View Full Version : Friday Update, February 24, 2012

Feb-24-2012, 08:20
Good day gentlemen!

Most of us are busy preparing the beta version of the upcoming patch. We did make a whole lot of FPS benchmarking, and the great news is, its all in line with the previously announced numbers. The performance increase is very significant.
Unfortunately we could not do any benchmarks on the famous Black Death track. We know everyones been asking about it. The track however is currently broken due to changes in other unrelated parts of the code. We probably wont get the old version to run anymore and have to make a new Black Death to go with the new patch. So any comparison between the old and the new Black Death will only be approximate (cant wait for the conspiracy theories BTW).

So our todays update is small but its got it where it counts.

We are showing the third and final ground vehicles video today. As most of you have guessed, it focuses on drivable tanks.

Watch it here:


As always, Id like to remind you that the feature is still a work in progress. We continue to test and improve the feature.

The sound is far from final. For example we are working on making weapon sounds more varied and historically accurate.

We have also made other changes since the version in which the video was made. The damage model for the vehicles was improved. Destroyed ground objects have inertia and continue moving after death. Component damage system (tracks, crew, gunners etc) has also been improved. Unfortunately due to yesterday being an official holiday we simply had no time to make additional footage and splice it into the video.

Most importantly, I do want to note one more time that at this time we do not know ourselves when and in which shape the feature will make it into the game.

Have a good weekend!

Feb-24-2012, 09:26
Thanks for posting this, Doc. Good to hear the code optimization seems to be going well. The ground action is neat to watch, but not really my cuppa tea. But it'll be neat to drive a tank through the trees (like they're not even there!) and blow up all the fuel bowsers with a big "100 OC" painted on 'em. :Grin:

Feb-24-2012, 09:41
PATCH!! :laugh1

Feb-24-2012, 12:04
PATCH!! :laugh1

Sums it up beautifully!

Feb-24-2012, 12:11
If you look at 2.40 on the video you'll see where our 100 octane went to ..... :inq:

Nice video ....

err .... :inq: ... IF there is a Beta Patch ..... will there be someone to hold my hand (literally :eek: ) to install this?

Feb-24-2012, 13:14
If you look at 2.40 on the video you'll see where our 100 octane went to ..... :inq:

Nice video ....

err .... :inq: ... IF there is a Beta Patch ..... will there be someone to hold my hand (literally :eek: ) to install this?

No problem, CRC. These are computers. Absolutely nothing can go wrog.

Feb-24-2012, 13:22
No problem, CRC. These are computers. Absolutely nothing can go wrog.

I feel better now ...... you spel like me ..... :Grin:

I sort of like the comment where one person over on 1C forums says "I can't wait to drive a Tiger" ...hummm :huh: ... maybe he should check his calendar ...... Tigers wont be in season for several years by CloD time .....:inq::no

Feb-24-2012, 13:36
Installing a beta patch is a snap CRC! We'll get you through it.

As far as the update - just flat out spectactular. :Grin:

Feb-24-2012, 14:58

Let the battle begin!

Feb-24-2012, 15:29
The 1C forum, as usual is full of retards - to put it lightly.

I honestly think some of those people have never read an update to this game, ever. There's guys in there complaining about having drivable vehicles, as if they think this wasn't on the horizon all along. It was 2 years ago when they showed the hatches opening on vehicles and the detail of them up close. I don't think it takes a rocket scientist to figure out the reason for all this animation is because people will be there!

The word clueless comes to mind. I think I'll just stop posting over there for a while. Logic and reason are a thing of the past to a whole bunch of people.

Feb-24-2012, 17:58

I really haven't seen much over at the banana forums for a while, I check periodically. I really dont wanna drive a tank but lets just see where all this goes.
Might be surprised.


Feb-24-2012, 18:11
I've had my WTF moments over the Friday updates, but overall I try to keep things in perspective. It's a video game.

Over at 1C/SimHQ I've been called a liar (re my SLI results), a hypocrite (Spit IIa viewpoint), gamer (low res online play), and a lot of unsavory inferences on all kinds of stuff over the years. Over a video game. I'm glad we all get paid lots of money to play this game! LOL

Feb-24-2012, 18:11
I don't want to drive a tank either. But I do want people that want to drive them to be an objective and in my stuka sights. :)

Feb-24-2012, 18:17
Exactly !!! kinda why I stated "lets see where this goes"


Feb-24-2012, 19:53
As far the update goes, it was the rail gun that interested me most.

Obvious scenario is the train being both a bombing/strafing objective and/or a tank objective, but possibly defended by human players manning the guns.

As for how long it's all been going on, I still have the original bonus disc from my first copy of IL2 1946 (2006) which shows early shots of objects intended for 'Cliffs' from way back then.

Here are a few of them. Recognise the car?! :)


Feb-25-2012, 03:52
Im dissapointed with it !..Maybe,(because of endless criticsism and negativety and countless "I want this, I want that " attitudes of the "Forum Community" towards them) the Devs have decided to "Clam Up" !...and who could blame them ?.If You had a mob "Spittin Venom" at you,how would You respond ?...We all have our answer to that one and it probably wouldnt include the word "Co-operate " !..So now,the Devs have said "throw the wolves a chunk of meat and let them fight over it" !...Again,can You blame them ?......I'd like to see the day when the Devs(and their marketing dept) can judge what will sell and what wont by reading "Forums"...thats not gonna happen soon ....If a lot of ye feel(like me) that COD is the "closest ever" to flying a WW2 aircraft(especially on ATAG),you know that we all will do "(whatever" to improve our experience in COD...we need to send some positive messages back to the Devs(and their marketing dept) !................So heres my response to the Devs (and marketing) about this Update! 'Ill be glad to be part of "the big Future Picture" of COD,I will gladly Buy any "Addons" that come out(even though I might not play them for more than 10 minutes but I will still Buy them)!..Hypothetical:...109 F4 addon for COD...I reckon that would sell pretty well ! .....But the basic "issues" need to be adressed First !...ie.. how are the "tanks" scenario going to work if AI hasnt been fixed ?...Fix COD and we will PAY Gladly to be part of the expansion of COD ...Jay

Feb-25-2012, 09:06
NExt Friday update:


Feb-25-2012, 09:22

I've always wanted to reap chickens and grow eggs on the vine. And drive one of those combine harvesters that puts steak into shrink wrapped plastic trays! Cool Game! :Grin:

Feb-25-2012, 10:05
Can we put "Roundels" on the tractor ???

I'd be good to go then !!!

Feb-26-2012, 09:33
Now I've got over the - 'No patch....not no patch mate.... no not yet mate, no.' - news, I have to say I'm with Bliss about the future potential of this.

And not just for gameplay purposes either.

Can you imagine what Barfly and Tinus le Roux (biltongbru) are going to do with the film making side of things?

Throw in some decent humans (the current ones look like obvious 'placeholders' to me...) and the scope is fantastic.

Battle of the Bulge?

Bring it on, I say! 'Storm of War' was a good working title. :dthumb:

Feb-26-2012, 20:24
Ok ... I've been one of those Nay sayers right here in the ATAG forums. Now @ jaydee, If a persons words are TOO harsh I might agree with you. After all there are quite a few knuckleheads like me out there. But I firmly believe that negative feedback (in the proper frame of mind) is needed as are all the cooys and ooooos. If a dev doesn't have a thick enough skin then he /she might ought to seek other work.

Bottom line, weeding out the REAL bad eggs, you need people to be able to express their opinions, as they do here and , I dare say , on 1C.

Incidently, I actually went through and counted all the nays and yeas in the 1C forums on the new patch and the Yeas won hands down. So the only thing I can see that a Dev has to do is weed through the bogus messages and read the meaningful ones. That shouldn't be too hard, as I did it.

Will I stop playing this sim because I get ground vehicles to control instead of more flyable aircraft? Absolutely not. But you have to admit, it would be nice to have more flyable aircraft, right?

If you have issues with my opinion that's fine. If not, that's fine too. I enjoyed your comment but I seriously doubt that our collective opinions will make much differance to the Devs in the long run, do you?

Feb-27-2012, 09:41
I have to agree with CRC, I wish they would concentrate on the flight aspect before getting the drive modelling wrong for late 1930's early 1940 cars/trucks and tanks.


Feb-27-2012, 16:15
Here's some food for thought. I know many people are new to the IL2 series with the release of IL2COD, but I honestly can't say this enough. Stuff like this has been in the works for a very long time. I honestly believe most of the ground stuff was done along time ago (minus the fine tuning to get it all to work out) I guess my point is, it appears many have a suspicion that the sim is completely changing from it's initial scope. That is a complete farce. As you can see in this old interview from Oleg (thankfully someone found it and posted it on 1C) you can see just how complex the scope of this project is, and that these ideas/modules have always been part of this sim.

Posted at 1C:

Regarding the debate on controllable tanks, AA, etc, I came across a pdf file I'd saved with an interview with Oleg from Feb 2009. It's an English translation of an interview originally posted on a Russian site - spread-wings.ru (?). English translation is by Luthier


Although obviously out of date there is some interesting talk about the goals they had in mind back then about SOW/COD future development. I can't post the pdf as it's 2.66MB (don't know if the pdf is still available online?), but here are some interesting excerpts (my highlights in bold)

Q: Youve stated many times in previous interviews that BoB will be drastically different from the
Il-2 series. What do you mean by that?

Oleg: Not a very easy question to answer, but Ill try to respond the best I can without divulging some secret information.

1. The engine and the system were developing is built from the ground up to allow future expansions. Each new product can be stand-alone, or it can plug in with the others starting with BoB, following the success of Pacific Fighters which proved that this model can be viable.

2. Were developing a system that is more than just a flight sim, but can be a sub sim, PT boat sim, tank sim, helicopter sim, etc. By the way, we just might have a flyable autogyro in BoB.

3. Were also writing a completely new, drastically improved online code with multiple modes and features. It can even support a server-based MMO with a monthly fee. This of course wont happen with BoB itself, but is possible on its engine, possibly made by other teams that further develop into this direction.

4. Quality level for ground and air objects is ages beyond what was one with Il-2. I dont think that such a huge leap will be possible after BoB; the only changes that can happen is increase in polycount or texture size, or more detailed interior details. Even Il-2 was often used as a reference by other developers, and BoB will even have uses for movies.

5. Were working on an add-on and expansion module that will not affect the online playing field. After BoB is released we plan to publish a set of tools that will allow end-users to:
* Create new planes;
* Create new vehicles, tanks, ships, etc;
* Create new static objects, such as building, bridges, equipment, etc;
* Create new maps, with limits on total size. Well leave large maps for ourselves, for our own new sims.

Q: And now Oleg, please go into more details on your thoughts of the future of Storm of War
compared to Il-2, given the potential youve built into the engine from the start.

Oleg: Considering what Ive said already, and given an initial commercial success of BoB, heres what I see:

1. Some number of developers internationally that worked with MSFS, and probably a large part of them too, will convert to our side. This is especially to be expected considering the recent closing of Aces studio. So these add-on developers might just start making add-ons for Storm of War. I think this might even include jets, including modern ones. At the very least I would expect someone to do Vietnam, not to mention WWI. This
should happen too. Generally WWI aircraft are easier to model and program, since they dont have such complex aerodynamics, no retractable landing gear, propeller pitch, and other advanced devices. Theres also no radio, which means theres no need to develop and record radio chatter.

2. Korea, in conjunction with RRG. Its development is now in background mode. Their
team is now working with us finishing up planes for BoB, and also modeling ships.

3. Africa, Malta, USSR. These are most appealing choices for us. Even though we know for sure that the Pacific is the most interesting subject matter for the international market, besides Battle of Britain that is. Generally the Eastern Front is a bit easier for us to do since we have loads more data on it, and theres less variety of vehicles and aircraft to model than all the other fronts.

4. Continuing combat around the English Channel, which will largely be made via expansions since well already have the main map.

5. Cooperation with other teams to create other games (perhaps by selling the engine). For example, an MMO with controllable soldiers and submarines etc. Or even a space sim around planet surfaces with somewhat realistic physics.

6. Console variants with simplified features.

Now I think everyone really needs to read this and remember this was 3 years ago. Just think how long before this that this stuff was being worked on? Now I agree on flight sim parts 1st, and as the company who's made the most successful combat sim if not the most successful sim of all time, I don't think they are ever going to lose that aspect of it. It's plain to see just how much ambition that has gone into this project, and IMO it's very understandable that it got released in an unfinished state. But I have no doubts that it will, one day, be the greatest combat sim ever created. When you start hopping in the guts of the sim and realize just how much is there compared to virtually any other title out there, besides just flight sims, you really get an admiration and respect for what these guys are doing.

IL2 new and old has always given the users the tools to recreate whatever they want. That is 1st and foremost why, for instance, the old game is still the most popular sim being played today. I know many a SP player is upset and that is understandable. But the tools are there to do anything from a dynamic campaign to, well, anything you can imagine.

Other companies release flight sims that are structured in a manner where you are very restricted. Anything in microsoft's wide world of NET framework can be added into a mission to do virtually anything you want on the fly. There isn't a single flight sim out there that comes close to that ability. You can change any setting you want server side from dot pitch to icons, to colors, to w/e and we don't even have real dedicated server files yet.

Again, I can completely understand the frustration that comes from a pilot that wants to be able to "just play". But once you dive into the guts of the thing, it's hard to have anything but the deepest respect for what these people are truly trying to offer us, and what will, more than likely, turn into the biggest modding community next to old IL2. What we'll start seeing in the next couple years as far as tools, SDK's, map makers, you name it, will be phenomenal. And with the addition of more options in the online world, there are definitely gonna be many good times ahead.

Feb-29-2012, 00:40
Well worth the watch. A nice general interview that shows just some of the ambitions of these guys. Mind you, this is 5 years old. Thanks to wheels_up on simhq. I didn't think this existed anymore.

If you notice 11 minutes in, Oleg is manning a AAA gun and firing at stuff. :Grin: Dynamic weather and all sorts of stuff are discussed and seen. I guess this stuff was in the works even longer ago than I thought.




Feb-29-2012, 15:18
I always get the feeling that someone spilled vodka on the computer that had all of that stuff, so they have to re-write it or something.

Feb-29-2012, 20:59
I always get the feeling that someone spilled vodka on the computer that had all of that stuff, so they have to re-write it or something.

Or Oleg took it with him. :uhoh