Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Pursuivant]

Please do not start dictating to the modding community what they should be doing ... because that is the moment the few skilled guys that are left will also leave.

SAS guys (GJE52 and Malone, VPMedia), I know how hard you've worked to improve the game, so please don't think that I'm disrespecting you, calling you out, or telling you how to spend your time. Having unsuccessfully attempted to make my own mods, I know just how hard and time consuming any addition to the game can be and I have vast respect for your talents!

But, the very nature of the requests forum is us beggars without the proper skills to do the job ourselves to try to pique the interest of those with greater ability. To that extent, all request threads are unrealistic. If I could do the work myself, I'd just surprise you all with the finished product.

If a modder is interested in any of the ideas I've proposed, and finds the information I've presented to be useful, then good for us all. If not, then this request can go the way of silly proposals for lawn-chair balloons and upgrades to Jetman.

I'm well aware that I've proposed literally thousands of ideas for changing the game in one thread. That was intentional, since all the requests are related and I wanted one thread which was easy for those who aren't interested in the topic to ignore. The alternative was dozens of threads with topics like, "Please move fuel tank damage boxes in Stock Do-217." or "Please make landing gear for I-15 breakable."

I'm also aware that it's unrealistic to hope that more than a fraction of the problems will be fixed. I can live with that, since IL2 is a pretty damned good game they way it is. But, if any DM problems get fixed then that's a win for everyone.

I also think that experienced modders underestimate community awareness of technical DM problems (vs. subjective battles about things like how tough a given engine should be). Most players - and perhaps some modders - don't realize that there are so many technical problems with DM, like misplaced hooks, incorrect placement of damage boxes, or weird breaking effects. As a casual player, I happily played IL2 for 10 years before I realized just how many DM problems and logical inconsistencies there were.

If you really are interested then make a start yourself, tell us what you are doing and what progress you have made.  Once you have done that then this thread starts to become relevant.

I'm willing to try, although my technical skills are sketchy. But, do you really want to trust a person you don't know with damage modeling, which is some of the most closely guarded code in the game?

If I knew how to do it, I'd happily do damage texture improvements, and simple housekeeping and bug-stomping like getting damage boxes and hooks correctly placed, but nothing more at the start. Changes which alter a plane's capacity to absorb damage should be reserved only for the best, most skilled, and most trusted mod teams.

[SAS~GJE52]

But, do you really want to trust a person you don't know with damage modeling, which is some of the most closely guarded code in the game?   

  ... no, it is far from being secret, it is just 3d work and textures......

try to pique the interest of those with greater ability. 

.. I think you will find that the guys with "greater ability" here are able to pique their own interest ..... 

  If not, then this request can go the way of silly proposals for lawn-chair balloons and upgrades to Jetman.
 

Actually ...I put up the "Lawn-chair + Balloons" request to illustrate just how silly some of these "suggestions" are .. and instead people took it as a serious request ......  ... need I say more .... 

If I could do the work myself, I'd just surprise you all with the finished product.   

.....then there is your answer ....  surprise me

G;

[SAS~Ghost129er]

If I could do the work myself, I'd just surprise you all with the finished product.   

.....then there is your answer ....  surprise me

I told him this in a PM I sent him recently. I PM-ed it as I felt it wouldn't have been the right thing to publicly say (the rest of what I wrote), but see? Not only am I but GJE as well as others are pretty much saying what we've been trying to tell you.

You say it's easy, then state you can't do 3d things as it's 'out of your league' well it was to me too, and you CAN overcome it and DO it indeed, you're just too lazy and don't have the time to do it yourself, so why should we modders spend our time? If you feel like this, imagine how we feel

@GJE - About the balloon; I /will/ make it fly. Just give me a few months. 

[vpmedia]

Dont get me wrong, I'd love to help but I'm in a phase right now where I try to enjoy the fruits of our labor.
Imho right now theres hardly anybody at SAS who would take on a project like this.

Btw I made some damage layers a few years ago, they're not that great but at least less blurry than the originals: https://www.sas1946.com/main/index.php/topic,25041.0.html

I also made a few damage layers for ww1 aircraft, for example Dr.I heavy damage:

https://www.sas1946.rocks/images/imageshit/img831/1830/20997150.jpg
https://www.sas1946.rocks/images/imageshit/img515/1181/32702427.jpg

[Dimlee]

Dear modders.... don't shoot the messenger. Please.
Pursuivant has done great research, it was thorough and time consuming work. Just look at his spreadsheets.
He did not demand, did not dictate what modding comunity should do, but just stated the issues he considered important. With all respect, by the way.
Probably most of his "wish list" is not feasible to implement. But may be someone with skills and time to spare will be interested and be able to resolve 1 or 2 problems listed.

P.S. vpmedia's damage layers are fantastic.

[tooslow]

Speaking of damage models ... there is one part of the damage modeling that I find particularly frustrating.   It is the loss of one or more of your control surfaces.  I believe the damage model that allows your controls to go out (without any corresponding damage to the control surfaces themselves) is over modeled.  I've read a large number of pilot accounts of dog fights and have yet to read of anyone having one of the controls go out during combat unless there was serious damage to the control surface itself. 

Apparently the IL2 damage model assumes a control cable can be hit and severed fairly easily.   I would venture to say that about 1 in every 10 to 20 dog fights I get a message indicating that my ailerons (or rudder, or elevators) have been shot out and they no longer work.  This type of damage does not seem to be supported by the numerous combat stories written by real WWII combat pilots.  I can not find a single example in the books and magazine articles I've read where this has occurred.

If you should agree this should be addressed ... then is it possible to make a potential "generic" fix that could affect all aircraft in the sim?     

[greybeard]

Thanks, Pursuivant, for focusing this neglected aspect of the game.

Indeed, since initial commercial launch, strong point was set on graphics, astonishing for 2001 standards, while technical aspects (virtually only flight model) were based only on boasting. On the contrary of older games like Red Baron II and 3D, I can't recall any mention regarding the realism of its damage model. Mentioned older games, this notwithstanding, soon found modders which dealed with DM inaccuracies (starting with famous bigger head of Pfalz XII pilot, who allowed too easy headshots for this aircraft), soon providing a tool to manage it. I can't find any damage model tool for IL-2.

Like a successful teacher titled a popular TV educational many decades ago, I think "It's never too late". Also, I think the "little steps" strategy works: why not fixing a plane DM while updating and improving? A tutorial would help much, made for different skill levels (from simple "toughness" inside flight model, to more complex 3D modeling), allowing as many as possible modders to increase realism. Me for one would be happy to do. Also some kind of tool would help.

I know there's risk of biasing, but, again, RB3D experience teaches that, even if modding is allowed to anyone, actually only correct work see spread use and is even loaded on servers for online gaming.

[Koty]

But, do you really want to trust a person you don't know with damage modeling, which is some of the most closely guarded code in the game?   

  ... no, it is far from being secret, it is just 3d work and textures......

I think you misunderstood him - I guess he meant the damage code and such... Like how many hitpoints each part has and such. While it is not that much of a secret for someone who is looking at the actual code/FM - where it is quite well visible, you can't really touch it through 3D... but well - 3D hitboxes are the basis of that.

While I think it would not be impossible to add certain generic hitboxes and make them act correctly, we would also need to teach AI how to deal with it. As a great example I might mention the A-26, while being an awesome mod, the depressurized gear causes too much of drag for AI. It can be retracted manually - but AI will not do that. Because it does not know it should.

It would be the same with any kind of hydraulics, elecrical (<-- not sure if spelling is correct, but s**ew it) lines or radar system. Not to mention we actually don't even have a (correctly) working radar.

  If not, then this request can go the way of silly proposals for lawn-chair balloons and upgrades to Jetman.
 

Actually ...I put up the "Lawn-chair + Balloons" request to illustrate just how silly some of these "suggestions" are .. and instead people took it as a serious request ......  ... need I say more .... 

Well maybe because you actually met the requirements of a good request - info + why it would be essential and how it would be possible to use...

If I could do the work myself, I'd just surprise you all with the finished product.   

.....then there is your answer ....  surprise me

G;

...I second you on that GJE...


Anyway... conclusion - even if it would be quite awesome to have, it's just too much effort at the point.

[vpmedia]

Dear modders.... don't shoot the messenger. Please.
Pursuivant has done great research, it was thorough and time consuming work. Just look at his spreadsheets.
He did not demand, did not dictate what modding comunity should do, but just stated the issues he considered important. With all respect, by the way.
Probably most of his "wish list" is not feasible to implement. But may be someone with skills and time to spare will be interested and be able to resolve 1 or 2 problems listed.

P.S. vpmedia's damage layers are fantastic.

Thanks mate, I'll surley do a whole new set of damage layers for the whole Bf 109 series sometime in the future.

[Pursuivant]

Sorry to resurrect an old thread, but it appears that there is a mod team out there which is light years ahead of everyone else when it comes to fixing FM and DM problems with the game.

http://vpbhq.com/

From what I can tell, their research makes my efforts look pathetic by comparison. Even better, they've apparently fixed the problems they've found.

The only problem is that they don't release their mod pack to the general public.

Currently, it appears that the VPB team is attempting to upgrade their mod-pack to incorporate useful features from the DT 4.12 release. I don't know if they'd be interested in playing with other mod teams, but possibly a collaboration might be fruitful.

[Koty]

Speaking of damage models, how far is that recoil thing? @mike

The thing is - for penetrating damage, it takes in account only the weight of the shell - while for the HE damage it takes - well - the HE equivalent. Currently, to have pure HE, you'd need to reduce the weight of the shell and the drag coeficient. Which would however also result into reduced recoil. But if we artificialy highered the recoil... Win-win situation.