TrueSky Update - layered clouds

[ATAG_Snapper]

Hey everyone,

 

Take a look at the layered cloud formations in a recent TrueSky update from Team Fusion Simulations. Stunning!!!!

 

 

[343KKT_Kintaro]

Spectacular! Thank you Riley!

 

Something here needs to be pointed out: these clouds do cast shadows beneath them, it's clearly visible on these Wildcats! I hope future videos will show clouds that cast shadows on the ground!

 

Keep going TFS! Never surrender!

 

 

 

Hey! The clouds' shadows are on the sea surface of the sea! So they do cast shadows on water at least!  

[Buzzsaw]

38 minutes ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

Spectacular! Thank you Riley!

 

Something here needs to be pointed out: these clouds do cast shadows beneath them, it's clearly visible on these Wildcats! I hope future videos will show clouds that cast shadows on the ground!

 

Keep going TFS! Never surrender!

 

 

 

Hey! The clouds' shadows are on the sea surface of the sea! So they do cast shadows on water at least!  

Cloud shadows are not yet where they exactly should be relative to the sun position... (are slightly off) we are working on finding where the error is.

[Veteran66]

we will get a Cloud Simulator, great Work

[BOO]

Impressive. Hope the shadows can be worked out. 

[Boomerang]

Wow, looks great, what a difference!

[Buzzsaw]

35 minutes ago, BOO said:

Impressive. Hope the shadows can be worked out. 

I am sure they can... we are hoping Simul's support can help with finding the issue.

[9./JG52_J-HAT]

Awesome, looking really good!

 

Those Martlets though. Not F4Fs? And no yellow circle around the stars? ?

 

(quick note, the video is marked for kids. It disables comments and afaik limits its reach)

[OBT-Mikmak]

The video can now be commented

[BOO]

1 hour ago, 9./JG52_J-HAT said:

 

quick note, the video is marked for kids. It disables comments and afaik limits its reach)

I think we mostly fall into the same bracket ? 

[343KKT_Kintaro]

2 hours ago, 9./JG52_J-HAT said:

Those Martlets though. Not F4Fs? And no yellow circle around the stars? ?

 

 

I think the visible stars on these Martlets do match with 1943 US Navy experimental markings (source: Wikipedia). So I guess that, at least in this video, they are more of a fantasy... as if we were witnessing a Pacific War scene... (indeed, the surface of the water looks as if the used map is Tobruk, which presents a more "tropical" colour of the water). But our Martlets in our Dover game do not have  arrest hooks. In this video, my assumption is that they are simply Martets "in disguise", not real American F4Fs.

 

[9./JG52_J-HAT]

4 hours ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

 

 

I think the visible stars on these Martlets do match with 1943 US Navy experimental markings (source: Wikipedia). So I guess that, at least in this video, they are more of a fantasy... as if we were witnessing a Pacific War scene... (indeed, the surface of the water looks as if the used map is Tobruk, which presents a more "tropical" colour of the water). But our Martlets in our Dover game do not have  arrest hooks. In this video, my assumption is that they are simply Martets "in disguise", not real American F4Fs.

 

Yes, I know they are just our Martlet III ? It was tongue in cheek, alluding to the possibility it could be a Torch tease for the next installment…

 

The Martlet III we have represent what is equivalent (and fought in North Africa) to the USN F4F-3A, ex-Greek models that went to the FAA after Greece fell to the Axis. Notice the long pitot tube, air-intake over the cowling and large single cowl flaps on each side. No folding wing, 4 guns. 
I‘m pretty sure they retained their arrestor hook, but don‘t really know.
In the video some have the 1943 red outline, some don‘t. AFAIK there weren’t any F-3 operating (also not stateside) when this was introduced. Star and Bars on all of them. This also doesn’t fit even the Pacific for the timeframe the model would be active (F-3/F-4). Nor Torch.

 

Anyone feel free to correct of add to what I wrote.

 

So yes, I know it‘s all fictional ? 
 

Edited October 5, 2022 by 9./JG52_J-HAT
Typos

[nachinus]

Really impressive! Im definitely giving clod another go as soon as the update is released. 

[Rapierarch]

Wonderful! Are they static clouds or dynamic?

[343KKT_Kintaro]

8 hours ago, Rapierarch said:

Wonderful! Are they static clouds or dynamic?

 

 

I think it has been said that all the weather, including the clouds, will be static at release of the visual update and dynamic at release of the next add-on (that latter will bring the Dover series up to version 6.0). I trust the TFS people will confirm if whether or not this is correct.

 

BUZZSAW comment:

 

Not correct.... see my later post.

 

[354thFG_Panda_]

Looking very good! Will the colour of the sky be updated as well? It looks too much on the grey side. Would also like to see how the clouds look at sun rise and sunset. Has a lot of potential. 

[SCG_Schneemann]

Yes, the sky/ground colors will be adjusted. It makes no sense to do it now until TrueSky is implemented correctly to see how it affects the visuals. It obviously is on the list before release.

[354thFG_Panda_]

34 minutes ago, SCG_Schneemann said:

Yes, the sky/ground colors will be adjusted. It makes no sense to do it now until TrueSky is implemented correctly to see how it affects the visuals. It obviously is on the list before release.

Thank you!

[No.54_Reddog]

Look cracking. Is there any info on how these are used in the ME yet? What I'm getting at is whether the mission maker simply selects a preset a la DCS or if the mission maker can put clouds exactly where they want.

[Buzzsaw]

1 hour ago, No.54_Reddog said:

Look cracking. Is there any info on how these are used in the ME yet? What I'm getting at is whether the mission maker simply selects a preset a la DCS or if the mission maker can put clouds exactly where they want.

You can custom build systems.... remember the clouds are moving with the winds... and winds vary depending on altitude.

 

So it is not the case of a static set of clouds or cloud layers.

7 hours ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

 

 

I think it has been said that all the weather, including the clouds, will be static at release of the visual update and dynamic at release of the next add-on (that latter will bring the Dover series up to version 6.0). I trust the TFS people will confirm if whether or not this is correct.

 

No, the clouds are not static, winds exist already... and the clouds move.

 

We could have shown you a time lapse video with clouds moving and wind blowing trees/windsocks/etc.  (maybe next update?)

 

What we will not be including is rain/snow/sleet/hail... hoping there will be fog though.

[Buzzsaw]

12 hours ago, 9./JG52_J-HAT said:

Yes, I know they are just our Martlet III ? It was tongue in cheek, alluding to the possibility it could be a Torch tease for the next installment…

 

The Martlet III we have represent what is equivalent (and fought in North Africa) to the USN F4F-3A, ex-Greek models that went to the FAA after Greece fell to the Axis. Notice the long pitot tube, air-intake over the cowling and large single cowl flaps on each side. No folding wing, 4 guns. 
I‘m pretty sure they retained their arrestor hook, but don‘t really know.
In the video some have the 1943 red outline, some don‘t. AFAIK there weren’t any F-3 operating (also not stateside) when this was introduced. Star and Bars on all of them. This also doesn’t fit even the Pacific for the timeframe the model would be active (F-3/F-4). Nor Torch.

 

Anyone feel free to correct of add to what I wrote.

 

So yes, I know it‘s all fictional ? 
 

We are definitely planning on adding other versions of the Martlet in the future.

 

And just to let people know, although it is not in our immediate future, we are now not ruling out going to the Pacific at some time.

 

(subject to alignment with 1C's plans for its other proprietary titles)

[9./JG52_J-HAT]

6 hours ago, Buzzsaw said:

We are definitely planning on adding other versions of the Martlet in the future.

 

And just to let people know, although it is not in our immediate future, we are now not ruling out going to the Pacific at some time.

 

(subject to alignment with 1C's plans for its other proprietary titles)

 

Very glad to hear this! Nice!

[BOO]

7 hours ago, Buzzsaw said:

 

What we will not be including is rain/snow/sleet/hail... hoping there will be fog though.

Is that off the table for good? 

[9./JG52_J-HAT]

And still on the topic of wind, has anything been done to the aircraft being blown away by wind?
I remember this was the case in the initial release, being really bad, and is still the case (maybe to a lesser degree) nowadays. IIRC it had something to do with the ground friction being too low.
 

And while at it, and since I mentioned the ground, the crazy head bounce we got now when rolling for take-off is a bit too much. Will it get toned down at some point?

[343KKT_Kintaro]

2 hours ago, BOO said:

Is that off the table for good? 

 

 

Buzzsaw was answering Rapierarch's question by correcting an assumption of mine which was partially wrong. My reading now is that, indeed, there will be two steps in the implementation:

 

1) At release of the visual update we'll get "clouds moving and wind blowing trees/windsocks/etc."...  but, again, at release of the visual update... "What [TFS] will not be including is rain/snow/sleet/hail... hoping there will be fog though."

 

2) At release of the add-on (version 6.0) TFS will include "rain/snow/sleet/hail..." in the weather engine.

 

So I don't think this is "off the table for good" BOO. Again, this is my reading of Buzzsaw's response. He'll tell us if my reading is correct.

 

 

 

2 hours ago, 9./JG52_J-HAT said:

And while at it, and since I mentioned the ground, the crazy head bounce we got now when rolling for take-off is a bit too much. Will it get toned down at some point?

 

 

I'm not playing the game for five months now, but I can't remember any head bounce when rolling for take-off. When did this problem start J-Hat? Is it older than five months?

 

 

[9./JG52_J-HAT]

52 minutes ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

I'm not playing the game for five months now, but I can't remember any head bounce when rolling for take-off. When did this problem start J-Hat? Is it older than five months?

 

 

 

If I am remembering right:

 

the airfields have always been bouncy. But when the „jello-pilot“ patch introduced G forces pressing your viewpoint down, all the bouncing while rolling for take off got a lot intenser. Must have been a year ago or so.

 

I‘ll check it later again just to make sure I am not remembering wrong.

[BladeMeister]

We're there even clouds in that video? The only thing I was watching were those 4 Barrel Chester Hun destroyers flying in a loose formation. TruSky what???

I'll have to go back and rewatch this later.

 

S!Blade<><

[343KKT_Kintaro]

6 minutes ago, 9./JG52_J-HAT said:

If I am remembering right:

 

the airfields have always been bouncy. But when the „jello-pilot“ patch introduced G forces pressing your viewpoint down, all the bouncing while rolling for take off got a lot intenser. Must have been a year ago or so.

 

I‘ll check it later again just to make sure I am not remembering wrong.

 

 

I'll go back to the game as fast as possible (might take a few supplementary months though) so that I can check this again... but I can't remember any problem with the taxiing manoeuvres on the ground in the last year.

 

 

1 minute ago, BladeMeister said:

We're there even clouds in that video?

 

 

Absolutely not! You can drink another one... and go back to bed...  ?

[JS81Knows]

Was I seeing things or was the blue sea neither from the sea off North Africa or the Channel?? 

 

Is this a hint of the new map?! If not when will it be announced?? Spring (the intended announcement window) was quite a long time ago... 

[Padre*]

15 hours ago, 9./JG52_J-HAT said:

And while at it, and since I mentioned the ground, the crazy head bounce we got now when rolling for take-off is a bit too much. Will it get toned down at some point?

 

Grass fields are always bouncy and uneven in real life. My head was shaking all over the place when I took a flight in a T6 Harvard from an English aerodrome last year. For me it adds to the realism.

 

23 hours ago, Buzzsaw said:

And just to let people know, although it is not in our immediate future, we are now not ruling out going to the Pacific at some time.

 

Let's hope that is a long, long way off in the future. I have nightmares of awfully bleak and uninteresting one sided maps flying over nothing but water from IL-2 1946 days, not to mention those maps could empty a server in minutes.

Edited October 6, 2022 by 334th_Padre*

[343KKT_Kintaro]

38 minutes ago, 334th_Padre* said:

Let's hope that is a long, long way off in the future. I have nightmares of awfully bleak and uninteresting one sided maps flying over nothing but water from IL-2 1946 days, not to mention those maps could empty a server in minutes.

 

 

Oh my God, Padre, you know nothing about the excitement back in the mid/late 2000s, when flying an AIchi D3A loaded with fuel and bombs over the "Battle of the Coral Sea map" (nothing but water!)... the excitement of relying at 100% on your navigation skills in order to find the American fleet on this empty desert... the excitement of finding the fleet at last... through a clouds formation... one hour after the coop has been launched (!)... the excitement of the last climb in formation so that every hikoki in the hikotai is in position before the dive... the enemy shells exploding all around... Attention! in position! airbrakes deployed! Then you dive! and the Yorktown starts growing... and growing... and growing... the shells exploding at a faster pace... then in this dive of madness... at 500 metres only from that dammed flat top, you drop your bombs and immediately recover the levelled flight... you reach the horizontal position just in time to see that your bomber is at one metre over the waves and that, out of your three bombs, two only impacted the carrier... your gunner's dead... your fuel tanks leak... then you realise: "I'll never make it, I'll never go back to the Zuikaku alive"... so you say goodbay to your hikotaicho and comrades, you reach some altitude and you use your gunsight for the last time, this time when the bomb you aim to crash on the target is nothing but your onw plane with you in the cockpit: TENNO HEIKA!!!!! BANZAAAAAAAAAAIIIIIII!!!!!!!!!!

 

Padre, please, do not say again that the Pacific in IL2-1946 was boring.

 

[BOO]

6 hours ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

 

Padre, please, do not say again that the Pacific in IL2-1946 was boring.

 

I’ll save him the trouble. Pacific fighter was dull, uninteresting and badly conceived. 1946 was an utter pile of unchecked nonsense. 
 

combined they were enough for me walk away from flight sims for 10 years.
 

 

[9./JG52_J-HAT]

9 hours ago, 334th_Padre* said:

 

Grass fields are always bouncy and uneven in real life. My head was shaking all over the place when I took a flight in a T6 Harvard from an English aerodrome last year. For me it adds to the realism.

 

 

Let's hope that is a long, long way off in the future. I have nightmares of awfully bleak and uninteresting one sided maps flying over nothing but water from IL-2 1946 days, not to mention those maps could empty a server in minutes.

 

That is good to know. I must admit I tested it again (VR test build, Cross Country in a 109E) and the bouncing seemed normal. 
Probably got fixed along the way then. Or I was imagining things. But I have very clear recollections of the screen going up and down like crazy with TIR in the past though.

[343KKT_Kintaro]

Padre, BOO, Flight simulators are approximations, which improve with time, but approximations. People who complain all the time about simulators' shortcomings are usually people who simply don't understand that. In the mid-2000s the two best combat flight simulators were '46 for warbirds and Lock On for modern jets. And there's no difference between Pacific Fighters and '46, they are exactly the same game as both do share the same engine, though Pacific Fighters is a standalone intended to the Pacific War and '46 is  compilation which gives the name by which now we know the first IL-2 Sturmovik. They are exactly the very same sim. So, BOO, you walked "away from flight sims for 10 years" you say... but... if there were better sims a the time... why did you walked away from sims? maybe because there weren't better ones at the time?

 

Padre, may I suggest you don't mind if others are happy with the development of a modern-standards Pacific War flight simulator? I simply can't understand this kind of negative comment. Peace and love Padre, peace and love. Oh, by the way, you're wrong: in the good old times the two main dogfight servers were "Spit vs 109" (European theatre) and "Zeke vs Wildcat" (Pacific theatre). It was the latter that was always the most crowded.

 

 

[BOO]

I think I understand what a sim is. Please don’t call me ignorant because I’m less easy to please or more easily bored than you are. Or spoon feed me the history. I was around at the time. It’ comes across a little patronising. Since PF and 46 are both DLCs I view them as such. Neither added value to the game for me. Not sure what point you are making about them all being the same engine. Figured that was obvious. 

Whether or not IL2 46 and LOMAC were the best available is moot. Both switched me off for differing reasons (performance of one, boredom with the other). I’m not one to try a ride a dead horse because it’s the only horse around. 

 

We disagree. That’s fine. We are allowed to. 

[No.54_Reddog]

On 10/6/2022 at 12:16 AM, Buzzsaw said:

You can custom build systems.... remember the clouds are moving with the winds... and winds vary depending on altitude.

 

So it is not the case of a static set of clouds or cloud layers.

No, the clouds are not static, winds exist already... and the clouds move.

 

We could have shown you a time lapse video with clouds moving and wind blowing trees/windsocks/etc.  (maybe next update?)

 

What we will not be including is rain/snow/sleet/hail... hoping there will be fog though.

 

Thanks for the reply, that's really encouraging. Its one of the things I dislike about the current DCS implementation that I cannot make the cloud cover over the target reflect what I want, maybe I want it socked in and difficult, or maybe I want the players to have to fly through a front into the clear to get to the target. Very much looking forward to getting my hands on the weather when it's released.

[343KKT_Kintaro]

21 minutes ago, BOO said:

I was around at the time

 

 

Ok... so there weren't flight sims that would have been good enough to you at the time ("at the time", we talk about mid 2000s). Is this what you mean? And you stayed away from flight sims for ten years because of PF and '46... Is this what you mean? So let's say you stayed away from flight sims... from mid 2000s to mid 2010s... this is quite coincident with the 2014 full release of "Battle of Stalingrad" and I guess that "Battle of Stalingrad" is the flight sim that made you are back into flight sims again... is this correct BOO? Kindest regards, and please no ofence, I'm only trying to understand.

 

[BOO]

1 minute ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

 

 

Ok... so there weren't flight sims that would have been good enough to you at the time ("at the time", we talk about mid 2000s). Is this what you mean? And you stayed away from flight sims for ten years because of PF and '46... Is this what you mean? So let's say you stayed away from flight sims... from mid 2000s to mid 2010s... this is quite coincident with the 2014 full release of "Battle of Stalingrad" and I guess that "Battle of Stalingrad" is the flight sim that made you are back into flight sims again... is this correct BOO? Kindest regards, and please no ofence, I'm only trying to understand.

 

Actually it was Clod and a chance Google one day when I was bored.   Had it been Stalingrad I’m not sure I would have come back at that time as it was too much of a mess   

[343KKT_Kintaro]

Just now, BOO said:

Actually it was Clod and a chance Google one day when I was bored.   Had it been Stalingrad I’m not sure I would have come back at that time as it was too much of a mess   

 

 

Hey BOO, I'm very surprised of your answer. I had the opposite feeling at release of IL2CoD, I was extremely disappointed because of the bugs I encountered in the original game in 2011. Then years passed and I purchased Stalingrad in 2015... but didn't install it before 2019. A few days later, still in 2019, I finally understood that the Blitz edition is a renaissance for "Cliffs of Dover"... and then really felt in love with it. I keep buying Great Battles products, I'm eager to seat in the cockpit of my brand new C-47... but for me, in spite of a few problems that I do admit, "Cliffs of Dover - Blitz" is at present the best combat flight sim out there, at least in the survey-type category.

 

 

[BOO]

1 minute ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

 

 

Hey BOO, I'm very surprised of your answer. I had the opposite feeling at release of IL2CoD, I was extremely disappointed because of the bugs I encountered in the original game in 2011. Then years passed and I purchased Stalingrad in 2015... but didn't install it before 2019. A few days later, still in 2019, I finally understood that the Blitz edition is a renaissance for "Cliffs of Dover"... and then really felt in love with it. I keep buying Great Battles products, I'm eager to seat in the cockpit of my brand new C-47... but for me, in spite of a few problems that I do admit, "Cliffs of Dover - Blitz" is at present the best combat flight sim out there, at least in the survey-type category.

 

 

I found it I think just after the 4.312 patch so it’s was playable from the get go. I also went straight into MP so it’s less appealing SP traits did not affect me. I was annoyed and a little disappointed at the release of blitz for my own private reasons. That’s when I joined the SCG squad and came over to BoX.