Brief Room Episode 24: Edit Everything

[LukeFF]

Hey comrades! In Dev Brief #24 we share what new capabilities the editor has in Korea and how it will improve the sim.

 

You can watch the video here: 

 

 

[CzechTexan]

Very good and informative video.  This will allow maps to be made much faster.  The smaller Pacific islands could be made very quickly, when the time comes for that.

[actionhank1786]

This is a lot of awesome information. I know one of my favorite things in the original Il-2 was trying to throw together custom airbases and hidden parking areas along roads on the Finland map to try and make some road bases for planes, but it was always a little difficult not having any control over the terrain or the roads. You were stuck just having what was there. 

This looks like an incredible amount of editing being able to be done for mission makers. 

[AEthelraedUnraed]

This is perhaps the most exciting video yet! They were spot on with many of the current issues of the Editor and what they came up with sounds good. It seems that there's a lot of great improvements coming.

[Avimimus]

Regarding the tools and smoothing for roads - It might be good to have:

- Strong elevation smoothing rules for railways (maximum grades/slopes tend to be quite low compared to vehicular roads, due to the difficult locomotives have producing traction).

- It might also be a good idea to have rules where you can only join railways if the splines line up perfectly at the joint (to require simulating a smooth switch/turnout).

 

It would also be great to have rules to allow applying different types of foliage (to make it easier for artists to create realistic changes in plant/forest types depending on altitude, latitude, and rainfall. Such a tool could be very useful in the long run and make it easier to make a very varied map.

[LuftManu]

Seems like a great inclusion! The new basis are cool!

Kind regards,

[Aapje]

@LukeFF

 

It would be nice if you'd consider a more lenient policy for the new engine for loading edited and new maps. This would probably generate a lot of user content, adding value to the game that 1GCS doesn't have to make, but that increases sales. Also, it could provide a much easier and more rewarding way for people to learn the map-making tools. Remember that one of the amateur map makers even joined IL-2, so this could even be a way to recruit new employees, who have already build up expertise in their free time.

 

It could be particular helpful for the Pacific, as it is probably relatively easy to create Pacific maps centered around smaller islands (especially when we also have carriers), that are not worth creating an entire module around. For example, the Battle of Peleliu might be an interesting setting for a campaign, but is probably too insignificant for a full module.

 

[deathmisser]

37 minutes ago, Aapje said:

@LukeFF

 

It would be nice if you'd consider a more lenient policy for the new engine for loading edited and new maps. This would probably generate a lot of user content, adding value to the game that 1GCS doesn't have to make, but that increases sales. Also, it could provide a much easier and more rewarding way for people to learn the map-making tools. Remember that one of the amateur map makers even joined IL-2, so this could even be a way to recruit new employees, who have already build up expertise in their free time.

 

It could be particular helpful for the Pacific, as it is probably relatively easy to create Pacific maps centered around smaller islands (especially when we also have carriers), that are not worth creating an entire module around. For example, the Battle of Peleliu might be an interesting setting for a campaign, but is probably too insignificant for a full module.

 

Yes stuff like this would be great and would guarantee a longer life span for IL-2 : Next generation. (I hate calling it Korea especially when more modules will be added) 

[Jackfraser24]

3 hours ago, CzechTexan said:

Very good and informative video.  This will allow maps to be made much faster.  The smaller Pacific islands could be made very quickly, when the time comes for that.

Maybe they could expand the map to include all of Korea and the relevant parts of Northeast China if they wanted to, right?

[Jade_Monkey]

As someone who spent a million hours in the editor, this is great news!!

I hope they spent some time making the editor more stable and do away with crashes. The GB version was very prone to getting overwhelmed and crashing. 

 

Massive news: undo button, new airfield pathways, more complex triggers, terrain and road editor, city and texture editor. Huge leap, love it.

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

Painting on textures is great future, where infranty stay environment change.

[Juri_JS]

The new mission editor options look really interesting. What I didn't fully understand is, if the new complex triggers require writing scripts or if this was a misunderstanding on my side.

Edited April 17 by Juri_JS

[Stonehouse]

21 minutes ago, Juri_JS said:

if the new complex triggers require writing scripts

It would be nice to have both. Complex triggers using editor elements and conditions (it would be great if the conditions themselves could be more complex as well and include ANDs and ORs etc) plus be able to execute a script via a trigger for those people able to code. It may then be possible to create a community library/repository of scripts which could be reused by mission builders. 

[AEthelraedUnraed]

11 hours ago, Aapje said:

It would be nice if you'd consider a more lenient policy for the new engine for loading edited and new maps. This would probably generate a lot of user content, adding value to the game that 1GCS doesn't have to make, but that increases sales. Also, it could provide a much easier and more rewarding way for people to learn the map-making tools. Remember that one of the amateur map makers even joined IL-2, so this could even be a way to recruit new employees, who have already build up expertise in their free time.

 

It could be particular helpful for the Pacific, as it is probably relatively easy to create Pacific maps centered around smaller islands (especially when we also have carriers), that are not worth creating an entire module around. For example, the Battle of Peleliu might be an interesting setting for a campaign, but is probably too insignificant for a full module.

I think they have a very lenient policy for editing maps already. For loading and editing maps in the editor, there are no restrictions whatsoever although as they say in the video, it's a complex process involving lots of different applications. For loading edited maps in game, there is only one exception to the "no restrictions" rule: heightmaps. But this is also part of their DRM: they need to make sure that people would not just put a copy of, say, the Normandy map online where people who don't have BoN can just download this copy.

 

If a team has advanced plans for making an additional map and seems capable enough, I have no doubt that the Devs are open to releasing the heightmap of the new map. As we see with the Finland map.

 

1 hour ago, Juri_JS said:

The new mission editor options look really interesting. What I didn't fully understand is, if the new complex triggers require writing scripts or if this was a misunderstanding on my side.

What I understand, is that complex triggers have scripts attached to them that are editable. I expect there'll be pre-made scripts for simple tasks such as "player has entered zone." What's more exciting is that if I understand it correctly, mission writers (at least those with the knowhow) have the ability to write their own scripts such that immensely complex behaviour is possible.

What is little known is that the current IL2:GB series already offers this option in the form of shockwave scripts. But that is a very complex process, completely undocumented, no debugging, and there are some other major limitations (e.g. objects' properties such as their location are only updated every 4 to 5 seconds, and you cannot read many of the more interesting properties for any but the player plane).

Edited April 17 by AEthelraedUnraed

[Avimimus]

No doubt.

 

That said - It would be nice to have a way to integrate improvements to maps by volunteers, and perhaps have them compiled by a third party (or something along those lines).

 

The fact is that there will always be errors when back-dating a map by a half century (or more), and motivated volunteers could provide notable improvements (e.g. more accurate British targets in the Normandy map, various fixes to Rhineland) - so if their technology can eventually include compositing fixes into an existing map, the community could probably contribute a lot given time.

[BlitzPig_EL]

All I ask is that there is the ability for an non IT person to use the editor to make satisfying missions without needing a degree in computer science and coding.

An "easy mode" for the editor that would allow those without you guy's knowledge of scripts, coding, etc, to use the editor without all the laborious steps of the current editor.

I can do it, but I don't like it.  I would like something more like the old IL2 editor as a switchable setting so we all can make missions and hence grow the community.

[Aapje]

5 hours ago, AEthelraedUnraed said:

But this is also part of their DRM: they need to make sure that people would not just put a copy of, say, the Normandy map online where people who don't have BoN can just download this copy.

 

Is that really a worthwhile form of DRM? The person would still be missing the planes of that module, the campaign wouldn't work, they presumably can't join MP servers that run the map and probably more. So they would still be very limited in how they can use the map. More a demo-experience rather than having the full module.

 

I think that the extra sales from having more user content would more than offset the very few people who only care about the map.

 

But if it is a serious concern, an alternative could be to support mods of existing maps. So then the game would load up, see that there is a mod for the Korean map, and then apply the mod. That would then only work if you have access to the map in the first place. The upside of that is that mods could be relatively small, if they only contain the changes. The downside is that would be a special feature that has to be build.

 

Quote

If a team has advanced plans for making an additional map and seems capable enough, I have no doubt that the Devs are open to releasing the heightmap of the new map. As we see with the Finland map.

 

The issue is that this kind of barrier blocks people both from getting to the point where they start making advanced plans and are capable.

 

Basically, the best way to get more people into serious modding is usually to offer them the ability to modify existing things, and then actually be able to use that modded thing. This way the learning curve is relatively shallow, since they only have to learn about the thing they want to change, not everything that is needed to make something from scratch. And the pay off is relatively quick, since they can see the fruits of their labor quickly.

 

So they can get into a nice cycle where they learn a new way to mod, apply that knowledge, and see their mod be of higher quality, then learn a new way to mod, apply it, see even higher quality, rinse and repeat. Then over time they learn a ton of skills, but in a gradual way that is way more manageable than having to learn all those skills immediately, before they can a benefit to learning these things.

 

Alternatively, a good way to learn is to make something from scratch that is relatively small and crappy, and then gradually make it better and bigger, or abandon it for a new attempt where you implement the lessons learned.

 

Both of these most common learning scenarios are really hindered when people run into barriers early on, where you can't run a mod without getting special permission (which people do not generally dare asking for something small and/or crappy), or where they are required to already be highly proficient before they can see the fruits of their labor.

Edited April 17 by Aapje

[AEthelraedUnraed]

3 hours ago, Aapje said:

Is that really a worthwhile form of DRM? The person would still be missing the planes of that module, the campaign wouldn't work, they presumably can't join MP servers that run the map and probably more. So they would still be very limited in how they can use the map. More a demo-experience rather than having the full module.

 

I think that the extra sales from having more user content would more than offset the very few people who only care about the map.

I think maps are a major reason to buy a particular module, especially in cases where plane sets overlap. Almost every plane appears in the career of more than one module. And while you may be right that there would be few people who *only* care about the map, I think there's a majority of people who care about both the map and the planes; the whole package, so to speak. And fact is that with Stalingrad planes, you could have a decent Kuban experience if you could just download that map.

 

Of course there would be benefits to having more user-made content, but they need to draw the line somewhere and I think that doing so at heightmaps is very reasonable.

 

EDIT: Also, I'm sure considerations like these have already been made way back when they decided on their DRM system. Obviously, back then they came to the conclusion that locking heightmaps was the desired way to go and they haven't changed their opinion since. You make some good arguments for leaving heightmaps unlocked but I see no reason to assume that the Devs haven't come up with the same arguments in their decision making process. Maybe the balance might shift in favour of unlocked heightmaps when Korea is out and IL2:GB presumably gets abandoned, but right now I wouldn't get my hopes up.

 

3 hours ago, Aapje said:

But if it is a serious concern, an alternative could be to support mods of existing maps. So then the game would load up, see that there is a mod for the Korean map, and then apply the mod. That would then only work if you have access to the map in the first place. The upside of that is that mods could be relatively small, if they only contain the changes. The downside is that would be a special feature that has to be build.

Let's first be absolutely clear that this is already exactly how it works for everything but the heightmap.

 

For heightmaps, you'd want to make sure that some illegally downloaded mod couldn't use, let's say, the Kuban heightmap as a mod for the Stalingrad terrain. Perhaps with one or two different pixels so that comparing against any of the payware maps doesn't work. And that's why heightmaps need to be locked: there's no other good method to make sure that people cannot play maps they haven't bought.

 

3 hours ago, Aapje said:

Basically, the best way to get more people into serious modding is usually to offer them the ability to modify existing things, and then actually be able to use that modded thing. This way the learning curve is relatively shallow, since they only have to learn about the thing they want to change, not everything that is needed to make something from scratch. And the pay off is relatively quick, since they can see the fruits of their labor quickly.

As said, this is already how it works for everything except the heightmap. So, first of all, heightmap edits are not usually necessary since terrain height tends to be rather static over the years so the only worthwhile things to change would be relatively minor corrections that most people would likely not even notice. Secondly, creating heightmaps is actually one of the easier things. If someone figures out how to modify surfaces, terrain textures, roads, forests, water maps, etc. and then wants to apply that knowledge to create entire maps, this should be a pretty small step.

 

People are already free to edit all those things above and have been for years. Yet we see relatively few mods that do so even though there's plenty that could be added/improved on the current maps. I think the main reason for that is a lack of documentation as well as the complexity of the process, rather than the fact that heightmaps are locked.

Edited April 17 by AEthelraedUnraed

[Mysticpuma]

I know there's quite a lot of assets from BoX that won't be compatible with Korea, but should so e of the later aircraft being available, does this give players the possibility of making the MTO with custom built maps?

[AEthelraedUnraed]

2 hours ago, Mysticpuma said:

I know there's quite a lot of assets from BoX that won't be compatible with Korea, but should so e of the later aircraft being available, does this give players the possibility of making the MTO with custom built maps?

The way I understand it, none of the BoX assets will be compatible with Korea. So any custom-built MTO map is going to have to be done on the GB engine.

 

Although it remains to be seen to what extent the new editor can be used for the old assets, or if it's possible to backport parts of it. In other words, it might be possible to use (some of) the new editor functionalities to edit/create GB maps.

[AtlasCloud24]

Thanks for sharing! Always great seeing the editor evolve—Korea’s looking promising already.

[Gambit21]

On 4/17/2025 at 4:22 AM, BlitzPig_EL said:

All I ask is that there is the ability for an non IT person to use the editor to make satisfying missions without needing a degree in computer science and coding.

An "easy mode" for the editor that would allow those without you guy's knowledge of scripts, coding, etc, to use the editor without all the laborious steps of the current editor.

I can do it, but I don't like it.  I would like something more like the old IL2 editor as a switchable setting so we all can make missions and hence grow the community.

Even with the DCS editor, where extensive use of scripts is possible (and some make heavy or nearly exclusive use of this) it’s never necessary. You can always brute-force something with straight editor logic - at least most things.

I wouldn’t worry. 

 

This editor desperately needs the ability to have different flights follow each other. So different flights in a squadron can be joined up etc without hours and hours of trying to time/adjust waypoint behavior like I had to do with Havoc and Hawks. DCS has this feature.

[Aapje]

That seems like a rather elementary feature, especially in a WW 2 sim, where escorting is very common, much more than in modern air combat.

[BlitzPig_EL]

And hopefully we will have AI escorts that, you know, actually escort you, instead of bimbling off to attack enemy aircraft on the other side of the map, or totally ignoring the enemy aircraft that is right on your tail.

[Jackfraser24]

8 hours ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

And hopefully we will have AI escorts that, you know, actually escort you, instead of bimbling off to attack enemy aircraft on the other side of the map, or totally ignoring the enemy aircraft that is right on your tail.

I wish they could get that fixed in Great Battles.