PDA

View Full Version : April 13th Update from B6:



ATAG_Deacon
Apr-13-2012, 08:26
Today, 08:13 AM
BlackSix
Moderator

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Moscow, Russian Federation
Posts: 204
Friday Update, April 13, 2012
Good day everyone!

We're very glad to announce that the beta patch is largely done. It's going into wide internal testing today, which will last through the weekend and probably a couple of days more. After we make sure nothing is amiss, we'll make the beta patch available to everyone :hpyclp::hpyclp::hpyclp::hpyclp::hpyclp::hpyclp::h pyclp:

We're ready to release details on some of the improvements you'll see in the patch. Here we go:

Performance

We've performed a huge amount of work improving both average and minimum FPS in the game. Most recommended-spec machine will see a roughly double average FPS and a significant reduction in the micro-freezes that had previously plagued the game. Their frequency, duration, and overall FPS impact will be greatly reduced or completely redone.

Some of the changes include:

• Completely rewritten rended pipeline, which reduced CPU load;
• Rewritten texture manager, reducing stutter when loading new textures;
• Moved landscape geometry generator to its own CPU core, reducing stutters;
• Optimized tree code, reducing stutters when moving across landscape or rotating camera;
• Moved grass generator to its own CPU core, decreasing stutters during low-level flight;
• Moved all building and vehicle damage models to be pre-loaded, rather than dynamically loaded when they are destroyed. This increased mission loading times and memory usage, and reduced stutters when blowing things up;
• Improved multithreading in many other aspects of the code, improving minimal FPS on most multicore machines.

Finally, we need to mention the launcher.exe crashes. This was a very hard issue to address as it wasn't caused by a single 100% reproducible bug, but rather rare combinations of various uncommon events. The work described above, coupled with a huge volume of general bug-fixing performed, should have at least minimized the number of instances that lead to crashes. We haven't encountered one in months, but determining whether that'll be the case for the general player base will be one of the leading goals for this beta test.

Flight Model

We've performed a tremendous amount of work testing and improving flight models in the game, as well as improving various aircraft engines. We used actual pilot's notes and flight testing data during the process (thank you Sean!). Unfortunately some deeply-set limitations in the engine code do not allow us to minimize the margin of error at altitudes about 7 km (21,000 ft) where most aircraft begin to perform worse than their real-life counterparts. Fixing this requires more extensive code rework and will therefore only appear with the upcoming sequel. However at lower altitudes most flyables will perform much closer to real life. We also have to note that some aircraft, most notably Spitfire Mk.II, had better performance than the real thing. Others, especially their engines, had reduced performance. We've addressed these serious issues and made our planes fly much closer to the real thing.

More specifically:

G 50.
Temperature models of the engine were wrong due to incorrect data. The engine could not get up to required power at all altitudes. We've also added +100 boost for WEP mode.

Spitfire Mk.II
The aircraft's speed performance was too good at all altitudes, sometimes 60 mph better than the real thing.

Spitfire Mk.I
Fixed the top speed dip above 18,000 ft.

Hurricane Mk.I
Speed performance was also too good at all altitudes, similar to the Spit II.

Blenheim Mk.I
Had many problems with the engine model. The engine overheated at normal RPM, the plane could not get up to stated airspeed at all altitudes. Maximum allowed airspeed was too great, and the plane could get up to 560 mph in a dive. A huge amount of work was performed to improve the plane's FM and bring it up to speed.

For a better example, here's a comparison of the old and new speeds of the Fiat G.50. The data was taken by a special internal module that tests speeds at a range of altitudes using optimal engine settings. Human players will likely not be able to set their engine precisely the same way, or fly exactly level at the exact altitude, so testing this for yourselves may give you slightly different results. The vertical axis is the speed in kph, the horizontal is the top speed.


Artificial Intelligence

Partial list:
• Fixed some non-working orders, removed others from the list. There are no more orders available to the player that the AI does not follow.
• Added a request for available targets;
• Turned off friendly fire for ground battles (improving FPS);
• Added the ability to query current waypoint for scripts;
• Told AI pilots not to commit ritual suicide when their leader crash-lands;
• Fixed out of turn take offs for AI pilots;

And there's lots more!

Finally, we continue to introduce you to the upcoming sequels. Here's some more village landscapes, showing the few churches still left around 1940s Russia. Once again, these are all coming from an external team that is very eager to do a great job and please the community. We'd also like to remind you that parts of the landscape such as the grass and the trees are temporary placeholders and will definitely not be a part of the final landscape.

Have a great weekend!


http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=31097

Doc
Apr-13-2012, 08:41
This is propaganda!!

This is all lies!!

There is no patch!!

:bgsmile:

Tvrdi
Apr-13-2012, 08:49
So its close...sounds promising...and surprise they already dealed with the FM fixes.

335th_GRAthos
Apr-13-2012, 09:04
Hell it seems I will be flying again! Pity, I had enjoyed four months of "detoxication" :blush!:

There is some awesome news in there!!!! If they manage to deliver what they wrote, we moved light years ahead!



Regarding flight models though, Hmm... I think there will be tears from the red side :hiding:

Spitfire Mk.II
The aircraft's speed performance was too good at all altitudes, sometimes 60 mph better than the real thing.
Snapper, can I get permission to use my "teflon wings" expression again? :Grin:


Spitfire Mk.I
Fixed the top speed dip above 18,000 ft.
Speed ok but, will it turn? :runaway:


Hurricane Mk.I
Speed performance was also too good at all altitudes, similar to the Spit II.
:roflmao: So it will no longer manage sustained turns like before; The only platform (besides Spit II) that scared me! Not any more... :runaway:


EDIT:

Spit I got better. Its speeds at altitude got progressively worse than the real thing in the old build. The patch will make it better.

The Hurricane got about 20 mph slower, sorry. It's historically accurate.



Let's see...


~S~

ATAG_Deacon
Apr-13-2012, 09:20
Response from Luthier:



#42
Today, 08:53 AM
luthier
Senior Member

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Moscow, Russia
Posts: 263

Quote:
Originally Posted by VO101_Tom
Can you give any information about the 109?
German flyables were in a much better state than the British ones, so we can't report anything dramatic. You will probably notice some changes in the 109 if you fly it a lot, but the others will be even less perseptible, just seen on the graphs that we decided not to make public.



:bgsmile: It's laughable...how ironic that they nerf the Reds even more :wtf:

ATAG_Knuckles
Apr-13-2012, 09:30
wouldn't it be funny if they really issue a patch and it really screws things up

sorry just a thought :angrymob::hiding:

Recoilfx
Apr-13-2012, 09:38
Hey if 109s are competitive against Spit IIas with the new patch, I vote we'd bring the Spit back! There is no point for us blue flyers to have overwhelming advantages.

ATAG_Deacon
Apr-13-2012, 09:39
Hey if 109s are competitive against Spit IIas with the new patch, I vote we'd bring the Spit back! There is no point for us blue flyers to have overwhelming advantages.

+1

Dutch
Apr-13-2012, 09:51
I'm kind of at a loss for words here.

Having tested the Spit/Hurri FMs in a number of ways and established that the IIa and Rotol Hurri are the FMs closest to freely available published data...............

It's good news about the Blen.

But I'll reserve judgement until we've experienced it all for ourselves.

At the moment I'm pleased about some stuff, but extremely worried about other stuff.

ATAG_Snapper
Apr-13-2012, 09:59
I'm kind of at a loss for words here.

Having tested the Spit/Hurri FMs in a number of ways and established that the IIa and Rotol Hurri are the FMs closest to freely available published data...............

It's good news about the Blen.

But I'll reserve judgement until we've experienced it all for ourselves.

At the moment I'm pleased about some stuff, but extremely worried about other stuff.

+1

Good news about the performance increase, though.

9./JG52 Hans Gruber
Apr-13-2012, 10:12
Lots of good news but we shouldn't jump to conclusions about the FM yet. In clarifying statements Luthier said the Spit I should be much faster at higher altitudes. None of us can say exactly how these planes performed and as this is a game I just hope there is a natural balance with each plane having strengths and weaknesses and neither side having a clear advantage.

Tvrdi
Apr-13-2012, 10:13
I'm kind of at a loss for words here.

Having tested the Spit/Hurri FMs in a number of ways and established that the IIa and Rotol Hurri are the FMs closest to freely available published data...............

It's good news about the Blen.

But I'll reserve judgement until we've experienced it all for ourselves.

At the moment I'm pleased about some stuff, but extremely worried about other stuff.

Both Spit II and Hurri ROTO were too good. Even most of my "red" CLOD friends agreed...In fact I support devs in this....and I fly for both sides equally...maybe even more in spit than in 109 tbh

Look at this post from banana forums LOL (the bolded part is hilarious ahahah):


king1hw wrote:

YOU HAVE GOT TO BE KIDDING RIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What data have you been reading I am sorry to hear that the allied planes are dumb down again to meet the German Blue demand much like il2 1946. This sim is going the way of the dodo and the allied bird in your series have never met the correct speeds at sea level and still to this day even with the mods in 46 they still are tanks.

So at low alt the spit Ia still performs like a joke and you have to only fly above 18000 ft to see a performance increase. This is laughable. Who won the war for gosh sakes. what pilot notes are you reading are they Germans.

I am sad to hear this.

king

Now, Im the one whining about whiners ahahahaha

Doc
Apr-13-2012, 10:26
Never will be agreement on this. Just fly!

335th_GRAthos
Apr-13-2012, 10:52
Response from Luthier:





I bow my head to the aknowleged historical correctness that finaly came to light...:angrymob:

Sorry, it is a bad sarcasm from my side, but it was too hard to resist (I wish you could see the huge smile on my face reading the post at the 1C forum).
Ok, ok, I admit I deserve to be mercilessly vulched on the first day I appear online :hiding:


Not all is lost though:

Spit I got better. Its speeds at altitude got progressively worse than the real thing in the old build. The patch will make it better.

The Hurricane got about 20 mph slower, sorry. It's historically accurate.


Now, where do I have that link to the youtube video where this RAF pilot was quoted saying the Bf109s ruled the skies :angrymob:


~S~

ChiefRedCloud
Apr-13-2012, 12:09
WELL, I'm Piffed .... :pouting: ..... not ONE word of my request in there ...... as simple CUP holder for my coffe or tea ........ :angry:

III./ZG76_Keller
Apr-13-2012, 12:27
I just hope the fixes to the He-111 bombsight are in there; can't wait to drop my bombs from 6km instead of 3km. :thumbsup:

Hopefully they've fixed the Bf-110 fuel system too.

ATAG_Colander
Apr-13-2012, 13:10
WELL, I'm Piffed .... :pouting: ..... not ONE word of my request in there ...... as simple CUP holder for my coffe or tea ........ :angry:

You already have one. Just press the button that reads "eject" on your PC and your cup holder tray will pop out.

ATAG_EvangelusE
Apr-13-2012, 13:12
Great news. Hope that we can see the end of the flame wars regards plane sets and that any exclusion of ac is purely to suit the mission. Looking forward to the beta......

ATAG_Septic
Apr-13-2012, 13:17
WELL, I'm Piffed .... :pouting: ..... not ONE word of my request in there ...... as simple CUP holder for my coffe or tea ........ :angry:

I know, not a mention of the multi-player pause key either :-(

Dutch
Apr-13-2012, 14:54
Interesting that the most FM work appears to have gone into the Fiat G.50 and the Bristol Blenheim.

If anyone's looking for pointers about the sequel, which airforce used these two aircraft, as well as the Hawker Hurricane MkI?

:pouting:

Uther
Apr-13-2012, 17:30
LOL that would throw a spanner in the works, if everyone expected Moscow and we got Finland...

G50 will be new best, I hope you Blenheim boys have your parachutes! :bgsmile:

Dutch
Apr-13-2012, 17:45
Uther, you owe me a beer if I'm right! :Grin:

My money's on Leningrad. Forgotten Battles revisited.

ATAG_Knuckles
Apr-13-2012, 18:55
LOL that would throw a spanner in the works, if everyone expected Moscow and we got Finland...

G50 will be new best, I hope you Blenheim boys have your parachutes! :bgsmile:

I used to live in Finland: not that it has anything to do with anything ????:blush!:

Dutch
Apr-13-2012, 18:59
One of my beer mates has a brother teaching in Finland. Just thought i'd mention it.

ATAG_Knuckles
Apr-13-2012, 19:29
Rauma, Finland around 1976

its worth a giggle I figure and again messing up this thread: "dont know why"

632

Atreides
Apr-13-2012, 20:04
Finally, we need to mention the launcher.exe crashes. This was a very hard issue to address as it wasn't caused by a single 100% reproducible bug, but rather rare combinations of various uncommon events. The work described above, coupled with a huge volume of general bug-fixing performed, should have at least minimized the number of instances that lead to crashes. We haven't encountered one in months, but determining whether that'll be the case for the general player base will be one of the leading goals for this beta test.http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=31097
Probable emotional response when this will indeed work:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ShABUGCMAeA

And probable emotional response when it won't:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tHlZ_FC1mnY&feature=related

Dutch
Apr-13-2012, 20:05
Rauma, Finland around 1976

its worth a giggle I figure and again messing up this thread: "dont know why"

632

Now that's what I call a 'VERY BAD PAIR OF SOCKS!' :bgsmile:

ATAG_Snapper
Apr-14-2012, 14:37
This is an advance review of the upcoming beta patch. The reviewer, a young German kid, is not entirely happy with the improvements to the G50:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ScA7PhDJPJE


EDIT: (or it might be ME flying the Spit Ia next week........:shocked:)


:bgsmile:

335th_GRAthos
Apr-14-2012, 18:52
G50 will be new best, I hope you Blenheim boys have your parachutes! :bgsmile:


I have another theory:
soon we will have the Spit IIa again online :shocked:

so,

we will have again the Bf109-E4 :hpyclp:
...I am polishing my MinengeschoЯe right now...and where a MinengschoЯ hits, no grass grows again :Grin:
634
(ok, ok it is a MK108 shot but I had nothing better)

~S~

Hoogs
Apr-14-2012, 20:31
This is an advance review of the upcoming beta patch. The reviewer, a young German kid, is not entirely happy with the improvements to the G50:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ScA7PhDJPJE


EDIT: (or it might be ME flying the Spit Ia next week........:shocked:)


:bgsmile:

OMG :shocked:

ChiefRedCloud
Apr-14-2012, 20:46
On a more SERIOUS note were the turrent controls really so wooshy on the Blenhiem as they are modeled in CloD? If not, is there any mention of fixing them? :pouting:

ATAG_Knuckles
Apr-14-2012, 20:53
Explain "Wooshy" I man the turret quite a bit, seem to be o.k. to me.

the one issue it has (and I understand blue has the same issue) is sporadic firing. You hold the fire button down and only a few rounds fire Errrrrrr

That I hope they fix.

Dutch
Apr-14-2012, 21:10
I'm sure that 'whooshy' is a technical term, but I know what Chiefy is driving at here, there's always a pause when you press the button, and the thing never stops where you want it to.

'Whooshy'..... Good word. :Grin:

ATAG_Knuckles
Apr-15-2012, 09:49
Ahhh the "rotating" part of the turret: wooshy yes its is actually !!!

ChiefRedCloud
Apr-15-2012, 17:19
Indeed .... Dutch wins the Tea & Crumpet Award ....... spot on there mate ..... Jolly good what say?

ATAG_Knuckles
Apr-15-2012, 17:25
Cheif, has anyone ever mentioned that your Georgia accent is ahhh a little different :bgsmile:

ChiefRedCloud
Apr-16-2012, 20:26
Cheif, has anyone ever mentioned that your Georgia accent is ahhh a little different :bgsmile:

:pouting:

ATAG_Snapper
Apr-16-2012, 20:33
Why is it that only Canadians speak English with no accent? :Grin:

Wolf
Apr-16-2012, 23:33
Why is it that only Canadians speak English with no accent? :Grin:

Oh sure AAAAeeeee :angrymob:

ATAG_Snapper
Apr-17-2012, 03:35
Eh? :bgsmile:

Dutch
Apr-17-2012, 06:41
There's a moose loose aboot this hoose! :bgsmile:

Must be the 'Nova Scotia' element!


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-xG3D8OMQk

ChiefRedCloud
Apr-17-2012, 09:27
636637On the point of Fuel .....

ATAG_Snapper
Apr-17-2012, 09:58
636637On the point of Fuel .....

Uh huh. Then look at the paragraph to the immediate left giving the speed at sea level of the Mark I at 6.25 lbs boost (280 mph) and 12 lbs boost (on 87 octane? Not likely!) --- 305 mph!!!! Compare that to the CoD maximim speed of 240 mph (:blush!:) of the Mark I at sea level. Full overboost yields.....nothing. The gauge goes from 6.25 to 6.5 lbs, but no increase in engine performance whatsoever.

No wonder the Blue 109 pilots laugh at the Spitfire Mark I's. They're a bad joke in this sim. But unleash the "Sissyfire" Mark IIa and the laughter suddenly stops. Yet the IIa in this sim more closely performs as the I and Ia should perform. :shocked:

Yes, the 109's are also undermodelled in Cliffs of Dover, just not to the sorry state that the Spit Mark I's are. The data has been out there since the end of World War 2, yet I learned today that Luthier, Project Manager of Cliffs of Dover, is supposedly "getting an education" about 100 octane fuel. Now. One flippin' year after the sim's release which followed 7 (?) years of research and development! Some "research"! :goofy:

Not looking for an unfair edge. The 109's need to be tuned as well. Just looking for some objective accuracy. Let's see if the upcoming patch can achieve that.

Doc
Apr-17-2012, 10:34
I press Ctrl-N and see Deacon in a Spit I or Ia and he has collected 6 or 7 skins. How does he do it?

ATAG_Snapper
Apr-17-2012, 10:59
I've flown with Deacon a lot. He would achieve kills with a Spitfire I with a fixed prop. I know how he does it. I try to do the same, but with varying success.

I've also seen guys with .45 Peacemakers outshoot guys with .38 Super Comp'd 1911 raceguns. For the first 5 rounds, at least. Same principle. But the fellow with the sixgun will eventually lose, no matter his skill. And Deacon does get shot down (as do I).

Doc
Apr-17-2012, 11:05
I've flown with Deacon a lot. He would achieve kills with a Spitfire I with a fixed prop. I know how he does it. I try to do the same, but with varying success.

I've also seen guys with .45 Peacemakers outshoot guys with .38 Super Comp'd 1911 raceguns. For the first 5 rounds, at least. Same principle. But the fellow with the sixgun will eventually lose, no matter his skill. And Deacon does get shot down (as do I).

I was only asking because I was impressed. I can get in a IIa and have a field day between the hours of 1900-2300 CST or so. Come back in between 0500-1100 CST when the Russians are on and I end up in a fetal position in total shock. How do they do it in their 109's I never know.

ATAG_Deacon
Apr-17-2012, 11:16
I press Ctrl-N and see Deacon in a Spit I or Ia and he has collected 6 or 7 skins. How does he do it?

~S~ Doc,

Many times I will climb high and hunt the bomber streams at the beginning of a mission. The Stuka's and -88's will take out flak at Lympne and Hawkenge...I like flak at Lymne and Hawkenge. I can usually get a few before they drop.

Other than that I do either die a lot down low or get the dreaded launcher crash :blush!:

One thing I've done recently is change the ammo mix in my guns. Here is my load out:

Outer 4 guns:

175 yards

Red Tracer
De-Wilde
De-Wilde
De-Wilde
Armour Piercing

Inner 4 guns:

185 yards

Red Tracer
Armour Piercing
De-Wilde
De-Wilde
De-Wilde

The spread and the load out will usually explode the tanks on a 109 (I know, there are two tanks...spray and pray you hit both ;) ) or easily de-wing a bomber. There are some who don't like tracers because they let your opponent know you're there. In this SIM they can usually hear you so it is pretty moot. I like to see where my rounds hit so I can adjust fire as needed.

Other than that the 1a does not have the speed to catch a cold. I was easily outrun by a 110 last night over English point. So disheartening. We can only pray the patch rectifies much, especially the boost/fuel issue. :shocked:

For now I will continue to fly high and try to put myself in position to attack. Although with the 1a I am usually just turning as hard as I can because I don't have any advantage...not speed, not climb rate, I stall at neg g, engine cut out when rolling, but dear god I have FUN...that's what it is all about :thumbsup:

~S~

Deacon

ChiefRedCloud
Apr-17-2012, 11:18
Uh huh. Then look at the paragraph to the immediate left giving the speed at sea level of the Mark I at 6.25 lbs boost (280 mph) and 12 lbs boost (on 87 octane? Not likely!) --- 305 mph!!!! Compare that to the CoD maximim speed of 240 mph (:blush!:) of the Mark I at sea level. Full overboost yields.....nothing. The gauge goes from 6.25 to 6.5 lbs, but no increase in engine performance whatsoever.

No wonder the Blue 109 pilots laugh at the Spitfire Mark I's. They're a bad joke in this sim. But unleash the "Sissyfire" Mark IIa and the laughter suddenly stops. Yet the IIa in this sim more closely performs as the I and Ia should perform. :shocked:

Yes, the 109's are also undermodelled in Cliffs of Dover, just not to the sorry state that the Spit Mark I's are. The data has been out there since the end of World War 2, yet I learned today that Luthier, Project Manager of Cliffs of Dover, is supposedly "getting an education" about 100 octane fuel. Now. One flippin' year after the sim's release which followed 7 (?) years of research and development! Some "research"! :goofy:

Not looking for an unfair edge. The 109's need to be tuned as well. Just looking for some objective accuracy. Let's see if the upcoming patch can achieve that.

:bgsmile: yea well I din't say I swore by it. I just have the book and was browsing, came upon this and thought, what the heck! So I thought I would share it.

I'm so far from knowing all this ya know ....... :hiding:

ATAG_Snapper
Apr-17-2012, 12:00
Sorry, Chief, didn't mean to get all lathered up! :happy

There's a small but vocal group over at 1C that seem bent on convincing everyone (including the devs, apparently) that 100 octane played a peripheral role, at best, for the RAF fighters and bombers during the Battle of Britain. Why? Can't say for sure, but the obvious effect would be maintaining the status quo re no 12 lbs boost/performance increase on CoD's Spit I's/Ia's or Hurricanes.

The 109's are also undermodelled and should be (MUST be) corrected, also. There's a strange relunctance on the devs' part to be straight out and forthcoming on what should be a very straightforward issue. Case in point: 109's in this sim should be able to dogfight with the IIa's on at least an equal basis; better in some situations, at a slight disadvantage in others. This applies the same to at least the Ia's vs the 109's in the sim right now, too.

I've flown the IIa on ATAG a few times (they're hard to get sometimes). It's a switch being 17 mph faster on the deck than your quarry rather than 33 mph slower when flying the Ia. I'd prefer it historical though with a closer matchup (the 109 a bit faster with a quicker roll, faster dive + bunting ability, the IIa faster turning at speed, but vulnerable to the 109's slats deployment in low speed turns. Climbing ability depends a lot on each pilot's skill over the other -- the edge going to the 109 experten). What keeps this sim alive for me is that I still get shot down in my invinceable IIa, and occasionally I knock down a 109 in my Ia. But the enjoyment would increase substantially if flight models were historically accurate for both sides.

Why the devs chose the route they did is a mystery to me. Any schoolboy in England could give strong arguments to Luthier for & against all these points -- tons of ACCURATE data is out there. Most of these schoolboys have a shelfful of books to prove it. And there's the Internet....

Let's see what the patch brings. Fingers crossed.

ATAG_Deacon
Apr-17-2012, 12:44
Let's see what the patch brings. Fingers crossed.

+1

Just my opinion: with the "toning down" (I am trying to be nice and only slightly sarcastic) of the Spit IIa and "improvement" to the Ia above 18(k), while the 109 remains virtually unchanged is that the server will have little choice but to add the IIa on an unlimited basis. Again, this is just my opinion.

Yes, this is a Battle of Britain SIM, however there is little activity that is comparable to the actual BoB itself. Tactically speaking, 109's should be tied to the bomber streams (a la Herman's orders). Hurries should focus on the bombers and Spits focus on the fighters. Radar warning would give ample time for fighters to be in their historic positions.

With no real radar atm and the bake n quake over Hawkenge/Littlestone/Dover, there is little historical SIMULATION.

To add, I am thankful for the map designers, ATAG, and the people who fly here, having FUN and doing the best with what's on hand. :hpyclp::hpyclp::hpyclp::hpyclp::hpyclp::hpyclp::h pyclp::hpyclp::hpyclp::hpyclp:

~S~ all,

Deacon

Dutch
Apr-17-2012, 12:47
Interesting little article here regarding lend-lease Hurris being supplied to Russia and the problems they had.



http://www.broquet.co.uk/history.htm

The Hurris he talks about had Merlin XX engines designed for 100 octane fuel.

Doc
Apr-17-2012, 14:27
This is what I love about this. You guys are priceless search engines that bring forward nuggets of interesting information now and then.

ATAG_Knuckles
Apr-17-2012, 17:16
This is what I love about this. You guys are priceless search engines that bring forward nuggets of interesting information now and then.

And sometimes useless drivel that is amusing none the less :thumbsup:

639

ATAG_Bliss
Apr-17-2012, 20:51
Knuckles - what the hell! :bgsmile:

That's what I call trained.

ATAG_Torian
Apr-18-2012, 04:04
+1
Yes, this is a Battle of Britain SIM, however there is little activity that is comparable to the actual BoB itself. Tactically speaking, 109's should be tied to the bomber streams (a la Herman's orders). Hurries should focus on the bombers and Spits focus on the fighters. Radar warning would give ample time for fighters to be in their historic positions.

With no real radar atm and the bake n quake over Hawkenge/Littlestone/Dover, there is little historical SIMULATION.

I have suggested this before but like to reiterate where possible.....If AI bomber groups were also targeting say 2 out of 3 or 3 out of 4 objectives then fighters would be encouraged to either escort their own or attack enemy formations rather than lurk over airbases. The imperative for fighters would be mainly back up at bomber altitudes and bomber jocks still have a job to do. Perhaps a slight increase in the number of AI bomber sorties would ensure every1 always has something to do.

Doc
Apr-18-2012, 08:58
Yes, this is a Battle of Britain SIM, however there is little activity that is comparable to the actual BoB itself. Tactically speaking, 109's should be tied to the bomber streams (a la Herman's orders). Hurries should focus on the bombers and Spits focus on the fighters. Radar warning would give ample time for fighters to be in their historic positions.

Deacon

Deacon you are correct. But we know Germany lost the battle and the war. Herman was a nincompoop. We on the other hand are trying to WIN the battle and the war lol

ATAG_Colander
Apr-18-2012, 10:41
Deacon you are correct. But we know Germany lost the battle and the war. Herman was a nincompoop. We on the other hand are trying to WIN the battle and the war lol

Indeed... If we are supposed to loose, why even bother playing? :)

ATAG_Deacon
Apr-18-2012, 11:41
It looks like they're getting close:

Today, 10:56 AM
Buchon
Senior Member

Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 306

Quote:
Originally Posted by SlipBall

Luthier was over at the bugtracker yesterday...it's possible he was rummaging through, to see what else he could drop in this patch....

just a guess
That makes sense with B6 saying "Now polished last minute questions and have already started to gather public version" :



I guess that they was testing graphics patch to be sure that there nothing wrong and now are adding the fixes that they have now accomplish.
__________________
Intel Core2 Duo 8500 @ 4.07 GHz / DDR3 4.00 GB @ 1600 Mhz / ATI HD5870 / Win7 64Bit


From the banana boards....:hpyclp:

Doc
Apr-18-2012, 11:48
I've never seen a larger gathering of net stalkers in one URL ever. I'm sure he was on ebay and Amazon as well. Loll

ATAG_Deacon
Apr-18-2012, 11:53
I think I've worn out my F5 key :blush!:

ATAG_Colander
Apr-18-2012, 12:05
From Sukhoi today...


Alexander, no news on building a public beta patch? Already itching

Not yet.

Doc
Apr-18-2012, 12:12
Can we develop a line for the over / under for release this week?

I say it's next week maybe Monday or Tuesday. I would not want to release after today. Friday I would just say lets continue to test over the weekend and if all goes well Monday.

You're a developer Colander. What would you do if you were the chief of operations and you are in their shoes? And remember you have just this last shot. There are people out there wishing you fail so they can direct others over to their booth and sell them something else. What do you do?

ATAG_Deacon
Apr-18-2012, 12:15
Can we develop a line for the over / under for release this week?

I say it's next week maybe Monday or Tuesday. I would not want to release after today. Friday I would just say lets continue to test over the weekend and if all goes well Monday.

You're a developer Colander. What would you do if you were the chief of operations and you are in their shoes?

My opinion, I think Friday. I think that they will have tested and tested over and over by then. They will release it prior to the weekend knowing that whatever bugs are there will be uncovered over the weekend with all of us being the "beta testers".

There will be bugs...it's a beta. :shocked:

ATAG_Colander
Apr-18-2012, 12:25
Problem:
They call it "Beta". The community thinks of it as "release".

By definition, a Beta is a version with the potential of having many bugs. Most of the community expects a flawless release.

Normally after beta comes the Release Candidate (RC). We will not see this.

On the other hand, we know that they can not afford releasing a bugged version so testing will continue as long as they need it to continue.

Additional to all this, we do not have all the information of what's going on behind the curtains.

In short, it will be ready when they feel is ready. Not a minute before.

So... In two weeks for sure!

Doc
Apr-18-2012, 12:28
Problem:
They call it "Beta". The community thinks of it as "release".

By definition, a Beta is a version with the potential of having many bugs. Most of the community expects a flawless release.

Normally after beta comes the Release Candidate (RC). We will not see this.

On the other hand, we know that they can not afford releasing a bugged version so testing will continue as long as they need it to continue.

Additional to all this, we do not have all the information of what's going on behind the curtains.

In short, it will be ready when they feel is ready. Not a minute before.

So... In two weeks for sure!

Where have I seen this before (http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpost.php?p=408134&postcount=734)...

ATAG_Colander
Apr-18-2012, 13:03
Where have I seen this before...

You did not say "in two weeks" :bgsmile:

[FFCW]Urizen
Apr-18-2012, 13:19
in two weeks? for sure? Or will that be like in 2 weeks it will be due in 2 weeks?
iґm a little confused :confused!:

ATAG_Colander
Apr-18-2012, 14:46
I'll be able to answer that question in two weeks ;)

Atreides
Apr-19-2012, 04:54
I know this one is old, however in the words of Gandalf:

A patch is never late, nor is it early, it arrives precisely when it means to.

;)