Team Fusion Update April 1st 2016 – Unfortunate date aside…here goes :)

[Mysticpuma]

Well as the title says, I guess at some point we would get a Friday on April Fool’s day…but what follows is all real.

As always, we are keen to find new modellers to help our team progress and if you think you have the skills to help (or know someone who may be interested) please visit this thread, read through it and if you or they are up for a rewarding challenging hobby....get in touch :thumbsup:

http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11129

So to begin, as I usually say, lots of work going on, lots of features being created….and as we enter April hand on heart, it looks like we may have to push back the July release. There is so much work to be done, so much content to be added but let me give you an insight into what is involved from our side in getting a release Patch to you and why we can’t consider a small interim patch.

The coder who compiles are patches spends a whole weekend creating the compile. We need one for Alpha, one for Beta, then we create one for a closed Beta, then Release candidate, then (if no bugs are found (unlikely)), the final one everyone gets. Then we get a community report/feedback and consider a small fix patch like we did with v3.01 and v4.312
So that's 5-weekends compiling versions before you get it followed by maybe a small bug fix release.
The intention is therefore to keep his workload down to a minimum because he is already under pressure with his 'real' work outside if this hobby.

For this reason we can't release bits and pieces as interim patches as each would require the above process. Version 5.00 will be big (probably 3Gb+) but a full package, if we were to add an interim patch, the whole process above would have to be carried out….and so even before we reach v5.00 you would have 10-weekends compiling, so it’s not an option sadly.

This is an unpaid hobby for all of us so we are respecting every member of the team and making this as easy, fun and enjoyable as possible for us as we balance what we are doing around our paying jobs and home life.

It will arrive but we're just working as hard as we can, when we can and keeping it fun rather than a chore :recon:


Okay, with that on the table (and I will of-course keep you up to date with a possible new launch date) here goes!

So for those of you who may not visit the forums regularly we are working on Oculus Rift implementation. Work was flying along nicely and then they released the consumer version and it is working with Oculus 1.3 runtime now but there's a problem with how the automatic timewarp works because of the game ability to zoom in and out. Work continues but VR with Oculus is expected (no promises though) to ship with v5.00

Okay, so moving on, for those of you who don’t follow our Facebook page:

https://www.facebook.com/teamfusionmod

here are a few images, updates and features from our list of WiP projects some of which haven’t been shown before (not even Facebook!)

German Schnellboot:

21907 21908 21909

Vosper MTB:

21910

Careful sneaking up on those canal and river barges, you never know what the Mission Builders have added:

21911

The CR.42 cockpit is well underway:

21912 21913 21914 21915 21916 21917 21918 21919

The Dewoitine 520 external model gets a bit of love:

21920 21921 21922 21923 21924

Bf-109 F4 still under construction and has two modellers working on it. One for the external, one for the cockpit. Due to the nature of the way they work, I can only share images they make available to me as they are perfectionists....and trust me, we know that the 109 guys want perfection! :-)

So these are the only images they have shared with me but work has continued since these arrived in my inbox....but it's always a surprise when I get anything of the F4 so here's what I can show you :photographer:

21925 21926 21927 21928 21929

The Wellington goes from strength to strength and all of the team can't wait to get in her :stunned:

21930 21931 21932 21933 21934 21935 21936 21937 21938 21939 21940

Some news from our skinning department and the default skins. Here’s a message they sent me:

Hope that these screenshots will show possible improvements to the present default skins, and how the look of the game can be simply improved by mere replacement of the default skins.
The screenshots show a suggested replacement for the default Wellington skin. These (present defaults) are quite dark, and the colours look wrong in the present version of the game (different versions of the game render aircraft colours differently).
Roundels should be ignored. They are my own, and the colours need tweaking. They are not proposed in-game roundel replacements, though hopefully some work towards replacing those will be done before the release of TF5.
The only difference you see in the screenshots is the replacement of the aircraft skin colours. The geodetic structure visible in the screenshots is overlaid by the game, and is present on every skin loaded in the game. It is just less visible on the present, darker, default skins.
The screenshots are taken at 09.00 over the Fields Map with heavy clouds, and also at noon over the Channel Map. The landscape is default, as is everything else (lighting/clouds etc.)

21941 21942

21943 21944

21945 21946

21947 21948

21949 21950

21951 21952 21953 21954 21955


As always thanks to Artist and his help with the bugtracker, latest information here:

From the Team Fusion Bugtracker (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de)

The bugtracker (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/projects/il2clodtf) keeps accumulating data: Since the last published update on January, 21st, 10 new users brought the total up to 937 registered users of which 58 have been active since then. We currently have 224 open issues (164 bugs and 60 feature requests). 3 have already been resolved with patch 4.312 and 26 are currently in progress (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/projects/il2clodtf/issues?set_filter=1&f[]=status_id&op[status_id]=%3D&v[status_id][]=2&f[]=&c[]=tracker&c[]=status&c[]=priority&c[]=subject&c[]=author&c[]=updated_on&c[]=category&c[]=votes_value&group_by=) to be fixed or implemented.

5 new issues have been raised since the last update, among them are (no judgment implied): Reported Bug #796 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/796): "Searchlight Beam Erratic Movement " (New) Reported Bug #795 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/795): "Searchlight Beams Brightness" (New) Reported Bug #794 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/794): "Biggin Hill Aerodrome incorrectly modelled" (New) Feature Request #793 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/793): "New Zoom-Out/In Function" (New) Reported Bug #792 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/792): "Default markings superimposed on aircraft" (New)

The issues with the highest (summary) vote currently are:
69: #725 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/725): "BF 110 Airspeed" (New) 55: #581 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/581): "RAF fighter engines incorrectly start cold in Multiplayer" (New) 53: #498 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/498): "Bf 109: Prop Pitch Inverted" (New) 48: #614 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/614): "Large cloud formations do not appear in replay of track (.TRK) files" (New) 47: #690 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/690): "Bf 109: The Half Armor Plate in upcoming 109 Variants" (New) 42: #602 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/602): "Defensive AI Gunner Skill Levels Set Too High" (New) 42: #742 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/742): "Bf 109 cooling system" (New) 40: #610 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/610): "Navigational Illumination Functionality: Smudge pots, Glim Lamps" (In Progress) 39: #598 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/598): "Damage to Gear and/or Flaps when safe speeds exceeded" (New) 39: #589 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/589): "Hawker Hurricane start up" (New)

There are a number of issues set on "Feedback". We kindly ask the authors to respond:
#604 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/604): "Blenheim: fuel cocks incorrectly labeled #669 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/669): "Bf 110: Navigational Lights #670 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/670): "Bf 110: Landing Lights #716 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/716): "Texture #718 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/718): "Ju-88: Sight cannot be moved to the left and to right #731 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/731): "Fiat BR-20 bomb aimer CTD #732 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/732): "Fiat BR-20 bomb aimind device can only be set to 2.700 meters #733 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/733): "Hurricane Mk I Rotol 100: Course setter #749 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/749): "Overheated cooling system shouldn't blow the radiator. #765 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/765): "Weird Lighting in cockpit during live flight #768 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/768): "Channel Map: Long Grass at Gravesend Airfield

We invite all pilots to participate in the bugtracker either by reporting bugs, requesting features, and/or vote on issues. But before you do anything, please read the guidelines and FAQ here: http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/projects/il2clodtf/boards/4
===


And finally, here’s a short video showing the startup sequence of the Beaufighter as presented to our team approx.. 3-weeks ago. Since then more work has taken place on tidying up textures, modelling, dials

(example here: 21956 ), etc, etc

Work continues on the Beaufighter as well as many others and I hope to have some more progress to share with you soon.

Hope that’s enough for now…..here’s the video, cheers, MP/TF

I have been asked to re-iterate by the lead modeller on the Beaufighter that this is still work in progress. lots has changed since this video was created more detail added, bugs fixed, textures tidied. Please understand, this video is WORK IN PROGRESS.....as such...it has already got much better :)



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhzLCSN_gbA

[71st_AH_Eagle]

Awesome work guys! Keep it up. :salute:

[ATAG_Flare]

Great work!

Thanks TF!


However those skins actually seem a bit too light . . . maybe it's just me.

[ATAG_Lewis]

Great work as per usual...The Wimpy skin looks way better for my money....and the Beau cockpit really makes me want to fly it big time!!...so good!


It will arrive but we're just working as hard as we can, when we can and keeping it fun rather than a chore :recon:

I'd much rather folks take time and at least it not be a chore....I'm sure with anything it feels like that sometimes even when its your hobby...~S~

[ATAG_Ribbs]

The Beau is ALIVE! And the Wimpy skins look fantastic! Good work by everyone involved! And thanks MP for the update..we as a community.. Have been waiting patiently for one, and you delivered!

Cheers

[keeno]

Fantastic update chaps, I'm loving it!

all looks incredible but the video is the business!!! Keep up the amazing work and thanks to all involved the time taken and talent involved is nothing short of jaw-dropping.


Cheers.

[Topgum]

Big Update, great work, awesome Features!!!
Thank you MP & TF:salute:

[Topgum]

However those skins actually seem a bit too light . . . maybe it's just me.

I agree.

[RAF74_Buzzsaw]

Everyone should understand the video is a very early Alpha of a partly finished new cockpit.

So for example, people may notice the trim control wheel moved horizontally across the cockpit instead of the wheel rotating circularly... this is a simple error in the code written for the hook direction and obviously would not display like that in the finalized version. The programmer knows that. There were also quite a number of unimplemented controls in that video... it was just a sample, (actually in-house sample) to show work is ongoing.

Our guys are working on a couple code utilities which will do a lot of the basic work to implement cockpits and controls, and speed up the process. Right now everything has to be written manually. We are looking at the long term, taking our time to build the tools we need... we want to have the means, methods and utilities in place so that future new aircraft/cockpit development will be much faster.

Lots and lots of work to be done... hoping everyone has patience and understands there is not a hard and fast deadline, we are basically ready when we are ready. ;)

[TWC_SLAG]

I don't understand the plaque saying "Before Landing Retract Under Turret" on the Wellington panel.

[RAF74_Buzzsaw]

I don't understand the plaque saying "Before Landing Retract Under Turret" on the Wellington panel.

Early models of Wellington IA had a dorsal turret, underneath the fuselage.

It caused so much drag, and slowed the aircraft, as well as not providing much protection, that the RAF decided to retro-actively remove it.

The version of the IA in the game, (mistakenly called IC) is one with the turret removed... however, the plaque is a reminder many had the turret installed.

[9./JG26_Brigg]

you guys are truly amazing and thank you :salute:

[Gromit]

Guys the amount of effort going into this is astounding, I am humbled that I cannot help being a computer imbecile, but I can honestly say thanks very much for giving up your time and skills on this project, when it arrives it arrives, until then great work!

[ATAG_Ezzie]

Everyone should understand the video is a very early Alpha of a partly finished new cockpit.

So for example, people may notice the trim control wheel moved horizontally across the cockpit instead of the wheel rotating circularly... this is a simple error in the code written for the hook direction and obviously would not display like that in the finalized version. The programmer knows that. There were also quite a number of unimplemented controls in that video... it was just a sample, (actually in-house sample) to show work is ongoing.

Our guys are working on a couple code utilities which will do a lot of the basic work to implement cockpits and controls, and speed up the process. Right now everything has to be written manually. We are looking at the long term, taking our time to build the tools we need... we want to have the means, methods and utilities in place so that future new aircraft/cockpit development will be much faster.

Lots and lots of work to be done... hoping everyone has patience and understands there is not a hard and fast deadline, we are basically ready when we are ready. ;)

Very much appreciate all the work etc and I'm happy to wait for as long as it takes.

Just curious to know if the observer cupola on the Beau will be accessible and if so will it have the single .303, noting that early Beaus didnt have them?

Ezzie

[TWC_SLAG]

Early models of Wellington IA had a dorsal turret, underneath the fuselage.

It caused so much drag, and slowed the aircraft, as well as not providing much protection, that the RAF decided to retro-actively remove it.

The version of the IA in the game, (mistakenly called IC) is one with the turret removed... however, the plaque is a reminder many had the turret installed.

So I need to add detail to dedication, in trying to describe TF guys. :thumbsup:

[II/JG77_Jack]

Great work! :salute:

[KansasCS]

Terrific update!


Gesendet von iPhone mit Tapatalk

[FightingSteel1]

Nice looking stuff there everyone! I'm excited about the future of this sim :).

[MJDixon]

Amazing work! :)

[Cassius]

Looks Great!:thumbsup:

[5./JG11_Rain]

Good stuff!

[DUI]

Sweeeeet - thanks a lot! :gourmet:

[II/JG77_RC]

Looks awesome ! Great quality work takes time :thumbsup:

Do you think we will still see TF 5.0 before the end of 2016 ?

:-)

~S~ !

[THE_ITALIAN_ACE]

Always a good work.
Ty for the news Mysticpuma.

[hauggy]

Amazing!
It's hard to wait. :)
I hope the 109 F4 won't be overperforming like in BoS.^^

[Wolf]

Very much appreciate all the work etc and I'm happy to wait for as long as it takes.

Just curious to know if the observer cupola on the Beau will be accessible and if so will it have the single .303, noting that early Beaus didnt have them?

Ezzie

Yes you will be able to move between the seats and sit as an observer. Variations of the beau with a Turret gun have not been provided yet for implementation. So most probable, but not yet. You will have to wait and see

[ATAG_Ezzie]

Yes you will be able to move between the seats and sit as an observer. Variations of the beau with a Turret gun have not been provided yet for implementation. So most probable, but not yet. You will have to wait and see

Excellent - thanks for the reply Wolf.

Ezzie

[kashiide]

Beaufighter MK1 never got rear mgs
observer position is not modelled,and probably will never be,it would take 5/7 months to make it and all you would be able to do in would be,well observing...as the radar is not coded yet in CLOD.
i think those 5/7 months could be used much more relevantly...
if one day we have Radar coded,then it will become relevant

[ATAG_Ezzie]

Beaufighter MK1 never got rear mgs
observer position is not modelled,and probably will never be,it would take 5/7 months to make it and all you would be able to do in would be,well observing...as the radar is not coded yet in CLOD.
i think those 5/7 months could be used much more relevantly...
if one day we have Radar coded,then it will become relevant

At the risk of going off tangent somewhat

According to Bristol Beaufighter by Jerry Scutts Beau Mk1C's operating in the ME had local modifications to put a Vickers 'K' in the observer position. This was authorised by Bristol as Modification 1170. Production examples later were built with a rear gun via modification 1162.

Just observing would still be worthwhile in my opinion. The rear view from the pilot station in the Beau is very limited rearwards and I think some players - myself included- would find it useful to be able to check 6 ourselves sometime when flying it as a fighter.

I'm happy with whatever we get but just wanted to offer some additional info and another perspective.

Sorry for the off topic.

Ezzie

[Talisman]

At the risk of going off tangent somewhat

According to Bristol Beaufighter by Jerry Scutts Beau Mk1C's operating in the ME had local modifications to put a Vickers 'K' in the observer position. This was authorised by Bristol as Modification 1170. Production examples later were built with a rear gun via modification 1162.

Just observing would still be worthwhile in my opinion. The rear view from the pilot station in the Beau is very limited rearwards and I think some players - myself included- would find it useful to be able to check 6 ourselves sometime when flying it as a fighter.

I'm happy with whatever we get but just wanted to offer some additional info and another perspective.

Sorry for the off topic.

Ezzie

It will be very disappointing if the Beau has no rear view from the observer position :( That's just what the old IL2 did and is not realistic. Without the rear observer view, Beau pilots will be robbed of the situational awareness that was inherently designed into the aircraft for combat. I can't believe that TF would rob the Beau of its rear observer capability for us in CloD.

[kashiide]

i am sorry but we can t take in account all field modifications.in the Beaufighter mk1 manual,there is no mention of it.
if someone provides a 3d model of the entire observer position,we ll be glad to implement.
but ,considering the time it takes to do it,approximately the same time that it takes to make a single engine aircraft cockpit,or almost a new external model,when the project started,we decided to model only the pilot position and,instead of making the observer position,alocate this modelling time to something more relevant
it is not il2 46,dev times are approx 3 times longer,so we have to make some compromises

[Talisman]

i am sorry but we can t take in account all field modifications.in the Beaufighter mk1 manual,there is no mention of it.
if someone provides a 3d model of the entire observer position,we ll be glad to implement.
but ,considering the time it takes to do it,approximately the same time that it takes to make a single engine aircraft cockpit,or almost a new external model,when the project started,we decided to model only the pilot position and,instead of making the observer position,alocate this modelling time to something more relevant
it is not il2 46,dev times are approx 3 times longer,so we have to make some compromises

This news has just poured a bucket of cold water on any excitement I had about the release of the Beau. I had taken it for granted in my mind that TF would not do the same as the old IL2 and miss out the rear aircrew position. To completely ignore a vital aircrew position is just tragic. To rob Beau pilots of the rear observer capability that was important enough to be part of the aircraft design for the war effort and for the capability of the aircraft is, frankly, more than disappointing to say the least.

P.S. Something more relevant than part of the fundamental design and functionality of the Beau, in terms of the rear aircrew observer position, is hard to imagine.

[kashiide]

we dont have the rear observer station because you did nt model it yet:D

[Talisman]

we dont have the rear observer station because you did nt model it yet:D

Why bother to deficiently model an aircraft in the first place. To actually decide from the start of the project to model the aircraft with a glaring deficiency is not a good thing surely. If a job is worth doing its worth doing well!

[kashiide]

Why bother to deficiently model an aircraft in the first place. To actually decide from the start of the project to model the aircraft with a glaring deficiency is not a good thing surely. If a job is worth doing its worth doing well!

for the moment this all we have to offer and...it is for free,nobody has to pay for it,if it is not enough for you,then just model it,or if you dont want to play it ,nobody is forcing you to do so.

you are saying we model deficiently, this is insulting,but this is your right to say this.
have a good day

[ATAG_Lolsav]

Disclaimer: I dont know how to model. I have no interest in even learning to do so. But i like to play with what modellers do :)


Althought i understand beeing the most accurate historically is important to us all, aswell to TF members, i also question myself: Do i want to play with those Beaufighter guns? A resounding "YES" echoes for eternity. And i believe many of us think the same. But its just a belief, so it worths what it worths.

So, a compromise solution can be found with ease. Release the "Beau" as TF could achieve (and it was a lot) and later, if doable and/or someone does it, to implement the observer post. Deal?

S! to all involved

[ATAG_Dave]

Thanks for another great update and as always thanks to everyone at TF for their hard work :salute:

[Talisman]

for the moment this all we have to offer and...it is for free,nobody has to pay for it,if it is not enough for you,then just model it,or if you dont want to play it ,nobody is forcing you to do so.

you are saying we model deficiently, this is insulting,but this is your right to say this.
have a good day

To express disappointment that developers have chosen to model an aircraft deficient of an aircrew position that was part of the functionality of the aircraft and contributed to its combat efficiency should not be considered insulting IMHO. If you wish to feel insulted because I have expressed disappointment and added some justifiable criticism, then that is your choice. I have admiration for people who can produce these aircraft for CloD and even more admiration for the good natured way people contribute time and effort for free as a hobby. However, because something is free, that should not mean that members of the CloD community should not be allowed to express disappointment regarding a fundamental deficiency in an aircraft model and criticism concerning that deficiency. You have given us a reason for your choice not to fully model the aircraft and we have to accept that.

Happy landings,

Talisman

[Continu0]

i think those 5/7 months could be used much more relevantly...


Main Point in this discussion. The beau will still be a very cool addidtion to the game, even without observer-position.

[Mysticpuma]

I'd like to chip in here and add something.

As Kashiide mentioned, it isn't modelled yet. Now, at some point this year we do actually want to give the community v5.00 and once that is out 'in the wild' we can look at what the future holds for v6.00 (plans have been made....but as v5.00 isn't out, not much point in any discussions yet).

We in TF appreciate that the community has waited (sadly) years for this next update but it is because no-one has us sat in an office, paying our wages and being held accountable. We really are just doing what we can, when we can because we love flight sims and we want to share that passion with you. With that in mind, the models we have created are of a professional standard and will give the majority of players their wishes....but....modelling as Kashiide mentioned is very time and labour intensive and is done out of nothing but good will. These are offered effectively as a gift to the community (especially those who are not able to create their own) and as such we hope(d) that everyone would see them as just that. A gift.

Throughout all modding, many features have been added such as field mods, maps, models, textures, etc, etc. It is the nature of modding. Also new modellers have joined teams and offered their input and skill (such as our team have had). We would consider giving the community at-least a flyable and usable variant of models for v5.00 and then once this is done maybe we can consider additions later.

The thing is, we could just sit here for another 6-years, keep working behind the scenes and have a B-17, B-24, B-25, P-47, P-51, FW-190 (variants), 109 variants, Do-17, etc, etc....and never get anything out, but what would be the point of that?

So for now, let us get on with at-least creating content that will be available with v5.00 and after that...we can then see where we go and what we create...but for now can we just calm down and appreciate that our guys are giving the community something amazing.....and maybe after v5.00 is out extra features can be added....but no guarantees.

Cheers, MP

[danperin]

And don't forget, guys...The AI observer will always alert about enemy planes close to you. :D

[Chivas]

Thanks Team Fusion, I really appreciate all the hard work, and hours you've put into this sim. I'm quite sure the Beau as modelled will also be appreciated by 99.9 percent of is users.

[♣_Spiritus_♣]

@Talisman,

We gladly take corrections/criticism and often approach the community for help finding missing information. The Beau's cockpit is modeled in extreme detail, better than the stock aircraft and has many more clickable items. The modeling is above par on every element. We do see what you are saying, yes it would be nice to have the observer position but not having it yet doesn't make WHAT WAS modeled inaccurate, it is just a matter of priorities.

Like MP said, we could delay delay delay to get everything but we have to release 5.0 and odds are people will love to fly the Beau even though the observer position isn't there yet. It's either that or you wait for post 5.0 to have flyable Beau.

I think everyone is of agreement it would be nice and realistic to have this position but there is literally about 9 of us modeling everything, from planes and cockpits to the ground objects for the new map, so we have to prioritize.

:salute:

[ATAG_Colander]

Or it could be released in TF5 as non-flyable until is 100% ready in TF6 ;)

[farley]

Or it could be released in TF5 as non-flyable until is 100% ready in TF6 ;)


:ind: ............ :( .............. :sobbing:

[RAF74_Buzzsaw]

As Kashiide said, it would take a LOT of time to do the 3D modeling of an observers cockpit... for some thing which would rarely be used by anyone.

We have to be realistic in where we apply our limited resources... and it does not make sense to spend this much time and effort when other aircraft cockpits could be completed instead.

Thanks :salute:

[RAF74_Buzzsaw]

Why bother to deficiently model an aircraft in the first place. To actually decide from the start of the project to model the aircraft with a glaring deficiency is not a good thing surely. If a job is worth doing its worth doing well!

Wrong attitude. You are getting something for free... done by a member who spent huge amounts of his personal time building it.

That person could tell you to 'shove it' and then you wouldn't get the aircraft at all. :idea:

I expect to see other aircraft released in the future... which will also not have all the gunner/observer positions modeled... because there is just too much time involved.

As a theoretical example, say we wanted to build a flyable B-17F.

For the cockpit work it would take us at least a year with the Pilot cockpit, bombardier station, the rear turret and upper and lower ball turrets functional, and the remainder of the turrets or gun positions only useable by AI. To build that same plane with all the turrets usable would add another year. And most of the turrets built in that extra year would rarely be used since they do not offer good fields of fire, often only have single guns, etc. Which solution is more logical?

[TheVino3]

Who the hell is going to be switching to the rear observer position during a dogfight? Who is going to volunteer to sit in the back of someone elses beau and observe for them? Theres no point adding it because no one will use it. It was a significant aspect of the real aircraft because there were guys whos job it was to sit in the observer position and observe. Very very very few people will bother with that in game, therefore it is rather obviously not going to be included.

[Wolf]

Just chuck a cam hook in the back so HE can sit there on his own and see out, but that would be it. :recon:

[ATAG_Ezzie]

Who the hell is going to be switching to the rear observer position during a dogfight? Who is going to volunteer to sit in the back of someone elses beau and observe for them? Theres no point adding it because no one will use it. It was a significant aspect of the real aircraft because there were guys whos job it was to sit in the observer position and observe. Very very very few people will bother with that in game, therefore it is rather obviously not going to be included.

Vino - I do.

there's a small bunch of us who do enjoy flying heavy fighters and who do switch to the rear seat during combat to check 6 and use the gun. The AI gunner is good at spotting contacts but has 2 'flaws' that detract from his performance. Firstly he will call out a fighter when he first spots it within a 5 km bubble and then will not update the position of the contact ever. And secondly he will only call out a contact once so if you come across the same contact 20 minutes later he will not call him out. In both cases the chatter of the gun will be the last warning that the contact is approaching to guns range. This is why I check 6 in the 110 during combat even though the AI is there. This has kept me alive more than once.

Having said that I accept that heavy fighter dudes like me are a minority and I accept the reasoning behind TF's decision. Just wanted to answer your question lest anyone think no one does use it.

Ezzie

[philstyle]

[/URL]: "Weird Lighting in cockpit during live flight #768 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/768): "Channel Map: Long Grass at Gravesend Airfield


I have replied to this with exact details.
TF already have these details however having been advised of this a number of times.

See 3:31 in this video:


https://youtu.be/47oXhrMwwus?t=3m31s

[Talisman]

@Talisman,

We gladly take corrections/criticism and often approach the community for help finding missing information. The Beau's cockpit is modeled in extreme detail, better than the stock aircraft and has many more clickable items. The modeling is above par on every element. We do see what you are saying, yes it would be nice to have the observer position but not having it yet doesn't make WHAT WAS modeled inaccurate, it is just a matter of priorities.

Like MP said, we could delay delay delay to get everything but we have to release 5.0 and odds are people will love to fly the Beau even though the observer position isn't there yet. It's either that or you wait for post 5.0 to have flyable Beau.

I think everyone is of agreement it would be nice and realistic to have this position but there is literally about 9 of us modeling everything, from planes and cockpits to the ground objects for the new map, so we have to prioritize.

:salute:

Thanks very much for your considered reply. I don't intend to post on this subject again, but I would like to make a few final points as feedback. I can understand that it will be tough doing what TF is doing and trying to pull everything together in a joined up and timely fashion. But rear observation was crucial to the Beau for safety, survivability and combat effectiveness in real life and I suggest that the usefulness of this capability in a combat flight simulator in MP and squad co-op missions should not be underestimated as not relevant, or less relevant than some of the lavish care and attention we see given in other areas. There are pages of posts about rear view concerns for other aircraft types on the forum, so I hope you can understand my feeling that the Beau is being somewhat short-changed in comparison with other aircraft in terms of rear observation capability concerns; from some quarters it appears to be being laughed off as not that relevant when in fact it is very relevant. Please correct me if I am wrong, but I believe the Beau is due to be 1 of only 3 basic type flyable twin engine attack aircraft available to pilots flying red. Pilots flying blue have numerous options of great twin engine attack aircraft to chose from, so I would have thought that a high degree of priority in terms of modelling time could have been given to the Beau. However, it would appear that one of the three flyable basic twin engine aircraft types for red will be 50% modelled in terms of crucial design function combat effective crew positions, giving a third of reds twin engine combat aircraft what amounts to zero percent rear observation capability. Yes, cool to have the Beau armament, but why then handicap the aircraft in terms of observation to the rear, particularly given the limited choice of twin engine attack aircraft for red. I submit that the observation to the rear is not just a "nice to have", particularly given the bigger picture.
One last point. When it comes to some other greatly loved aircraft types it appears that plenty of constructive criticism can be given on the forum without the accusation of causing offense, but then when it comes to other perhaps less loved aircraft types the impression I get is that some aircraft are more equal than others. If someone raises a concern on the forum about the lack of capability/deficiency of a certain aircraft, I do not come and post that it is not important and tell them they have the wrong attitude. I think it is a cheap shot against fair criticism to just say be thankful, or do it yourself then if you want it. I can see that there has been a compromise, but I would have rather seen a less fundamental compromise somewhere else, perhaps with a training aircraft for example. A higher priority on what represents a third of reds twin engine attack aircraft would have been better IMHO. But there, its done and decided now. We had to put up with it in IL2 and we will have to put up with it again, but at least more twin engine attack aircraft were available to use on IL2. I guess it just feels like salt being rubbed into an old wound. Suppose I am just being seen over-passionate (or something more unkind) and unreasonable.
Finally, I salute and thank all those involved with TF and the aim of developing CloD to, well, the sky is the limit. Good luck.

Happy landings,

Talisman

[Gromit]

Wrong attitude. You are getting something for free... done by a member who spent huge amounts of his personal time building it.

That person could tell you to 'shove it' and then you wouldn't get the aircraft at all. :idea:

I expect to see other aircraft released in the future... which will also not have all the gunner/observer positions modeled... because there is just too much time involved.

As a theoretical example, say we wanted to build a flyable B-17F.

For the cockpit work it would take us at least a year with the Pilot cockpit, bombardier station, the rear turret and upper and lower ball turrets functional, and the remainder of the turrets or gun positions only useable by AI. To build that same plane with all the turrets usable would add another year. And most of the turrets built in that extra year would rarely be used since they do not offer good fields of fire, often only have single guns, etc. Which solution is more logical?

Buzz I take it the Wellington, Do17 etc as AI have the gunners in the defensive model, but not the positions graphically modelled, in other words you could not man the guns in a flyable version, would it be much work to add the defence model into an aircraft in this manner?
In all the memoirs and books about the Coastal command strike wings they mention the retro fitting of "scare guns" in Beaufighters that did not receive them from the factory, In "Armed Rovers" mention is given of everything from Vickers K to Browning's being mounted, it seems practically no CC Beau flew without one.

Not a criticism simply a possible solution as having almost 120 degrees of blindness and no gunner could well leave all this effort and hard work unused as 109's cue up and just sit behind you?

Never simple this lark.

[ATAG_Lolsav]

@ Talisman

Maybe you are right about how the community reacted to your points. But as you say you are passionate about the flight simms so are the TF members, who, in their right, may have also replyed in a passionate manner. That doesnt mean TF didnt aquire your input, because, in the middle of the "fray" the message has passed trough. Also a reply was endorsed stating the reasons why a choice was made.

"Inputs" where there is passion might do a scratch or 2, that doesnt mean there is no respect. Its like discussing football (the one played with the foot :) ) with friends, we can have diffrent passions but we still like each others.

Personnaly i welcome your input and want to encourage you to speak up evrytime you have a question like the previous one. Doesnt mean you get automatically your point acknowlegde but also provides more insight for evryone (and not just TF) about the particularity of a aircraft.

S!

[ATAG_Colander]

football (the one played with the foot :) )
22001

[kashiide]

as Wolf suggested,we can put a camera hook,so people who want to observe will be able to

[41Sqn_Banks]

as Wolf suggested,we can put a camera hook,so people who want to observe will be able to

Perfect solution!

[Joker]

Firstly, thank you for all the efforts and the fact that this is still a moving project.

My usage of and credit to TF when I use TF5 is my commitment to you TF folks. Just as it has been for the earlier patches.

So wishing you all the best with bringing this to release ...... what can be said, this slip / delay is sad news.

It's not a good sign that no new target date has been offered .....

Given the amount if items listed in the OP which make for great reading by the way, it sure seems like a hell of a lot and it makes for a concern as to whether the scope of this TF5 has been or has become too much!
When did OC Rift get prioritised for example. I've not doubt it'll be a fan favourite but is it mission critical?

Fingers crossed and another can of patience opened here.

S!

Joker

[ATAG_Colander]

When did OC Rift get prioritised for example. I've not doubt it'll be a fan favourite but is it mission critical?


Is not prioritized but sometimes one gets burned of working on the same thing for years. Switching to something different helps breaking the monotony while at the same time keeps something being done on the MOD instead of taking a long break.

[ATAG_Lolsav]

When did OC Rift get prioritised for example. I've not doubt it'll be a fan favourite but is it mission critical?

The implementation is beeing worked on. I dont own OR but i welcome the efforts to make this sim "future ready". Also, i dont think the one doing that work was "misplaced", since its more of a coder work than a artist work. The team has many members and many specialits on each area. So, althought in a "time consuming" logic i could forsee a reasonable critic, it has the flawn of not beeing the same person who does evrything.

S!

Edit - The guilty one replyed before i did.

[♣_Spiritus_♣]

Is not prioritized but sometimes one gets burned of working on the same thing for years. Switching to something different helps breaking the monotony while at the same time keeps something being done on the MOD instead of taking a long break.

^^^ This. I'd also add that switching to work on something new refreshes your eyes on the previous project and may just give you answers or a better way to approach something that was causing issues before.

[Chivas]

Firstly, thank you for all the efforts and the fact that this is still a moving project.

My usage of and credit to TF when I use TF5 is my commitment to you TF folks. Just as it has been for the earlier patches.

So wishing you all the best with bringing this to release ...... what can be said, this slip / delay is sad news.

It's not a good sign that no new target date has been offered .....

Given the amount if items listed in the OP which make for great reading by the way, it sure seems like a hell of a lot and it makes for a concern as to whether the scope of this TF5 has been or has become too much!
When did OC Rift get prioritised for example. I've not doubt it'll be a fan favourite but is it mission critical?

Fingers crossed and another can of patience opened here.

S!

Joker1

I'm afraid, VR support is mission critical. Combat flight Sims that don't implement VR will no longer generate enough profit to create further theaters, as their base moves on to VR. VR even has the capability to reinvigorate the stagnant flight sim genre. Most flight simmers already have, and continually upgrade their highend systems, so the cost of VR isn't that oppressive for this genre. Especially when a VR headset replaces multiple 3D displays, TrackIR, and Decent Headphones, for only six hundred dollars.

[RAF74_Buzzsaw]

Buzz I take it the Wellington, Do17 etc as AI have the gunners in the defensive model, but not the positions graphically modelled, in other words you could not man the guns in a flyable version, would it be much work to add the defence model into an aircraft in this manner?
In all the memoirs and books about the Coastal command strike wings they mention the retro fitting of "scare guns" in Beaufighters that did not receive them from the factory, In "Armed Rovers" mention is given of everything from Vickers K to Browning's being mounted, it seems practically no CC Beau flew without one.

Not a criticism simply a possible solution as having almost 120 degrees of blindness and no gunner could well leave all this effort and hard work unused as 109's cue up and just sit behind you?

Never simple this lark.

The retro-fitted guns were much more commonly a feature of the Beau VI, Beau TF-X, Beau-21, etc. Not the Beau I... except a few Beau IC's which were retro-fitted. None of the IF's or NightFighter IF's had them.

Re. the Wellington:

We ARE building the rear and front turrets for the Wellington IA.

The reason is logical... unlike the Beau I of which the overwhelming majority had no rear turret, (only a few field mods had one) the Wellington had front and rear turrets operational from the start. We have built the Frazer Nash FN-5, which is the turret used in the IA and IC... not the earlier Vickers turret used in the I. In addition, the FN5 was used for both front and rear, so that simplifies the task in that the same cockpit model can be used for both. (with minor differences)

We are obviously building the bombardier station for the Wellington too... because this is critical for the players to be able to use the aircraft in the way it was intended... Ie. dropping bombs from altitude.

On the other hand, if we build the Wellington IC version for TF 5.0, (unclear at this time) we will not be making 'cockpits' for the waist gunner positions... these would not be used by many players, as they have a poor field of fire, only one gun, and all the effort would not be worthwhile as there is a tremendous amount of detail inside. These waist gunner positions would be added to the external model and of course the AI would fire them.

[hauggy]

1

I'm afraid, VR support is mission critical. Combat flight Sims that don't implement VR will no longer generate enough profit to create further theaters, as their base moves on to VR. VR even has the capability to reinvigorate the stagnant flight sim genre. Most flight simmers already have, and continually upgrade their highend systems, so the cost of VR isn't that oppressive for this genre. Especially when a VR headset replaces multiple 3D displays, TrackIR, and Decent Headphones, for only six hundred dollars.

What a joke most simmers I know don't even buy a TrackIr and you think everybody will buy VR ???
I'm not even remotely interested in VR personally because it's not going to be perfect and I can't play if I don't see my keyboard, this statement just sounds like your personal opinion.
VR existed in 1992 :
22006
Like 3D it's an old technology of the "future" (and I hate 3D).

[ATAG_Septic]

Happy and grateful for the update MP!

Any news is good news. From my time Beta testing I understand that Team Fusion will do what a member is able and willing to do. Sometimes it is unavoidable that there's many hours spent on tedious and difficult work that a person really doesn't want to do, which is where there is a serious risk of fatigue and burn-out. I'm very, very grateful to those who are able to press on.

Thanks to all!

Septic.

[RAF74_Buzzsaw]

I would add another point:

If players flying the Beaufighter are flying it like a bomber, and depending on a rear gunner, then they are flying it poorly.

The Beaufighter to be flown successfully should be flown in pairs, very aggressively, using its tremendous low level speed, and using fighter tactics, with tactics like the 'Thatch weave'.

The Beaufighter I has a speed of approx. 300 mph on the deck... very close to that of a single engined fighter... players need to use that speed, and the tremendous forward aimed firepower it has, as the basis of their tactics.

[ATAG_Colander]

What a joke most simmers I know don't even buy a TrackIr and you think everybody will buy VR ???
I'm not even remotely interested in VR personally because it's not going to be perfect and I can't play if I don't see my keyboard, this statement just sounds like your personal opinion.
.


I think the point is that those that did try trackIR can't play without it any more. The same applies to those with VR. On the other hand, there are some that will not buy a trackIR and those that will not like VR.
In any of such cases, Cliffs has few players already so if we can avoid loosing players by implementing VR, that's what we'll try to do.

The keyboard is a valid point although I personally don't use the keyboard but for flaps and gear. Everything else I need to fly is mapped to a joystick key.

[♣_Spiritus_♣]

What a joke most simmers I know don't even buy a TrackIr and you think everybody will buy VR ???
I'm not even remotely interested in VR personally because it's not going to be perfect and I can't play if I don't see my keyboard, this statement just sounds like your personal opinion.
VR existed in 1992 :
22006
Like 3D it's an old technology of the "future" (and I hate 3D).

So are you still flying Captain Goodnight using this:

22007

on this:

22008

?

Granted it was an awesome game:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79e718KNml0

But the future is VR for flight sims and most games. In 5 years time VR will be as common as HD televisions.

[ATAG_Bliss]

There are people working 1000s of hours of their own free time for the betterment of everyone. As far as I'm concerned, none of these guys owe me, or anyone for that matter, anything. I know there's other forums out there that lambast TF at every turn and constantly try and poke fun at the program management, what TF does, "their direction" or w/e. But these are the same people that don't have the 1st skill in anything to do with modding in the 1st place.

I'm constantly reminded of this sign I see at many auto shops. As a car guy and someone who builds race cars, nothing is more resoundingly true than this sign.

https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/736x/ef/d6/de/efd6de76d00e68472378572446f63c1c.jpg

Back in my "shop" days, we witnessed this over and over again. The guy who brought his car in to have it repaired thinks he actually knows more about how to fix it than the guys that do it for a living. Think about that. The person brought the car there (aka they couldn't fix it). But now that it's there, they are going to try and tell you how to fix it.

And generally after you got done with the parts they wanted replaced because,... "they knew that was the problem"...., and it still didn't fix it..., that's when they generally were quite humbled, walked away, and you started to finally do your job you knew how to do of diagnosing and fixing the problem.

But even in that example, the shop is charging this guy for a repair. It's not a free ride. So if that customer wants to pay me to do it the wrong way, replace the wrong parts, or simply pay me to throw his own money at it, well more power to him.

On the flip side, if you are taking time out of your day, your life, and spending time on a project that is 100% because of your passions (aka this game for instance), positive reinforcement is what's going to help keep you going. That's how life works. If your boss is an asshole, and treats you like crap, you generally leave and go somewhere else. Now just imagine reading negativity from people towards something you are doing for them, for free.. And we aren't talking you helped someone out for a couple hours. We're talking about people literally giving away 1000's upon 1000's of hours of free work.

It takes a special type of individual to be that talented to be able to do the code work, the mod work, the artwork, the cockpits, the fixes etc.,etc.,etc.,. but it even takes an even more special type of person to be able to shrug off the assholes of the world that love to kick the gift horse in the mouth.

Without the efforts of TF this game would have died 4 years ago. That is a fact. And if some people don't like the way TF does it, by all means, do it better yourself. And when you post an update of your own work (which you won't), and you find people scorning you for the amount of time it's taking you, the way something looks, the management, or w/e, just let me know how you feel about the next 100 hours you take away from family, from your free time, from other things you can be doing, in only an attempt for the betterment of everyone else. Because I guarantee you, the absolute last thing you'll want to do is work another minute for free when there's people in the audience that has the audacity to lambast you for your efforts in the 1st place.

Thanks TF for everything you've done. You have my utmost respect and admiration for the years of enjoyment you've brought to everyone here. :salute:

[hauggy]

So are you still flying Captain Goodnight using this:

22007

on this:

22008

?

Granted it was an awesome game:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=79e718KNml0

But the future is VR for flight sims and most games. In 5 years time VR will be as common as HD televisions.

Lol in fact I had an Atari 2600 and I still love "space invaders" to this day.
My opinion is people will buy VR when it will be ready with good games and cheaper (OR is "only" 750€ in my country, also most people will need a new PC).
I'll just wait and see for now I just hope team fusion don't prioritise this VR thing over content VR has yet to convince me.

[SoW Reddog]

1

I'm afraid, VR support is mission critical. Combat flight Sims that don't implement VR will no longer generate enough profit to create further theaters, as their base moves on to VR. VR even has the capability to reinvigorate the stagnant flight sim genre. Most flight simmers already have, and continually upgrade their highend systems, so the cost of VR isn't that oppressive for this genre. Especially when a VR headset replaces multiple 3D displays, TrackIR, and Decent Headphones, for only six hundred dollars.

Well lucky for us that CloD is not reliant on profit, is completely unsupported by the IP owners and TF aren't in it for the money. I'm glad that you have "only six hundred dollars" spare to replace already functioning and expensive kit. Many don't.

[ATAG_Bliss]

And it seems the truth has upset the usual suspects:


I could start modding tomorrow but that would be a huge step backwards as I'd have to start from team vanilla game and redo the TF work. Additionally and more importantly it would split the community and that is the reason we haven't done it thus far.

I about spit on my monitor when I read this. This is coming from a guy that can't even figure out how to shut off the TAB 7-1 system in the game, something Colander did all within a mission script.

But he doesn't want to split up the community with his modding abilities?? http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/images/smilies/roling%20on%20the%20floor%20laughing.gifhttp://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/images/smilies/roling%20on%20the%20floor%20laughing.gifhttp://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/images/smilies/roling%20on%20the%20floor%20laughing.gif

Thanks for the laugh Reddog!!!

[ATAG_Ezzie]

Just chuck a cam hook in the back so HE can sit there on his own and see out, but that would be it. :recon:

Ok - thanks Wolf.

Ezzie

[ATAG_Ezzie]

as Wolf suggested,we can put a camera hook,so people who want to observe will be able to

Ok - Thanks kashiide.

Ezzie

[ATAG_TCP]

Gotta love that horizontally moving trim wheel xD
I know it's a work in progress but it's still slightly amusing, going great with the update, pumped for that Dewoitine almost as much as a Swordfish LOL. ;)
Got soooo much content in this update for you guys, almost hard to believe there is a group of volunteers willing to put this much time and effort into this thing, very lucky and glad you lot are though :D

AChristianPilot

[SoW Reddog]

And it seems the truth has upset the usual suspects:



I about spit on my monitor when I read this. This is coming from a guy that can't even figure out how to shut off the TAB 7-1 system in the game, something Colander did all within a mission script.

But he doesn't want to split up the community with his modding abilities?? http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/images/smilies/roling%20on%20the%20floor%20laughing.gifhttp://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/images/smilies/roling%20on%20the%20floor%20laughing.gifhttp://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/images/smilies/roling%20on%20the%20floor%20laughing.gif

Thanks for the laugh Reddog!!!

No he didn't. Prove it.

[ATAG_Bliss]

No he didn't. Prove it.

Yes he did and he's already repeated it on here to you several times. But by all means keep thinking you could ever possibly mod the game, rework what TF has done, and release your own patch when you can't even figure out a mission script.

By all means, please put your money where your mouth is.

[Wolf]

Gotta love that horizontally moving trim wheel xD
I know it's a work in progress but it's still slightly amusing, going great with the update, pumped for that Dewoitine almost as much as a Swordfish LOL. ;)
Got soooo much content in this update for you guys, almost hard to believe there is a group of volunteers willing to put this much time and effort into this thing, very lucky and glad you lot are though :D

AChristianPilot

That sideways movement was resolved a long time ago. I did have a chuckle when I saw that video. Was very early work.

[SoW Reddog]

Yes he did and he's already repeated it on here to you several times. But by all means keep thinking you could ever possibly mod the game, rework what TF has done, and release your own patch when you can't even figure out a mission script.

By all means, please put your money where your mouth is.

Sorry, would love to stay and chat but I'm busy running my own server, forum and persistent campaign. Besides, we wouldn't want to completely derail the thread would we?

[Gromit]

Hell I would take it as it is in the video, it's pretty amazing work to a guy who has trouble installing patches. :-)

[Gromit]

I would add another point:

If players flying the Beaufighter are flying it like a bomber, and depending on a rear gunner, then they are flying it poorly.

The Beaufighter to be flown successfully should be flown in pairs, very aggressively, using its tremendous low level speed, and using fighter tactics, with tactics like the 'Thatch weave'.

The Beaufighter I has a speed of approx. 300 mph on the deck... very close to that of a single engined fighter... players need to use that speed, and the tremendous forward aimed firepower it has, as the basis of their tactics.

I don't think it's so much reliant on a gunner, it's the total lack of visibility over a huge arc which would be covered by the observer, when I play Blenny IVf I don't jump in the turret, but the gunner firing is a bit of a hint to do something drastic, a camera hook so you can check six would as suggested be a workable solution, but if it's a complicated time absorbing addition then as far as I am concerned you guys are doing enough already thank you very much.

[ATAG_Bliss]

Sorry, would love to stay and chat but I'm busy running my own server, forum and persistent campaign. Besides, we wouldn't want to completely derail the thread would we?

It's not a problem at all. I'm sure you'll keep right up with the snide remarks about how you could do it better than everyone else and that your skills are god like. You are awesome after all.

And just an FYI...The parts about "no game file modifications" might be your 1st sign. This happens to be in response to you btw.

http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/showthread.php?t=17791&p=194540&viewfull=1#post194540

[kashiide]

camera hook is already done,some restriction have to be made so the player see as less as possible the interior,because it is the external model texture and,from so close,it does not look good,but basically it is an already solved issue.player is now able to look out 360° from observer position

we hope people for who this point of view is important will be satisfied by the compromise

[ATAG_Ezzie]

camera hook is already done,some restriction have to be made so the player see as less as possible the interior,because it is the external model texture and,from so close,it does not look good,but basically it is an already solved issue.player is now able to look out 360° from observer position

we hope people for who this point of view is important will be satisfied by the compromise

Yes - thanks again kashiide. Very much appreciate the compromise solution and your flexibility and am looking fwd to learning how to fly/ fight effectively in the Beau now that we can check 6.

Ezzie

[Gromit]

Will be right there with you Ezzie, Beau is one of my all time favourites.

[ATAG_Ezzie]

Will be right there with you Ezzie, Beau is one of my all time favourites.

Sound good Gromit - looking fwd to flying with you and like- minded reds.

Built the Tamiya Beau a few years ago and some bits have fallen off over the years but still looks ok.

Edit - I'm from Australia and all pictures we take are upside down down here. Wish Apple would fix this ....

22010

[ATAG_Lolsav]

S

Edit - I'm from Australia and all pictures we take are upside down down here. Wish Apple would fix this ....

22010

roflmao

You can always ask FBI to crack it open to flip it :D

[Joker]

Is not prioritized but sometimes one gets burned of working on the same thing for years. Switching to something different helps breaking the monotony while at the same time keeps something being done on the MOD instead of taking a long break.

I fully understand this answer Colander ... in fact, mojo is important in PM terms for sure. Spiritus, fully agree too!
I totally get OC's potential by the way. So enough said on this specifically.

Speaking for myself here, my reaction was/is a mix of impatience and enthusiasm based disappointment to this latest news. (go figure eh?)
I also appreciate and respect that this is a volunteer project by you guys.

Another bug bear again cropped up between my last post and this one .... ....I read a regular comments from TF representatives that remind me that "I am owed nothing". These are difficult to re-read and I'd like to explain why I think these are not helpful and do nothing to advance the topic!

TF folks have volunteered their time. I am so impressed and thankful and supportive (in such a limited way, it's frustrating sometimes). I too have volunteered from time to time in my own community for example .... the point being that in any volunteer action .... the volunteer takes on a responsibility regarding the action s/he has volunteered for. The decision to volunteer sets expectations which are not immune from judgement and discussion.

Speaking for myself, the TF5 volunteered action it's out there as an expectation and my reaction is grounded on that expectation. So reading what comes across as a polite 'STFU message' and being told that I'm owed nothing is difficult to read at best and borderline out of order frankly.

I'm not trying to have a go, lodge a complaint or illicit defence from TF ... TF guys deserve more respect than that. ( cutting the hand that feeds you and all that )

I am one voice trying to communicate a difficult feedback/message without coming across as self-entitled. Tf set these expectation that I'm reacting to here. That's what it is.

With no new targeted expectation date to accompany the message of the delay, it's throws TF5 back into the open-endedness which is concerning. Surely that is understandable?

What remains to be stated again here is a huge positive sentiment of "thank you" to the TF team!

Respectfully!

S!

[ATAG_Bliss]

Another bug bear again cropped up between my last post and this one .... ....I read a regular comments from TF representatives that remind me that "I am owed nothing". These are difficult to re-read and I'd like to explain why I think these are not helpful and do nothing to advance the topic!

TF folks have volunteered their time. I am so impressed and thankful and supportive (in such a limited way, it's frustrating sometimes). I too have volunteered from time to time in my own community for example .... the point being that in any volunteer action .... the volunteer takes on a responsibility regarding the action s/he has volunteered for. The decision to volunteer sets expectations which are not immune from judgement and discussion.

Speaking for myself, the TF5 volunteered action it's out there as an expectation and my reaction is grounded on that expectation. So reading what comes across as a polite 'STFU message' and being told that I'm owed nothing is difficult to read at best and borderline out of order frankly.

I suggest reading what I said again. There was no polite STFU or anything of the sort. There is a huge difference between criticisms and the flat out condescending, rude, and disrespectful comments your squad mates have said about TF. And if you didn't catch on already, that's exactly the people I was directing my comments towards. I also find it highly ironic that you will type what I have highlighted when 2 of your squad mates consistently make rude, sarcastic, and condescending comments about TF management, their work, their priorities and their people, you don't say a word about that. Again, there are ways to criticize without being a complete and utter jackass.




I'm not trying to have a go, lodge a complaint or illicit defence from TF ... TF guys deserve more respect than that. ( cutting the hand that feeds you and all that )

Make sure you convey this to your squadmates.


I am one voice trying to communicate a difficult feedback/message without coming across as self-entitled. Tf set these expectation that I'm reacting to here. That's what it is.

With no new targeted expectation date to accompany the message of the delay, it's throws TF5 back into the open-endedness which is concerning. Surely that is understandable?

What remains to be stated again here is a huge positive sentiment of "thank you" to the TF team!

Respectfully!

S!

It's not a difficult message at all though. It's pretty simple to respect other people's work and to criticize it without being a condescending asshole. Eventually when you see enough of it, people speak up. As you can see in this very thread, one of the nicest guys you'll ever meet, also a TF member, had enough and had to say something. But you think my message about that is the problem? I doubt you'd get many people to agree with you.

Have a read at this fine gem and let me know how much respect you see towards TF? But that's ok for you though right? Just heaven forbid anyone speaks up about it? Then it's out of line? Got it! http://stormofwar.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=3344

[♣_Spiritus_♣]

Lol in fact I had an Atari 2600 and I still love "space invaders" to this day.
My opinion is people will buy VR when it will be ready with good games and cheaper (OR is "only" 750€ in my country, also most people will need a new PC).
I'll just wait and see for now I just hope team fusion don't prioritise this VR thing over content VR has yet to convince me.

Indeed, the price point right now is what will make some wait which is understandable, although if you add up what it replaces and what you are getting it is a fair price, especially for a first generation consumer version. The price will come down after a year or two once we have two or three good options to pick from. Also the lack of games is probably a turnoff to some, from my point of view I just fly CloD and DCS... and probably ED or SC, they seem pretty freaking awesome. So the lack of games is a non issue for me just because I strictly only play a couple games anyways.

VR isn't being prioritized, it is just another project being worked on. Most on TF have at least 3 or 4 major projects going at the same time (some have many multiples of that) and switch between them to help keep things fresh. This is why it took me like 7 months to finish modeling and texturing the new Blenny turret, it didn't take me 7 months to do all that work, I switched to my other projects like the Martlet, or its cockpit, or ground objects I was working on and made huge progress on those projects before getting tired of them and switching back to the turret.

[Mysticpuma]

An example of other work underway is:

22013 22014 22015 22016

We all work in different areas of expertise and do VR implementation is not impacting on content building. There are features that certain departments share work on but the end goal is to do this for the community of which we are a part....we have as much interest in completing this as you have in getting your hands on it :)

Lots of content, lots of features.....all for free.....we're working on it, cheers, MP

[Talisman]

camera hook is already done,some restriction have to be made so the player see as less as possible the interior,because it is the external model texture and,from so close,it does not look good,but basically it is an already solved issue.player is now able to look out 360° from observer position

we hope people for who this point of view is important will be satisfied by the compromise

Many thanks your time and efforts Kashiide :thumbsup:

P.S. The recent start-up video looked great. :salute:

Happy landings,

Talisman

[Gromit]

An example of other work underway is:

22013 22014 22015 22016

We all work in different areas of expertise and do VR implementation is not impacting on content building. There are features that certain departments share work on but the end goal is to do this for the community of which we are a part....we have as much interest in completing this as you have in getting your hands on it :)

Lots of content, lots of features.....all for free.....we're working on it, cheers, MP

How the hell do you do this????? :stunned:

[9./JG26_Brigg]

1

I'm afraid, VR support is mission critical. Combat flight Sims that don't implement VR will no longer generate enough profit to create further theaters, as their base moves on to VR. VR even has the capability to reinvigorate the stagnant flight sim genre. Most flight simmers already have, and continually upgrade their highend systems, so the cost of VR isn't that oppressive for this genre. Especially when a VR headset replaces multiple 3D displays, TrackIR, and Decent Headphones, for only six hundred dollars.

Critical for those who have already dropped $600 on a VR unit, but trust me there is way more important things to sort out first in this sim than enabling a feature for the minority to see a return on their investment.

[-Sven-]

I think project-wise putting effort (and there seems to be quite some involved) into VR is not proportionate to the ones that benefit from it. VR support is of course great for those who have a VR unit. Most who have one probably take part in some development state where they have a direct stake in the overall succes of VR, otherwise they won't be able to play with it if no game developer sees enough customer potential. Hence a vocal minority of consumer turned paper boys voicing their opinion is logical. I think VR is over-hyped for what it offers, it has many flaws, limitations when it comes to flight equipment and a big pricetag for something that does not replace my monitor for daily use.
But if that's the way resources are used then 'even goede vrienden' as we say in Dutch, no harm done.

Patiently awaiting TF5, just voicing an opinion.

[Gromit]

I think VR support would be a good selling point to attract new players, simply because it shows this game is still developing, I have heard several people claim CloD is obsolete, and the youtube video's certainly attract attention, I have no doubt the initial uptake would be small but VR is the future of gaming, a few years from now we will no doubt laugh at how primitive Oculus is, but right now if the game is to live on it needs a community, I think TF is correct to develop this capability.

[III./ZG76_Saipan]

I think VR support would be a good selling point to attract new players, simply because it shows this game is still developing, I have heard several people claim CloD is obsolete, and the youtube video's certainly attract attention, I have no doubt the initial uptake would be small but VR is the future of gaming, a few years from now we will no doubt laugh at how primitive Oculus is, but right now if the game is to live on it needs a community, I think TF is correct to develop this capability.


perhaps, but if you check the steam forums you will see many people trying to run this game on substandard systems. the jumpy to a beefy gpu will also slow the move to vr.

[Gromit]

perhaps, but if you check the steam forums you will see many people trying to run this game on substandard systems. the jumpy to a beefy gpu will also slow the move to vr.

Possibly so, but this seems to me to be investing in the future, and that in my opinion is a very sensible thing to do! :salute:

[Chivas]

Like most ground breaking tech VR is initially expensive. There is no doubt that many people can't afford it, while others erroneously compare VR to the 3D TV launch. Anyone who has tried good VR, understands there is no comparison. Some people continue to fly with a Monitor, and Mouse, but does that mean everyone else should. Time moves on, and VR has the capability to make flight sims a popular genre again. COD has to move with the times, or I can guarantee that not only will COD lose flyers, but many of the modders that make it so good.

[Joker]

Have a read at this fine gem and let me know how much respect you see towards TF? But that's ok for you though right? Just heaven forbid anyone speaks up about it? Then it's out of line? Got it! http://stormofwar.org/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=17&t=3344


I already have Bliss and moved on without engaging in it you'll notice too. I'll do the same here! It's not important.

My post was motivated by the OP announcement and I allowed my own emotion to distract me. I apologies to the thread for the distraction caused.

Colander's reply about keeping up spirits regarding OCR explains a lot and it make good sense. The work list seems huge and July is off the table. I'm interested hugely and worried it may slip away.
The lack of a new expectation date triggered this.

S!

[IIJG27Rich]

Is the map going to be held a secret up until release or will there be a preview kind of thing? Not complaining just asking. :salute:

[ATAG_Bliss]

I already have Bliss and moved on without engaging in it you'll notice too. I'll do the same here! It's not important.

My post was motivated by the OP announcement and I allowed my own emotion to distract me. I apologies to the thread for the distraction caused.

Colander's reply about keeping up spirits regarding OCR explains a lot and it make good sense. The work list seems huge and July is off the table. I'm interested hugely and worried it may slip away.
The lack of a new expectation date triggered this.

S!

Hi Joker - I completely understand and there's no reason for any sort of apology. At the end of the day no one else is modding Clod besides TF. They have a track record of fixing things, creating things, and releasing patches. There is always going to be delays when you are dealing with work being done in people's free time.

But regardless of these delays and issues encountered from doing the work, every single one of the TF guys knows what the goal is for 5.0. Some of these goals won't be on par with what everyone wants. There will always be people that would rather have x than y. But the main thing, and you already saw it, is the fact that a side project isn't going to effect the outcome negatively. In most cases it probably helps keep people from getting burned out.

I too too have high emotions when it comes to this. We've been here operating 24/7 since the game was released 5 years ago. No one wants to see this succeed more than me. I'm just hopeful people actually realize, especially with thier track record already, the guys doing the work probably know what they are doing and that their priorities are in line with the majority of people's wants and needs.

[1lokos]

I don't think it's so much reliant on a gunner, it's the total lack of visibility over a huge arc which would be covered by the observer, when I play Blenny IVf I don't jump in the turret, but the gunner firing is a bit of a hint to do something drastic, a camera hook so you can check six would as suggested be a workable solution, but if it's a complicated time absorbing addition then as far as I am concerned you guys are doing enough already thank you very much.

Is not possible put a "observer" in the rear cockpit - in fact a gunner without weapons?

So he call enemy on six like in other heavy's. ;)

[Wolf]

Guys its done... new topic. :thumbsup:

:P

[Wolf]

I am throwing my two cents in here... mostly cause I can't be assed doing work at my desk right now for someone in the business I don't like.....
You most likely have not heard of me. I am suppressed and forced to work in a cold dark, damp room in the basement of TF.

So going on ATAG_Bliss quote below whom I support. Here is some perspective or insight.

I wrote an original mission called Channel_Command and Bliss invited me to their server so it could be run on there exclusively. A talented guy called Salmo began tweaking it and then took over as a master mission builder cause his coding skills were professional compared to mine. But it got the ball rolling with many people coming to play on this great server and Bliss, myself and others began to look at the game and what else we could do.

That was close to 5 years ago and I clocked up 800 hours flying time TILL then.. Since then I have worked in the background and TF was formed and for the last 3-4 years I have been online flying with people maybe 10 times.... All my time has been devoted to development. Don't get me wrong... with the shit I have done I find it hard to play online cause I just have so much fun with my creations. So my flying hours are now around 1500 but that has all been 30 seconds hear and there building and testing new stuff and packing it away for later.

TF5 will see my work of over 6 gigs alone and many others like me released I hope.

So just sit back and think about those numbers and compare them to what you do and contribute.

I love the game and the community (YOU! but please put a shirt on). Hope to be flying online some day soon with you all :)
And watching you get shot down by mine and others creations :-P





I too too have high emotions when it comes to this. We've been here operating 24/7 since the game was released 5 years ago. No one wants to see this succeed more than me. I'm just hopeful people actually realize, especially with thier track record already, the guys doing the work probably know what they are doing and that their priorities are in line with the majority of people's wants and needs.

[ATAG_Flare]

I am throwing my two cents in here... mostly cause I can't be assed doing work at my desk right now for someone in the business I don't like.....
You most likely have not heard of me. I am suppressed and forced to work in a cold dark, damp room in the basement of TF.

So going on ATAG_Bliss quote below whom I support. Here is some perspective or insight.

I wrote an original mission called Channel_Command and Bliss invited me to their server so it could be run on there exclusively. A talented guy called Salmo began tweaking it and then took over as a master mission builder cause his coding skills were professional compared to mine. But it got the ball rolling with many people coming to play on this great server and Bliss, myself and others began to look at the game and what else we could do.

That was close to 5 years ago and I clocked up 800 hours flying time TILL then.. Since then I have worked in the background and TF was formed and for the last 3-4 years I have been online flying with people maybe 10 times.... All my time has been devoted to development. Don't get me wrong... with the shit I have done I find it hard to play online cause I just have so much fun with my creations. So my flying hours are now around 1500 but that has all been 30 seconds hear and there building and testing new stuff and packing it away for later.

TF5 will see my work of over 6 gigs alone and many others like me released I hope.

So just sit back and think about those numbers and compare them to what you do and contribute.

I love the game and the community (YOU! but please put a shirt on). Hope to be flying online some day soon with you all :)
And watching you get shot down by mine and others creations :-P

Wolf:

It's guys like you who make this flight sim community a better place - no matter the squad tag or forums they frequent. Thank you and all the others like you who are doing so much for this sim. Don't let the vocal minority set you back - most of us are totally behind your work.

:salute: :salute: :salute:

Flare

[RAF74_Buzzsaw]

Here's the bottom line to those members of the community who don't contribute anything to TF but who feel their opinions are important:

We have had close to one hundred people come through Team Fusion. Of those, around 25 have actually contributed significantly. We have a lot of tourists unfortunately who make a lot of promises, come in, look around, and then bail out. :photographer: :skydive:

Of those 25 productive members, I would guess most have put in at least 500 hours... many have put in a LOT more. By a lot more, I am talking thousands and thousands and THOUSANDS of hours.

And those are quality hours... because those members are VERY VERY talented people. Some are unique... I know everyone in this mod team, and in all my years in the hobby, with many and varied involvements with modding games... I have never met guys as talented as the ones I encountered in TF. These are people with serious PROFESSIONAL training. And they go beyond simply professional. Because when professionals are given a job, they are also provided with the tools they need to complete it... but TF members... we don't get any tools, no guidelines, no assistance, no familiarization courses, ZERO, ZILCH, NADA. And yet these TF members manage to solve the puzzles they are presented with.

Now all of this takes a lot of time and effort... a lot of head scratching, kick the computer through the wall, yell at the dog, be grumpy with the wife/girlfriend, effort.

:hitsthefan: :smash: :pcsux: :cussing::cussing::cussing:

(well, not too grumpy... we know better than that... :recon: )

So those on the outside should understand that sometimes we might not have a lot of patience for those who, having zero experience with the above, having contributed nothing, come onto this board and tell us what we should or should not be doing.

There is actually a lot of thought put into what aircraft or cockpit we should or should not be doing... and of course, if there is no modeler available to do the work... then it won't get done.

There has been comment in this thread about how we should have the Beaufighter rear observer position modeled. But what many perhaps don't understand, is that task requires the same number of hours of labour as a regular aircraft cockpit.... and we only have so many actually capable 3D modelers.... and they are working in their spare time. So if we did the Beaufighter rear cockpit, something else would need to be dropped... as for example, the 109F cockpit... or maybe the external models for the Spitfire V's, or maybe the externals for the Hurricane II's... Does the community think an observer's cockpit for the Beau is more important than one those three aircraft being dropped from the flyable list? I think common sense would tell us... No.

All the members of TF are fairly bright... that is a given considering the work we are doing... and we have spent a LOT of time thinking about this mod... so when those who are outside are tempted to make a critical post, they should consider the above... and maybe think twice.

Everything TF does is a balancing act... between our real lives, and what we can devote to this hobby. We only participate in the team because it provides a certain personal satisfaction. At a certain point, that potential satisfaction can be overwhelmed by the inconvenience and annoyance of the situation.

The good news is... TF is working hard, we are making GREAT progress, and I believe when we release TF 5.0, the community will be very happy with the result. ;;)

[ATAG_((dB))]

Here's the bottom line to those members of the community who don't contribute anything to TF but who feel their opinions are important:

We have had close to one hundred people come through Team Fusion. Of those, around 25 have actually contributed significantly. We have a lot of tourists unfortunately who make a lot of promises, come in, look around, and then bail out. :photographer: :skydive:

Of those 25 productive members, I would guess most have put in at least 500 hours... many have put in a LOT more. By a lot more, I am talking thousands and thousands and THOUSANDS of hours.

And those are quality hours... because those members are VERY VERY talented people. Some are unique... I know everyone in this mod team, and in all my years in the hobby, with many and varied involvements with modding games... I have never met guys as talented as the ones I encountered in TF. These are people with serious PROFESSIONAL training. And they go beyond simply professional. Because when professionals are given a job, they are also provided with the tools they need to complete it... but TF members... we don't get any tools, no guidelines, no assistance, no familiarization courses, ZERO, ZILCH, NADA. And yet these TF members manage to solve the puzzles they are presented with.

Now all of this takes a lot of time and effort... a lot of head scratching, kick the computer through the wall, yell at the dog, be grumpy with the wife/girlfriend, effort.

:hitsthefan: :smash: :pcsux: :cussing::cussing::cussing:

(well, not too grumpy... we know better than that... :recon: )

So those on the outside should understand that sometimes we might not have a lot of patience for those who, having zero experience with the above, having contributed nothing, come onto this board and tell us what we should or should not be doing.

There is actually a lot of thought put into what aircraft or cockpit we should or should not be doing... and of course, if there is no modeler available to do the work... then it won't get done.

There has been comment in this thread about how we should have the Beaufighter rear observer position modeled. But what many perhaps don't understand, is that task requires the same number of hours of labour as a regular aircraft cockpit.... and we only have so many actually capable 3D modelers.... and they are working in their spare time. So if we did the Beaufighter rear cockpit, something else would need to be dropped... as for example, the 109F cockpit... or maybe the external models for the Spitfire V's, or maybe the externals for the Hurricane II's... Does the community think an observer's cockpit for the Beau is more important than one those three aircraft being dropped from the flyable list? I think common sense would tell us... No.

All the members of TF are fairly bright... that is a given considering the work we are doing... and we have spent a LOT of time thinking about this mod... so when those who are outside are tempted to make a critical post, they should consider the above... and maybe think twice.

Everything TF does is a balancing act... between our real lives, and what we can devote to this hobby. We only participate in the team because it provides a certain personal satisfaction. At a certain point, that potential satisfaction can be overwhelmed by the inconvenience and annoyance of the situation.

The good news is... TF is working hard, we are making GREAT progress, and I believe when we release TF 5.0, the community will be very happy with the result. ;;)


I find it sad that you have to justify all that Buzzsaw. Rest assure that most of this community stand behind TF and are grateful of your work.

[ATAG_Lolsav]

and I believe when we release TF 5.0, the community will be very happy with the result. ;;)

Unless you toss in a flying toaster i wont be completely happy :P


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Cm7tv5cM8g

[Gromit]

Hell no we don't want those, they out climb a Hurricane with ease!

[ATAG_((dB))]

Hell no we don't want those, they out climb a Hurricane with ease!

I don't want to disappoint but you everything does lol :-P

[Wolf]

I see you got hold of Secret WW2 V4 Rocket test footage.


Unless you toss in a flying toaster i wont be completely happy :P


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Cm7tv5cM8g

[LARRY69]

Flying Toasters? ..no problem for TF. They make all wishes come true!:angel:

http://i1364.photobucket.com/albums/r739/larry691/1-toaster%202_zpsju9pijxx.jpg~original

[keeno]

Hi all,

normally I wouldn't dream of joining in threads like this with anything more than a heart-warming thanks to guys at TF, but I sat and read through this particular update initially with awe at what the team has/is producing and anticipation at what we as a community will soon enough be able to become immersed but then slowly as the thread developed my jaw began to drop as I read posts expressing disappointment that x or y may not be to their particular liking. This from people who offer nothing to the project but are here to simply take. It's the easiest thing in the world to take, much more difficult to give something back. I find it hard to believe that TF have even a) replied and b) even begin to justify their decisions.

When this game was released it was virtually unplayable, TF resurrected it from the bin and have developed it in a way that probably know-one at the time thought possible, if the game had stayed just there, then I for one was more than happy, to see what it pending now blows my mind, it's simply unbelievable that there are people who continue to develop this game for others to enjoy for free!

Some people though, no matter how much you try to explain and reason with can not see anything more than their own wants or opinions, sometimes to try and explain is nothing more than a waste of time, I applaud TF's attempts to try, I personally wouldn't have even bothered.

This, for me, is the best progress update so far, sad to see it develop into this.

[Mysticpuma]

And even though we don't have the time to commit a modeller to a beautiful fully functioning observer cockpit.....we have added an observer position that will sate the appetite of those who wish to see who is about to shoot them down :)

So moving on.....next update will have footage of the fully operational Death Star that someone sent me a PM voicing their disappointment about not being included :D

[ATAG_Lolsav]

next update will have footage of the fully operational Death Star that someone sent me a PM voicing their disappointment about not being included :D

Snitch! :grrr: :D

[Wolf]

And even though we don't have the time to commit a modeller to a beautiful fully functioning observer cockpit.....we have added an observer position that will sate the appetite of those who wish to see who is about to shoot them down :)

So moving on.....next update will have footage of the fully operational Death Star that someone sent me a PM voicing their disappointment about not being included :D

Aargh crap! Did the Death Star have an observer seat at the back???

If it didn't, it would explain why the rebel scum kept creeping up on them...

Now I just need to get back to coding the giant laser leaver where those two idiots stand with their backs to the laser and no safety rail.

[Kendy for the State]

And even though we don't have the time to commit a modeller to a beautiful fully functioning observer cockpit.....we have added an observer position that will sate the appetite of those who wish to see who is about to shoot them down :)

So moving on.....next update will have footage of the fully operational Death Star that someone sent me a PM voicing their disappointment about not being included :D
Many Bothans have died to bring you the plans to this observer cockpit...

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

[Ekko]

Thank you Team Fusion:thumbsup:
Thank you Puma:thumbsup:

After reading the full thread, did not believe my eyes.
I am very grateful(i think this is the right word to use
HERE):grrr: for your skills and FREE time


What a massive patch you Gents are putting your free time into.

Grateful i am:thumbsup:

[Talisman]

Here's the bottom line to those members of the community who don't contribute anything to TF but who feel their opinions are important:

We have had close to one hundred people come through Team Fusion. Of those, around 25 have actually contributed significantly. We have a lot of tourists unfortunately who make a lot of promises, come in, look around, and then bail out. :photographer: :skydive:

Of those 25 productive members, I would guess most have put in at least 500 hours... many have put in a LOT more. By a lot more, I am talking thousands and thousands and THOUSANDS of hours.

And those are quality hours... because those members are VERY VERY talented people. Some are unique... I know everyone in this mod team, and in all my years in the hobby, with many and varied involvements with modding games... I have never met guys as talented as the ones I encountered in TF. These are people with serious PROFESSIONAL training. And they go beyond simply professional. Because when professionals are given a job, they are also provided with the tools they need to complete it... but TF members... we don't get any tools, no guidelines, no assistance, no familiarization courses, ZERO, ZILCH, NADA. And yet these TF members manage to solve the puzzles they are presented with.

Now all of this takes a lot of time and effort... a lot of head scratching, kick the computer through the wall, yell at the dog, be grumpy with the wife/girlfriend, effort.

:hitsthefan: :smash: :pcsux: :cussing::cussing::cussing:

(well, not too grumpy... we know better than that... :recon: )

So those on the outside should understand that sometimes we might not have a lot of patience for those who, having zero experience with the above, having contributed nothing, come onto this board and tell us what we should or should not be doing.

There is actually a lot of thought put into what aircraft or cockpit we should or should not be doing... and of course, if there is no modeler available to do the work... then it won't get done.

There has been comment in this thread about how we should have the Beaufighter rear observer position modeled. But what many perhaps don't understand, is that task requires the same number of hours of labour as a regular aircraft cockpit.... and we only have so many actually capable 3D modelers.... and they are working in their spare time. So if we did the Beaufighter rear cockpit, something else would need to be dropped... as for example, the 109F cockpit... or maybe the external models for the Spitfire V's, or maybe the externals for the Hurricane II's... Does the community think an observer's cockpit for the Beau is more important than one those three aircraft being dropped from the flyable list? I think common sense would tell us... No.

All the members of TF are fairly bright... that is a given considering the work we are doing... and we have spent a LOT of time thinking about this mod... so when those who are outside are tempted to make a critical post, they should consider the above... and maybe think twice.

Everything TF does is a balancing act... between our real lives, and what we can devote to this hobby. We only participate in the team because it provides a certain personal satisfaction. At a certain point, that potential satisfaction can be overwhelmed by the inconvenience and annoyance of the situation.

The good news is... TF is working hard, we are making GREAT progress, and I believe when we release TF 5.0, the community will be very happy with the result. ;;)

Yes Buzzsaw, working free for a community can sometimes feel like something that is going out of fashion these days, so it is extremely encouraging to see the spirit alive and well in TF.
If we stop and think about it, we will probably have all benefited at some time from someone working in our interest for free. Some people might tell us its a mugs game, but I would disagree. In addition to work, family and personal interests, I have run or helped to run a couple of free of charge youth clubs, numerous sports clubs and a number of different social clubs for my local communities over a period of 35 plus years and worked with quite a few people who have worked for free in their communities; including charities, etc. Free community work can be a testing and trying path to tread at times, but I have always considered the children and adults I have chosen to support and spend my time with, worthy of giving feedback and constructive criticism to influence the way forward; particularly as it can help to foster a feeling of inclusion to benefit all.
I am sure there will be a many in our flight simulation community who will have worked for free for a community somewhere or somehow, but are not in a position to help by being a member of TF, no matter how much they might like to do so. I am equally sure that many will share some elements of understanding of what it takes to keep TF on the road.
Please keep up the good work, as it is very much appreciated, even though I can see and understand that it may not seem like that sometimes.
As someone who benefits from TF's good works I salute TF and wish you all happy landings,

Talisman

[Phoenix]

Many thanks for your time and efforts Team Fusion. Extremely looking forward to all this!!

[Wolf]

Many Bothans have died to bring you the plans to this observer cockpit...

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

Classic!!!! :bravo::bravo::bravo::bravo::bravo::bravo:

[7./JG26_SMOKEJUMPER]

Early models of Wellington IA had a dorsal turret, underneath the fuselage.

It caused so much drag, and slowed the aircraft, as well as not providing much protection, that the RAF decided to retro-actively remove it.

The version of the IA in the game, (mistakenly called IC) is one with the turret removed... however, the plaque is a reminder many had the turret installed.


Wow nice touch.


Thanks TF crew I am really looking forward to this.

I had no idea you where bringing in a French fighter. I really like this a lot actually. I think everyone likes to fly their native A/C. I'm sure a lot of French guys will fly it a lot like I fly Red. I looked up the history of that A/C and where it tangled with Wildcats. It has a pretty decent combat record early on vs the Australians and British. They where flying Tomahawks? I still don't completely understand the different names of the P-40 yet. Warhawk, Tomahawk, Kittyhawk. Can someone remind me?

[7./JG26_SMOKEJUMPER]

This thread has made me saddened a bit.

Just did a lot of cross forum reading. WTF guys.....

[ATAG_Flare]

Many Bothans have died to bring you the plans to this observer cockpit...


Aargh crap! Did the Death Star have an observer seat at the back???

If it didn't, it would explain why the rebel scum kept creeping up on them...

Now I just need to get back to coding the giant laser leaver where those two idiots stand with their backs to the laser and no safety rail.


So moving on.....next update will have footage of the fully operational Death Star that someone sent me a PM voicing their disappointment about not being included :D

Speaking of Death Stars:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wji-BZ0oCwg

Looks like the Empire is building it faster than you guys! :devilish:

[ATAG_Flare]

Wow nice touch.


Thanks TF crew I am really looking forward to this.

I had no idea you where bringing in a French fighter. I really like this a lot actually. I think everyone likes to fly their native A/C. I'm sure a lot of French guys will fly it a lot like I fly Red. I looked up the history of that A/C and where it tangled with Wildcats. It has a pretty decent combat record early on vs the Australians and British. They where flying Tomahawks? I still don't completely understand the different names of the P-40 yet. Warhawk, Tomahawk, Kittyhawk. Can someone remind me?

Where would the French have fought Wildcats? Was it Vichy France against MTO Brit carriers? Please share, Smoke!

[ATAG_Lolsav]

Edited per SmokeJumper request.

To tell you the truth i didnt felt like he was beeing rude. Honest. Maybe its a cultural thing. We forget we do not have all the same background. What may be sensitive for some, it is not for others. I always try to take that in account when it comes to the "interweb" expression.

I do not agree with some aspects of his critics, but i didnt perceive any disrespect from Talisman. He didnt hire me as his lawyer and he doesnt need one, but i would not like to see this thread turn to a "witch hunt" (is it ok to use this reference in this reply?).

[7./JG26_SMOKEJUMPER]

To tell you the truth i didnt felt like he was beeing rude. Honest. Maybe its a cultural thing. We forget we do not have all the same background. What may be sensitive for some, it is not for others. I always try to take that in account when it comes to the "interweb" expression.

I do not agree with some aspects of his critics, but i didnt perceive any disrespect from Talisman. He didnt hire me as his lawyer and he doesnt need one, but i would not like to see this thread turn to a "witch hunt" (is it ok to use this reference in this reply?).



I was already editing anyway. I don't want to add to the pile. Basically I agree so if you could edit your post I would appreciate it.

Like I said in my edit, did a lot of cross forum reading just now. A whole lot of opinions from people not sticking up their hand to help.

If this tri split wasn't around imagine what could be getting accomplished.


Egos......

[7./JG26_SMOKEJUMPER]

Where would the French have fought Wildcats? Was it Vichy France against MTO Brit carriers? Please share, Smoke!


It was Vichy vs Americans right over Casablanca I think.

[Wolf]

Speaking of Death Stars:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wji-BZ0oCwg

Looks like the Empire is building it faster than you guys! :devilish:

No. This is the next TF Friday Update video from Mysticpuma. Someone released it early

[Mysticpuma]

Is nothing safe anymore!?
Guess I'll have to use the X-Wings instead :)

[=FI=Murph]

All I can say is thanks for everything. It looks like it's going to be an amazing Christmas this year.

[Flyingblind]

Or next Christmas. Two Christmases for sure. :thumbsup::)

[ilario38]

First of all TANK YOU! Great work. Very happy also for the extra trying to make CoD fliable with Oculus. I only wonder if also Il 2 1946 will be as adapted to Oculus.






Well as the title says, I guess at some point we would get a Friday on April Fool’s day…but what follows is all real.

As always, we are keen to find new modellers to help our team progress and if you think you have the skills to help (or know someone who may be interested) please visit this thread, read through it and if you or they are up for a rewarding challenging hobby....get in touch :thumbsup:

http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11129

So to begin, as I usually say, lots of work going on, lots of features being created….and as we enter April hand on heart, it looks like we may have to push back the July release. There is so much work to be done, so much content to be added but let me give you an insight into what is involved from our side in getting a release Patch to you and why we can’t consider a small interim patch.

The coder who compiles are patches spends a whole weekend creating the compile. We need one for Alpha, one for Beta, then we create one for a closed Beta, then Release candidate, then (if no bugs are found (unlikely)), the final one everyone gets. Then we get a community report/feedback and consider a small fix patch like we did with v3.01 and v4.312
So that's 5-weekends compiling versions before you get it followed by maybe a small bug fix release.
The intention is therefore to keep his workload down to a minimum because he is already under pressure with his 'real' work outside if this hobby.

For this reason we can't release bits and pieces as interim patches as each would require the above process. Version 5.00 will be big (probably 3Gb+) but a full package, if we were to add an interim patch, the whole process above would have to be carried out….and so even before we reach v5.00 you would have 10-weekends compiling, so it’s not an option sadly.

This is an unpaid hobby for all of us so we are respecting every member of the team and making this as easy, fun and enjoyable as possible for us as we balance what we are doing around our paying jobs and home life.

It will arrive but we're just working as hard as we can, when we can and keeping it fun rather than a chore :recon:


Okay, with that on the table (and I will of-course keep you up to date with a possible new launch date) here goes!

So for those of you who may not visit the forums regularly we are working on Oculus Rift implementation. Work was flying along nicely and then they released the consumer version and it is working with Oculus 1.3 runtime now but there's a problem with how the automatic timewarp works because of the game ability to zoom in and out. Work continues but VR with Oculus is expected (no promises though) to ship with v5.00

Okay, so moving on, for those of you who don’t follow our Facebook page:

https://www.facebook.com/teamfusionmod

here are a few images, updates and features from our list of WiP projects some of which haven’t been shown before (not even Facebook!)

German Schnellboot:

21907 21908 21909

Vosper MTB:

21910

Careful sneaking up on those canal and river barges, you never know what the Mission Builders have added:

21911

The CR.42 cockpit is well underway:

21912 21913 21914 21915 21916 21917 21918 21919

The Dewoitine 520 external model gets a bit of love:

21920 21921 21922 21923 21924

Bf-109 F4 still under construction and has two modellers working on it. One for the external, one for the cockpit. Due to the nature of the way they work, I can only share images they make available to me as they are perfectionists....and trust me, we know that the 109 guys want perfection! :-)

So these are the only images they have shared with me but work has continued since these arrived in my inbox....but it's always a surprise when I get anything of the F4 so here's what I can show you :photographer:

21925 21926 21927 21928 21929

The Wellington goes from strength to strength and all of the team can't wait to get in her :stunned:

21930 21931 21932 21933 21934 21935 21936 21937 21938 21939 21940

Some news from our skinning department and the default skins. Here’s a message they sent me:

Hope that these screenshots will show possible improvements to the present default skins, and how the look of the game can be simply improved by mere replacement of the default skins.
The screenshots show a suggested replacement for the default Wellington skin. These (present defaults) are quite dark, and the colours look wrong in the present version of the game (different versions of the game render aircraft colours differently).
Roundels should be ignored. They are my own, and the colours need tweaking. They are not proposed in-game roundel replacements, though hopefully some work towards replacing those will be done before the release of TF5.
The only difference you see in the screenshots is the replacement of the aircraft skin colours. The geodetic structure visible in the screenshots is overlaid by the game, and is present on every skin loaded in the game. It is just less visible on the present, darker, default skins.
The screenshots are taken at 09.00 over the Fields Map with heavy clouds, and also at noon over the Channel Map. The landscape is default, as is everything else (lighting/clouds etc.)

21941 21942

21943 21944

21945 21946

21947 21948

21949 21950

21951 21952 21953 21954 21955


As always thanks to Artist and his help with the bugtracker, latest information here:

From the Team Fusion Bugtracker (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de)

The bugtracker (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/projects/il2clodtf) keeps accumulating data: Since the last published update on January, 21st, 10 new users brought the total up to 937 registered users of which 58 have been active since then. We currently have 224 open issues (164 bugs and 60 feature requests). 3 have already been resolved with patch 4.312 and 26 are currently in progress (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/projects/il2clodtf/issues?set_filter=1&f[]=status_id&op[status_id]=%3D&v[status_id][]=2&f[]=&c[]=tracker&c[]=status&c[]=priority&c[]=subject&c[]=author&c[]=updated_on&c[]=category&c[]=votes_value&group_by=) to be fixed or implemented.

5 new issues have been raised since the last update, among them are (no judgment implied): Reported Bug #796 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/796): "Searchlight Beam Erratic Movement " (New) Reported Bug #795 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/795): "Searchlight Beams Brightness" (New) Reported Bug #794 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/794): "Biggin Hill Aerodrome incorrectly modelled" (New) Feature Request #793 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/793): "New Zoom-Out/In Function" (New) Reported Bug #792 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/792): "Default markings superimposed on aircraft" (New)

The issues with the highest (summary) vote currently are:
69: #725 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/725): "BF 110 Airspeed" (New) 55: #581 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/581): "RAF fighter engines incorrectly start cold in Multiplayer" (New) 53: #498 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/498): "Bf 109: Prop Pitch Inverted" (New) 48: #614 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/614): "Large cloud formations do not appear in replay of track (.TRK) files" (New) 47: #690 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/690): "Bf 109: The Half Armor Plate in upcoming 109 Variants" (New) 42: #602 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/602): "Defensive AI Gunner Skill Levels Set Too High" (New) 42: #742 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/742): "Bf 109 cooling system" (New) 40: #610 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/610): "Navigational Illumination Functionality: Smudge pots, Glim Lamps" (In Progress) 39: #598 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/598): "Damage to Gear and/or Flaps when safe speeds exceeded" (New) 39: #589 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/589): "Hawker Hurricane start up" (New)

There are a number of issues set on "Feedback". We kindly ask the authors to respond:
#604 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/604): "Blenheim: fuel cocks incorrectly labeled #669 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/669): "Bf 110: Navigational Lights #670 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/670): "Bf 110: Landing Lights #716 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/716): "Texture #718 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/718): "Ju-88: Sight cannot be moved to the left and to right #731 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/731): "Fiat BR-20 bomb aimer CTD #732 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/732): "Fiat BR-20 bomb aimind device can only be set to 2.700 meters #733 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/733): "Hurricane Mk I Rotol 100: Course setter #749 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/749): "Overheated cooling system shouldn't blow the radiator. #765 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/765): "Weird Lighting in cockpit during live flight #768 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/768): "Channel Map: Long Grass at Gravesend Airfield

We invite all pilots to participate in the bugtracker either by reporting bugs, requesting features, and/or vote on issues. But before you do anything, please read the guidelines and FAQ here: http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/projects/il2clodtf/boards/4
===


And finally, here’s a short video showing the startup sequence of the Beaufighter as presented to our team approx.. 3-weeks ago. Since then more work has taken place on tidying up textures, modelling, dials

(example here: 21956 ), etc, etc

Work continues on the Beaufighter as well as many others and I hope to have some more progress to share with you soon.

Hope that’s enough for now…..here’s the video, cheers, MP/TF

I have been asked to re-iterate by the lead modeller on the Beaufighter that this is still work in progress. lots has changed since this video was created more detail added, bugs fixed, textures tidied. Please understand, this video is WORK IN PROGRESS.....as such...it has already got much better :)



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhzLCSN_gbA

[Oersted]

Lovely start-up sequence, can't wait to fly the Beau!

[ATAG_Flare]

Will there be torpedoes in TF5? Will there be any planes that can drop them? The Beau or the Welly perhaps?

[Mysticpuma]

Will there be torpedoes in TF5? Will there be any planes that can drop them? The Beau or the Welly perhaps?

Already under discussion and research in TF private forums. Could be the subject of a future update depending on how it goes :)

[IIJG27Rich]

Tordedoes would be great fun. :thumbsup:

[toranamadman]

Great work guys . Looking forward to release of v5.0 :)

[HurricaneHarvest]

Excellent work guys, pity about the delay, was wondering whether a Donation / bidding system might encourage more work (and silence whining wives? :D ). As most players of this game would be older and wealthier shirley bidding on "next addins" would be a win / win ? i've already offered $1,000 for a flyable defiant .. do i hear $1,100 for beau observer?

BTW, Surely the Beau is overkill for a BOB (early war) game ? You'd have to be a brave 110 pilot to take on a beau. 111 pilot, bale on first site of a beau. The Westlands Whirlwind would have been a more accurate wot-if scenario (if they got merlin engines). i would have preferred the Hampden or Battle or French planes for a Battle of France. Then go med.

Just my thoughts on previous discussions.

[ATAG_Ribbs]

It's a nice thought HH..but TF doesn't accept donations of any kind..the do it for the love of the Hobby. :thumbsup: They work as hard as they can and as much as real-life permits. They all have families that they like to spend time with while they continue to Keep the Dream Alive. as the old adage goes..it will be done when they get what they want completed. Trust me I can hardly wait for another update..just like everyone else I'm sure.

Cheers

[Mysticpuma]

HurricaneHarvest. We don't take donations for many reasons but one is that by taking money there would be expectation of delivery ad we just can't promise anything.

We work as and when we can and do it for free and then whatever we can provide is hopefully of benefit to our community.

The Beau has been given an observer position as mentioned previously, maybe you missed the news?

We're doing what we can, as we can.

Cheers, MP

[ATAG_Colander]

The only way the team could spend more time in the mod is by quitting their respective jobs and dedicating to the mod full time.
Even if money could be accepted, I doubt there would be enough donations to pay everyone's salary+insurance+whatnot :)

[Mysticpuma]

The only way the team could spend more time in the mod is by quitting their respective jobs and dedicating to the mod full time.
Even if money could be accepted, I doubt there would be enough donations to pay everyone's salary+insurance+whatnot :)

Hmmmmm. ...I daren't ask what your "Whatnot" is :)

But let's not forget the World Cruise and Playboy Mansion vacations that need to be built in ;)

[ATAG_Colander]

Playboy Mansion vacations

You mean purchase? :D

[No.64_Johnny]

Will there be a Spitfire Mk V with Aboukir Filter in the next patch? Cheers:thumbsup::)

[Mysticpuma]

Spit V is planned....filter....have to wait and see :)

[RAF74_Buzzsaw]

Excellent work guys, pity about the delay, was wondering whether a Donation / bidding system might encourage more work (and silence whining wives? :D ). As most players of this game would be older and wealthier shirley bidding on "next addins" would be a win / win ? i've already offered $1,000 for a flyable defiant .. do i hear $1,100 for beau observer?

BTW, Surely the Beau is overkill for a BOB (early war) game ? You'd have to be a brave 110 pilot to take on a beau. 111 pilot, bale on first site of a beau. The Westlands Whirlwind would have been a more accurate wot-if scenario (if they got merlin engines). i would have preferred the Hampden or Battle or French planes for a Battle of France. Then go med.

Just my thoughts on previous discussions.

As has been mentioned, we cannot accept money to work on a mod of CLIFFS OF DOVER, it would open us up to being sued by 1C and Maddox games for unauthorized use and profitting from the use of their licensed product.

Re. the Beaufighter... not overkill vs. the Bf-110... in fact although the Beaufighter has much better speed and performance at lower altitudes, that falls off quickly with altitude... the 110 is faster at higher alts... and will likely out sustain turn at any altitude the Beau as the 110 is quite a bit lighter and has lower wingloading.

The Beau IF/IC is a historical aircraft for the period and as such, it is appropriate when modeled correctly.

We already have a flyable Defiant... but just the testbed version with a Spitfire instrument panel...

As it stands, it is doubtful we will see a Defiant release, just too much work to do a 3D cockpit for an aircraft which is not likely to be flown by many people. (minimum 6 months work)

Westland Whirlwind would be a lovely aircraft to have... and we do have the data to model one... but MUCH more work than a Beau... as the external model has to be done as well as the cockpit. Creating this aircraft would be at minimum a full year's work and would involve work from at least 3 people in TF... if we had modelers who were interested and had the skills. Which we don't, as available team members are working on other projects.

[IIJG27Rich]

Money is the root of all evil... Not kidding.

[priller26]

Nice work! It will be nice and toasty HOT here by the time the work is released...Im hoping we we will get some guidance as to whether or not a fresh install and up modding should be performed prior to installing this one...I like my game the way it currently sits..with the SweetFX, various skins..and Deastersoft additions..I just hope I can plug and play with the mod..but understand if a new install is required..it will be worth it!

[HurricaneHarvest]

As has been mentioned, we cannot accept money to work on a mod of CLIFFS OF DOVER, it would open us up to being sued by 1C and Maddox games for unauthorized use and profitting from the use of their licensed product.

Re. the Beaufighter... not overkill vs. the Bf-110... in fact although the Beaufighter has much better speed and performance at lower altitudes, that falls off quickly with altitude... the 110 is faster at higher alts... and will likely out sustain turn at any altitude the Beau as the 110 is quite a bit lighter and has lower wingloading.

The Beau IF/IC is a historical aircraft for the period and as such, it is appropriate when modeled correctly.

I'll tell this to the crews of 111s ... 8O



We already have a flyable Defiant... but just the testbed version with a Spitfire instrument panel...

As it stands, it is doubtful we will see a Defiant release, just too much work to do a 3D cockpit for an aircraft which is not likely to be flown by many people. (minimum 6 months work)


I'm VERY VERY VERY VERY VERy OK if you want to release a Franken-modelled defiant in 5.0 - spit cockpit and welly turret. Then I'll be able to test why 141 sqn performed so poorly while 264 sqn handled the defiant successfully. A question that has always confused me.

Vote 1 : release franken-modelled defiant in 5.0!!! vote YES!



Westland Whirlwind would be a lovely aircraft to have... and we do have the data to model one... but MUCH more work than a Beau... as the external model has to be done as well as the cockpit. Creating this aircraft would be at minimum a full year's work and would involve work from at least 3 people in TF... if we had modelers who were interested and had the skills. Which we don't, as available team members are working on other projects.

I think there was whirlwind in 1946 ? hmmm

Pity about donations, I've seen great modding efforts in Total war game = Third Age Total war, and saw the aftermath when some young modders regretted putting so much time & effort for zero financial gains (yes they got girlfriends who complained). I felt guilty playing such a great mod knowing modders gained nothing!!! :( I did donate small amounts to some modders but finding who these people are can be very difficult - they dont give out details. I support STEAMs efforts for $ for modders.

But i understand CLODs unique situation & the dark lords are always watching.

My favorite saying is - "quality costs"

[=FI=Murph]

There was a team in New Zealand working on a Whirlwind for 46, and though it was nearly finished, all the work was lost in the big earthquake.

[VII.Racetrack]

I don't know where is going to come out the new Update but maybe you could show us some of the audio WiP :)

bb and keep it going!

[Mysticpuma]

As soon as I have something to show from our sound designer I will post it for you guys :)

[No.64_Johnny]

Any update?:):)

[Mysticpuma]

Nope. Nothing to report.

[RAF74_Buzzsaw]

There is lots of work being done behind the scenes as always.

[=FI=Murph]

I do have a question, but I'll say in advance that I understand if this might not be high on the list of fixes, since I do get that TF works on what they think is important or interesting. That's as it should be, it's their time and their work.
Anyways, here goes;
Are the issues with ground vehicles not being able to use roads and bridges, etc. being looked at? Is there any progress to report on this? I would guess this might be deep in the game's coding? It's just that having the ability to set up ground attack missions with vehicles using the roads, tracks etc., would add so much to the game in terms of the variety of scenarios we could create.
Many thanks, guys. You have really turned a sow's ear into a silk purse so far, I can't wait to see what the future brings.

[Mysticpuma]

Yes, the bridges and vehicles are certainly on the list and being looked at. The main team member who is involved in this is currently helping with the cockpit export/import but has made significant progress with the bridges. Like everything there is just one sticking point he needs to....errrr..unstick and it should be solved.
As soon as it's sorted we/I'll post an update showing it.

But yes, it's under scrutiny :)

[=FI=Murph]

Thank you MP, that's great news!

[7./JG26_SMOKEJUMPER]

Yes, the bridges and vehicles are certainly on the list and being looked at. The main team member who is involved in this is currently helping with the cockpit export/import but has made significant progress with the bridges. Like everything there is just one sticking point he needs to....errrr..unstick and it should be solved.
As soon as it's sorted we/I'll post an update showing it.

But yes, it's under scrutiny :)



Oh that is good news.

I've found some FMB instructional videos. :)


Is there a checklist for ATAG map making I should be aware of? That might be a new thread.

[ATAG_Ribbs]

I feel this is awesome news about bridges and the vehicles. It will bring alot of ground attack mission and scenarios into play. Not to mention fuel convoys and ground vehicles being able to attack cities and airfields, as an active part of campaigns. Very excited about that...if the splined roads issue is squashed as well. S!

Cheers

[dix]

As soon as I have something to show from our sound designer I will post it for you guys :)
Oh this is interesting :o

I hope it's something concerning the noise of the planes around you :D

I remember in IL2 1946 I could hear my mates changing the throttle settings to keep formation, here i rarely hear anything unless i open the canopy when i'm on the ground, let's not speak about the wind noise in the air :laugh:

Bumped into this video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dd9FDczUQlM) yesterday, and it's actually cool the noise the planes flying around you do
But I wonder what can you actually hear in real life :doh:

[ATAG_Colander]

But I wonder what can you actually hear in real life :doh:

Well, in real life you have a big 12 cylinder engine running a few feet from you so chances are you will not hear much else.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Im6bA4fHA3I

[dix]

Well, in real life you have a big 12 cylinder engine running a few feet from you so chances are you will not hear much else.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Im6bA4fHA3I

oh that is beautiful thanks for sharing :D

I thought the dcs effect was absolutely exaggerated, but I also thought they could hear something in real life, which seems to be not the case at all :laugh:

[horse61a]

Well as the title says, I guess at some point we would get a Friday on April Fool’s day…but what follows is all real.

As always, we are keen to find new modellers to help our team progress and if you think you have the skills to help (or know someone who may be interested) please visit this thread, read through it and if you or they are up for a rewarding challenging hobby....get in touch :thumbsup:

http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/showthread.php?t=11129

So to begin, as I usually say, lots of work going on, lots of features being created….and as we enter April hand on heart, it looks like we may have to push back the July release. There is so much work to be done, so much content to be added but let me give you an insight into what is involved from our side in getting a release Patch to you and why we can’t consider a small interim patch.

The coder who compiles are patches spends a whole weekend creating the compile. We need one for Alpha, one for Beta, then we create one for a closed Beta, then Release candidate, then (if no bugs are found (unlikely)), the final one everyone gets. Then we get a community report/feedback and consider a small fix patch like we did with v3.01 and v4.312
So that's 5-weekends compiling versions before you get it followed by maybe a small bug fix release.
The intention is therefore to keep his workload down to a minimum because he is already under pressure with his 'real' work outside if this hobby.

For this reason we can't release bits and pieces as interim patches as each would require the above process. Version 5.00 will be big (probably 3Gb+) but a full package, if we were to add an interim patch, the whole process above would have to be carried out….and so even before we reach v5.00 you would have 10-weekends compiling, so it’s not an option sadly.

This is an unpaid hobby for all of us so we are respecting every member of the team and making this as easy, fun and enjoyable as possible for us as we balance what we are doing around our paying jobs and home life.

It will arrive but we're just working as hard as we can, when we can and keeping it fun rather than a chore :recon:


Okay, with that on the table (and I will of-course keep you up to date with a possible new launch date) here goes!

So for those of you who may not visit the forums regularly we are working on Oculus Rift implementation. Work was flying along nicely and then they released the consumer version and it is working with Oculus 1.3 runtime now but there's a problem with how the automatic timewarp works because of the game ability to zoom in and out. Work continues but VR with Oculus is expected (no promises though) to ship with v5.00

Okay, so moving on, for those of you who don’t follow our Facebook page:

https://www.facebook.com/teamfusionmod

here are a few images, updates and features from our list of WiP projects some of which haven’t been shown before (not even Facebook!)

German Schnellboot:

21907 21908 21909

Vosper MTB:

21910

Careful sneaking up on those canal and river barges, you never know what the Mission Builders have added:

21911

The CR.42 cockpit is well underway:

21912 21913 21914 21915 21916 21917 21918 21919

The Dewoitine 520 external model gets a bit of love:

21920 21921 21922 21923 21924

Bf-109 F4 still under construction and has two modellers working on it. One for the external, one for the cockpit. Due to the nature of the way they work, I can only share images they make available to me as they are perfectionists....and trust me, we know that the 109 guys want perfection! :-)

So these are the only images they have shared with me but work has continued since these arrived in my inbox....but it's always a surprise when I get anything of the F4 so here's what I can show you :photographer:

21925 21926 21927 21928 21929

The Wellington goes from strength to strength and all of the team can't wait to get in her :stunned:

21930 21931 21932 21933 21934 21935 21936 21937 21938 21939 21940

Some news from our skinning department and the default skins. Here’s a message they sent me:

Hope that these screenshots will show possible improvements to the present default skins, and how the look of the game can be simply improved by mere replacement of the default skins.
The screenshots show a suggested replacement for the default Wellington skin. These (present defaults) are quite dark, and the colours look wrong in the present version of the game (different versions of the game render aircraft colours differently).
Roundels should be ignored. They are my own, and the colours need tweaking. They are not proposed in-game roundel replacements, though hopefully some work towards replacing those will be done before the release of TF5.
The only difference you see in the screenshots is the replacement of the aircraft skin colours. The geodetic structure visible in the screenshots is overlaid by the game, and is present on every skin loaded in the game. It is just less visible on the present, darker, default skins.
The screenshots are taken at 09.00 over the Fields Map with heavy clouds, and also at noon over the Channel Map. The landscape is default, as is everything else (lighting/clouds etc.)

21941 21942

21943 21944

21945 21946

21947 21948

21949 21950

21951 21952 21953 21954 21955


As always thanks to Artist and his help with the bugtracker, latest information here:

From the Team Fusion Bugtracker (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de)

The bugtracker (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/projects/il2clodtf) keeps accumulating data: Since the last published update on January, 21st, 10 new users brought the total up to 937 registered users of which 58 have been active since then. We currently have 224 open issues (164 bugs and 60 feature requests). 3 have already been resolved with patch 4.312 and 26 are currently in progress (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/projects/il2clodtf/issues?set_filter=1&f[]=status_id&op[status_id]=%3D&v[status_id][]=2&f[]=&c[]=tracker&c[]=status&c[]=priority&c[]=subject&c[]=author&c[]=updated_on&c[]=category&c[]=votes_value&group_by=) to be fixed or implemented.

5 new issues have been raised since the last update, among them are (no judgment implied): Reported Bug #796 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/796): "Searchlight Beam Erratic Movement " (New) Reported Bug #795 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/795): "Searchlight Beams Brightness" (New) Reported Bug #794 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/794): "Biggin Hill Aerodrome incorrectly modelled" (New) Feature Request #793 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/793): "New Zoom-Out/In Function" (New) Reported Bug #792 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/792): "Default markings superimposed on aircraft" (New)

The issues with the highest (summary) vote currently are:
69: #725 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/725): "BF 110 Airspeed" (New) 55: #581 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/581): "RAF fighter engines incorrectly start cold in Multiplayer" (New) 53: #498 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/498): "Bf 109: Prop Pitch Inverted" (New) 48: #614 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/614): "Large cloud formations do not appear in replay of track (.TRK) files" (New) 47: #690 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/690): "Bf 109: The Half Armor Plate in upcoming 109 Variants" (New) 42: #602 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/602): "Defensive AI Gunner Skill Levels Set Too High" (New) 42: #742 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/742): "Bf 109 cooling system" (New) 40: #610 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/610): "Navigational Illumination Functionality: Smudge pots, Glim Lamps" (In Progress) 39: #598 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/598): "Damage to Gear and/or Flaps when safe speeds exceeded" (New) 39: #589 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/589): "Hawker Hurricane start up" (New)

There are a number of issues set on "Feedback". We kindly ask the authors to respond:
#604 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/604): "Blenheim: fuel cocks incorrectly labeled #669 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/669): "Bf 110: Navigational Lights #670 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/670): "Bf 110: Landing Lights #716 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/716): "Texture #718 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/718): "Ju-88: Sight cannot be moved to the left and to right #731 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/731): "Fiat BR-20 bomb aimer CTD #732 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/732): "Fiat BR-20 bomb aimind device can only be set to 2.700 meters #733 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/733): "Hurricane Mk I Rotol 100: Course setter #749 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/749): "Overheated cooling system shouldn't blow the radiator. #765 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/765): "Weird Lighting in cockpit during live flight #768 (http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/issues/768): "Channel Map: Long Grass at Gravesend Airfield

We invite all pilots to participate in the bugtracker either by reporting bugs, requesting features, and/or vote on issues. But before you do anything, please read the guidelines and FAQ here: http://tfbt.nuvturais.de/projects/il2clodtf/boards/4
===


And finally, here’s a short video showing the startup sequence of the Beaufighter as presented to our team approx.. 3-weeks ago. Since then more work has taken place on tidying up textures, modelling, dials

(example here: 21956 ), etc, etc

Work continues on the Beaufighter as well as many others and I hope to have some more progress to share with you soon.

Hope that’s enough for now…..here’s the video, cheers, MP/TF

I have been asked to re-iterate by the lead modeller on the Beaufighter that this is still work in progress. lots has changed since this video was created more detail added, bugs fixed, textures tidied. Please understand, this video is WORK IN PROGRESS.....as such...it has already got much better :)



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lhzLCSN_gbA Thats alot of hardwork, but it is appreciated!