Well it's official

[JediMaster 451]

It was easier then.

[+daddyairplanes 9,286]

"The game's just not complete without the corroding effects of seawater"

ahhh, so now we have the excuse when SF2NA patches pork our mods. "its not me guys its the ocean."

[+Stary 2,426]

Will it require water cooling system to run?

[+Coupi 4,303]

Good guys...

 

Very hard... waiting for this SF2NA!!!

 

Coupi.

[+JSF_Aggie 1,291]

We don't have pitching decks now, right?

 

 

There's a parameter in the Movement section of a ship's _data.ini that will cause the deck to pitch. However, last time I tried it would usually knock the aircraft off the catapult.

[fallenphoenix1986 603]

Interesting, hopefully that gets sorted then.... having perfectly stable decks has always bugged me with this series, especially up north.

 

Craig

[+PureBlue 71]

There's a parameter in the Movement section of a ship's _data.ini that will cause the deck to pitch. However, last time I tried it would usually knock the aircraft off the catapult.

 

Thanks for the info.

It's the SuspensionConstant under [Movement]

I just tried 0.5 and 1 for the value, and the only anomaly was the aircraft landing gears compress as the deck pitches.

They were stable on the catapult though, while a nice little pitching effect could be felt.

Edited January 25, 2012 by PureBlue

[MigBuster 2,875]

There is a solo A-6 mission in YAP1 that gets you landing on a pitching moving deck I seem to remember.

[Fubar512 1,350]

the only anomaly was the aircraft landing gears compress as the deck pitches.

 

An anomaly? That's what the gear Oleos are supposed to do when they experience a compression load, such as the aforementioned deck rising underneath them, or when they hit the tarmac upon landing.

[+JSF_Aggie 1,291]

Cool, I'll have to give it a try now. It's been forever since I tried, maybe even prior to SF2.

[+PureBlue 71]

An anomaly? That's what the gear Oleos are supposed to do when they experience a compression load, such as the aforementioned deck rising underneath them, or when they hit the tarmac upon landing.

 

Well of course...

 

I meant a graphic anomaly, when the pitching happens the gears will look like moving in the air above the deck. Anyway it's pretty much a non-issue for me..

[+SkateZilla 49]

Thanks for the info.

It's the SuspensionConstant under [Movement]

I just tried 0.5 and 1 for the value, and the only anomaly was the aircraft landing gears compress as the deck pitches.

They were stable on the catapult though, while a nice little pitching effect could be felt.

 

yeah I abandoned this along time ago, and TK never mentioned fixing it,

 

when it was first introduced planes would remain at deck level as teh deck moved, planes would seem to sink into the deck or float above it, but that might have been fixed with the "collision mesh" which my carrier doesnt use because of some random glitch in the model or ini somewhere that prevents the game from loading my collision.lod..

 

hopefully w/ SF2NA and a new model this issue is gone.

 

which carrier are you using it on?

Edited January 26, 2012 by SkateZilla

[+EricJ 4,004]

Well it works fine on your carrier (I use 0.5) with no issues.

[+PureBlue 71]

which carrier are you using it on?

 

Just tried it on the stock Essex SCB-125, and went up to 3.0

Haven't tried landing yet..

[+SkateZilla 49]

hrm,

 

i remember when it was introduced in a WoV patch that was a issue with planes not responding to the moving deck,

 

TK said it was only for other ships.. so me and someone else that was doing another carrier abandoned it..

 

TK prolly adjusted it so that when the ship pitches the "Landing Height" Square Area/Plane and all of the Coordinates for deck items and systems pitches with the model.

 

im still trying to figure out why the title doesnt like the collision nodes i make, its gotta be something stupid in max, but until / unless i get something to compare the MAX/INI files with it will take a big of time to figure out.

Edited January 26, 2012 by SkateZilla

[+SkateZilla 49]

Three new Images Added via Facebook about 12 minutes ago...

 

(is it me or does it look like TW is taking hints from 3rd party mods in regards to Particle Effects/features)

 

Edited February 4, 2012 by SkateZilla

[steelflanker 32]

Totaly mindblowing!!

Man I can't wait to get that on my hard drive.

[fallenphoenix1986 603]

So either that particular Kiev ain't modeled as a carrier or were getting sinkable cariers?

 

Craig

[+Crusader 2,077]

8 more new pics on google+

[+Stary 2,426]

So either that particular Kiev ain't modeled as a carrier or were getting sinkable cariers?

 

Craig

I think the second one

Haha! TK listened to my today's request at Thirdwire, asking for some new screens

 

It's lovely shots

 

One more thing -particles are subtely reflected in water too (I was worried about this) can't wait to try my Unified Effects pack with this one

Edited February 4, 2012 by Stary

[+76.IAP-Blackbird 3,554]

I have to say, that I would like to see this graphics in a Fleet Command Sequel! Looks Great!

[+Crusader 2,077]

So either that particular Kiev ain't modeled as a carrier or were getting sinkable cariers?

 

Craig

 

TK posted on TW forum long ago that if sinkable carriers are required for gameplay he will make them sinkable.

So go figure

[+Florian 394]

Looking at the last picture i see two separate dual launchers pointing to the target. Do we now get multiple missile launchers on one ship?

[+Stary 2,426]

from Google+

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I still can't understand why they keep the 6 years old cloud bitman though

[+Stary 2,426]

is it me or these are Yaks lined on Kiev...?