Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Rate This Thread
Hop To
Page 2 of 3 1 2 3
#3523671 - 02/21/12 09:42 PM Re: Patch 4.11 and Its Implications ***** [Re: WhistlinggDeath]  
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 605
WhistlinggDeath Offline
Member
WhistlinggDeath  Offline
Member

Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 605
La Jolla, CA
Can you describe why you support Patch 4.11 Bearcat or what you feel its strengths/weaknesses are ?


If you can defeat me in a fair same altitude duel, you are either Hartmann's ghost or you have a ganja problem that needs treatment.

Like asking weird questions and are good at math? Maybe you can join us at the Jacobs School of Engineering, UC San Diego. Tackling the grand mysteries of the age with science.

At the core of most of life's deep mysteries, is the language that Mother Nature truly speaks in, ..... mathematics.
Inline advert (2nd and 3rd post)

#3523951 - 02/22/12 07:05 AM Re: Patch 4.11 and Its Implications [Re: WhistlinggDeath]  
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 5
Music Offline
Junior Member
Music  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 5
Canada
Through Post WD

No one can say this is just your opinion anymore. After a month of flying 4.11, I still see my wing man flying beside the enemy who is shooting at me, I still see AAA firing though buildings, and clouds, and the lack of populated servers is really getting depressing.
I have yet to find out how to get unlimited ammo, but limited bombs, and after testing your 109 190 .50cal damage model concerns, I agree, they do not break when shooting from the Six. Only once in dozens of trials did I see any thing come off the plane. They all went down, but they went down in one piece.

I should have kept my Up_3 and DBW files, as I am playing off line most of the time because of the above mentioned server issue. The two servers that have any kind of population are wonderwoman server's.

I think, and this is just my opinion, that TD, SAS and the other modders should get together and release a unified version of the game, so that we can keep some sort of community going. There are to many versions now, and the online pool is only so big, and atm it's not big enough to support five (5) or more versions of the same game.

Let's hope that commonsense prevails over Ego, and that all the talented people working on various aspects of the game can pool their resources, and make the 4.12 version a game that all wish to play.

Just a plea to from a rookie, who enjoys engaging real people, even if I lose 75% of the time.


You Are what You Think
#3523963 - 02/22/12 08:20 AM Re: Patch 4.11 and Its Implications [Re: Bearcat99]  
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 331
T}{OR Offline
[DBS]
T}{OR  Offline
[DBS]
Member

Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 331
Croatia, Zagreb
Originally Posted By: Bearcat99
From my understanding HSFX will try to keep it's updates in line with the official version, which IMO is a good thing.


That is good to hear indeed.


Originally Posted By: Music
I have yet to find out how to get unlimited ammo, but limited bombs, and after testing your 109 190 .50cal damage model concerns, I agree, they do not break when shooting from the Six. Only once in dozens of trials did I see any thing come off the plane. They all went down, but they went down in one piece.


Strange. All over TS I hear people talking how .50 cals now pack a bigger punch...

#3523976 - 02/22/12 09:31 AM Re: Patch 4.11 and Its Implications [Re: WhistlinggDeath]  
Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 5
Music Offline
Junior Member
Music  Offline
Junior Member

Joined: Feb 2010
Posts: 5
Canada
Maybe they do, but Shoot at a 109 or 190 from directly behind, and the plane will smoke, and crash, but nothing breaks off. It's not the .50's, it's the planes damage model, or lack there of. Just those two plane types. Mine was just a short test, and when I saw that WD's analysis was proving to be correct, I ended that exercise. I do find that when you get a good hit's with .50's, they do do some damage, like breaking off wings, and even blowing up the target, so the .50's are not the problem.


You Are what You Think
#3524002 - 02/22/12 10:48 AM Re: Patch 4.11 and Its Implications [Re: Music]  
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,833
DaveP63 Offline
Member
DaveP63  Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,833
Indiana, USA
Originally Posted By: Music


I think, and this is just my opinion, that TD, SAS and the other modders should get together and release a unified version of the game, so that we can keep some sort of community going. There are to many versions now, and the online pool is only so big, and atm it's not big enough to support five (5) or more versions of the same game.

Let's hope that commonsense prevails over Ego, and that all the talented people working on various aspects of the game can pool their resources, and make the 4.12 version a game that all wish to play.



Won't ever happen. TD has implemented some "mod" stuff into it's patches but there's too much out there in the mods that add stuff that TD can't touch. Like Channel Maps, certain aircraft, certain carriers, etc. In some cases, yes, there is ego. But, there are also some valid reasons as well.


i5-4460@3.2ghz, 16GB Ram, Gigabyte GTX1050Ti 4GB, 2TB HDD, 500GB SDD
#3524015 - 02/22/12 11:49 AM Re: Patch 4.11 and Its Implications [Re: WhistlinggDeath]  
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 605
WhistlinggDeath Offline
Member
WhistlinggDeath  Offline
Member

Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 605
La Jolla, CA
Also, speaking from a programming point of view, it is going to take longer to rework (in some cases much longer) Patch 4.11 into HSFX or Ultrapack. The overheat algorithm is incorporated in several aspects and this will cause real headaches for several of the programmers fixing the mod packs. Even if they want to incorporate Patch 4.11, it will be awhile before something as large as UP 3.0 can mesh with it.


If you can defeat me in a fair same altitude duel, you are either Hartmann's ghost or you have a ganja problem that needs treatment.

Like asking weird questions and are good at math? Maybe you can join us at the Jacobs School of Engineering, UC San Diego. Tackling the grand mysteries of the age with science.

At the core of most of life's deep mysteries, is the language that Mother Nature truly speaks in, ..... mathematics.
#3524072 - 02/22/12 02:32 PM Re: Patch 4.11 and Its Implications [Re: Music]  
Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 440
KidVicious Offline
IL2 Rookie
KidVicious  Offline
IL2 Rookie
Member

Joined: Dec 2001
Posts: 440
Texas USA
Originally Posted By: Music
and after testing your 109 190 .50cal damage model concerns, I agree, they do not break when shooting from the Six. Only once in dozens of trials did I see any thing come off the plane. They all went down, but they went down in one piece.


It looks like I wasn't the only one that noticed this, or was looking into it. It's also a problem in UP3 RC4.

http://www.warbirdsofprey.org/index.php?topic=11057.0


To the man I aim, not the aircraft
IL2-1946 UP3 Aerial Combat Videos
#3524082 - 02/22/12 02:56 PM Re: Patch 4.11 and Its Implications [Re: WhistlinggDeath]  
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 490
4Shades Offline
Member
4Shades  Offline
Member

Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 490
Perth, Western Australia
Quote:
Also, speaking from a programming point of view, it is going to take longer to rework (in some cases much longer) Patch 4.11 into HSFX or Ultrapack


Oh really? That's not what I hear.

Cheers,
4S


IV/JG7_4Shades

SEOW Developer
#3524412 - 02/22/12 11:39 PM Re: Patch 4.11 and Its Implications [Re: WhistlinggDeath]  
Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 622
Fishingnut Offline
Member
Fishingnut  Offline
Member

Joined: Dec 2004
Posts: 622
Good ole' U. S. of A.
I don't like the patch because it changes things that the community at large didn't ask for. For the life of me I can't remember ever seeing any posts where anyone whined about needing more overheat. Most people are like me and probably feel the old overheat was just fine. And in some cases the old overheat was pretty excessive, really. I like to fly in formation ( not be the flight leader ) and the new way the AI jink all over the place is not only ridiculous, it's also very unrealistic. If they flew like that when in formation in W.W.II, then there would have been many more mid-air mishaps then there were. I have never seen any footage of aircraft in formation bouncing and flouncing all over the place. TD likes to think they are introducing overheat based on realism, but yet introduce the AI jinking all over the place, which is hardly realistic!! Supposedly this will allow the AI to see behind them since they took out the "see-behind-radar" the AI used to have. While I applaud the taking away of the see-behind-radar, I don't think that introducing the "jink-all-over-place" thing is the answer.

Now and in the future, I will fly older patch versions, not 4.11!! Too bad, because some things new in the patch are great but they always have to ruin everything by putting in nonsense that people don't like. I don't like to have to take good along with bad, I only want good.

#3524439 - 02/23/12 12:41 AM Re: Patch 4.11 and Its Implications [Re: WhistlinggDeath]  
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 490
4Shades Offline
Member
4Shades  Offline
Member

Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 490
Perth, Western Australia

Part of the reason that some of the Allied air forces abandoned the "vic" was because the close formation flying was actually taking up more of the pilots' time than searching the sky for enemies, leaving them vulnerable to surprise attack.

When TD, or anyone else for that matter, introduces a new feature it usually takes a couple of revisions to get it right. TD will have learnt a lot from the new overheat and check six implementations and I suspect these features will be refined in subsequent releases.

On the jinking, I wonder what my own flight profile actually looks like when I am flying in known enemy airspace. I regularly fishtail to check my 6, dip wings etc. Thank goodness my wingman doesn't complain on the radio! maybe there needs to be some attention given to the alert level of the flight, so that relaxed flights fly smoothly, and alert/worried flights jink more.

Finally, the idea that features should only be added if *enough* people ask for them is a little silly. Modders are people too, so their voices count. And there is no way to determine a democratic vote for new mods. There are hundreds of new features appearing that most people have never asked for or even thought of. The realistic radio navigation is a prime example. The community at large never requested it (because it makes flying more difficult) but it was the right thing to introduce, it is much more realistic and it works brilliantly.

Cheers,
4S


IV/JG7_4Shades

SEOW Developer
#3524462 - 02/23/12 01:18 AM Re: Patch 4.11 and Its Implications [Re: WhistlinggDeath]  
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 605
WhistlinggDeath Offline
Member
WhistlinggDeath  Offline
Member

Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 605
La Jolla, CA
I dont know guys. I agree with both of you (Fishing and Shades). But Fishing has the better point IMHO. No one wants a negative feature (as in more realistic overheat, more realistic flat spins, quicker blackouts from negative G, etc... LOL) included unless it is done right. And by right, I mean, as a full real player (at least when I can be on the West Coast), I welcome it, but if it takes two years, then it takes two years. If it takes Patch 4.14 in 2013, then it takes that long. The current overheat model is applied poorly and across all airframes in an uneven manner that is not realistic. And it is a shame too, cause the improved AI and 6DOF is really great stuff that has been long requested.

Now that others have finally encouraged me to get off my duff and get it installed, I am finding HSFX to be not only better but more realistic. Time will tell, but I think Patch 4.11 was released a good year before it should have been. It needs significant polishing and fine tuning. And it should not be our job, as the select few souls who like to fly American boom and zoom planes to take it in the butt for yet another round of "polishing".

Dang my butt is sore from the IL2 "developers". That can of 6DOF lube is going too quick.

Last edited by WhistlinggDeath; 02/23/12 01:20 AM.

If you can defeat me in a fair same altitude duel, you are either Hartmann's ghost or you have a ganja problem that needs treatment.

Like asking weird questions and are good at math? Maybe you can join us at the Jacobs School of Engineering, UC San Diego. Tackling the grand mysteries of the age with science.

At the core of most of life's deep mysteries, is the language that Mother Nature truly speaks in, ..... mathematics.
#3524470 - 02/23/12 01:25 AM Re: Patch 4.11 and Its Implications [Re: WhistlinggDeath]  
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 917
I B Spectre Offline
Member
I B Spectre  Offline
Member

Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 917
Florida, USA
I thought I'd read last year that HSFX said they would not be modding past 4.10.1, I think it was. Based on that and what I've read TD did with 4.11, I can't see any reason to go beyond what I have now. It's not that I want uber Allied aircraft as I don't think we've ever had them anyway. The last thing I want is even further crippled aircraft, be it allied or axis. Granted, pilots who flew them provide anecdotal information, but it's light-years beyond what any of us or the development team have to draw upon. Published specifications and operating data, at the very least, provide important input. I don't know what to make of it being ignored.

#3524508 - 02/23/12 02:36 AM Re: Patch 4.11 and Its Implications [Re: WhistlinggDeath]  
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,833
DaveP63 Offline
Member
DaveP63  Offline
Member

Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 1,833
Indiana, USA
This patch was about a year in development. Believe it or not. They are (allegedly) looking at the AI routines to tone down the bobbing and weaving, yet still keep the all seeing eye at bay. I did see a one liner buried in a post from one of the TD guys vaguely hinting that they might deem it worthy to look a slightly toning down the overheat "feature". Oh, and fix the USN aircraft issues is on the agenda as well.

Originally, I thought the deal with the overheat was much ado about nothing because people were caning engines at 10K feet on tropical maps. But based on the fact that you are not going to have (many) battles at 20K+ feet where lots of these aircraft were designed to operate (because of the game engine), it makes little sense to go to such extremes from one patch to the next. From what I'm beginning to read across the forums, altitude doesn't seem to make as much difference as it should. Also, there seems to be more and more empirical data indicating that their algorithm is wrong. Very wrong. If they're not going to (or can't) implement it properly and across the board, they really need to take it out and totally revamp it. bs_sign


i5-4460@3.2ghz, 16GB Ram, Gigabyte GTX1050Ti 4GB, 2TB HDD, 500GB SDD
#3524544 - 02/23/12 04:33 AM Re: Patch 4.11 and Its Implications [Re: WhistlinggDeath]  
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 26,557
wheelsup_cavu Offline
Lifer
wheelsup_cavu  Offline
Lifer

Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 26,557
Corona, California
Were you able to find any useful information at the link I gave you WD?


Wheels


Cheers wave
Wheelsup_cavu

Mission4Today (Campaigns, Missions, and Skins for IL-2)
Planes of Fame Air Museum | March Field Air Museum | Palm Springs Air Museum
#3524546 - 02/23/12 04:35 AM Re: Patch 4.11 and Its Implications [Re: WhistlinggDeath]  
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 605
WhistlinggDeath Offline
Member
WhistlinggDeath  Offline
Member

Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 605
La Jolla, CA
Dave, you dont know how poorly it is written. I have been writing code now for almost 19 years (learned in elementary school surprisingly) and the algorithm is, .... well, let me be diplomatic, .... poorly done. I would post some large sections of it for all to see, but need to abide by SimHQ rules. There are algebra mistakes in it and several small math errors (a computer will compute very fast the wrong answer if that is all you tell it to do), and it is not properly mated to altitude dependence. I am sure HSFX and the UP coders will be at a loss for words.

Btw, that reminds me, out of curiosity, what did Team D do to earn the trust of Oleg so that this project could be handed over to them. Can someone fill me in with that back story ?

Last edited by WhistlinggDeath; 02/23/12 04:41 AM.

If you can defeat me in a fair same altitude duel, you are either Hartmann's ghost or you have a ganja problem that needs treatment.

Like asking weird questions and are good at math? Maybe you can join us at the Jacobs School of Engineering, UC San Diego. Tackling the grand mysteries of the age with science.

At the core of most of life's deep mysteries, is the language that Mother Nature truly speaks in, ..... mathematics.
#3524550 - 02/23/12 04:39 AM Re: Patch 4.11 and Its Implications [Re: WhistlinggDeath]  
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 605
WhistlinggDeath Offline
Member
WhistlinggDeath  Offline
Member

Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 605
La Jolla, CA
Wheels -Yes, I did mate. Thank you. A bit of it seems slightly different numbers from what I have read in some other sources (in the case of the P51 for example) but very informative. I am not much of a WWII aviation historian, but the hobby is growing on me. I feel very fortunate that you, Beebop, GK and Max run M4T and are pretty decent guys. You should have seen my first and only two threads at the 1C. I thought it was open hunting season on WD, .....hehe. smile

Last edited by WhistlinggDeath; 02/23/12 04:40 AM.

If you can defeat me in a fair same altitude duel, you are either Hartmann's ghost or you have a ganja problem that needs treatment.

Like asking weird questions and are good at math? Maybe you can join us at the Jacobs School of Engineering, UC San Diego. Tackling the grand mysteries of the age with science.

At the core of most of life's deep mysteries, is the language that Mother Nature truly speaks in, ..... mathematics.
#3524553 - 02/23/12 04:44 AM Re: Patch 4.11 and Its Implications [Re: WhistlinggDeath]  
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 26,557
wheelsup_cavu Offline
Lifer
wheelsup_cavu  Offline
Lifer

Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 26,557
Corona, California
Originally Posted By: WhistlinggDeath
Wheels -Yes, I did mate. Thank you. A bit of it seems slightly different numbers from what I have read in some other sources (in the case of the P51 for example) but very informative. I am not much of a WWII aviation historian, but the hobby is growing on me. I feel very fortunate that you, Beebop, GK and Max run M4T and are pretty decent guys. You should have seen my first and only two threads at the 1C. I thought it was open hunting season on WD, .....hehe. smile

Happy to hear that you were able to get some useful information.

I did see the festivities at 1C. wink


Wheels

Post #16775 copter


Cheers wave
Wheelsup_cavu

Mission4Today (Campaigns, Missions, and Skins for IL-2)
Planes of Fame Air Museum | March Field Air Museum | Palm Springs Air Museum
#3524764 - 02/23/12 03:42 PM Re: Patch 4.11 and Its Implications [Re: Fishingnut]  
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,334
Greybeard Offline
Member
Greybeard  Offline
Member

Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,334
Italy
Originally Posted By: Fishingnut
I like to fly in formation ( not be the flight leader ) and the new way the AI jink all over the place is not only ridiculous, it's also very unrealistic.
...
Now and in the future, I will fly older patch versions, not 4.11!! Too bad, because some things new in the patch are great...


I absolutely agree; formation flight, not as leader, was what I mostly wished since the dawn of flight sims and later appreciated when it became practicable.

I think 4.11 FM is a major improvement in respect of all previous versions: it's a pity they wasted with certain trouvailles.

I strongly believe that an historical criterion must be the basis of an historical flight sim; all the rest is rubbish and brings to chaos and self-destruction. The core is finding reliable data (but scientific approach helps much to select best one), then to implement into sim; even no matter if that's popular or not - that will be always best choice.

Whole communities self-destructed (and talented people did a lot of vanished work) trying to follow personal tastes: typically in the end ALL leaves disgusted, being not matched their expectations!

GB

#3524778 - 02/23/12 03:52 PM Re: Patch 4.11 and Its Implications [Re: 4Shades]  
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,334
Greybeard Offline
Member
Greybeard  Offline
Member

Joined: May 2004
Posts: 1,334
Italy
Originally Posted By: 4Shades
There are hundreds of new features appearing that most people have never asked for or even thought of. The realistic radio navigation is a prime example.


Well, not quite exact: I asked for a working landing approach instrument on late german planes. I think TD does listen to observations.

GB

#3524850 - 02/23/12 06:23 PM Re: Patch 4.11 and Its Implications [Re: WhistlinggDeath]  
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 718
SkyHigh Offline
Member
SkyHigh  Offline
Member

Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 718
Ireland
There is some consideration being given at SAS to extracting the AI mod from 4.11, which would give everybody options to include it in a 4.09 or 4.10 install. This has the potential to keep nearly everybody happy, but perhaps at the expense of fragmenting the community.

Page 2 of 3 1 2 3

Moderated by  RacerGT 

Quick Search
Recent Articles
Support SimHQ

If you shop on Amazon use this Amazon link to support SimHQ
.
Social


Recent Topics
CD WOFF
by Britisheh. 03/28/24 08:05 PM
Carnival Cruise Ship Fire....... Again
by F4UDash4. 03/26/24 05:58 PM
Baltimore Bridge Collapse
by F4UDash4. 03/26/24 05:51 PM
The Oldest WWII Veterans
by F4UDash4. 03/24/24 09:21 PM
They got fired after this.
by Wigean. 03/20/24 08:19 PM
Grown ups joke time
by NoFlyBoy. 03/18/24 10:34 PM
Anyone Heard from Nimits?
by F4UDash4. 03/18/24 10:01 PM
RIP Gemini/Apollo astronaut Tom Stafford
by semmern. 03/18/24 02:14 PM
Copyright 1997-2016, SimHQ Inc. All Rights Reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.6.0