New IL2 game

[+Stary 2,427]

http://babelfish.yahoo.com/translate_url?doit=done&tt=url&intl=1&fr=bf-home&trurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.sukhoi.ru%2Fforum%2Fshowthread.php%3Ft%3D67866%26page%3D16&lp=ru_en&btnTrUrl=Translate

 

1. optimization of houses is like ready, it is necessary to [protestirovat] still day- other in order to be certified that they did not add unexpected Glucks. Houses became such rapid that the flight with the complete houses now in all to the pair of [fpsov] is slower than flight generally without the houses.

 

2. optimization of forest occurs somewhat more slowly, but everything appears optimistically. We still will add [ustanovochku] the variety of forest, which will roughly speaking allow you instead of the different bushes and the trees entire landscape to plant by some fir trees, which still will raise productivity. In other respects, [lks] will become by an order more rapid, due to a certain worsening in the general impression - distant trees will grow more gradually.

 

3. optimization of shadows - separate task of the houses (in the test of №1 it was measured without the shadows). As it proved to be, problem exists not in the code, but in the models, especially in some cabs. Is used on the fine details very precise alpha, which hangs strong brakes to everything else. It is necessary to [provetsi] the inventory of all models, to determine all such places and to repair, and we will obtain very strong increase In [fPSa] everywhere, due to a certain loss in the beauty of the bagatelles of every kind.

 

4. support [sLI] - let us make, will as soon as finish №1 and №3. as I in my opinion already somewhere wrote, this can be very rapid [remonotom], and it can require serious consultations with the producers of cards, which will engage much more than time. Thus far I cannot accurately say.

 

5. micro-frieze above the landscape they are caused to by 99% trees. Work on their №3 will solve. Instantaneous [podzagruzki] nevertheless will remain in the game, since it is not possible to hold entire gigantic map in the memory always. It is necessary to dynamically [podgruzhat] necessary landscape. This occurs, in my opinion, one time of every 12 kilometers, and occur smoothly and measured off, so that this will be very little noticeably.

 

6. windows [MP] in [attache] are like ready, to still [protesti] to the lousiness of day- other.

 

7. cardinal optimization of drawing ( isolation of entire [rendera] into the separate flow ) will dramatically increase [FPS] roughly speaking doubly. This work will engage the minimum month.

 

Thus, the plan of simple - to let out for the following week even smaller [patchik], which will include №1,2, 6, and is possible №3. then on the circumstances - support [sLI] let us most likely, let out together with №7 somewhere toward the end of April - to beginning of May.

 

Well and finally, I must before to you be apologized for the fact that me is not very evident on the forums. This will continue as the minimum to the output of the following mini -[patcha]. To read I everything find time, but to answer as the entire does not leave. Thanks to you for the support!

there will be patch next week, adressing some of the issues, mostly related with slowndowns caused by buildings and trees, I guess it's a good sign

 

as it is at current state COD reminds me very of CFS 3, but I had no problems flying that title on Ati 9200 with 512mb of ram, back in early 2003

Edited April 3, 2011 by Stary

[JediMaster 451]

I don't know, CFS3 was IMO relatively polished. It ran slow on anything but top-end systems, and it was missing some things we'd have like to have, but it was complete. It also had the largest map of any WWII sim released since then. All the Il-2 maps are far smaller, and well there are no other WWII sims! Only EAW had larger IIRC.

[SopmodMikeFour 4]

the campaign model in CFS3 was simply outstanding and I loved the RPG aspect but its damage modeling was horrendous.As the aircraft took hits you would gradually lose control of the aircraft a little at a time until you simply could not turn at all or went into an uncontrollable dive and crashed.It was ridiculous.

Edited April 4, 2011 by SopmodMikeFour

[Dave63 13]

I don't know, CFS3 was IMO relatively polished. It ran slow on anything but top-end systems, and it was missing some things we'd have like to have, but it was complete. It also had the largest map of any WWII sim released since then. All the Il-2 maps are far smaller, and well there are no other WWII sims! Only EAW had larger IIRC.

 

Heretic!!! Wait until the IL2 police show up and tar and feather you for even mentioning...Ugh...I can't stand to say it...CFS3, in the same sentence as the holy of holys!!!

 

'488758']

[JediMaster 451]

The stock plane DMs in CFS3 were indeed stupid, with things like control cables given a 60% chance of being damaged!

 

The Firepower addon and 1% 3rd party planes were far better and made the game quite playable, even if the DX7-class graphics made it dated looking from its release.

[+Brain32 265]

Call me a fanboy and hang me high I don't give a fu*k, but this stuff you will not see anywhere else. Yes currently in like 5 fps until the patch comes out(beta patch announced for late today or tomorrow) but still...daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaamn...

 

Just check some of theese screens:

http://simhq.com/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/3244760/1.html

[+Stary 2,427]

Fanboy! Hang him high, let him stutter!

 

j/k my friend, it's daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaamn... indeed

 

the problem with CloDo is, that being developed by this particular team with or without Oleg Maddox, it has no chance of being immersive Battle Of Britain experience. These guys are great at making high detail, good FM and DM planes, but lack that "touch of god" to make great campaign with tons of things happening in the air, and on the ground or sea. Not with this engine (and I STILL think it's hugely updated Il2 engine) not with their approach. Call me lite-fan, but sometimes some simplifications have to be made to achieve such big-scale goal. Why EAW was such a big success at rendering big formations of bombers with whole Luftwaffe and few sqadrons of escorts swarming around? Due to simplified FMs for bombers and overall 1996 (around when the works started after 1942-PAW) planes models. YES I know we are 12 years later, but still calculating pulse of wounded ventrail gunner and temperature on 6th cylinder of outer port engine is a bit too much. At the end of the day it allways goes down to placing few 30mm rounds into the wing root. CloDo currently, the more I (try to) play it, is only about quick not so random dogfights of squadron-size forces, that only if your system can cope with (mine can't). Similar case was with ROF when it came out, but that title since has been gradually patched and updated into now playable good WW1 simulation, with promised revised campaign system on the horizont.

 

And with all the shiny detailed models, really beautiful self-shadowing cockpits and nice damage models? Their novelty will wear out quickly, believe me. I actually prefer to feel there's actual desperate homeland defence, brutal air war going on around me (EAW, BOB2, WOP to some extend) than looking at beautiful models (both of them...) at 10 frames per second, with stutters.

One more regarding damage modelling -it's good(?) old Il2 style, nice but not so random. Individual bullets decals on planes? Oh, Janes' Attack Sqadron (remember that one?) had it too, but it didn't turn into much of a success. Sure it's nice, it's a feature I like, but not with the cost of actual gameplay.

 

As for CFS3, I like it from day one. Still have it on my HDD with ETO expansion. And it ran quite smoothly on my not the best then system back then too. But true, controls damage modelling sucks in stock version.

[SopmodMikeFour 4]

The stock plane DMs in CFS3 were indeed stupid, with things like control cables given a 60% chance of being damaged!

 

The Firepower addon and 1% 3rd party planes were far better and made the game quite playable, even if the DX7-class graphics made it dated looking from its release.

I played a multitude of addon mods and campaigns that were great.The mediterranean campaigns and others.They did improve on the issues to a point.

[SopmodMikeFour 4]

For those of us with multi-core computers I found a fix on the 1c website.This has helped my flying.Barely any stutter now.I was able to fly the 2nd mission in the UK campaign and got into a fight with Stukas as they were dive bombing a convoy.No lag for me at all on medium settings although over land the stutter was there but barely.Not really noticeable.Try it out.

 

CoD performance fix

This worked for me and thought I would share it for you all to try as well.

 

1) Turn anti epilepsy filter off:

 

Go to C:\Users\[username]\Documents\1C SoftClub\il-2 sturmovik cliffs of dover

 

find conf.ini and

 

In [bOB] section in write this line:

AntiEpilepcy = 0

 

 

2) The game only uses 1 core, to use several cores:

 

In [rts] section uncomment ProcessAffinityMask= and use these values:

 

2 cores - 3

3 cores - 7

4 cores - 15

6 cores - 63

8 cores - 255

 

After editing that line save the file and go fly.

Edited April 5, 2011 by SopmodMikeFour

[+Stary 2,427]

already tried that (3) on two cores without luck, tomorrow will try for quad at work

[SopmodMikeFour 4]

I have a quad and I did see significant improvement.One thing that bugs me though is on medium settings and even at short range while in formation the markings on their aircraft would disappear and at other times could be seen.At 50 yards or so it seems all aircraft markings disappear from the planes.Since there is no distance slider I am wondering how this can be fixed.

[+Stary 2,427]

I noticed the dissapearing decals too, even having models set to high. I think the range they are set to disappear is waay to short, given that in quick combat tyou allways fight against Italy with their big while roundels.

 

BTW Kegetys (of Operation Flashpoint/Arma fame!) already released SFS files extractor...

http://www.kegetys.net/

[Dave63 13]

I played a multitude of addon mods and campaigns that were great.The mediterranean campaigns and others.They did improve on the issues to a point.

 

Still got it installed for that exact reason. Don't tell, they'll pull my card...

[SopmodMikeFour 4]

Still got it installed for that exact reason. Don't tell, they'll pull my card...

 

Ah them long flights doing bombing missions in the HE-111 or JU-88's. Lets get off this subject before I reinstall it.

[+SkippyBing 8]

I've just about got CloD running on my machine after discovering the anthropomorphic control setting was why I couldn't use my throttle, as the slightly erratic input from one of my trim dials meant the stupid thing thought I was using two hands already.

 

It's nice enough but as has been said on here it's not exactly the Battle of Britain when you've got all of one squadron per side in any given flight and the lack of dynamic campaign is a complete fail in this day and age. The after mission dialogue/story thing bears no relation to what I've just done, which admittedly is generally dead stick my Hurricane somewhere on the coast after I blow the engine up, and having to successfully complete a sortie before progressing to the next one is so late '90s!

 

I did at one stage brave the Ubi and 1C forums to see why I couldn't use my throttle and sweet Jesus are they hostile to anyone who doesn't praise the mighty Oleg for being able to beta test that which he has deigned to give us. Apparently if you have a problem with paying £30 for incomplete buggy software you're some sort of BF2 playing pirate who doesn't understand how complicated a flight sim is and should immediately go and spend £150 on a new graphics card before even thinking of complaining about frame rates.

[+Stary 2,427]

well put Skippy, having few questions myself I did not even bothered registering there...

 

funny as any other more complicated sim runs fine here, Flamming Cliffs 2 with many more planes with their radars and avionics, ground control, missiles flying all in one scenario without problems. I repeat myself here -they apparently overmodelled few things user would never be aware of going under the hood=unnecessary. Bad optimization is the other thing. Funny, here's how CloDo looked back in... August 2006:

 

http://www.gamesaktuell.de/Storm-of-War-Battle-of-Britain-PC-132480/News/Battle-of-Britain-Spielbare-Version-auf-der-GC-vorgestellt-718814/galerie/1049570/#?a_id=718814&g_id=-1&i_id=1049575

[SopmodMikeFour 4]

I don't know why Oleg and team went from the great campaign model in IL-2 to this severely inferior rendition.Honestly I'd rather they had just ported that part over.I don't like that I am stuck in 2 linear campaigns and I am stuck flying the plane the campaign chooses for me in a dramatic romance novel.Seriously,what were they thinking?I hope they do not intend on releasing the dynamic aspect IL-2 had as some DLC,but in this day and age I would not be surprised.As is,since I am not much of a multiplayer flyer,this title is going to have a very short shelf life if this is how its going to be.Campaigns are 99% of my bread and butter.Oleg should know better that most flight simmers fly offline campaigns.

 

I agree with you on being able to run any other sim just fine.I can max out DCS Black Shark and A-10C and have no frame rate issues.As beautiful as it looks,I think they paid way too much attention to ground scenery and I am certain that's a good reason for a lot of the frame rate issues.

Edited April 6, 2011 by SopmodMikeFour

[+Stary 2,427]

one of the problems I have with this title is this:

 

 

 

to me this just doesn't look like big nextgen 2011 release that was in development for more or less 6 years, more-what I see does not justify such performance on quad i5 with 1GB Ati HD 5770 on board, W7 64bit system.

 

And it's just single plane in a free flight mode...

 

edit:

shot taken at all high settings with roads, grass and shadows on

 

beta patch should be up later today, will see

 

(side note: I wonder how long will it take for BOB guys to put into their sim grass, they already made autogenerated, based per surface type, trees available since 2.10)

Edited April 6, 2011 by Stary

[+Brain32 265]

I did at one stage brave the Ubi and 1C forums to see why I couldn't use my throttle and sweet Jesus are they hostile to anyone who doesn't praise the mighty Oleg for being able to beta test that which he has deigned to give us. Apparently if you have a problem with paying £30 for incomplete buggy software you're some sort of BF2 playing pirate who doesn't understand how complicated a flight sim is and should immediately go and spend £150 on a new graphics card before even thinking of complaining about frame rates.

Well yeah there are pricks everywhere, half of the topics there is of a same nature like this one however...and sure as hell nobody messed with me when I complained there...

 

 

funny as any other more complicated sim runs fine here, Flamming Cliffs 2 with many more planes with their radars and avionics, ground control, missiles flying all in one scenario without problems. I repeat myself here -they apparently overmodelled few things user would never be aware of going under the hood=unnecessary. Bad optimization is the other thing.

I don't see FC2 being more complicated, sorry...

As for optimization just the other day I installed LockOn v1.0, thats from 2003, it still runs like crap on my machine...

 

Now sure like I said, I'm a fanboy, but I also like facts and I do know what's under the hood here. Maybe it's about priorities in a flight sim...but I think BoB is definitely "next-gen". As for what f***ed it up, the answer is as old as the PC games themself - money. It simply had to be released....

[+Stary 2,427]

money, true to some point, but they had quite a bit of time to spend those nickels in a proper way, from what I see and hear they even had not send two guys from sound department and texture artist to capture real Merlin sounds and make proper english grass colour palette (we can argue about the latter, the sounds can't defend themselfs IMO)

[+Brain32 265]

As for the sounds they could and they did but chose not use recordings of engine sounds as they could not be changed dynamically as the conditions change during operation.

I can't explain it properly as some time ago(years) one of the devs explained how they made the sounds, they are actually fabricated from the real sounds in such a way the sound can adapt to the situation. Well like I said I can't explain it properly it was ages ago and not exactly my area of understanding.

 

The idea was sound and logical, the implementation however...well subject to opinions, for example sound mods that came into il2 46 after the game hacking were never up to my taste and some even sounded horrible(some however were indeed awsome) and messed up the entire game for me. I actually used custom sound removing mod during the time I had to use mods for il2 to be able to play on-line...

[+Stary 2,427]

Beta patch:

 

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=20795

 

very slow download, 64 MB total

 

Mirrors:

 

Eng

http://uploading.com/files/m21m18d1/IL2COD_13915.rar/

 

Rus

http://uploading.com/files/a21736c7/..._13915_ru.rar/

Edited April 7, 2011 by Stary

[+Stary 2,427]

soo... ok, I actually have worse framerates after applying this patch... I'm starting to think 1946 was the opus magnum in the Il2 series...

[+Brain32 265]

Oh you came by better than me, I can't even start the game after the patch.

 

You know what buddy, we need to schedule a reminder to try this game again in April....2012

Edited April 7, 2011 by Brain32

[JediMaster 451]

Hmm. Did you uninstall the game, reinstall it, then uninstall it again, delete the directory, sacrifice a rubber Ju-87 to the simming gods, and then reinstall?

 

It's not guaranteed to work until you follow those steps.

 

Oh, and reinstall Windows.