Jump to content

Gunrunner

+PLATINUM MEMBER
  • Content count

    1,278
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    2

Gunrunner last won the day on October 22 2015

Gunrunner had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

189 Neutral

1 Follower

About Gunrunner

  1. If I were TK, I'd open-source the engine under a strict-ish licence, keeping myself as the manager/maintainer and concentrate on selling games based upon it, content for them and let the community do the heavy lifting that I no longer have the financial means to do. Anyway... I did my part not by contributing to what I consider a ill-managed fundraising campaign, but by buying one more SF2 complete package.
  2. Damn, he really isn't any good at this business and financing thing isn't he ?
  3. The funny thing, because it's setup as a donation with no guarantee or strings attached and the timeframe is entirely unreasonable for the amount and the size of the active community at the present time, many people who would or could contribute, or contribute more are just staying away from it because they are NOT willing to give money to TK to finance further mobile games. TK screwed himself with this one and will once more get bitter with us and use this whole fiasco as a further excuse not to care about us. @russouk2004 The problem with that attitude is that you're far from the only one in that situation, I certainly am too, and it's this lack of goodwill and trust that TK created over the years that is also harming his current "effort"; We'd rather wait and see, at the risk of dooming the project, than blindly trust TK... A few years ago he might have made it though.
  4. Yeah, I might misinterprete the conditions of the site, as might have TK when setting it up, I wasn't suggesting he is out to scam the community, just that the site doesn't seem to work the way we've grown accustomed to with other crowd-funding sites. To me (from clicking on "Keep it all" on the campaign page) plus (from the How it works page) plus the fact it's a tool for fundraisers, not crowdfunding plus (from the Terms of Service) It all suggests my interpretation is correct.
  5. Let's see, the way the fundraising is setup TK expects to raise at least $25k in 2 weeks, and keep the money if that goal is not reached, without having to provide anything in return... Even if I still had the funds set aside for when TK finally stopped being an ass, under these conditions... nope.
  6. Let's see, considering the history of similar initiatives, the absence of an actual list of fixes and features planned and a keep-it-all financing model... We'll see in, somewhat appropriately, two weeks.
  7. Nowhere to be found, at least they don't extract, which might mean 5 things, from most to least probable : - They were omitted from the DLCData028.cat intentionnally with the calls for them as a placeholder. <<== (Innocent looking arrow pointing at the most probable reason, considering other decals are in the same situation.) - The were omitted from the DLCData028.cat by error. - They are aliased to another decal set. (Nope, they don't show up.) - There was an error in the name of the decal called. (But there is no eligible decal in the DLCData028.cat or anything close to what they should be in any other CAT.) - For some reason they don't extract AND don't show up on CAT extractors AND don't show up in-game. (Yeah, riiiiiight.)
  8. It's a known problem with some old models that were either not meant for the "new" dynamic shadow model, or had bugged meshes that were never fixed by the author. The easiest fix is to disable the shadows on that particular plane, it's not ideal but usually the only clean solution. You can do that by locating the Objects/Aircraft/[PlaneName]/[PlaneName].ini file for the plane with a problem and change : ... [Shadow] CastShadow=TRUE ... to ... [Shadow] CastShadow=FALSE ...
  9. Actually they engage, they are marked as being engaged in level bombing, but since getting out of that state (and following the next waypoint, or trying another pass) requires dropping their bombs and they can't/won't, they remain in the level bombing mode, flying level, straight in the same direction. The dive bombing profile is different because there's a distance to target/altitude set of conditions for getting out of it and doing another pass, so even if there is no weapon release, they disengage and try another pass, "endlessly". At least the part I identified, you can see it by using the debug HUD info, it tells you which AI profile the plane you're observing is performing, the strike crafts going straight endlessly are stuck in level bombing.
  10. That's the same bug, but using two different bombing profiles*, the one Menrva describes is when guided bombs are mounted on AI flights trying to perform dive bombing attacks, the one described by Major Bloodnok is when they try to perform level bombing attacks with the same loadout. * Don't ask me how the engine decides which to perform with FIGHTER or ATTACK planes, the same mission, with the same planes and loadout doesn't always lead to the same bombing profil being used by the AI, there's probably a RNG and a chance for each in some file for each plane type and mission type, but I haven't bothered searching for it. Only BOMBER are predictable as in my experience they only use level bombing.
  11. Excellent job... any chance of a template being released? /me dones his rivet-counter hat Nooooowwww, on a less positive note... - The flare boxes are untextured. - The ground crews need a good talking to because the state of the B versions is simply disgraceful (you forgot to remove or tone down a weathering/dirt layer when exporting the B skins, except the Tiger Meet one). - The front "exhausts" behind the air intakes do not all have shadows "baked" and some use the top colour rather than the bottom, making them "asymetric". You must be sick of staring at all the skins you have to manage and small mistakes like these are easy to let slip (hence the template question, so you can concentrate on releases and OCD twits like myself can "fix" things themselves without pestering you).
  12. I'm using a mix of Paint.NET (for 95% of the work, and it's free) and Photoshop CC (the monthly version) for the rest (mostly TGA work - Paint.NET sucks at it - and converting modern PSD templates to be read by Paint.NET - there's a PSD plugin but it doesn't play well with files from beyond version 7.x). Be aware that the modern Photoshop interface and keyboard layout is radically different from what you're used to, it might be a pain to adapt at first.
  13. Yes, it's normal, you don't return exactly at the same heading and it depends on your airspeed. The NORMAL behaviour is closer to the real thing. Oh, by the way, it's spelt "rudder".
  14. Ships on terrain

    I thought of it but then they wouldn't be in this long close single-file formation, the second picture could under some circumstances have been that, but the first couldn't. @don246 Glad to have been of help.
  15. Ships on terrain

    Considering the formation in the first picture, I'm willing to bet that in the DATA.INI of that particular ship, the GroundObjectRole is set to TRANSPORT rather than CARGO_SHIP.
×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use, Privacy Policy, and We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue..