Jump to content
Han

Developer Diary 227 - Discussion

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, WheelwrightPL said:

Their priorities are mostly wrong, who in the community asked for "advanced pilot physiology" ? It is a waste of time and resources on secondary issues.

Also, why do I need to see ships and planes 100km in the distance ? It is irrelevant because by the time those ships and planes become dangerous, the situation may diametrically change anyway.

 

Instead the team should concentrate on environmental physics/destruction and increasing graphics fidelity. It would be awesome to see building crumble realistically as they are leveled by bombs, Battlefield 5 style. Or adding individual physics to barrels of aviation fuel as they roll in different directions and explode, Just Cause 4 style. And the interaction between various physics objects which creates moments of unpredictable destructive beauty in motion. Alas: we will probably never see those things or maybe in 10 years with their current misguided priorities.

 

 

 

While you do have a right to your opinion - we have a right to ridicule your wrongheaded thinking.

 

Increased view distance is absolutely welcome in an aviation sim of any sort. So minus one for you on that one.

 

I do think it would be awesome to have destructible environments, you have a good point there - the random destruction cascade element would be very cool. That said, given the relatively small studio building out this wonderful game I'll wait the 10 years to have this feature. Plus one for this point.

 

Edited by Dirt_Merchant
Clarity
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 10

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, WheelwrightPL said:

Their priorities are mostly wrong, who in the community asked for "advanced pilot physiology" ? It is a waste of time and resources on secondary issues.

Also, why do I need to see ships and planes 100km in the distance ? It is irrelevant because by the time those ships and planes become dangerous, the situation may diametrically change anyway.

 

Instead the team should concentrate on environmental physics/destruction and increasing graphics fidelity. It would be awesome to see building crumble realistically as they are leveled by bombs, Battlefield 5 style. Or adding individual physics to barrels of aviation fuel as they roll in different directions and explode, Just Cause 4 style. And the interaction between various physics objects which creates moments of unpredictable destructive beauty in motion. Alas: we will probably never see those things or maybe in 10 years with their current misguided priorities.

 

Well first paragraph is no for me and second ofcourse yes, maybe if I would be in charge I woud do the things other way for example would add just physiological effects to the AI gunners not to the players and work with realistic newtonian destruction of objects and ground plus replace damage decals with one to one representation and more things in ships to be damaged - that woud be somthing -  not the revolution but just other  evolution...   but  what we will  have is geart also...

BTW Going for increased draw distance for planes can't be wrong priority

Edited by 307_Tomcat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, WheelwrightPL said:

It would be awesome to see building crumble realistically as they are leveled by bombs, Battlefield 5 style.

Do not know, how you play BFV, but the little moving avatars are more interesting, than the crumbling buildings. In IL2 you will move with more than 100 m per second on treetop level, so high fidelity graphics will be a short visual pleasure.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for the update, and for making this game the best! You folks rock! The P-38 is soon to be a reality, I'm thrilled...:yahoo::good:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, L3Pl4K said:

Do not know, how you play BFV, but the little moving avatars are more interesting, than the crumbling buildings. In IL2 you will move with more than 100 m per second on treetop level, so high fidelity graphics will be a short visual pleasure.

 

I see your point but you can always circle around and observe the progressive destruction you caused and/or you can fly PO-2 for more "in your face" experience. Also, the replays would look awesome as well.

  • Haha 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Very solid DD!!

 

Loving all pictures for planes and pilots, but even more excited about the new features and enhancements. Excellent progress!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, WheelwrightPL said:

Their priorities are mostly wrong, who in the community asked for "advanced pilot physiology" ? It is a waste of time and resources on secondary issues.

Also, why do I need to see ships and planes 100km in the distance ? It is irrelevant because by the time those ships and planes become dangerous, the situation may diametrically change anyway.

 

Instead the team should concentrate on environmental physics/destruction and increasing graphics fidelity. It would be awesome to see building crumble realistically as they are leveled by bombs, Battlefield 5 style. Or adding individual physics to barrels of aviation fuel as they roll in different directions and explode, Just Cause 4 style. And the interaction between various physics objects which creates moments of unpredictable destructive beauty in motion. Alas: we will probably never see those things or maybe in 10 years with their current misguided priorities.

 

All of the things they mentioned in this DD have been vociferously demanded on the forums for a long time. 

People have been begging for increased visibility distances for years. They will be a necessity for anti-shipping missions and longer visibility will make combat with jets more viable. Right now the visibility bubble is a serious limitation and they are addressing that. Seeing ships far away means hunting moving convoys becomes actually feasible and not an exercise in frustration. Seeing planes from farther away adds a new layer of strategic positioning...now you can see a formation of bombers in the distance and call out a warning, or position yourself for an intercept course some minutes from now. Defending targets against incoming ground attackers will be more interesting as instead of just orbiting the target, you will be able to patrol likely routes and not miss attack formations that were just 1 km too far away.

The pilot physiology has been demanded pretty consistently because of people flopping around the sky in crazy negative/positive G extreme maneuvers to shake people off their tail, which can be quite annoying and a little bit immersion breaking (though I don't find it so bad as some others do). It's also a much bigger possible factor due to G-suits being issued to american pilots, a distinct advantage that until now has not been modeled in the game. And if, as I suspect, the physiology model will be applied to other crew members in the same way the FM is applied to AI planes, this may alleviate some issues with high-G shots from gunners.

The destruction physics you describe would only ever be seen by most people in recordings and videos after the fact. When I drop a bomb, by the time it goes off I'm far away or out of view, so I would never see barrels rolling around or buildings crumbling. For Tank Crew I can see this being worth doing perhaps. But as far as a development priority for a flight sim, it's one of those "wouldn't it be cool if 'X' happened?" things that don't add much to the game for most players. 

  • Upvote 16

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

End of September the release of BOPM.

That is only 66 days, 7 hours, 3 minutes and 30 seconds away.

https://countdown.onlineclock.net/

 

Looking forward though for the promised screenshots of the map in one of the coming DD's.

(And hopefully some screenies of the FC Arras map sooner or later.)

  • Haha 7
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

September should be a blast for all of us.

 

Thank you to all the devs for making this possible. This is very cool!

Edited by Novice-Flyer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great DD! My question is, if the new, more advanced pilot physiology is turned off by the server admins, does it revert back to the current physiology, or none at all?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

we'll increase the maximum visibility distance for planes and ships from 10 to 100 km and the resulting visibility distance will realistically correspond to the lighting and weather conditions.

 

This made me happier than a tornado in a trailer park!

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, RedKestrel said:

The destruction physics you describe would only ever be seen by most people in recordings and videos after the fact. When I drop a bomb, by the time it goes off I'm far away or out of view, so I would never see barrels rolling around or buildings crumbling. For Tank Crew I can see this being worth doing perhaps. But as far as a development priority for a flight sim, it's one of those "wouldn't it be cool if 'X' happened?" things that don't add much to the game for most players. 

 

I understand different people have different priorities, which also has to do with the way they play the game which influences their expectations of it. However, for me, I must disagree with the above because I usually attack ground targets with cannons (as opposed to level-bombing from high altitude), and when you're blasting away in your HS-129 you have the prime seat in the ensuing physical destruction and can see all the details: barrels flying, observation towers tumbling over, chimneys sheared by the explosive 20mm bullets etc: etc: So, I respectfully yet vehemently disagree: the destruction visuals are crucial part of the experience if you're a ground pounder in a slow WW2-era plane.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, WheelwrightPL said:

 

I understand different people have different priorities, which also has to do with the way they play the game which influences their expectations of it. However, for me, I must disagree with the above because I usually attack ground targets with cannons (as opposed to level-bombing from high altitude), and when you're blasting away in your HS-129 you have the prime seat in the ensuing physical destruction and can see all the details: barrels flying, observation towers tumbling over, chimneys sheared by the explosive 20mm bullets etc: etc: So, I respectfully yet vehemently disagree: the destruction visuals are crucial part of the experience if you're a ground pounder in a slow WW2-era plane.

 

While I disagree that this should be on the priority list for most of this game, it is an important priority for Tank Crew.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Uufflakke said:

End of September the release of BOPM.

That is only 66 days, 7 hours, 3 minutes and 30 seconds away.

https://countdown.onlineclock.net/

 

Looking forward though for the promised screenshots of the map in one of the coming DD's.

(And hopefully some screenies of the FC Arras map sooner or later.)

 

 

Yes, already counting the days...

 

DEVs.... Drool.... Beautiful work on the 38!!! Never imagined the pilot fatigue etc.. top notch!

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am completely sold on VR ( in particular Pimax5K if you want to know and I am REALLY looking forward to experiencing the view in the P-38! It promises to be impressive made more so in VR.

Re. The B-25 I will be first in line to “buy” it when & if it becomes available to be flyable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

That is an incredible DD.

*Feeling spoiled*

Going from 10km to 100km viewrange is something I find amazing I never expected this to happen until it was announced and i'm glad you're doing it.

Such an improvement is certainly a must for the upcoming Pacific theater along with some more realistic fuel tank modeling and drop tanks. :)

Sorry for my earlier negativity I'm very satisfied with the direction Il-2 is taking, please keep communicating with us and keep up the good work.

Also for the love of god please look into that glitch that makes the smoke stacks flash orange.

Thank you and have a good day!

Edited by =FEW=Hauggy
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great DD! Thanks for your amazing work.

 

Now that Bodenplatte and Flying Circus are near of completion, when do you plan to announce next installment?

 

No rush, of course, just for curiosity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, WheelwrightPL said:

 

I understand different people have different priorities, which also has to do with the way they play the game which influences their expectations of it. However, for me, I must disagree with the above because I usually attack ground targets with cannons (as opposed to level-bombing from high altitude), and when you're blasting away in your HS-129 you have the prime seat in the ensuing physical destruction and can see all the details: barrels flying, observation towers tumbling over, chimneys sheared by the explosive 20mm bullets etc: etc: So, I respectfully yet vehemently disagree: the destruction visuals are crucial part of the experience if you're a ground pounder in a slow WW2-era plane.

 

I see your point - I rarely attack buildings and other structures with cannons. EDIT: But your original post talked about damage modeling from bombs going off and buildings crumbling, not for cannons. 

But I disagree with the idea that the devs are going completely in the wrong direction. They're addressing long-standing community requests that will improve gameplay for many players. And not so long ago there were improvements to damage models for tanks and ground vehicles to make them more realistic and more satisfying for tank-killing, so its not like there has been no movement on ground pounding. Of course, Many people at the time asked "Why should I care about truck or tank damage models, I fly fighters! Devs should focus on increasing the view distance/AI/Pilot physiology!". 

 

2 hours ago, pfrances said:

 

While I disagree that this should be on the priority list for most of this game, it is an important priority for Tank Crew.


This I agree with, and they've already improved building destruction physics for the Prokhorovka map. I'm sure as Tank Crew is developed we will see more improvement in this area. 

Edited by RedKestrel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bloody brilliant DD. What none of you have connected though is that INCREASED SHIP DRAW DISTANCE IS AN ABSOLUTE MUST TO MAKE THE PACIFIC VIABLE! Are we daring to dream again...? :fly:

  • Upvote 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Increased visibility distances are clearly something many have been asking to be looked at for a long time, and the devs comments provide hope that this mater will be addressed intelligently; so I trust they will find an effective way of balancing object size (either singly or collectively for large groups of objects moving together) along with contrast against the background and prevalent lighting.

 

Based upon real world accounts and scientific research papers there are plenty of occasions where it may be unrealistic to expect a pilot to spot another aircraft little more than 1km away, equally in the right light  and with an optimal viewing position it's presence may be detectable way beyond 50km.

 

Lets hope this turns out to be a genuine improvement to the fidelity of the simulation, not merely giving in to constant whining about gameplay.... I don't want to be the wet blanket here but for years people went on and on about some of the flight models in ROF, those folk cheered when the devs finally announced they had given in to the pressure and made changes, only for people to then claim the sim was well and truly nerfed by those changes and that things should revert back to the way things were before.

 

You can't please all of the people all of the time, but by and large the devs do a decent job of pleasing most of the people most of the time, but whatever follows an announcement  like this will be endlessly dissected and discussed for a long time because it is something many feel passionate about.

 

HH

 

 

 

 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow  !  Simply excellent.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Such a great DD; the very best in a long time I think!

 

That P-38 looks gorgeous, I'm going to have to dust off my yoke for that baby...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

This is the best Dev Diary I have read.

I am so happy with the direction things are going right now.

 

I avoided buying IL2 BoS for a long time because of the direction it appeared to be heading in. Locked loadouts, single-player only unlocks and other issues gave me the impression that the Devs where at the very least not going in the direction I would have liked and at worst they looked out of touch with the flight sim community (not that I can talk for everyone).

I have had my mind completely changed since and this Dev Diary is a wonderful display of the Development heading in exactly the direction I hoped it might.

Changes to visibility distance, the AI and pilot physiology where all at the top of my list of hopes and I imagine that is the same for many people. I wonder if much of this focus was a result of the survey of players carried out some time ago.

The air marshal mode is something I know nothing about, but it is certainly encouraging to see a focus on multiplayer.

 

I'm so happy and I intend to buy another collector plane just to show my appreciation.

BRAVO!

Edited by [DBS]Browning
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, =BAIT=CG_Justin said:

Great DD! My question is, if the new, more advanced pilot physiology is turned off by the server admins, does it revert back to the current physiology, or none at all?

Who said it's even going to be an option? Most likely going to be a change encompassing the entire game. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, JgonRedcorn said:

Who said it's even going to be an option? Most likely going to be a change encompassing the entire game. 

 

‘Read the DD.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amazing.

I am looking forward to everything in this update, but especially the visibility and pilot physiology! G-forces and stress rarely seem to bother a pilot in-game, especially online.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Improved AI maneuvering in a dogfight and Improved visibility distance of planes and ships, wauuuuu i like it :) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, HappyHaddock said:

Increased visibility distances are clearly something many have been asking to be looked at for a long time, and the devs comments provide hope that this mater will be addressed intelligently; so I trust they will find an effective way of balancing object size (either singly or collectively for large groups of objects moving together) along with contrast against the background and prevalent lighting.

 

Based upon real world accounts and scientific research papers there are plenty of occasions where it may be unrealistic to expect a pilot to spot another aircraft little more than 1km away, equally in the right light  and with an optimal viewing position it's presence may be detectable way beyond 50km.

 

Lets hope this turns out to be a genuine improvement to the fidelity of the simulation, not merely giving in to constant whining about gameplay.... I don't want to be the wet blanket here but for years people went on and on about some of the flight models in ROF, those folk cheered when the devs finally announced they had given in to the pressure and made changes, only for people to then claim the sim was well and truly nerfed by those changes and that things should revert back to the way things were before.

 

You can't please all of the people all of the time, but by and large the devs do a decent job of pleasing most of the people most of the time, but whatever follows an announcement  like this will be endlessly dissected and discussed for a long time because it is something many feel passionate about.

 

HH

 

 

 

 

Increasing view distances is absolutely not comparable in any way to changing flight models. Not being able to see a convoy of ships because I'm at 4k when they might only be 7km out from me is a massive issue that needs fixed. Massive contrails disappearing before your eyes allowing high altitude planes to escape unseen is a massive issue. These are in no way the same as adjusting flight models for gameplay. This comments a bit ridiculous really. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sweet!

Increased ships visibility and wakes, planes also.....sweet sweeet sweeet!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Holy Mother of Lockheed! That P-38 looks fantastic. That just HAS to be my ride, in here. It has to be. I hope I don't suck in it as badly as I do the P-47.

But I'm surprised at the fact that the Lightning is almost done. I thought it would be our last airplane, but it sounds as though the Mustang has a way to go. With all the information available on the P-51D, I had expected it to be one of the first and it looks as though it may be the last.

Anyway, I'm looking forward to getting my ass kicked in P-38!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, JgonRedcorn said:

Increasing view distances is absolutely not comparable in any way to changing flight models. Not being able to see a convoy of ships because I'm at 4k when they might only be 7km out from me is a massive issue that needs fixed. Massive contrails disappearing before your eyes allowing high altitude planes to escape unseen is a massive issue. These are in no way the same as adjusting flight models for gameplay. This comments a bit ridiculous really. 

 

My comment wasn't intended to suggest any direct similarity, merely point out that for many people the flight models in ROF were, to borrow a phrase from you; "a massive issue that needed to be fixed", but that when they got the changes they asked for that those same folk weren't happy with the way things were implemented.

 

There are plenty of case where viewing distances do need to be increased, and a convoy of ships is just one, as are the contrails on bomber formations. I merely hope we don't get a situation that in enabling people to spot convoys of ships or bomber formations from 50+km we also end up in a situation that something as small as a single biplane seen against a dark sky at dusk is also visible at more than 50km.

 

Everything the devs have said about what they are attempting sounds positive, lets hope they can deliver increased viewing distances only where they are appropriate.

 

 

 

 

Edited by HappyHaddock
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, JgonRedcorn said:

Who said it's even going to be an option? Most likely going to be a change encompassing the entire game. 

I can read the English language.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know if I missed it or simply forgot reading about it, but the mention of a programmer to work on AI is welcome news to this simmer. It all bodes well for the future of this series.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So next two months waiting to the next allied plane, it will be then almost a year after last one. Dont get me wrong, and dont want to be rude, but that is one hell of a dissapointment. Last information was June, or mayby little delayed in Jully. Dont understand, why one axis plane wasnt postponed to bring one allied plane earlier... Can imagine, that 262 was may be also hard task to implement into game...

  • Sad 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Visibility improvements are very welcome.  I always thought it was odd when ship hunting that the ships just "appear" at a certain range.  Being a highlight of the sim, it will be awesome to see ships changed (and other targets) in this way.

 

I am a wee bit disappointed we have to wait for all the remaining planes at once, at the end of September (an estimate, I am sure), but on the other hand I might guess some of the work that needs to be done on each remaining plane might depend on related work on another model under development.  I guess I'll just have to keep on enjoying the sim as it is and wait with the rest of you.  :)

 

The pilot physiology effects and use of g suits (where appropriate) could really change the way we fly now and make some of the more nimble planes at slower speeds really show where they can shine.  The difference in effects on a pilot in an I-16 and a pilot in an Me 262 in a dogfight could be a much more pronounced affair than it is now, for example.

 

Mitchell's, ponies, 38's and tempests... new map, visibility improvements..... Yeah.  Lots to be excited about here...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SCG_Riksen said:

Yayyyy! From 10 to a 100 ... Now that is impressive!

 

Yes agree, however I still have hope that they don´t wait until end of september to release the P51.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, CSW_Hot_Dog said:

So next two months waiting to the next allied plane, it will be then almost a year after last one. Dont get me wrong, and dont want to be rude, but that is one hell of a dissapointment. Last information was June, or mayby little delayed in Jully. Dont understand, why one axis plane wasnt postponed to bring one allied plane earlier... Can imagine, that 262 was may be also hard task to implement into game...

 

The way I read it, it seemed the plan was to release them all in one big update at the end of September

 

"At the moment we plan to make all these four planes available to you in the next huge update at the end of September that will also bring the important new features we're working on at the moment. Here's the rundown on their current statuses:"

Edited by ACG_Herne

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, ACG_Herne said:

 

The way I read it, it seemed the plan was to release them all in one big update at the end of September

 

"At the moment we plan to make all these four planes available to you in the next huge update at the end of September that will also bring the important new features we're working on at the moment. Here's the rundown on their current statuses:"

Yeah Herne, exactly, and thats the dissapointment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Awesome DD! Great job guys. Learning about increasing visibility and ongoing work on the AI just made my day (besides the beautiful planes).

 

I also welcome the option of pilot fatigue. Also, making this a selectable option is wise. I hope this will cast an end for some peeps flying by trim at high g‘s.

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...