Jump to content

Developer Diary 273 - Discussion


Recommended Posts

44 minutes ago, CCG_Pips said:

I repeat.......first sight.....😉

Please, remind this post and we will have a new discussion later. I just hope to have to express my apologizes!!!!😉

 

I hope we are both pleased with the outcome.  🍻

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1CGS
1 hour ago, CCG_Pips said:

I repeat.......first sight.....😉

 

As you can see, I buy EVERYTHINGS here................but Rheinlandmap was extremely disappointing for me and what I see here seems to send us to the same kind of map.......Anyway, I do not buy maps, but planes and tanks ......................so.......

 

Please, remind this post and we will have a new discussion later. I just hope to have to express my apologizes!!!!😉


Show me any map, in any sim featuring this part of Europe in WWII of this size with what 70+ historically researched and modeled airfields? If we had focused on cities you would be complaining that the airfields were not historically laid out and ‘generic’. Only so many hours in the day.

 

Jason

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 22
Link to post
Share on other sites

@Jason_WilliamsTyphoon and Spit IXe plus and updated Rheinland map - it's 99% complete (adding the B-26 and Ar 234 would make would make it 100%). Do that and I just might have your baby! :wacko:

Edited by JG7_X-Man
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Jason_Williams said:


Show me any map, in any sim featuring this part of Europe in WWII of this size with what 70+ historically researched and modeled airfields? If we had focused on cities you would be complaining that the airfields were not historically laid out and ‘generic’. Only so many hours in the day.

 

Jason

 

Precisely, you were only focused in big cities with lots of details like cathedrals.

 

That's very good, well done! you did, also very nice Air bases, nothing to complain about.

 

But a map is not just that. I will not go over the many defaults of the Rheinland map, which I would not like to see repeated with the Normandy one.

 

We're not going to argue, I'm very happy with the game overall and its already announced future, but that's no reason to blissfully endorse all your decisions or choices.

 

For example, sacrificing quality for the large size of the maps is a choice that can be debated. After all, I am the customer and I have the right to say if something is bothering me.

An empty Normandy map between cities (as it is the case with Rheinland), with beaches as ugly as those on the Dutch coast on Rheinland would be a big disappointment.

 

But no problem at all, I would continue to be a "good customer" since the game does not stop at maps and material (planes and tanks) is of a very high level.

 

Pips

Edited by CCG_Pips
  • Upvote 14
Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, JG7_X-Man said:

 Excluding MSFS - NONE!

 

MSFS doesn't have to dig up airfields that have been gone for nearly 80 years, they just automatically adapt public and satellite data (and even then, Germany is still missing a few airports etc), and that's with the backing of Microsoft's money and thousands and thousands of employees

 

The maps we have are already great for most combat purposes, and considering the small size of the dev team they're extremely impressive imo

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 9
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have one question about Normandy map, will you model the map with and without destructions from allied bombing?

Le Havre has been flattened in summer 1944 and seeing your first screenshot the city is intact.

Same goes for many cities like Falaise and so on...

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, FAW-Tromplamort said:

I have one question about Normandy map, will you model the map with and without destructions from allied bombing?

Le Havre has been flattened in summer 1944 and seeing your first screenshot the city is intact.

Same goes for many cities like Falaise and so on...

The maps (aside from Stalingrad) default to intact, then in the mission editor you can set level of destruction.

  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, =621=Samikatz said:

 

MSFS doesn't have to dig up airfields that have been gone for nearly 80 years, they just automatically adapt public and satellite data (and even then, Germany is still missing a few airports etc), and that's with the backing of Microsoft's money and thousands and thousands of employees

 

The maps we have are already great for most combat purposes, and considering the small size of the dev team they're extremely impressive imo

You are right, i even like to fly in Stalingrad. One of the most iconic Maps of il2

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

5 minutes ago, =621=Samikatz said:

 

MSFS doesn't have to dig up airfields that have been gone for nearly 80 years, they just automatically adapt public and satellite data (and even then, Germany is still missing a few airports etc), and that's with the backing of Microsoft's money and thousands and thousands of employees

 

The maps we have are already great for most combat purposes, and considering the small size of the dev team they're extremely impressive imo

 

Further to this, many people seem to think that MSFS models ground detail to a better degree than it actually does. Excluding hand-crafted stuff (some airports, points of interest), and possibly the few cities modelled through photogrammetry (which has issues of its own), the level of detail that MSFS provides simply wouldn't be acceptable for an air combat sim which emphasises low-level action. MSFS is untended to model the whole (present day) world at the sort of detail that looks good unzoomed from a couple of thousand feet. It does a very good job of it. That's all it does. The technology involved simply isn't capable of modelling the environment at a significantly greater level of detail, because the data source, satellite imagery, is two-dimensional, and lacks the resolution to model smaller objects.

  • Upvote 5
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Jason_Williams said:


Show me any map, in any sim featuring this part of Europe in WWII of this size with what 70+ historically researched and modeled airfields? If we had focused on cities you would be complaining that the airfields were not historically laid out and ‘generic’. Only so many hours in the day.

 

Jason

Here you go

Five's Maps - WWII OnLine Wiki

 

WWIIOL did it twenty years ago. Per Wikipedia,

"It uses a ½ scale map of Western Europe with 52,000 km2 (20,077 sq mi) of accurate terrain (800 m resolution satellite data)."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_Online

 

For the record - I don't have a dog in this fight. WWIIOL is a crappy game now so it may be a moot point but it's not like it hasn't been done before. I like this game minus the obsession catering to single player gamers but you asked a question and I have answered it for you. Hopefully you found it helpful, informative and creatively inspiring.

 

If I still have your attention, please add more netcode support, would love 200 capacity servers. Thank you ❤️

Edited by Enigma89
  • Confused 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1CGS
3 minutes ago, Enigma89 said:

Here you go

Five's Maps - WWII OnLine Wiki

 

WWIIOL did it twenty years ago. Per Wikipedia,

"It uses a ½ scale map of Western Europe with 52,000 km2 (20,077 sq mi) of accurate terrain (800 m resolution satellite data)."

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_Online

 

Ah yes WWI Online. Was so ambitious in its day. I played it in the beginning way back when. I would hardly say it's apples to apples though. 

 

Jason

  • Upvote 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Jason_Williams said:

 

Ah yes WWI Online. Was so ambitious in its day. I played it in the beginning way back when. I would hardly say it's apples to apples though. 

 

Jason

Fair point.

Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, Jason_Williams said:

. I played it in the beginning way back when

 

Yeah you was not alone sir.  I was young and beautiful when i was flying over this map. I'm just beautiful now only. 

  • Haha 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest deleted@210880
1 hour ago, Enigma89 said:

 

 minus the obsession catering to single player gamers

 

 

 

You're off your rocker.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Jason_Williams said:


Show me any map, in any sim featuring this part of Europe in WWII of this size with what 70+ historically researched and modeled airfields? If we had focused on cities you would be complaining that the airfields were not historically laid out and ‘generic’. Only so many hours in the day.

 

Jason

Looks gorgeous, can't wait to fly my  Griffon around there, and do some night ops in the flying piano.

 

 

 

Has any tweaks been made in terms of the graphics to help FPS? Understand if it's in the no comment not ready situation.

 

Looks very detailed so I'm curious how hard it's going to hit us performance wise! Or is it about the same as Velikie?

 

 

 

 

Edited by Denum
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have wondered about mission planning for the the Arado 234.I remember it being really well modeled in the original IL-2 1946 but pretty useless ( for me) in game play. I can see with the new map some photo recon possibilities but I’m betting SM & Campaign use will be pretty limited both in number & type of missions based mostly in getting in & getting out ( and taking photos?) That beggars the question will we be able to take pictures & if so how a successful mission & its corresponding photos be judged?

Jason,would you take a moment to give us your thoughts?

Link to post
Share on other sites

RoF carreer had very nice recon mission where you had to take pictures at the right place or "item" the right item.

As the mission builders are very similar in both product, it may be possible to have immersive reco mission (and I wish we had some, not only for the Ar234)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Without info from Jason I’m guessing that some intrepid mission builder might do mini scripted campaigns for the 234 much like those done for the Ju-52 ( & possibly the upcoming C-47 as well...I hope,I hope?????)

To my knowledge no other aircraft in BoX are camera equipped but there are of course possible candidates. Again the small number of missions possible might not be worth the developers investment. I have a feeling most players would rather have “Brownings “ rather than a “Brownie”....😉

BTW Flying Circus does have two seaters with cameras , but I haven’t tried o use them

Edited by Blitzen
Spelling
Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Can anyone remember if they've said the map will also feature an earlier war version to allow Rhubarbs and Circuses from 1941 onwards too, or is it solely modelled on '43-'44?

 

von Tom

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, von_Tom said:

 

 

Can anyone remember if they've said the map will also feature an earlier war version to allow Rhubarbs and Circuses from 1941 onwards too, or is it solely modelled on '43-'44?

 

von Tom

Map is set in 1944. Planed carrer is to be whole in 1944, they just said they gona do pre-invasion setup and post invasion set up, thats the only thing i remenber they said about differant versions of map, nothing about making 1941-42-43-44 versions of map, they just gona make pre and post invasion airbases setup as ALG bases needs to be added after D-Day. But in MP or other SP no one stops people from using pre invasion map for earlyer events, there just aint gona be bases lie they looked in 41, but they will be how they looked in 44 pre invasion.

 

From BoN anouncet topic:

We plan to have two versions of the map. There will be both pre-Invasion and post-Invasion versions.

Edited by CountZero
Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Blitzen said:

I have wondered about mission planning for the the Arado 234.I remember it being really well modeled in the original IL-2 1946 but pretty useless ( for me) in game play. I can see with the new map some photo recon possibilities but I’m betting SM & Campaign use will be pretty limited both in number & type of missions based mostly in getting in & getting out ( and taking photos?) That beggars the question will we be able to take pictures & if so how a successful mission & its corresponding photos be judged?

Jason,would you take a moment to give us your thoughts?

 

Why was it useless for you?

 

I flew it on a bunch of IL-2 1946 scenarios mostly attacking the kinds of things that it was good at hitting. Especially bridges.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I loved it. Used it a lot on the 'mountain' map, whatever that was called. Great fun, especially in bad weather.

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/26/2021 at 7:08 PM, AndyJWest said:

 

 

Further to this, many people seem to think that MSFS models ground detail to a better degree than it actually does. Excluding hand-crafted stuff (some airports, points of interest), and possibly the few cities modelled through photogrammetry (which has issues of its own), the level of detail that MSFS provides simply wouldn't be acceptable for an air combat sim which emphasises low-level action. MSFS is untended to model the whole (present day) world at the sort of detail that looks good unzoomed from a couple of thousand feet. It does a very good job of it. That's all it does. The technology involved simply isn't capable of modelling the environment at a significantly greater level of detail, because the data source, satellite imagery, is two-dimensional, and lacks the resolution to model smaller objects.

I'm doubting you have played MSFS to say it doesn't model ground detail good enough for low level action. The objects are being generated with centimeters accuracy and I'm sure if you push the AI tech behind it it could differentiate a well from a doghouse. Not to derail the topic to a rival sim, but in my opinion it's a simmers dream and I would die for the same lighting, clouds and world detail in IL2. But we're talking different budgets, different team size, different resources and I'm absolutely fine with that.

 

I just hope some lessons learned by rivals to efficiently generate convincing simulated worlds by computer tech / artificial intelligence would benefit 1C in the future apart from their in-house tech. It's an exciting time for us simmers.

  • Upvote 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, von_Tom said:

 

 

Can anyone remember if they've said the map will also feature an earlier war version to allow Rhubarbs and Circuses from 1941 onwards too, or is it solely modelled on '43-'44?

 

von Tom

 

Yes, Jason stated that the map can be used for the period 1941-1944. I think there will be a pre-invasion version without the ALGs so you can do all kind of interesting things like Operation Jubilee. Of course, don't expect all airfields in the UK to be 100% accurate for any given date, so I guess we'll have to live with having some airfields being there that didn't exist in 1942 etc.

 

47 minutes ago, longjap said:

I'm doubting you have played MSFS to say it doesn't model ground detail good enough for low level action. The objects are being generated with centimeters accuracy and I'm sure if you push the AI tech behind it it could differentiate a well from a doghouse. Not to derail the topic to a rival sim, but in my opinion it's a simmers dream and I would die for the same lighting, clouds and world detail in IL2. But we're talking different budgets, different team size, different resources and I'm absolutely fine with that.

 

I just hope some lessons learned by rivals to efficiently generate convincing simulated worlds by computer tech / artificial intelligence would benefit 1C in the future apart from their in-house tech. It's an exciting time for us simmers.

 

Yes, the generated buildings are very detailed and good looking. But now fly in MSFS and do a mock bombing run on an average bridge and you will see what is meant by Andy. It looks pretty shitty tbh, the fake overlay roads, the course textures, the AI cars teleporting... This was not meant to be seen up close. Can it be improved with their tech? Absolutely, but I doubt it will be Asobo's priority to cater for combat sim requirements.

 

Edited by SYN_Vander
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Han unpinned this topic

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...