders, tool makers, content testers......... Only a very stupid thought: What about teaming up? Hopefully eastriverman
  13. Cannot answer THAT question since I'm on the german side but while being commanding officer of the KG51 equipped with the fighter bomber version of the Me 252 there were railway attack missions. However, the trains were stationary within urban areas with some trucks and tanks araound them, probably to simulate unloading troops. In other words: trains yes, moving no. So, probably there are "stationary" missions also available on the allied side in BOBP. best eastriverman
  14. Greetings, to add to the topic I tested the performance of the Bf-109 K-4 with the DB 605 DC engine in clean configuration (no gunpods etc.) and with 100% fuel at 7000 meters. Pushing the throttle to 100&% in level fligth gives you 483 kph IAS which is a 40 kph IAS speed advantage over the Spitfire IXe. After 9:35 Minutes you get a warning "duration of emergency power exceeded" but the speed stays at 483 kph IAS. Continuing with100% gives you after 11:41 a warning "engine damaged" and from then on the speed slowly decreases. After 13:50 minutes the warning "engine overheated" is diplayed and at that time the speed has decreased to 434 kph IAS. At 14:37 the engine stops working. No fire, no explosion, the propeller just stops spinning. So, being on the safe side, you can go with 100% emergency power approximately 10 Minutes at that altitude before throttling back to keep the engine healthy. That will be the time window in which one has to get rid off the Spit. But it's still diffcult to do so since sharp turns and abrupt maneouvers to get a quick lead for shot, which work fine at low altitude, will cause an immediate stall and a significant loss of altitude due to the thinner air and the reduced lift of the wings. Moreover, the Spit can do tighter turns at 7000 meters without stalling than the K-4 can. The recipe that worked out for me in the end was to employ a zoom and boom tactic: Start the fight with an altitude advantage. Dive down when the Spit approaches, do a careful turn to get the proper lead for a shot and pull up again. If you are a good shot, the fight will be over already, otherwise turn back and try again. Did 6 of these intercept missions in the meantime and it worked well every time. best eastriverman
  15. HiHo! Having fought my way through these battles as a german fighter pilot, I got aware of a strange fact: In none of these battles a ever saw one of these ground objects: # Katyusha rocket launchers # KV-1s heavy tanks # Trains # Ships OK, there are no ships in BoM, but I searched the whole Volga in BoS and all the Sea in BoK and THERE ARE NO SHIPS. All of that is present in Quick missions but not in the careers and I really cannot understand why it has to be. To be honest: After becoming a skillfull pilot all the careers become a bit boring over time and I hoped I could beef them up by spending the rest of my ammo on a supply train on my way back from the main mission or put my bomb not onto a puny artillery piece but onto an enemy ship instead or flatten out some nasty Katyushas with gunfire an so on. The load screens shown when a new career mission is set up are a bit misleading, too. On one screen you can see a pair of Bf-109Fs doing a bomb run on a russian gunboat on the Volga at Stalingrad. But sadly, in fighter units you only have frequent fighter bomber missions agains ground targets, never against ships which are nonexistent anyway . So, question to all players who are/where active in the careers: Do you have the same experience? And, yes in the options menu I've activated all types of ground targets 😀 best regards eastriverman
×
×
  • Create New...