VonBeerhofen

A new feature was added to EAWPRO which changes the flightmodel's behaviour to allow for a wider range of aircraft. The feature was added to the EAW.INI entry FlightModel=X which now can use 4 values: 0 = off 1 = pre WWII planes 2 = WWII planes (default) 3 = post WWII planes There's probably a bit more to do but the switches are working. VonBeerhofen

You do whatever you must do Mr. Jelly, I have no need for your tools, as I told you on multiple occasions, why do you keep offering them? My hexeditor can enter ANY field in ANY file with ANY number. It can even change entire columns with a specific range of values with or without a certain amount of randomness, there's really nothing like it. It for instance can randomise a single object's postion in the EAW_TTD where ever that object is sitting in the file, or ANY range of TMODS. It can copy paste just those objects into a new file, so they're all sitting behind each other, the object or entire blocks of objects can be moved a line up or down or 100 lines, without destroying the data in that line, reverse or rotate the data, invert or encrypt their values, add or subtract a single value to a column, line or an entire block in which certain positions can remain untouched, it's possibillities are almost beyond comprehension and is the most powerfull tool I have ever created. Even today after 10 years of use I get new ideas on how to use it It can do this to all filetypes in EAW, including all 30 planes in the PLANES.DAT. I hope you can do something with that information because it renders all your editors practically obsolete I'm sorry to say. So I don't think there's any problem whatsoever and what you say only goes for your tool, which I'm obviously not using. It's just a hexadecimal value in a file and anyone can take control of it. VonBeerhsofen

Weren't you the one who called up the codegroup in the thread ''Coders head over the the Erk's mess at the Gen '' a few days after I forcefully returned into SimHQ because Mr. Jerlly, another codegroup member, had stolen EAWPRO, and tried to organise the codegroup to get me banned again? And weren't you also not the one who did exactly the same thing in the Gen's public forum, to which I posted a URL to show that you had been banned yourself for a year, after that call to get rid of me? Weren't you the one who wrote a post in HQ that I was now in this forum SPREADING HATE, a post which should have gotten you banned, but instead got erased by Sandbagger and replaced with a warning to move on? Mind you I saved them all onto my drive and there were others I pointed to these threads as soon as I found them. Are you here to accomplish the same thing? VonBeerhofen

Don't worry guys, I don't have any use for Mr. Jelly's tools, although I do occasionally use them. The tools I have develloped are way more sophisticated. As I said the ME262 with the .88 nose canon was tested to work fine in the Launchpad long ago. These are just hex values in a file and any hexeditor can change them. If I recall Mark is right, there is an earlier version which allows direct editing of the gun values, not sure if it's still active in later versions. It could have been the value in the top left pane, which shows the adress locations and the set value. I just no longer really need them but they served their purpose pretty well. VonBeerhsofen

Since stock v1.2's gunvalues don't allow the gun's full ranges to be used and the weapon names don't work when values are in between two callibres the routine was rewritten. It will allow deviations from the standard hitpower without loosing the weapon names and adds the possibillity of a 50mm weapon or higher. The stock values are 2, 4, 12, 24, however any single byte value can be used, so the maximum hitpower value can be 255. That would probably be a callibre the size of a medieval canonball or so, which is obviously not very usefull but it can be set. I've choosen 36 for the 50mm, since the value is the same when the 20 and 30 mm hitpower values are added up which I think will be a reasonable representation of the weapon. Ofcourse the ME262's nosemounted .88 is also a feasable option and I should have it's value somewhere when we tested it with an RAF pilot and friend, may he rest in peace, who flew Meteors in the Korean war and who also described the weapon's devastation It principally means that there's more room to precisely modify the PLANES.DAT's weapon's values to more historical accurate hitpower of weapons, which by default aren't incorporated. Another advantage is that in combination with the plane's armour values planes can be better ballanced against each other in terms of matching the planes advantages/disadvantages vs the other planes. Ofcourse the routine was optimised to run much faster, :) VonBeerhofen

Sorry m8 I don't know where your paranoic ideas come from but I do know that you said to adapt a more positive view when nothing negative was said and that no attack was made on any version. The 1.2 upgrade is out there and that's the only thing that concerns me, I hope it helps people to keep having fun with EAW and I hope you and Jelly feel the same, :) VonBeerhofen

How about the pilotmap icon and pilotmap issue or my simple 3D objects with 256 polygons and a fully working R/S? How about the so called bugs that were no bugs? There's probably a lot more I can think of when I set my heart to it but I don't want to. Keep entertaining these people Rotton, I'm outahere because I've been through this about a 1000 times. You always drag unrelated topics into it, just read how many times you refer to another forum, portray yourself as an angel and always end up screaming murder. I don't see any reason why you entered into this discussion other then to be provocative and derail the thread as usual, people with malintent will always find a reason . Anyway, I've had enough of it, no attack was ever made on any version, period. VonBeerhofen

Let me make on thing very clear, v1.1 is NOT as challenge to V1.2 and v1.2 is NOT achallenge to EAWPRO or v1.60. EAWPRO is NOT a challenge to v1.60 and I'm definately not challenging v1.60 with whatever I create, because v1.60 does NOT work on my machine. Nothing I write relating to EAWPRO, or other versions in my posession, ONLY relate to those versions and can not possibly be a challenge to whatever version or game. These are all standalone creations which have no simmilarity with any other creation, other then having planes in them. Since I can not challenge v1.60 for what it is other then what I've read about it, I do not understand that people feel challenged nonetheless and feel the need to come into an inconspicuous thread dealing with v1.2, which is no challenge to anything really, but merely gives people an extra choice, as do EAWPRO and v1.60. Whatever people try to drag into this conversation, I have no interest whatsoever in v1.60 because it doesn't work on my computer, and as such I can't challenge it either. Yet people are trying to proof that I DID challenge that version prior to Rotton's appearance, but rereading my posts I can't find anything that even remotely hints at that version. You will never read anything about that version in my threads written by me, unless others draw me into a debate about it or try to challenge my creations, what I write is general information available to anyone and known throughout the EAW community. Sure enough this is a free forum for all and I can't stop people from entering my threads and write whatever they feel like writing, no matter how unrelated. It would however be a great help to this forum when people would have such unrelated debates in their own threads about their own versions, so I have a choice to stay out of it. I don't have that choice in my own threads dealing with my own creations, sure enough I can keep my mouth shut when under attack but that would mean giving in to other people's challenges and/or unfounded attacks, like for instance about 3D plane shadows. I have a right to work in peace on my creations but appearently it's not allowed. I have no reason to enter anyone's thread which doesn't deal with my creations or doesn't challenge my work, so why do people feel they have the right to come into mine, when it's not dealing with their creations? Is that normal behaviour or is that something much more worrying? Saying detrimental things in another forum is a two way street, or perhaps better a threeway, when we include Mr. Jelly, but that's no reason to coninue the same thing inhere. I stand by my words, wether people like it or not. VonBeerhofen

Your desription of events is not factual but you seem to be pretty intent on dragging this thread into another endless debate about what happened, which I'm not willing to persue as my time is too precious. What happened can be read in the posts in this thread and there's nothing in it that should spark a debate about EAWPRO or v1.60. There's also nothing to challenge when I mention that certain gameversions don't work on my computer, it's a fact I've mentioned before and I think people can understand the limitations of legacy computers, however it's that statement which is challenged and it turns into a cross examination to which the answers have been supplied already on numerous occasions. It's a cascade of unrelated posts from the moment Rotton enters and the question is why? My previous question still stands but remains unanswered. I think you should stop trying to drag this thread into another endless debate and let me do my work in peace, instead of further undermining my effort. VonBeerhofen

People should ask themselves why Rotton followed me inhere and entered this thread in the first place. Was it to thank me for the effort and encourage me to be even more creative? And why keeps Mr. Jelly posting totally unrelated information to this thread? Is it to praise me for my effort or is it just masking another brutal attack on me and my work? Talking about an off topic EAWPRO doesn't change the fact that it's trying to hide a brutal attack for no reason whatsoever. Why does this happen again and again whenever I start a totally innocent thread which is meant to help. Why is the subject being changed into more attacks and my credibillity undermined, and what is it contributing? Did I say something to deserve this? This thread is about a v1.2 update which makes it work on newer operasting systems, not about EAWPRO or v1.60. The question I asked is totally ignored but still stands. VonBeerhofen

Don't try and go that route again with me Mr. Jelly. The fact that I'm first told to adapt a more postive attitude when nothing negative was said and the follow up smear campaign to turn me into the bad guy are direct attacks on me and my work and is totally uncalled for. What is innuendo in the fact that v1.60 isn't working on my legacy machine? Do you think I'm lying? Why do the both of you keep messing up honoust threads which are meant to help the EAW community? Do you think that it will keep people flying EAW or help me devellop my work further? The EAW community is well aware of what's been going on for a very long time now. I've asked this question in another forum and I will ask it here again, will you and Rotton allow me to do my work in peace or will you keep haunting me with your unfounded accusations whenever I post something of interest? VonBeerhofen

Once again, v1.60 has nothing to do with my release of a 1.2 version or the fact that there are people who may not be able to run other versions. It's merely trying to hide the fact that a person is brutally trying to discredit me and my work without any reason, both in this forum and in another. VonBeerhofen

I strongly object to the above form of personal attack in a thread which is meant to help this community. This thread holds no threat to any version, in fact there's no mention of any version prior to Rotton's appearance and that goes for simmilar threads in another forum. Perhaps I should be sorry for the low specs of my computer but I'm not, neither should anyone else who can not afford a top of the line machine or is simply trying to hang on to their old machines because they do the required job and it's all they need. Why would this release or the fact that my computer is incapable of running certain versions of a game have any impact on those versions at all? If it works good then people will be happy campers and stick to their choice, however when it doesn't then people have the right to an alternative, which is what I'm trying to provide. If people want a cross examination then this is the wrong thread for it, even more so because the answers have long been provided without any further result other then unfounded accusations. VonBeerhofen

I can't be positive about something that doesn't work on my machines. As for the computer specs and visiting old threads in HQ, I doubt wether anyone has any interest in them but you. I recall the same questions being asked about a month or so ago, also in a thread which had nothing to do with v1.60. Why are you repeatedly trying to draw a positive release thread, which may help this community survive, into a negative one. I haven't said anything negative about you or v1.60. That it's not working is just a fact but further unrelated to the topic of the 1.2 version. You obviously doubt my findings relating to v1.60 as has happened on numerous occasions, but you keep dragging that version into anything I say, at moments which have nothing to do with it. When I then reitterate that it doesn't work you try to turn me into a bad guy which isn't particularly helping with me trying to remain productive for this community. Can't you be positive for once, if only for those who now have an alternative? I encourage anyone to play the version they like and I don't care which one that is, as I've also said on numerous occasions. Once again v1.60 is totally offtopic here, so are EAWPRO or v1.1a. 1.2 update is released and there's nothing more to be said other then that I hope it will solve some people's issues. I hope that's positive enough for you. VonBeerhofen

We've been through these questions several times since 2010, I suggest you reread those threads in HQ. They're still the same computers and I hope you'll find the answers to your questions, which are obviously your concern. My concern is those people who have simmilar systems as mine, or lack the knowledge and understanding on how to make their games work with those legacy machines or even newer ones. I hope the patch will get them going again so they can continue playing the game when revisited, the same way they were used to. In that respect v1.60 is totally off topic as it's no longer comparable in any way with v1.2 VBH