Jump to content

RIBob

JUNIOR MEMBER
  • Content count

    177
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

14 Neutral

About RIBob

  1. Track IR and FE 2

    Thanks for the info; I'll try TrackIR w/o mouse emulation and see how it goes. Do you have pertinent links to such info which might assist me? A newbie here to Track IR, and so asking for all possible help. Which DOF is not "built-in"? Having 5 out of 6 seems odd. Any way to overcome the missing DOF? Thanks in advance! RIBob
  2. Mods, please re-post to appropriate forum.; probably a dupe. I just today got Track IR (latest (2019) iteration) working in conjunction with FE 2. An amazing, and immersive difference! I have tried this TIR device/program with other flight sims, and at this point, it works well with FE 2 and EAWPRO. The trick is to install the program, get it running, and then shut down. After re-start, go back to TIR main folder, and look for mouse emulator application. Make a shortcut to this application to a convenient place. After that, start TIR, center your headview, diminish TIR screen, and them click on mouse emulator program shortcut. Then start the game. An incredible difference! Cannot overstate the necessity to use the feature in order for it to become second-nature. Haviing just begun to do so, I'll NEVER go back to the very limited hat switch. YMMV. Disclaimer: No personal financial interest in mfr/vendor.
  3. Is there an over-riding reason to use SF 1 as a point of departure, as opposed to SF 2? I understand there are considerable differences between the two versions of SF, and that the same difference pertains to First Eagles 1 and 2, the WW I flight sim. It being a fact that "TK", a designer of EAW, also played a major part in the designing of FE1 and SF1, perhaps explains the compatibility of the games, at least to some extent. The number of recent submissions for both SF1 and FE 1 has declined over time, with most modding work being done with the very different "2" versions of both games. In that instance, the number of submissions for both "2" versions of the game has been considerable, and is ongoing. It is worth mentioning that some FE1/SF1 mods may work in FE2/SF2, but the converse is seldom possible. It is likely that the mods for FE1/SF1 when installed into the "2" versions of the game will require some tweaking, but perhaps not. Perhaps the Mods which work with little or no issues are relatively simple ones. It is presumed that FE1/SF1 version of the game is much more like EAW than is the second "2" versions, and that is why you chose the "1" version with which to experiment. That is understandable. That said, is EAW inherently incompatible with the "2" versions of FE2/SF2? If so, then that explains your choice. If not, then may I suggest considering the "2" versions of FE/SF games as a better departure point? FWIW, I consider both FE 2 (Modded), and SF 2 (modded) as exemplary flight sims. The Modder community has gone a long way in modifying, and improving both sims to a remarkable degree, despite the somewhat outdated graphics. Even though less than (modern) top-tier, the graphics on both "2" versions of the games can be much improved with a modern computer and Gfx card, allowing both games to run at "full-option", as pertains to graphics. I have run some rather old games at "full option" settings on my new "Gaming computer" and the ability to run the graphics wide-open, with nothing downgraded, makes a surprising difference in many games. Depends on the game, of course, and perhaps some mods as well. Surprisingly, the semi-arcade game "Crimson Skies" seems to have benefited the most from having all Gfx options run at full capability. Admittedly, this was subsequent to applying the "Widescreen" patch/mod, which added the essential "csfix" patch (runs game on newer OpSys),and the "Widescreen" patch, which allows running at native monitor resolution. It is now a "NoCD" game, a distinct side benefit. Almost "Night vs. Day" difference in the graphics. It is also worth mentioning that the FE2/SF2 games are TrackIR-friendly, as is EAW, with some minor tweaks. I have not yet tried the latest version of V1.60 with TrackIR, but other versions of the game required only simple set-up of the TrackIR program itself, and inversion of the mouse "Y" axis within the game graphics preferences. I fully expect V1.60 to be TIR-friendly as well. Will report back on this. MarkEAW has recorded the major contributions of SkyHigh, and my minor contributions on this topic on his Help Site. So, with apologies for rambling a bit, and perhaps some ignorance, submitted for discussion.
  4. EAW Install Files

    Call me stupid--and some have done so-- but what I want is a simple-to-run V1.29 that does not require a lot of skull-sweat to install and run. IOW, a version of 1.29 that is as simple to run as the original game, with no fussing around. To my thinking, anything else is a step-away from the original game, and that's not what I am asking-for. I certainly appreciate the optional choices, but what I'm asking for is the most-advanced version of the original game, with no great differences from the original choices/options menu. In short, running the most advanced version of the original game just like the original game was run. Sorry If I sound demanding, or like a jackass. Don't mean to do so. Probably my fault for not describing my requirements better, and possibly my fault for not fully understanding what has been offered.
  5. Outdated graphics?

    May I interject with some possibly uninformed and ignorant comments? Nothing new, lol. I recently got Microsoft "Crimson Skies" to run on my win 10 "gaming computer". This computer is not cutting edge, but not far from it. After installing "CS", patching it, and installing some Mods, I found I was finally able to activate some features in the game graphics selections, namely "Shadows". Had never been able to do so before. This simple feature. once activated transformed the graphics in some scenarios. Absolutely stunning was the difference. Previously, all the gfx choices were maxxed-out; at least those that the game allowed. Some were downgraded by the game, and resisted any attempt on my part to select them--"Shadows" being a case in point. In lesser computers, the game disallowed some gfx options. What is possible for a different game bears little direct application to EAW. Apples and oranges. I get that. I also get that EAW has come inherent gfx challenges. That said, the addition of the ostensibly simple gfx addition of "Shadows" feature to "Crimson Skies" was a HUGE boost to the visual depiction of the game. Not possible, even with the fairly ancient Crimson Skies game without a fairly good computer set-up. The point here is that modern computers, perforce running modern Operating Systems and modern GFX cards can wring much more out of older games, such as EAW, than one might suspect. Some obscure gfx features, once activated, and in conjunction with all of the gfx features being able to be turned-up to max can help to give the EAW game (and other games) some additional life. The desire to keep EAW viable and compatible on older computers is understandable, and laudable. However, the future is with more powerful computers and modern graphics cards. Past a certain point, older computers become quite expensive to keep running. BTDT. FWIW, I spent some money and time upgrading my Win 7 Pro computer today; namely cloning and installing a 2 Tb SSD. I'll keep the older comp for a while, but I know it will only be for a while. The future is elsewhere. Newer, more capable, computers can possibly allow unexpected advantages compared to older computers, as depicted above. There is a synergy available in being able to activate/max-out various gfx features. Now, I understand game playability as opposed to gfx features. I prefer playability, if forced to make a choice. With a modern computer, one is not forced to make such a choice; one can have both. Submitted for discussion.
  6. EAWHS Files Section Updated

    I will offer unskilled help. No telling what's in old files. As you mention, lots of stuff forgotten, but valuable nevertheless. I think it very important to "attribute" such contributions to the original contributor when possible, and if such is not known, state so, and ask for informed info as to original contributor ; such revised info to be posted as such becomes available/confirmed. They deserve credit for their contributions, and I'm sure all here would agree that they should get it.
  7. EAWHS Files Section Updated

    Interesting topic. I was astonished that I "took" to Assembler programming so many years ago, after struggling with other languages that were supposedly "easier'. It has been decades since I did anything but learn Assembler in school, but I distinctly recall that most students were overwhelmed by the complexities/opportunities offered by Assembler language. I found it exhilarating, but others found it daunting. OTOH, some of these same students outperformed me in the "easier" languages. I reckon that my class was almost all pretty smart people; The preference for/against Assembler was personal/self-imposed, and not purely intellectual. NOT to be construed as an offer for advice on Assembler language! Like I said, it's been decades.
  8. Like most, I reckon, I prefer a wider angle of view, which, as you note, is something different from a simply enlarged, mistakenly-termed "widescreen" view. If I interpret your comments correctly, then the largest 4:3 window that fits within one's monitor is probably the upper limit, in view of not encountering 'stretching" of the essential gunsight. The reduction in apparent font size of the "essential info" displayed on lower corner of screen, as screen resolution is greatly increased is problematic, as is the degradation of the instruments on the dashboard. There are times when accurate, easily readable info is quite essential. I understand the font size can be altered, but I'm too stupid to do that, lol. As you have noted elsewhere, this issue, or related issues, is an inherent problem with EAW, and not easily remedied without skills that have not been forthcoming, sad to say. There are some flight sims that are so written/constructed that "widescreen" mods/patches can be applied to the original game (if it lacked such originally) with no apparent drawbacks, and to considerable overall advantage. That EAW lacks this feature has to be taken into account as a negative feature, but ought to be evaluated in conjunction with the numerous positive features EAW offers.
  9. This article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_common_resolutions gives some info about resolution, and more importantly, aspect ratios. EAW seems particularly fond of a 4:3 aspect ratio, if I'm not mistaken. Probably an artifact of its' origins on CRT monitors way back when. Obviously, many users, while maintaining older computers on which to run EAW, will likely buy new monitors to better view many things. Maybe even try to run EAW on Win 10 or some other OpSys with a newer computer. Now, this might sound stupid, but let's say a user has a new monitor, say 1920x1080. Not cutting edge at all, and semi-obsolescent. 1920x1080 is not 4:3 ratio (but close), and so somewhat unfriendly to EAW. Assume the GFX card and CPU will adequately support such a resolution. Now, What to do? From your comments, I'm guessing that the user should edit the screen resolution in the Config.Ini of the EAW game to maintain the largest possible 4:3 aspect ratio within their monitor screen. Is this correct, assuming no other issues? IIRC, I tinkered within the D3W wrapper program to maximize the screen size/resolution of v1.28e EAW on my 1920x1080 monitor, and saw no visible "ovaling" of gunsights or any other objectionable effects. Both height and width could be independently manipulated within the wrapper program. Perhaps any distortion present was so slight that I took no notice, not specifically looking for such. RIBob
  10. Success! Both V1.2 and EAWPRO both work properly now. Now to re-create both versions using a V1.2 No CD/No movies basis. I wouldn't mind retaining the music, as it gives some "flavor". Does such a V1.2 NO CD/NO Movies exist, and, if so, how is it labeled, and where can it be found? Needless to say, my problems so far were caused by NOT following the explicit instructions given on your Help site; IOW, having the game folder reside on C drive, and them having shortcut on desktop.
  11. Both game and shortcut are on desktop, and the problem still exists. maybe I should put game at root of C, and create shortcut on desktop.. May
  12. Hmmmmmmm. I'll try the shortcut, and report back tomorrow. Thanks.
  13. Well, I spoke too soon. Looks like every version I've tried to create winds up with a big 'ol cursor arrow as soon as the game starts. Doesn't appear till the flying starts, then it is there, immovable. I doubt it's the games themselves, must be something about my computer. Any ideas?
  14. OK, just found the "Stripped" version of EAW in my files. Unzipped V1.2 patch into it, and then unzipped latest iteration of EAWPRO into that. Everything seems to be working fine. Tried some of the NOCD/no music/no movies files on your site, but for some reason there was a very large cursor (pointer) right near dead center of the screen. At any rate, all seems to be well. Many thanks. e
  15. New animation codes in EAWPRO

    Anything that adds to the realism of the Sim is always worthwhile. Congrats, VB! Now, a mechanical oil pressure gauge will have a pipeline/tube connected to its' gauge, running from engine, through the firewall, into the cockpit dashboard. This oil pipeline will contain oil under pressure supplied from the engine. If ruptured, it will spew oil, under considerable pressure, as long as the supply of oil lasts. An electrical oil pressure gauge will have an electrical sensor mounted on the engine, which will transmit its' findings to the electrical gauge on the cockpit dashboard. Same thing goes for other sensors, such as water/coolant or even vacuum. In the case of electrical gauges, if the wire from sender to gauge is cut, only the signal is lost, and there is no leakage due to such. There are mechanical ways to configure such gauges (more reliable/simpler), and electrical (more accurate/less chance of cockpit intrusion of unwanted fluids/ less impact due to leakage caused by damage). It is my understanding that most aircraft mfrs gradually made the transition from mechanical gauges to electrical gauges. When this transition occurred, and in what exact aircraft, remains a subject of research as to particular aircraft/time of transition. I suspect that the increasing reliability of aircraft electrical systems played a part, particularly in combat aircraft, where damage could be a frequent occurrence. As one who once had a mechanical oil pressure gauge fail within the cockpit of my car, I can say the oil sprayed out over my legs, and did not spew from the gauge. Of course, this incident was the result of a oil tube failure, and not because the gauge was struck by a bullet. thank heaven. That said, and presuming state-of-the-art military aircraft mfrs had foresworn mechanical gauges at some ill-defined point, then the leakage of fluids, both coolant and oil, onto the windscreen were possible, depending on the exact damage to the engine. IOW, One, or Both might occur, depending on the type of engine (air-cooled vs. water-cooled), or circumstances. Likely that a engine-damaged aircraft will be subsequently struck with more bullets, and additional engine damage resulting, thus resulting in possible leakage of other vital fluids. Certainly, oil AND coolant leakage from the engine, striking the front windscreen would create quite a mess, the two fluids being Immiscibale (not being able to be mixed), and creating a complete visual mess. Of course, given such catastrophic damage to one's engine--BOTH Coolant AND OIL loss, the pilot might be reasonably thinking about bailing out, at least in a single-engine aircraft. I know for certain that the Brits, say from the advent of the Jean Paul Defiant aircraft, used Glycol as an engine anti-freeze. There are written songs about it losing its coolant. German A/C not so much knowledge. Possibly, instead of glycol, simple alcohol. Germans had lots of brewing/alcohol capacity. So, good for you, VB, in creating fluids impacting the front air screen, which is all that is really necessary. Engine coolant (as appropriate to the aircraft) would probably be less visually detrimental than engine oil loss,, but either one would be a signal to the pilot of a single-engine aircraft that they would bailing-out pretty soon. In fact, some sort of time-limit might be added to visual signs of coolant/oil leaks and subsequent engine failure. Such is certain to happen once such vital fluids have begun to leak. Submitted with all due respect, and for consideration..
×

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..