Developer Diary, Part XVII

[JG13_opcode]

We need to run tests to find out the answer to your question.

Well let me rephrase my question. I'm just interested in knowing if the engine will handle Mach and compressibility effects in some way, as opposed to the old engine which clearly did not.

 

I don't need to know specifics about the individual aircraft.

Edited May 25, 2013 by JG13Doggles

[Bearcat]

The waiting continues as there was hardly anything news worthy after the weeks of no updates.

Well.... We will be waiting until it is released anyway so .... (I'm just saying....)

[Uufflakke]

I think it should be "waagerecht" and not "wagerecht" on the instrument

 

No, it is 'Wagerecht'.

(Wagerecht = Horizontal, Level)

 

 

 

Edited May 25, 2013 by Uufflakke

[71st_AH_Hooves]

No, it is 'Wagerecht'.

(Wagerecht = Horizontal, Level)

 

 

 

dude this rendering is too worn out it would never look like this in real life.........................................................wait...................................................  .   .  ..... .

[Guest deleted@7076]

-Deleted-

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 12, 2022 by Varrattu

[StG2_Manfred]

!!! waagerecht == horizontal, level !!!!!

 

~V~

 

BTW: smart aleck == Schlauberger, Besserwisser,  Klugschei????er

 

 

 

+1

 

And as it stands at the "beginning of a sentence", first letter have to be in upper case, therefore 'Waagerecht'

[Caudron431]

The pit looks very nice!

 Also, I am amazed to hear that MIKOYAN visited your office! Absolutely incredible. Congratulations!


 

THIS.....JUST........ROCKS!

 

Yes, congratulations indeed, and thanks for the new update. Keep on the good work guys

[BlackSix]

Stepan Anastasovich in our office:
 

[76SQN-J0NJ0N]

Stepan Anastasovich in our office:

 

1.jpg 4.jpg

 

Amazing. Well done guys, I can't wait to sink all my spare cash into this! 

[smink1701]

Stepan Anastasovich in our office:

 

1.jpg 4.jpg

Very cool.  I hope I have that much hair at his age.  I wish I had that much hair now!

[Rjel]

I think it's pretty cool that imput from veteran pilots from the war is viewed favorably by this team. In the past it was dismissed as old men's fading memories.

[707shap_Srbin]

About S.Mikoyan. Large interview with him. In russian (use translate)

[Sokol1]

I think it should be "waagerecht" and not "wagerecht" on the instrument

 

Perhaps a case of lack space to write one more "a"...

 

 

Source:  http://www.cockpitinstrumente.de

 

Sokol1

Edited May 27, 2013 by Sokol1

[AX2]

Thanks for update

 

Great work !!! 

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

The waiting continues as there was hardly anything news worthy after the weeks of no updates.

 

They weren't working for the most part. Holidays and visiting battlegrounds. They've said right from the begining they will only do updates when they have things to report. Only a little progress, so, only a little report. And I like the static Friedrich. Can't wait for in game shots and a chance to saddle it up next year.

 

~S

[MACADEMIC]

No, it is 'Wagerecht'.

(Wagerecht = Horizontal, Level)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hey, that cockpit looks too flat!

 

 

MAC

[Freycinet]

The waiting continues as there was hardly anything news worthy after the weeks of no updates.

 

If a Friedrich cockpit is "hardly anything news worthy" to you then I seriously doubt your interest in WWII sims...   

[Uufflakke]

Perhaps a case of lack space to write one more "a"...

 

Sokol1

 

 

Exactly.

That must be the reasons why they left out the 'a'.

[Zorin]

... I guess most of us will disagree, but your opinion is more than welcome.

 

1) What will be included in the list of ground targets? ...

 

30 ground objects = will cover the most basic set of tanks, trucks and artillery pieces for both nations. 500 buildings and scenario objects = necessary to make Stalingrad look like Stalingrad and not five random types of houses on a rough Stalingrad city map.

 

2) What are the reasons behind starting the game at Operation Uranus, roughly three months after the outbreak of the battle?

 

Obvious level playing field, otherwise there would be loads of whining from the Reds as they would have to fight with inferior planes only.

 

3) A pair of aircraft will be made in the same order in which they were presented community?

 

That question didn't even make sense in the first place.

 

4) Will AI leading plane fly at cruising or at full throttle during the flight to the target or to the home?

 

We knew that already.

 

5) Will there be a competent flight executive officer who knows how to land any group of AI without sending to the 2nd round?

 

Evasive answer that basically means NO, which is perfectly in tune with the basic and simple approach of BoS.

 

6) NVIDIA or ATI? What platform BoS will give preference??

 

Obvious answer.

 

7) Will the engines refuse because overcooling on full realism given the fact that we'll have winter in the game? Let's say I glided for 3-4 minutes with the open radiator then I added the throttle but the engine refused because it become too cold. Will this done?

 

First and only bit of real info in the entire update.

 

8) Will the game loader have built-in protection for the checksums to somehow avoid the possibility of replacing terrain texture or technique? Those which allow to find an opponent earlier than standard.

 

Obvious answer. It is 2013...

 

9) Will the cartridge case fall down from the planes?

 

Obvious answer. Basic realism...

 

Cokpit shots.

 

Well, we know what the 3d guys come up with in this regard, given it was all seen in CloD already. So hardly news yet again.

[royraiden]

1) What will be included in the list of ground targets? ...

 

30 ground objects = will cover the most basic set of tanks, trucks and artillery pieces for both nations. 500 buildings and scenario objects = necessary to make Stalingrad look like Stalingrad and not five random types of houses on a rough Stalingrad city map.

 

2) What are the reasons behind starting the game at Operation Uranus, roughly three months after the outbreak of the battle?

 

Obvious level playing field, otherwise there would be loads of whining from the Reds as they would have to fight with inferior planes only.

 

3) A pair of aircraft will be made in the same order in which they were presented community?

 

That question didn't even make sense in the first place.

 

4) Will AI leading plane fly at cruising or at full throttle during the flight to the target or to the home?

 

We knew that already.

 

5) Will there be a competent flight executive officer who knows how to land any group of AI without sending to the 2nd round?

 

Evasive answer that basically means NO, which is perfectly in tune with the basic and simple approach of BoS.

 

6) NVIDIA or ATI? What platform BoS will give preference??

 

Obvious answer.

 

7) Will the engines refuse because overcooling on full realism given the fact that we'll have winter in the game? Let's say I glided for 3-4 minutes with the open radiator then I added the throttle but the engine refused because it become too cold. Will this done?

 

First and only bit of real info in the entire update.

 

8) Will the game loader have built-in protection for the checksums to somehow avoid the possibility of replacing terrain texture or technique? Those which allow to find an opponent earlier than standard.

 

Obvious answer. It is 2013...

 

9) Will the cartridge case fall down from the planes?

 

Obvious answer. Basic realism...

 

Cokpit shots.

 

Well, we know what the 3d guys come up with in this regard, given it was all seen in CloD already. So hardly news yet again.

No one is forcing you to come here, if you dont like what you see and read you can leave.If every answer is so obvious to you and you are so eager to judge based on nothing, then get out for a while and come back when theres "something" so you can judge again

[71st_AH_Hooves]

Thanks for that Zorin,  oh BTW no body cares about your answers.   or what you have to say/slam, or if you ever post here again, especially if that garbage is going to be your MO.    Just sayin..... 

[LukeFF]

Having a bad day, Zorin?

[Zorin]

a) I have not, with a word, said I do not like what was presented in this update.

b) I did not judge anything in particular, as there was nothing to judge in the first place.

c) @Hooves: If logic equates to garbage in your book, I am sure your life most be a blast.

d) @LukeFF: No, why do you think so? Don't say it is because I do not fall over with excitement in light of this upate.

If a Friedrich cockpit is "hardly anything news worthy" to you then I seriously doubt your interest in WWII sims...   

 

Why is that? It is a cokcpit everyone has seen a million times in various forms, now being made by the same 3D guys who built the cockpits for CloD only they were told to continue working with a stricter poly limit to turn an E into an F cockpit.

 

There is no need to glamourize this whole process, IMO. The entire team does what they have to do.

[Rjel]

Still enjoying these continuing updates. Still laughing at the continuing sniping from CLoD advocates.

Edited May 26, 2013 by Rjel

[JtD]

Guys,

 

The cockpit is in the "engine", but it's not "outside" in the sunshine etc. Everything is 3D as it should be. Will look great when you sit in it and see the shadows working etc.

 

Jason

Shadows don't fix wrong gauges or labels, do they? I don't understand why you guys aren't doing it right, I mean there's no extra effort in painting a correct texture instead of a wrong one.

[Freycinet]

JtD, what's with the attitude, sorry? - They are showing work in progress. There may be a wrong gauge and then they deal with it after being told about it. What's the big deal? - Honestly, it is to be appreciated that we get an insight in the development process. No need to be aggressive and attack the developers.

 

Try to think a bit about these words in the RoF update:

"We are also working on our second big project, a continuation of the legendary series - IL-2 Sturmovik: Battle of Stalingrad. This is a very exciting and, of course, very difficult project for us. We received the chance to work on it thanks to our work on Rise of Flight, and of course, your trust. Who knew that your early decision to trust in our team would lead to this opportunity? We appreciate your continued support!"

[Freycinet]

BTW, Jason, I suggest that you change to a monthly update schedule (since there weren't any updates the last two Fridays we're almost there anyway)... - The usual whiners will just get their knickers into a bind with weekly updates. Better avoid listening to their constant griping every week. I for one would prefer just to have to face their nonsense once a month... It is not as if there isn't a lot of great flight simming to be done already, what with RoF and CoD, so the real flight simmers out there won't miss a thing, we're having great fun actually playing.  

[JtD]

JtD, what's with the attitude, sorry?

Because I don't understand why they are doing wrong instruments. I'm worried we'll end up with cockpits like in the original Il-2 where essential gauges were missing, mislabelled, misscaled and therefore completely useless. Polite questions in that direction have been ignored, so I've changed tone of voice. Not sure it will lead anywhere, but at least I want to try - some folks making most silly posts with lots of huge letters and big silly pictures have gotten a response, so I figure that type of conversation is more successful around here. Sorry for your inconvenience, I'd like to be more civilized and if that turns out to be possible, I'll go back there.

 

I'd prefer if this topic was a discussion with the devs, though, not among us, no offence meant.

Edited May 26, 2013 by JtD

[t4trouble]

Who? made all these guys the forum police, said guys want to take a deep breath and relax.... If this is the treatment by people expressing an opinion or critique, you'll be doing a great job scaring off any

newcomers, my 2cents

[[DBS]airdoc]

Hi all,

 

I have to say that the 109 cockpit shots are a bit disappointing, especially the first one. I can't offer an explanation on what I don't like in particular, but my overall sense is that it looks a bit "sketchy" instead of realistic. 

I am not jumping in to criticise the dev team, as I have tremendous faith in you guys, and I 'll give you my full support. But I 'd like to say, that when it comes to modelling the cockpit of an aircraft that all flight simmers know very well, the results should be up to the competition. Every flight sim out there includes the 109, but not every one includes the LaGG. So i think that most of us who are already familiar with that cockpit, pretty much felt that these screenshots don't do justice to your work. I 'm sure that your efforts will result in an outstanding 109 cockpit, but I don't think it is a good publicity move to include screenshots of unfinished, "raw" work. Bear in mind that these screenshots will be reposted on flight sim forums, and the whole community is going to start talking about them.

Keep up the good work

[APIKalimba]

Because I don't understand why they are doing wrong instruments. I'm worried we'll end up with cockpits like in the original Il-2 where essential gauges were missing, mislabelled, misscaled and therefore completely useless. Polite questions in that direction have been ignored, so I've changed tone of voice. Not sure it will lead anywhere, but at least I want to try - some folks making most silly posts with lots of huge letters and big silly pictures have gotten a response, so I figure that type of conversation is more successful around here. Sorry for your inconvenience, I'd like to be more civilized and if that turns out to be possible, I'll go back there.

 

I'd prefer if this topic was a discussion with the devs, though, not among us, no offence meant.

With all due respect, how can a virtual 0000 and 11111 graphic representation of a gauge in a video game be useless ?

I am kind of dissapointed reading comments about accuracy at this point. Surely a reminder of very painful threads in the years of making CLOD. I thought 

that those days were finally behind. We have the privilege of having the best team to develop a new HC WW2 sim, and there you go again...Haven't you learned anything ?

Who cares about a missing letter if in the end this sim comes to life with all its improvements ?

Give the gang a break...please...

[JtD]

With all due respect, how can a virtual 0000 and 11111 graphic representation of a gauge in a video game be useless ?

A cylinder temp gauge ranging from 0-130 with the limits being in the 200 range is useless. A fuel gauge showing empty when there still are 15% capacity left is useless. And such. These are my, possibly unfounded, worries.

 

Do you know why there's a red line at 2600 rpm in the screen shots? I don't. But it will probably cause a bit of confusion among those who pay attention - the rpm limit for the DB 601E being 2750 max (or 2500 for combat power and 2700 for emergency), and we're told we can fly the aircraft by the book. I haven't seen an real instrument showing this line. Why put it in? What's the point? Why not leave it out, have less work and a more correct cockpit? I just don't get it.

 

But now that it is in, it actually is an effort to correct it, which given the "we don't have the resources" statements means it might actually stay in. Given that the scope of the "Battle of Stalingrad" has been reduced to only half the battle, the glass is only half full to begin with. I think a little bit of care should be taken to not make it even less full through a number of details.

[MACADEMIC]

BTW, Jason, I suggest that you change to a monthly update schedule (since there weren't any updates the last two Fridays we're almost there anyway)... - The usual whiners will just get their knickers into a bind with weekly updates. Better avoid listening to their constant griping every week. I for one would prefer just to have to face their nonsense once a month... It is not as if there isn't a lot of great flight simming to be done already, what with RoF and CoD, so the real flight simmers out there won't miss a thing, we're having great fun actually playing.  

 

Would have to completely disagree with you there. Really appreciate the regular weekly news and miss them when they're not coming. Just because some people aren't happy with some of the news doesn't mean other poeple don't appreciate them. The majority mostly isn't the most vocal part of the community.

 

MAC

[APIKalimba]

A cylinder temp gauge ranging from 0-130 with the limits being in the 200 range is useless. A fuel gauge showing empty when there still are 15% capacity left is useless. And such. These are my, possibly unfounded, worries.

 

Do you know why there's a red line at 2600 rpm in the screen shots? I don't. But it will probably cause a bit of confusion among those who pay attention - the rpm limit for the DB 601E being 2750 max (or 2500 for combat power and 2700 for emergency), and we're told we can fly the aircraft by the book. I haven't seen an real instrument showing this line. Why put it in? What's the point? Why not leave it out, have less work and a more correct cockpit? I just don't get it.

 

But now that it is in, it actually is an effort to correct it, which given the "we don't have the resources" statements means it might actually stay in. Given that the scope of the "Battle of Stalingrad" has been reduced to only half the battle, the glass is only half full to begin with. I think a little bit of care should be taken to not make it even less full through a number of details.

So JtD, you mean that if those "issues" of yours are not fixed, you will not be able to enjoy the sim ? You mean that those written fictionnal numbers on a fictionnal gauge will have a real impact on

how the sim will behave ? You need absolute accuracy from the sim to be siiting comfortably in your basement, in a comfortable chair, with a  plastic" modern jet" joystick looking at a 2d screen to fully appreciate virtual reality ?

[DD_bongodriver]

For some, inaccurate instruments will be as bad as no Anti Aliasing is for others, people should stop being such sycophantic fanbois and accept there will be criticism........

Edited May 26, 2013 by bongodriver

[Zorin]

JtD, as much as we tend to not get along, I have to agree with you. Either do something right or don't do it at all. There is not a single reason why they keep making these mistakes. They work for months, as we are being told, on a single cockpit and still can't manage to at least get the gauges and labels right. How sad is that?

 

And to all who critizise JtD for saying this out loud, would you not mind the fuel gauge in your car being wrong or the speedometer having a wrong reeadout netting you a ton of speeding tickets? Just for a moment: THINK BEFORE YOU POST YOUR FANBOYISH NONSENSE. These things have to be correct or otherwise there is no point in calling this a SIMULATOR.

Edited May 26, 2013 by Zorin

[JtD]

So JtD, you mean that if those "issues" of yours are not fixed, you will not be able to enjoy the sim? ...

No. I have a tendency to state what I mean, sometimes impolitely honest, so there's no need for you to make silly assumptions. You're free to re-read what I wrote and have a laugh at yourself about what you're trying to read into it. However, if you only want to have silly internet arguments for the sake of them, go find Crumpp and tell him the Allison E4 engine had a supercharger. I'm not available for such nonsense.

[Freycinet]

Ok, so we're down to somebody in here saying openly what amounts to "I'm going to be rude and annoying because that seems to be the only way to elicit answers".... What makes you think that you (of all people in the world) are entitled to the developers giving you their attention? - If it was only you, no problem, but there are hundreds of people out there who all want exclusive access to the developers. How many of you are so convinced of being specially entitled that you decide that you'll just drop all decorum and polite behaviour and start pestering the developers until your little particular issue gets a hearing? Can't you see how intolerable the whole interaction gets for everybody with I dozens deciding that they merit special attention and then souring all threads with bitching and moaning?

 

Well, I'm obviously talking to a wall here. Just amazing how people can't look beyond themselves and maybe get a realistic idea of their place in the bigger view of things... Surely that is not how you act in real life? "Oh, nobody listens to me around the dinner table. I'll just shout and be obnoxious till someone takes notice!"... Huh? 

[Zorin]

Ok, so we're down to somebody in here saying openly what amounts to "I'm going to be rude and annoying because that seems to be the only way to elicit answers".... What makes you think that you (of all people in the world) are entitled to the developers giving you their attention? - If it was only you, no problem, but there are hundreds of people out there who all want exclusive access to the developers. How many of you are so convinced of being specially entitled that you decide that you'll just drop all decorum and polite behaviour and start pestering the developers until your little particular issue gets a hearing? Can't you see how intolerable the whole interaction gets for everybody with I dozens deciding that they merit special attention and then souring all threads with bitching and moaning?

 

Well, I'm obviously talking to a wall here. Just amazing how people can't look beyond themselves and maybe get a realistic idea of their place in the bigger view of things... Surely that is not how you act in real life? "Oh, nobody listens to me around the dinner table. I'll just shout and be obnoxious till someone takes notice!"... Huh? 

 

Ok, I guess we have to make this REALLY simple for you.

 

Something is wrong, someone offers help and advice -> You are greatful and take the advice to make right what was wrong.

 

That has nothing to do with attitude or anything. Just basic logic.

 

Besides, JtD looks beyond himself, cause if he wouldn't do that he would give a damn about you and let you have a game full of errors.

[DUTTENHOFER]

Everyone halt. Hands off the keyboards. Stop developement. There's a red bit on my gauge. The game is ruined.

 

I've been googling around, and it seems like there are a few refurbished 109s with the red tick on the gauge. Maybe this is a something added after the war? How about we go and find out? Or how about we ask the developers their reasoning for putting it in there. What's going on is melodramatic crying and the dismissal of a product that hasn't even been released. You guys really aren't offering help by saying "Why do you do everything wrong?" and "You should put this or that in despite the only source of evidence being my post here."

 

The cockpits look good, and I'm glad to get this kind of communication between developers and fanbase. And if I may put in my personal preference towards the updates, I'd love to see how the damage model looks with the RoF engine. Idk if it's just me, but I'd be more excited to see one dent in a fuselage than 300 pinpoint-accurate gauges.