ok, enough of that admiration, what about bad things, stupid AI?

[Renato71]

Well, its like those cars that have parts from various factories, and they are assembled it under third brand. That brand cannot say "We put it together quite nicely, everybody loves the seats we bought, and it is not our fault that engine is from our old Wartburg. Just put more air refresheners and you will not sense the fish oil any more. Admire the steering wheel and do not look under the bonnet." :D

 

No man - I'm engine lover. AI has to be improved radically or this will be like Su-25T in FC, a variation to a dart game, instead of a boxing match. Just look at that screenie by CAT_101st - from a distance the same thing as in LO/FC. Setting up a nice path for vehicles is in about 75% of cases resposible for me giving up on finishing some big mission. Pathfinding of alternative routes (other bridges, inclines, slopes, fords, being attacked...) will be the most exciting improvement.

 

Unless someone can make AI that will hide trucks behind building or in garages and tunnels - that will top every addition :D

[CAT_101st]

That would be a nice option to have the ground AI try and find cover with in a given distance. and at that have a top speed for evation wile gitting their. mabe even a change of diection every few seconds. :idea:

[Bucic]

The good: There's not much to think of as additions in the area of flight model (except wind gusts) and onboard systems modeling. Damn, it feels weird! :thumbup:

 

The bad (I know of):

1. You get 80 FPS on high detail level and it drops to less than 10 FPS because... camera is close to smoke trails from a pair of flares. Similar thing with water on high. Compare it to the water effects in current Il-2 versions *. Now theres two options. Either it has been abandonned due to new graphics engine announcement or... the coder is waiting for a punch.

 

2. Check out my sig.

 

* There was no visible FPS drop (or it was less than 10%) when I turned the highest detailed water and it looked like this (attach.).

[Flori]

I wonder how many TOW Rockets a single Bradley can fire.

I count 6 TOW the bradley shots on me by driving at full speed.

Normaly this Tank is only able to shot 2 of them before he had to reload.

[Brute]

I wonder how many TOW Rockets a single Bradley can fire.

I count 6 TOW the bradley shots on me by driving at full speed.

Normaly this Tank is only able to shot 2 of them before he had to reload.

 

 

BMP-2s spam AT-5's like it's going out of style, too. Instant reloads and all. :music_whistling:

[Bucic]

• still only basic (to be polite) set of radio commands. No "weapons/fuel status" query, no "damage status" query, no "repeat last message", no "what is your posit" and so on. Still quiet in the radio in the middle of the battle (except your wingmen standard talks). The only way to put some life there is triggers usage but it will hit one that it's fake sooner or later.
   
  
• checklists only in hardcopy (printed) manuals :blink:
  

I'm looking forward to be corrected.

[CE_Mikemonster]

I'm still learning to fly the aircraft, and haven't flown it into combat yet, but it confuses me why we have such a high LOD on tanks that you will only ever see up close if you crash near.

 

Whereas villages that you will fly over routinely still have the messed up satellite imaging ground textures (even just green would be pref to pixellated aerial images!), but also 3D buildings.

[Feuerfalke]

I'm still learning to fly the aircraft, and haven't flown it into combat yet, but it confuses me why we have such a high LOD on tanks that you will only ever see up close if you crash near.

 

Whereas villages that you will fly over routinely still have the messed up satellite imaging ground textures (even just green would be pref to pixellated aerial images!), but also 3D buildings.

 

:D True.

 

I hoped it would improve, but screenshots like this always reminded me of my start as a model builder. 80 hours spend on the model, then placing it on a green tablecloth. :doh:

 

[EvilBivol-1]

I'm still learning to fly the aircraft, and haven't flown it into combat yet, but it confuses me why we have such a high LOD on tanks that you will only ever see up close if you crash near.

 

Whereas villages that you will fly over routinely still have the messed up satellite imaging ground textures (even just green would be pref to pixellated aerial images!), but also 3D buildings.

Because creating individual vehicle 3D models is a wholly separate task that can be performed by any number of independent individuals, while the terrain and graphics engines are deeply integrated with accessibility limited to a few specialists and generally require heavy investments to develop.

 

If you mean terrain surface textures specifically, there's no problem in making a mod and in fact some already exist.

 

Long-time forum members should remember that we often invoke "resources" to explain various design decisions and why certain things are done the way they are. While this may seem obvious, I think it's helpful to remember that software requires actual people to design, draw, code, test, and document it. What ultimately makes it into the product depends greatly on who is available to do what in the time-frame provided. In ED's case, things are further complicated by the possibility of working on multiple concurrent projects simultaneously (military-side, for example), sometimes stretching the staff in more than one direction.

Edited January 13, 2009 by EvilBivol-1

[Feuerfalke]

Because creating individual vehicle 3D models is a wholly separate task that can be performed by any number of independent individuals, while the terrain and graphics engines are deeply integrated with accessibility limited to a few specialists and generally require heavy investments to develop.

 

If you mean terrain surface textures specifically, there's no problem in making a mod and in fact some already exist.

 

Long-time forum members should remember that we often invoke "resources" to explain various design decisions and why certain things are done the way they are. While this may seem obvious, I think it's helpful to remember that software requires actual people to design, draw, code, test, and document it. What ultimately makes it into the product depends greatly on who is available to do what in the time-frame provided. In ED's case, things are further complicated by the possibility of working on multiple concurrent projects simultaneously (military-side, for example), sometimes stretching the staff in more than one direction.

 

So you're saying you weren't able to recruit any 3D artist that was willing to model houses and urban details? I studied architecture and urban planning, where can I apply - ROFLOL :prop: