Developer blog# 346: Li-2 Paratroopers, Flying Circus Update, Normandy Screenshot Contest

[RoteDreizehn]

I must say IckyAtlas is not wrong. Indeed you told as new things without show the new advantages.

I saw your Roadmap until 2024 and i am please for the ta152. But for me it isnt enough for advantages in the Sim Engine itself.

 

Compared with Movers, Gonky and Wombat last interview with Matthew (Wags) there are Worlds between this.
Matthew is really a hero in the Simulator Scene.
 

Admitted - you havent the same dev resources. But matthew shows us his enthusiasm and their will
to make some things better.
 

Sorry LukeFF is not to blame you here - but the Devs should show us a little more that we have trust in their...

Edited August 11, 2023 by RoteDreizehn

[Avimimus]

2 hours ago, simfan2015 said:

I personally love the 2023-2024 GB roadmap. 

In fact I never expected any new GB content once I learned about their 'new project', so I was truly surprised about it! 

We have sufficient WWII content in GB as it is (and will be by the end of 2024) . It was not enough FC and TC content and maps that is not yet present in GB. 

 

Well, in an ideal world we'd get a modules with '44/'45 Soviet planes (to complete WWII) and get a Channel Map for FC (with the rest of the Rise of Flight content and a few additional aircraft to fill in some gaps). I am hoping there is enough backwards compatibility to make this possible. We'll see.

 

 

3 hours ago, Holtzauge said:

@ZachariasX & @Avimimus: A bit late to the party here, but concerning the drag of bracing wires & rods, we had a quite interesting discussion on The Aerodrome forum about that.  Totally orthogonal to the subject of the thread title but interesting nonetheless.

 

My take from this was that the vanilla braided wires as used by the Germans contributed quite a lot to the parasitic drag (up to 15%!) while the profiled rods used on the British planes cut it drastically.

 

The discussion begins on page 12 with a post by HoHun and goes on from there. Given your discussion earlier on in this thread I think you may find The Aerodrome discussion interesting as well. 

 

Thanks! This is very interesting. I often find The Aerodrome a bit hard to navigate (partly because the automatic locking of threads leads to thread duplication.. so one has to set up searches to find the info)... so I really appreciate the link!

[Avimimus]

 

54 minutes ago, RoteDreizehn said:

I must say IckyAtlas is not wrong. Indeed you told as new things without show the new advantages.

I saw your Roadmap until 2024 and i am please for the ta152. But for me it isnt enough for advantages in the Sim Engine itself.

 

IkcyAtlas was factually wrong on a few points: The reality is that a roadmap has been released, devs are not focussed on WWI (but rather are focussing on the new module), they are significantly improving map technology (just not for already released maps), there were a lot of new technologies released in the last development cycle (e.g. massive damage model rework, addition of dynamically forming bullet holes, new clouds). All of these statements are based on publicly released information.

 

As for the DCS interview - an astute observer will notice that there is very little that was mentioned or announce that wasn't already announced several months, or in some cases, two or three years earlier. It didn't substantially expand or clarify the DCS roadmap...

 

I think, if one pays enough attention, one finds that the differences in the amount of information available about development aren't as large as you think. Even comparing the DCS whitepapers with some of the information in past development updates (e.g. about the math behind ballistic calculations or gee force simulation) is pretty similar.

[ITAF_Rani]

58 minutes ago, RoteDreizehn said:

w your Roadmap until 2024 and i am please for the ta152

Ta 152 could introduce a new scenery like East Germany/Hungary 1945?

[LuftManu]

I can't see neither any problem with content. We even have some details about the next project, said by Han in offtopic and the video from last year (not even a year). We also know that content like we are used to (collector aircraft) is confirmed up to 2024 for both WW1 and WW2. Maybe we have more suprirses? who knows, but I remember pictures from a Finland map in the forum. I hope that thing becomes real down the road! but it was never announced.

 

I think the "Sim Engine content" some talk about will come with the next project. How? we will know when the team is ready to tell us more, but taking into account the team was really happy in the comments made by Han makes me think we will have a great surprise ?

 

 

Kind regards,

 

 

[RoteDreizehn]

5 hours ago, ITAF_Rani said:

Ta 152 could introduce a new scenery like East Germany/Hungary 1945?

 

maybe, hope for it - its sad that C3 will not come. H1 is only usable at 9000 M (29527 Feet) or 11000 M (36089 Feet) and above with GM1

Edited August 11, 2023 by RoteDreizehn

[Avimimus]

30 minutes ago, RoteDreizehn said:

maybe, hope for it - its sad that C3 will not come. H1 is only usable at 9000 KM (29527 Feet) or 11000 KM (36089 Feet) and above with GM1

 

Apparently most actual combat with the H1 ended up happening at lower altitudes though... I was a bit surprised when this was pointed out to me.

[RoteDreizehn]

28 minutes ago, Avimimus said:

 

Apparently most actual combat with the H1 ended up happening at lower altitudes though... I was a bit surprised when this was pointed out to me.

 

This is a great explaination. Pls ignore the Swatiska, this is historical nothing to do with nowadays...

 

Polare -> 33:12 

 

Spoiler

 

 

 

Edited August 11, 2023 by RoteDreizehn

[BMA_FlyingShark]

6 minutes ago, RoteDreizehn said:

Pls ignore the Swatiska, this is historical nothing to do with nowadays

We know but it's a rule and will be moderated if you don't put your vid in a spoiler.

I personally couldn't care less but I prefer to tell you.

 

Have a nice day.

 

[LukeFF]

6 hours ago, AEthelraedUnraed said:

For example, the soldiers would hugely benefit from having German and Soviet variants. Right now, they are basically useless for Tank Crew, which is the part where they would make the greatest impact. Implementing this seems a question of simply re-rigging the already-existing German and Soviet soldier models.

 

I agree, but it has to be remembered that these animated soldiers were made primarily to go along with the Normandy beach landing scenes. Plus, I imagine that if animated Soviet and German soldiers were made they would also take the time to update what are now quite old 3D models.

[Avimimus]

27 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

I agree, but it has to be remembered that these animated soldiers were made primarily to go along with the Normandy beach landing scenes. Plus, I imagine that if animated Soviet and German soldiers were made they would also take the time to update what are now quite old 3D models.

 

Ahh... yes, I know... still... it doesn't keep me from at least wanting a static PTRD crew or a PIAT. Maybe someday, eh? One can dream.

[LukeFF]

2 minutes ago, Avimimus said:

Ahh... yes, I know... still... it doesn't keep me from at least wanting a static PTRD crew or a PIAT. Maybe someday, eh? One can dream.

 

Hopefully! I have seen a lot of renders of the new soldiers for the new project, and they are a quite noticeable improvement from what we have now. ? The Caliber developers have been a great help in this endeavor. 

 

3 hours ago, RoteDreizehn said:

Sorry LukeFF is not to blame you here - but the Devs should show us a little more that we have trust in their...

 

Well, as has been said, a different approach is being taken with this new project. Not much is worse in game development than announcing a whole slew of new features and then having to backtrack on them because they didn't work out. When the new project is ready to be announced, it'll be announced. ?

[Avimimus]

Yes, objectively it makes the most sense for developers to keep quiet about features/content until they are sure they can complete it - and it also makes sense for them to wait until closer to release to begin advertising it. I suppose the exception would be if they needed help researching something

 

But subjectively, I want pretty images and new features to make my dreams more colourful! So, at heart, I find myself wishing for the developers to be unwise and share earlier.

 

I even like the IAR-80/81 pre-order... the longer period from announcement/pre-order to release means more time to look forward to it. ? Some people feel otherwise though, so I understand the decision to delay pre-orders.

[AEthelraedUnraed]

5 hours ago, LukeFF said:

I agree, but it has to be remembered that these animated soldiers were made primarily to go along with the Normandy beach landing scenes.

Well yes, but that is exactly the point. They do give us what they promised, but then usually don't go the extra mile to make it really stand out. In this case, a bit of extra effort would have turned a fully cosmetic feature into something actually useful that IMO could have been game changing for Tank Crew. I guess Flying Circus as well could have benefited; giving air support during some of the infamous mass assaults, or trying to stop some advancing platoons of Germans during Operation Michael sounds like good fun as well as screenshot material for your sales department.

 

5 hours ago, LukeFF said:

Plus, I imagine that if animated Soviet and German soldiers were made they would also take the time to update what are now quite old 3D models.

True for the Soviet soldiers as well as the German winter uniform, but all of the German vehicles/artillery since Bodenplatte already use an updated soldier model of a similar quality to the platoon "vehicles". The existing FC soldier models are of a similar quality too.

 

4 hours ago, Avimimus said:

Yes, objectively it makes the most sense for developers to keep quiet about features/content until they are sure they can complete it - and it also makes sense for them to wait until closer to release to begin advertising it. I suppose the exception would be if they needed help researching something

I absolutely understand they wait with announcing anything definite until they're sure they can deliver. But I think there's a lot more that can (should) be announced than is the case now; currently the only thing we know is that it's a combat flight simulator featuring propeller aircraft. I think Combat Pilot actually does this really well; they haven't really announced anything except that it's a flight sim about the Battle of Midway that includes at least the Akagi and the Zero (which is pretty much a given) but that's enough to know more-or-less what we can expect.

 

I think that if the Devs would answer at least some basic questions about whether or not the current content, including missions, is compatible with the "new project," it would serve to allay some of the reservations Icky and I have about developing new missions for a product that's potentially nearing End-Of-Life.

Edited August 11, 2023 by AEthelraedUnraed

[Avimimus]

2 hours ago, AEthelraedUnraed said:

I think that if the Devs would answer at least some basic questions about whether or not the current content, including missions, is compatible with the "new project," it would serve to allay some of the reservations Icky and I have about developing new missions for a product that's potentially nearing End-Of-Life.

 

Yes, that is my main source of concern too. The nature of software development means that it is quite possible for even the devs to be uncertain how much backwards compatibility will exist (or how much it will cost to maintain) - especially if they are pushing forward rapidly in upgrading the engine in multiple core areas.

 

Of course, I also have an ulterior motive - if there isn't backwards compatibility they could spend a decade gradually rebuilding all of the existing content from scratch. However, if there is backwards compatibility, it would mean that they'd have to build more unusual theatres, aircraft, more WWI aircraft - and other things we haven't seen in a sim before...

 

That said, we're already getting some of this (e.g. we should be pretty glad that they are adding WWII artillery spotting, photorecon, and transport missions, gliders - things ignored in most sims up to this point).

 

 

2 hours ago, AEthelraedUnraed said:

Well yes, but that is exactly the point. They do give us what they promised, but then usually don't go the extra mile to make it really stand out. In this case, a bit of extra effort would have turned a fully cosmetic feature into something actually useful that IMO could have been game changing for Tank Crew. I guess Flying Circus as well could have benefited; giving air support during some of the infamous mass assaults, or trying to stop some advancing platoons of Germans during Operation Michael sounds like good fun as well as screenshot material for your sales department.

 

For WWI infantry assets also potentially act as targets behind the front, the fire from their weapons posses a threat to low-flying aircraft, and one can do things like contact patrols (i.e. where orders or supplies would be dropped to some of the more isolated forward positions in no-man's land). There were a lot more types of interactions between aircraft and infantry in WWI than just supporting massed assaults. It'd be very cool if such features appear in this engine someday.

 

P.S. Red Baron II had massed infantry assaults, although they were removed from Red Baron 3d. They used 2d sprites I believe. But it was only for massed charges, and honestly, it was less interesting than the Rise of Flight mods and mods in other sims where you could attack infantry behind the lines.

[BlitzPig_EL]

So, you are thinking that the next project will be WW2?   No need to make any of this compatible with the new project if it is set in a different time frame.

 

Just sayin'.

[Avimimus]

1 hour ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

So, you are thinking that the next project will be WW2?   No need to make any of this compatible with the new project if it is set in a different time frame.

 

Just sayin'.

 

Well, the more compatibility there is, the more the existing product line can benefit from engine upgrades (e.g. improved weather, improved AI). That is a major benefit, and would help boost/sustain WWII/WWI sales.

 

Even an early jet simulator might benefit from a few points of overlap (e.g. The Korean War had the U-2VS, F-51, C-47, Li-2, Yak-9, Tu-2S, A-26). So that is at least seven aircraft (and there may be a few more which overlap). Also, while the F.8 Meteor is too different from the WWII Meteors to have much overlap, the P-80A and P-80C could probably be modelled at the same time without requiring that much additional research or programming effort.

 

So it is desirable to find a way to ensure at least some backwards compatibility.

[Enceladus828]

23 hours ago, LukeFF said:

Well, as has been said, a different approach is being taken with this new project. Not much is worse in game development than announcing a whole slew of new features and then having to backtrack on them because they didn't work out.

I totally get that but new features that the devs are not 100% sure if they can work as intended (I hope all will work as intended) imo should impede them from telling us where the next installment will be (Okay, maybe a carrier based battle but we have Combat Pilot for that).

They could tell us if the next installment will take place in either the ETO or PTO including South East Asia without giving away which battle it is. There are plenty of battles in Europe that would sell well and there are plenty of places in the PTO that can be covered without overlapping with Combat Pilot.

 

Cheers.

Edited August 12, 2023 by Enceladus

[RNAS10_Mitchell]

If they tell us thier plans now, they will be busy responding to guestions, countering false rumors, defending decisions,  etc..  Besides, I'd bet many design decisions are still being made as they progress and really determine what they can actually do, what will be impossible,  and what will be possible,  but not cost effective.    I would also suspect that marketing will want an impressive final announcement that includes eye candy, and actual deliverable content teasers.  At anyrate, I don't think they will comment until they are ready.   We can certainly  wish they would tell us tons of information regarding a not yet product, but tbh, I wouldn't  expect  them to.

 

Cheers

Edited August 13, 2023 by RNAS10_Mitchell

[JG27_Steini]

On 8/11/2023 at 4:45 PM, LuftManu said:

I can't see neither any problem with content. We even have some details about the next project, said by Han in offtopic and the video from last year (not even a year). We also know that content like we are used to (collector aircraft) is confirmed up to 2024 for both WW1 and WW2. Maybe we have more suprirses? who knows, but I remember pictures from a Finland map in the forum. I hope that thing becomes real down the road! but it was never announced.

 

I think the "Sim Engine content" some talk about will come with the next project. How? we will know when the team is ready to tell us more, but taking into account the team was really happy in the comments made by Han makes me think we will have a great surprise ?

 

 

Kind regards,

 

 

 

Thx for sharing again. I miss some important things on the list. It all just sound only better graphics. Game graphics are now from good to great (models). Makes me pessimistic again that the worst current feature (problems with AI and/or mission design) will again the worst part of the game. Sounds for me that the new project is just an (graphical) iteration, not a real new engine that would solve many problems. It seems that developer like to talk about design and less about functions. It is frustrating for me that more important features never will been talked about, like there is an firewall  that will block everything they are not able to develop. Maybe some one can tell me why we get every year a new graphic feature and other featues still do not work as intended.

Edited August 13, 2023 by JG27_Steini

[LuftManu]

1 hour ago, JG27_Steini said:

 

Thx for sharing again. I miss some important things on the list. It all just sound only better graphics. Game graphics are now from good to great (models). Makes me pessimistic again that the worst current feature (problems with AI and/or mission design) will again the worst part of the game. Sounds for me that the new project is just an (graphical) iteration, not a real new engine that would solve many problems. It seems that developer like to talk about design and less about functions. It is frustrating for me that more important features never will been talked about, like there is an firewall  that will block everything they are not able to develop. Maybe some one can tell me why we get every year a new graphic feature and other featues still do not work as intended.

Hello Steini,

We have to wait until the team decides to show what the new project is. I am sure they roam these forums and also know what the player base wants. Remember that we don't know anything yet so we can't know what will come and what won't. And yes, some base features were mentioned in the video last year, like AI or better tech in general.

 

 

[JG27_Steini]

2 hours ago, LuftManu said:

Hello Steini,

We have to wait until the team decides to show what the new project is. I am sure they roam these forums and also know what the player base wants. Remember that we don't know anything yet so we can't know what will come and what won't. And yes, some base features were mentioned in the video last year, like AI or better tech in general.

 

 

 

Thank you for your optimistic point of view. I would like to now what approach they make in the new project. I just found it interesting that this list shows nearly only graphic features and i am sure that the average flight simer is more interesseted in technical aspects. So, that makes me think about this list. It is like they promote a new "shiny " product for new customers but not the "old" simers wishing important features the series, so far, did not have. Thanks.

 

Do you have the link for interview last year. Thank you.

Edited August 13, 2023 by JG27_Steini

[LuftManu]

2 minutes ago, JG27_Steini said:

 

Thank you for your optimistic point of view. I would like to now what approach they make in the new project. I just found it interesting that this list shows nearly only graphic features and i am sure that the average flight simer is more interesseted in technical aspects. So, that makes me think about this list. It is like they promote a new "shiny " product for new customers but not the "old" simers wishing important features the series, so far, did not have. Thanks.

 

Do you have the link for interview last year. Thank you.

 

 ?

 

 

Kind regards,

[FuriousMeow]

Considering the frequency that some request a new engine be used, specifically the Unreal 5 engine even though it is not good for flight sims, the graphics improvements were probably highlighted because of that.

[Enceladus828]

19 hours ago, LuftManu said:

We have to wait until the team decides to show what the new project is.

Do these new features affect what scenario they do or what planes will be included? 
If they do Sicily they could tell us the new aircraft, map dimensions, and pilot career timeframe. Then later when the new features are ready to be revealed they could have a separate announcement.

[ITAF_Rani]

5 hours ago, Enceladus said:

If they do Sicily they could tell us the new aircraft, map dimensions, and pilot career timeframe

Unfortunately as Jason stated Sicily seems to be out question..

[LuftManu]

7 hours ago, Enceladus said:

Do these new features affect what scenario they do or what planes will be included? 
If they do Sicily they could tell us the new aircraft, map dimensions, and pilot career timeframe. Then later when the new features are ready to be revealed they could have a separate announcement.

I guess we have to wait for the team to gives us more info ?