Jump to content

Menrva

+MODDER
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content count

    4,443

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    45

Everything posted by Menrva

  1. My extended thanks to the team for this release. We need proper ODS skins for the ODS 30AE mod. Any volunteers? References are available here: https://dstorm.eu/pages/en/usa/c-2.html
  2. Most have probably missed this fact that with Strike Fighters 2 North Atlantic, additional types.ini statements for a terrain have been introduced. Here below you'll find the extra ones: [TargetTypeXXX] Reported=FALSE DetailLevel=2 FadeWithDistance=TRUE IgnoreHeading=TRUE AdjustZBuffer=FALSE The most interesting and useful statement is DetailLevel. The Ground Objects graphics setting in the options has always been rather pointless in Strike Fighters as it would only affect randomly parked aircraft. This DetailLevel statement makes it much more useful when applied to most if not all target types defined in a terrain's types.ini. DetailLevel=3 means that the target type will spawn only when Ground Object settings are set to Unlimited, a value of 1 means that the target type will only spawn when Ground Object settings are set to Medium or higher. The below screenshots show it clearly. Ground Objects set to Unlimited; even the smallest eye-candy objects are shown, loading times are obviously higher. Ground Objects set to Low; only priority objects (those that should be targets for missions) are shown, loading times are quicker. The downside is that it requires a terrain modder to add such DetailLevel statement to each of the eye-candy objects in a types.ini file. If you have 300 or more, you can imagine it takes quite a bit of work and trial and error to choose which priority to assign to each object. This update/feature will be part of the IraqWA terrain in a future update of the ODS 30AE mod. The other statements are also used in the stock IcelandNA terrain, here below a summary of what I managed to figure out about them: FadeWithDistance - No matter what, it doesn't seem to work. it would have been cool to have terrain objects fade like TOD entities; most likely this is a placeholder for something TK never implemented properly. IgnoreHeading - Rather self-explanatory, it makes the object type ignore the heading you give to it in a terrain target area of the targets.ini file. TK uses it for the countless tree LODs created for the IcelandNA terrain. AdjustZBuffer - When set to false for runways, they suffer from heavy z-buffering issues on tile based terrains. Most likely this option was needed for specific runways on the IcelandNA terrain, since runway LODs are placed over another LOD, that of the terrain. For our usual tile based terrains, this statement may be of little to no use. Reported - The only statement I couldn't figure out. For sure you wouldn't set it to false for main terrain objects. This info may be useful to terrain modders wiling to optimize their own terrains and make them more scalable depending on graphics settings. Please admins, pin this topic for future reference.
  3. @Wilches I should have specified, do NOT use Photoshop. It doesn't save 8bit bitmaps properly. Now you have to start from scratch. Extract the water bitmap via TFDtool, repaint green and yellow areas with MS Paint. Use MS Paint or it'll most likely break.
  4. I don't know what you're trying to achieve. Just look at the IcelandNA water bitmap. You have to use the same exact green and yellow colors (respectively indicating where friendly and enemy fleets can spawn), save it as 8bit. It's best to use MS Paint for this. You need to have ships in the GroundObject folder, with their data properly updated to SF2NA standards. Then you just have to pray and hope the game spawns stuff like you wish. Nothing else can be done. I cannot help more than this. Use the search bar on the site, I already explained how to create water bitmaps properly on several topics.
  5. I think there's quite a lot of confusion over here. Carrier Stations are never used in single missions, they exist only for campaign use. Adding ship objects to those target areas won't achieve nothing apart from having static ships able to fire back. Naval fleets ala SF2 North Atlantic just require a proper water.bmp and the NavalMap=TRUE statement. You cannot control where the fleet exactly spawns on game generated missions, that's a limitation you cannot overcome. Only in campaign data we can specify precisely where a naval fleet or a static carrier station can be. Fleets ala SF2NA are dynamically spawned objects, nothing to do with terrain target areas.

  6. Mirage F1EQ-6

    Menrva reviewed ludo.m54's file in Mirage F1

    Yet another masterpiece addition to the huge family of Mirage F1s! Congrats to the Mirage F.1 Team for a very well researched and polished addition.
  8. No. I don't think any of my terrains ever got a campaign (with the exception of IraqWA getting one from yours truly with the ODS 30AE mod, and the Iran-Iraq war mod using a much outdated version of the same terrain). When I released my first terrains, community members who used to make campaign mods had already left. I very much doubt we'll see campaigns for any of those, there's little to no interest in those terrains I released (TexasASC is one of the worst IMHO, it needs a rework). I'm already busy with the ODS mod, so I don't have time to spare in the making of other campaigns.

  9. E-3A RSAF

    Menrva commented on PeacePuma's file in Other

    @PeacePuma Great job mate! Do you mind if I include this in the next iteration of the ODS 30AE mod? With due credits to you of course. The E-3D we use has a number of issues, so this E-3A with fake-pilot CFM engines should be a much better alternative.
  10. I fail to see where I've been negative. Actually, I wanted to add something positive, that is, more correct information instead of such a misleading topic title. It's okay, next time I'll simply shut up.
  11. It's not game engine wise, but you're entitled to believe what you want. I already explained above why. If you want to have a parked aircraft be attacked by gunners, it works, but it's just a workaround that applies to Aircraft objects, not GroundObject ones. I won't repeat myself a third time.
  12. Well, to be honest I don't see anything special about it or in its data. It's no wonder gunners would target it simply because it's an aircraft, not a ground object. We know this since ages; it is possible to create a standalone parked aircraft from any aircraft object (done already by comrpnt, like his Static SFP1 Stock Aircraft Pack, Static WOV Stock Aircraft Pack and Static WOE Stock Aircraft Pack), and then manually add them to airbases by editing mission files. It's just a mere workaround that would only work with aircraft. The title of the topic is misleading, we're talking about aircraft objects really, not proper ground object entities.
  13. It's not a grey filter really, you'd be disappointed when you see it. Anyway, it's achieved by using one of those blending ops in the DTVFilterMaterial (INV_DST or INV_SRC, can't remember which one of the two) and by giving it a black texture instead of the stock GreenTVFilter texture.
  14. You can't, it's not possible on Strike Fighters. The way it works, the filter is applied through one of a few DirectX blending operations. Me and guuruu experimented with it after I discovered other blending operations we can use, more details here: Unused Blending Operations - Thirdwire: Strike Fighters 2 Series - Mods & Skinning Discussion - CombatACE. We managed to achieve some sort of grey IR filter but it's far from being acceptable, lights and the sky are colored and it would only work under certain times of day with other side issues. SF2 includes and makes use of few DX10 features; some other, more advanced blend ops are not implemented at all. It may be possible to achieve a grey IR filter through a custom shader for the DTV filter material, but I haven't succeeded so far in creating one.
  15. You joke but it's also real: At 44:30 he mentions a Pilot Activated Automatic Recovery System. It was implemented starting in 1994 on the Nighthawk, but the Soviets had a similar system since the 1950s. Not to mention that the theory behind stealth aircraft was conceived by Pyotr Yakovlevich Ufimtsev, Soviet physicist and mathematician.
  16. I haven't looked into your campaign data yet, but that's the most probable reason why it ends prematurely. You can make the ground war start at a later day, not as soon as the campaign starts. You can find out how by looking at the campaign data I made for ODS 30AE.

  17. F-22A Raptor Skin Pack

    Menrva posted a file in F-22

    Version 1.4

    358 downloads

    F-22A Raptor Skin Pack October 13th, 2021 (1st Release) by Menrva >For Strike Fighters 2 games This is an extra skin pack for the high quality F-22A Raptor aircraft add-on. Most skins are based on ideas and depictions from other videogames. Here below a list of the included ones: -YF-22 Paint Scheme (inspired by the real YF-22 prototype) -Sea Raptor Livery (inspired by the F-22N Sea Raptor concept) -Saudi Grey Camouflage (as depicted in Digital Image Design's F-22 Total Air War) -Egyptian Woodland Camouflage (as depicted in Digital Image Design's F-22 Total Air War) -USAF Pac West Camouflage (as depicted in Digital Image Design's F-22 Total Air War) -Desert Lightning Camouflage (as depicted in NovaLogic's F-22 Lightning 3) -Phoenix Livery (from Namco Hometek's Air Combat, as depicted in Ace Combat 7: Skies Unknown) -Phoenix Livery, Dark (as depicted in Project Aces' Ace Combat Infinity) -Scarface One Livery (as depicted in Namco Hometek's Ace Combat 2) -Z.O.E., Red Livery (from Namco Hometek's Ace Combat 2, as depicted in Project Aces' Ace Combat Infinity) -Mobius One, ISAF Livery (as depicted in Project Aces' Ace Combat 04: Shattered Skies) -Abell, Black Livery (as depicted in Project Aces' Ace Combat 04: Shattered Skies) -Razgriz Livery (from Project Aces' Ace Combat 5: The Unsung War, as depicted in Project Aces' Ace Combat 6: Fires of Liberation) -Pegas, 3-Tone Blue Camouflage (as depicted in Project Aces' Ace Combat 6: Fires of Liberation) -Indigo Wing Livery (as depicted in Project Aces' Ace Combat 6: Fires of Liberation) -Gryphus One Livery (from Access Games' Ace Combat X: Skies of Deception, as depicted in Project Aces' Ace Combat Infinity) -Warwolf Livery (as depicted in Project Aces' Ace Combat: Assault Horizon) -Mobius One, IUN Livery (as depicted in Project Aces' Ace Combat 7: Skies Unknown) -Trigger Livery (as depicted in Project Aces' Ace Combat 7: Skies Unknown) -JASDF 2-Tone Blue Camouflage (as depicted in Project Aces' Ace Combat 7: Skies Unknown) As a bonus, different aircraft configuration files are included in the "(Alternative Data)" folder. You'll be able to choose between realistic loadouts (default configuration of the aircraft add-on package) and what-if loadouts inspired by the mentioned F-22 videogames of the late 90s, namely weapons included in F-22 Lightning 3. Both configurations are also available with the addition of invisible skids; those will allow you to perform belly landings, which are a feature of good old F-22 Total Air War. Notes: -The B61 tactical nuclear bomb is a retarded version, but drop it safely from high altitude at high speed. Take note that it does not damage the stock Runway object, due to the armor values of it. The B61 is meant to be used against naval fleets you may encounter on some custom terrains. -You need to tweak the SoundList.ini file in order to fully experience any new sounds. Read "(Add to SoundList)" for further details, and remember to extract the SoundList.ini file from the FlightData.cat archive, if you do not have a custom one in your mod folder already. >Credits (in no particular order): -yakarov79, for his high quality templates which allowed me to easily put some new paint on the aircraft. -ravenclaw_007, for sharing some of his latest weapon 3d models for the bonus what-if loadouts. -Astore, for providing me with better Ace Combat themed emblems, and for being one of the few Italian Ace Combat fans like me. -godrugalultimate, from DeviantArt, for making incredibly detailed Ace Combat themed decals. -RythusOmega, for providing all Ace Combat 7 emblems and whose skins have been used as reference for the Phoenix liveries. -Lanzerince, whose Ace Combat 7 skins have been used as reference for the Scarface livery. -mue, for his LOD Viewer which helped immensely in the making of the skins. -Blade, for sharing info about the purpose of the game's decal levels. -My girlfriend, for supporting me in all of my endeavors. >Disclaimer: This is a freeware; yet it can be redistributed ONLY in other CombatACE mods/mod packages. This mod may NOT in any way, shape or form be used in any payware additions.
  18. @UllyB I'm cool, I already left the discussion since it was pointless. Next time I should ignore certain posts. Can you add the Alpha Jet E to this big wishlist? I had suggested it a few posts ago but I think you missed it. If you exclude it from the list I won't be offended, it's huge already.
  19. Again, where did I mention it is available? I think you're misunderstanding quite a bit. Let me quote posts as they happened and tell me if I said otherwise. Then you said this after my post, and I must suppose you were referring to cocas' version if you missed angelp's posts at the screenshot thread. After that, angelp posted screenshots on this topic of his work in progress X-32 (not yet available, and miles different than cocas' F-32). However, you still continued to state it's not a proper X-32. So this left me with a big WTF. I give the benefit of the doubt that you were initially referring to cocas' version, though the way it was worded it was quite confusing to my eyes. But I don't understand why you stated the same in front of a yet to be released X-32 that angelp teased over here. I hope it is clear now.
  20. It looks like you are salty and want a fight somehow. It's your mistake if you were referring to cocas' F-32 while I explicitly mentioned angelp's version which was shown in the screenshots thread a few days ago (and honestly you weren't referring to cocas' version either, you criticized angelp's version even after he showed it here as well). So, it seems to me you f*cked up and don't want to admit it. At this point it's clear you want to be trolling and I am saddened to see this happen, I did not expect such toxic behavior from you.
  21. Well, the way you worded the message it sounded different to me. It is language barrier I guess, it happens to misunderstand. Again, about the X-32, angelp also wants to reproduce the real one, but without many references that is the best he got at the moment. So, instead of saying look at the pictures, I think it'd be best to share those references, no? If you don't want, it's no problem, but then what was the point of the message? The only thing we got closer to an X-32 was cocas' F-32, and that one looked nothing like the real X-32. Apart from this, peace brother. russouk2004 was making a U-2R, then I think he had to leave modding due to RL issues. So yeah, I think the U-2R is a good suggestion to the list. Though the list is big already, may I add the Alpha Jet E? In theory we have Florian's wonderful Alpha Jet A, the E version features a different nose compared to the A. If only we had a source file of that one, an E version would be much feasible to make.
  22. Hmm, I am genuinely wondering what is wrong about it to be honest. We were shown two 3d models, one featuring the delta-wing of the X-32 prototype, the other featuring the revised wings Boeing had designed after further JSF program requirements. If you have more info and references, I think it'd be more constructive to share those instead of spitting on new additions for a dwindling game and community. I know angelp did his best to reproduce the different X-32s with the few references he had. The only what-if I see in those is the skin, and weapon loadouts of course. Also, I do not get this point. UllyB is willing to bring something to the table for everyone. I think it is no good for the community that some aircraft are not recreated just because few privileged or lucky end-users still have such models that cannot be distributed. What is the point of that? To share is to care IMHO. Even if some old-timers have exclusive access, it'd be nicer if the roster of CombatACE aircraft could be expanded to include those which IMHO cannot be defined as existing for the community as a whole. There are aircraft I'd like to feature in the ODS opera omnia mod we're slowly improving for completeness sake, but obviously I cannot feature capun's Mohawk and other such aircraft as they are not for everyone as per capun's wishes. Just my two cents. As for cockpits, I'm not against having aircraft without one, we have tons of those and usually I keep them for AI use in proper scenarios where they are needed. Having an aircraft 3d model done is already a good step, the community can always produce a proper cockpit at a later stage (though chances for this are very slim at this time). And giving how nicely detailed cockpits are more complex to recreate, I'd rather focus on aircraft overall.
  23. My pick is the X-15, I'd be very interested to see it in Strike Fighters. But also the S-2 Tracker would be a nice addition to the ODS mod. The X-32 is being made by @angelp as far as I know, so I don't think we need someone else start a new one from scratch. The C-2A Greyhound was made by Veltro2k but it is still unreleased and maybe someday Wrench will release it. It will be included in a future update of the ODS mod with specific tweaks, though. Unfortunately no, there is no OV-1C. The one you found is a dead post, it was made by capun of the A-Team, then the Strike Fighters community got divided long ago and A-Team stuff got fully removed from CombatACE. Such stuff is only released on the A-Team site which is not exactly end-user friendly nor freely available for downloads. So yeah, the Mohawk would be a nice addition to the CombatACE roster of aircraft as well. Even better, I would wish such a decade long rift would be solved, but when I joined CA it had happened already and I'm not fully aware of how it unfolded. I don't mean to open old wounds, I'm sure both sides have reasons. The 3d models are inaccurate, from the canopy shape to the F-35C having just one wheel on the nose instead of two wheels as required for carrier ops. Back when those models were made, the F-35s were not even operational, so such inaccuracies had to be expected. I was working on revamping Klavs81's F-35 cockpit with tons of .ini tricks and new textures, but even that 3d model leaves a lot to be desired for SF2 (it was made for SF1 at the time, and SF1 had more limited functions for cockpits). A brand new cockpit 3d model with more realism and functions would be quite difficult to recreate on Strike Fighters' engine, so the old one could do okay anyway.
  24. I think you have a corrupt/incomplete downloaded .ISO file or the tool you used to extract the .ISO messed up badly. There's no such thing as installe.exe and installx.bin files. Inside the .ISO you should find the following (check screenshot): The completely downloaded file weighs 3.47 GB. The ISO does not need to be extracted, you can mount it directly on a virtual drive if you're on Win10 or Win11 (more details here: How to mount ISO images on Windows 10 | Windows Central). If you really want to unpack it, you should use the latest available version of 7-Zip.
  25. They don't, I mean TK doesn't. TK created the server and no moderators exist for his TW server. Actually, it is surprising it is plagued very rarely by spammers, but nobody can remove any such posts from the server when they happen. TK does not deal at all with his own server, technical support for end-users is non existent. I'm sure there are fans who would gladly help him manage the server, but he's not interested in any interaction at all with the community. BTW, ThirdWire is a one-man development team, it's just TK at this time.
×

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..

  I accept