Developer Diary, Part 141 - Discussion

[Felix58]

My understanding is the devs were unsure about developing a player flyable JU52 and it might be marginal sales wise as an individual unit.  But it is a definite feature above other flight sims and hopefully it will inspire new players interested in this era of aviation.  Sounds like the devs are giving this module the attention it deserves and cudos to them for responding to the community's enthusiasm for this project.

Personally I think it is a huge plus in so many ways and I hope it inspires a DC3 version at some stage.  

[Sokol1]

I dont think they will be able to go in and fight. Just be stationary targets and if enough of them are close to the enemy airfield it will capture it I think but no actual fighting 

 

In the ancient  (~1998) Warbirds online the paratroopers drop by Ju-52 when hit ground run - in  "Lemmings style"   -  for the nearest control tower, what they blow up - and themselves - capturing the airfield. Before reach the tower they can be killed by strafe. 

[itsmecamille]

That's awesome news. I love the fact that we're getting a proper paratrooper drop mechanism. This is definitely the sort of stuff I love to see developed so even though I'm almost only flying in VR these days I've pre-ordered the Ju52 to support that (and hopefully I'll get to fly in VR in a few months)

[A_radek]

Awesome news! And beautiful models! 
One small thing, is it the unfortunate lighting angle in the screenshots or does the ju52 corrugated skin lack a normal/bump map? Looks so flat.

[Boomerang]

Looking good!

[150GCT_Veltro]

Great news, now we need the recon DLC!

[Pilot_Rabbit]

[Feathered_IV]

I must admit, my first thought when I saw this was: "Aren't you a little short for a paratrooper?"

 

 

 

 

Well done devs, and all the best for the festive season.

[Gambit21]

I wonder if we'll be able to choose how many paratroopers. I need a small commando team for an upcoming mission.

[6./ZG26_McKvack]

Awesome news! And beautiful models!

One small thing, is it the unfortunate lighting angle in the screenshots or does the ju52 corrugated skin lack a normal/bump map? Looks so flat.

It would not be possible to model the entire corrugated skin because of the extreme amounts of polygons, time to make it and it would probably decrease performance as well

 

What they have done now looks really good. You only notices it at really short ranges and ehen flying it, you wont notice it

Edited December 9, 2016 by 6./ZG26_McKvack

[A_radek]

It would not be possible to model the entire corrugated skin because of the extreme amounts of polygons, time to make it and it would probably decrease performance as well

 

What they have done now looks really good. You only notices it at really short ranges and ehen flying it, you wont notice it

McKvack, I realize that. Been working with 3d for 16 years now Not that you could have known this.

So only asked if it's missing a normal or bump map. Could be it has one, but lighting angle not showing it very pronounced in those screenshots.

[JG300_Olrik]

Amazing news.

I always dreamed of being a liner pilot ; the Ju52 will make my day

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

So only asked if it's missing a normal or bump map. Could be it has one, but lighting angle not showing it very pronounced in those screenshots.

It definetly has and you can increase the effect by baking some of the corrugated lines into the diffuse texture. It's just the glossy skin and the angle of view that make it harder to see.

Edit: Example of a less glossy skin:

Edited December 9, 2016 by 6./ZG26_5tuka

[A_radek]

It definetly has and you can increase the effect by baking some of the corrugated lines into the diffuse texture. It's just the glossy skin and the angle of view that make it harder to see.

Awesome!

[LLv34_Untamo]

S!

 

Good news. A request as a server keeper:

As we don't yet have a russian counterpart, it would be nice to have russian skin for the Ju-52, and the ability to lock the skin for just this plane (and keep other skins unlocked on the server).

[THERION]

Hi folks,

 

this is going to be a great new feature in this wonderful sim! This will give us a whole new aspect in MP, but will also demand a lot of coordination work to use it successfully.

 

And by the way for me even more important as it honors and gives those courageous pilots the respect they deserve! They didn't got air kills or ground kills, but they risked

their lives to resupply all of them who earned medals and fame - and they were not cheered as much as fighter and bomber pilots in history books... they also saved many

lives evacuating them from hell in harshest conditions...

 

I'm really looking forward to get my hands on it and yes - I pre-ordered this old lady on day one!!!

 

Cheers,

 

JJRouss

 

 

PS: No critisism but the shape of the helmet of the paratrooper looks a bit like an italian helmet, isn't it? Or is it just me? Thanks very much anyway for your tremendous work...

[Brano]

Honestly, I don't even want to fight a war in the Ju52 - I really just want to fly it around because it's just so damned cool.

War is fed by,not fought in Ju-52 

[ICDP]

I posted it elsewhere but this new direction you guys are taking has made me more than happy to support this sim again.

 

Well done devs.

[Nil]

And by the way for me even more important as it honors and gives those courageous pilots the respect they deserve! They didn't got air kills or ground kills, but they risked

their lives to resupply all of them who earned medals and fame - and they were not cheered as much as fighter and bomber pilots in history books... they also saved many

lives evacuating them from hell in harshest conditions...

 

Honor, as they flew a non combat plane into combat missions... many of them lost their lives . German hq was very good at sending them to the death. Because of that, not enough Tante Ju were left for resupply soldiers in the Stalingrad pocket.

 

S!

 

Good news. A request as a server keeper:

As we don't yet have a russian counterpart, it would be nice to have russian skin for the Ju-52, and the ability to lock the skin for just this plane (and keep other skins unlocked on the server).

 

That is indeed a very good idea and somewhat (?) required to implement the Ju52 new game mechanics on MP server.

I just just hope the Ju52 will be available for all server.

Edited December 9, 2016 by Nil

[6./ZG26_Loke]

So you use right throttle as right break, left throttle as left break and center throttle as both left and right breaks.

Which leaves me with the problem of having only one throttle control, hmmmm!

 

Really looking forward to the Ju-52, but also think it's gonna be a challenging aircraft to operate.

[Jade_Monkey]

So you use right throttle as right break, left throttle as left break and center throttle as both left and right breaks.

Which leaves me with the problem of having only one throttle control, hmmmm!

 

Really looking forward to the Ju-52, but also think it's gonna be a challenging aircraft to operate.

Even with two axis in throttle, im trying to think what's the best way to approach this.

 

If you use one for the middle and the other for the external engines, how do you turn? Does it have good rudder response on ground so doesnt require brakes to turn?

[6./ZG26_Loke]

If you use one for the middle and the other for the external engines, how do you turn? Does it have good rudder response on ground so doesnt require brakes to turn?

Good question!

[Asgar]

 

 

PS: No critisism but the shape of the helmet of the paratrooper looks a bit like an italian helmet, isn't it? Or is it just me? Thanks very much anyway for your tremendous work...

 

 

nope, Fallschirmjäger Helm

[Yogiflight]

This might not be your only problem with braking, as you have to pull the throttle behind the low level limiter, so below zero power. I do not know how this works for a normal HOTAS throttle.

[kestrel79]

Honestly, I don't even want to fight a war in the Ju52 - I really just want to fly it around because it's just so damned cool.

 

I agree I might use the ju52 for casual flights, since this sim gives me the best feeling of flight and immersion

[150GCT_Veltro]

About combat, we could have a trigger to create some sort of "firing fortification" (trench ecc. ecc..) after their landing.

 

Edited December 9, 2016 by 150GCT_Veltro

[Nil]

So you use right throttle as right break, left throttle as left break and center throttle as both left and right breaks.

Which leaves me with the problem of having only one throttle control, hmmmm!

 

Really looking forward to the Ju-52, but also think it's gonna be a challenging aircraft to operate.

 

Good question!

 

This might not be your only problem with braking, as you have to pull the throttle behind the low level limiter, so below zero power. I do not know how this works for a normal HOTAS throttle.

 

I believe braking with throttles axes will be very complicated for pilots without a 3 throttle quadrant (thus 99% of pilots)

So I guess it will be simplified: 

Brake button with no rudder: Engine 2 becomes automatically idle.

Brake button with left  rudder: Engine 1 becomes automatically idle.

Brake button with right rudder: Engine 3 becomes automatically idle.

 

It is already simplified that way for axis aircraft:

Brake button with left rudder: left brake pedal is pushed

Brake button with right rudder: right brake pedal is pushed

 

So why it would be different here?

[Jade_Monkey]

About combat, we could have a trigger to create some sort of "firing fortification" (trench ecc. ecc..) after their landing.

 

What good is that going to do? You are barely going to see them from a plane and its a waste of resources for the devs.

 

I understand people are excited but the feature creep in these suggestions is a bit ridiculous.

[[CPT]Pike*HarryM]

It will be interesting to see how the engines/brakes etc are all implemented. I would prefer that the left and right engines remain 1 and 2 and the center engine would be 3, so as to not conflict with current mapping for twin engine aircraft. The center engine would be more like an auxiliary engine, set it and forget it most of the time. IMHO naturally

[150GCT_Veltro]

What good is that going to do? You are barely going to see them from a plane and its a waste of resources for the devs.

 

I understand people are excited but the feature creep in these suggestions is a bit ridiculous.

 

 

[Nil]

Dear Jade Monkey, it is just a suggestion. I would feel bad if I got the comment you gave 

 

It will be interesting to see how the engines/brakes etc are all implemented. I would prefer that the left and right engines remain 1 and 2 and the center engine would be 3, so as to not conflict with current mapping for twin engine aircraft. The center engine would be more like an auxiliary engine, set it and forget it most of the time. IMHO naturally

 

The 3 engine configuration is very special somehow , most multi engine were 2 or 4 engines , 

The Ideal way to do it would be to have an option "engine 2 is an auxiliary engine on 3 engines aircraft"

[Chief_Mouser]

It will be interesting to see how the engines/brakes etc are all implemented. I would prefer that the left and right engines remain 1 and 2 and the center engine would be 3, so as to not conflict with current mapping for twin engine aircraft. The center engine would be more like an auxiliary engine, set it and forget it most of the time. IMHO naturally

Agreed 100%. The centre engine needs to be the 'extra' and the wing engines numbered as per usual.

I'm lucky in having an old Saitek throttle quadrant that I don't use atm but will be mapping it purely for the Ju52. Other folks don't have this luxury and keeping confusion away from engines 1 & 2 is paramount.

Cheers.

Edited December 9, 2016 by 216th_Cat

[Jade_Monkey]

Sorry Veltro & Nil, it wasn't meant as an attack. I just didn't want the expectations to spiral out of control.

[Dakpilot]

Agreed 100%. The centre engine needs to be the 'extra' and the wing engines numbered as per usual.

I'm lucky in having an old Saitek throttle quadrant that I don't use atm but will be mapping it purely for the Ju52. Other folks don't have this luxury and keeping confusion away from engines 1 & 2 is paramount.

Cheers.

 

Yes Saitek (now thrustmaster)  triple throttle quadrant is perfect for the job even 'detent' for the brakes, obviously a bit expensive just for this purpose and wonder about mapping it separately for JU-52, I guess can have separate key map profiles but a bit of a faff to chop and change with aircraft

 

Interesting how they will do it

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[No601_Swallow]

About combat, we could have a trigger to create some sort of "firing fortification" (trench ecc. ecc..) after their landing.

 

 

 

Yep. perfectly doabe with the ME right now, as long as we can get the right "event" ("paratrooers landed" or some such) added to the ME.

 

[in fact as regards storming an airfield, there are even those banners that can get slowly hoisted to show an airfield has been captured, if people don't mind a slightly game-y element.] 

Edited December 9, 2016 by No601_Swallow

[Habu]

 

 

Yes Saitek (now thrustmaster)

No saitek is now Logitech.

[Dakpilot]

No saitek is now Logitech.

 

Doh!... yes of course, you are right 

 

Cheers Dakpilot

[Urra]

What are "squad air drops" in the DD?

""It can track new events like cargo unloading at an airfield and squad or cargo air-drops. ""

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

What are "squad air drops" in the DD?

""It can track new events like cargo unloading at an airfield and squad or cargo air-drops. ""

 

I believe this is referring to the Fallschirmjager squadrons (paratroopers) that can be selected as a "loadout."

[Jade_Monkey]

Anyone know the typical height for german paratroooer drops?

 

For some reason i always think germans jumped from low distances.