Post links to 'cheating using the soundmod' tracks here:

[zapatista]

Originally Posted by uf_josse

Saddly, it isn't necessary to have the sound mod to perform this kind of cheat.... Qtim's available tools (available since long time) are enough...

Anyone can access java classes with Qtim's tools can very easily tweak weapons...... it is not so new.

AAA and Wasy are probably for nothing in this case.

Weapons or FM swapping are very saddly 2 of the most easier things to modify.

What is really hard is to make a good and accurate tweaking.... but the thing seen in your tracks is easy to done..... too much easy for everyone has bad intentions.

I effectively try to tweak some weapons for more accuracy (like Breda or 13.2 browning for IAR 81A) i don't agree at all with use of widly exagerated weapons.

Not my way. I never diffuse tools or method how to do that.

that is a nice principle to work under, but sadly what will ruine the online world is people using the exact same method but to make exagerated superman weapons, and there is no way to stop them or detect them.

btw how do you know you are making it more realistic and accurate ? for example with fixing the ".50 cal problem" (where many people for a long time have complained it isnt as effective as it should be), do you only look for errors in the il2 code, or use % increase in weapons damage rate ?

and one unwanted side effect, even if the hack is used to fix errors with the best intentions, the problem is still that people can use those "fixes" to fly online on full real servers with checksum 2 enabled, and they are not prevented from joining, and other users are using a less effective ammunition even if it is the same loadout

[uf_josse]

Originally Posted by zapatista

btw how do you know you are making it more realistic and accurate ? for example with fixing the ".50 cal problem" (where many people for a long time have complained it isnt as effective as it should be), do you only look for errors in the il2 code, or use % increase in weapons damage rate ?

Hummm, for answering and clarify my work, i work directly in java code of the game...

Weapons have allready really usefull and good choosen properties, like weight, speed, type of munition, type of power, ability to penetrate and so on..... game engin is really well done for weapons.

When i had a look, i compare many things to doc (books, net and so on).

For example..... did you know that IAR81A used same 303 as the spit and MG131 in game?

Did you know that HS129 antitank guns had no APCR rounds ?

I manage to modify mg131 to have FN-browning 13.2 with accurate datas... no more (impossible at this stage to put FN-Browning in 7.92 instead 303 because it impact other planes, like spitfire and i don't modify in FM because i don't want to give more possibilities to cheat at those to download my mods..so, probably never put 7.92 on IAR-- sad).

Mg151/15 had no explosive shells... i gave it, but much less powerfull than mg151/20)

For the .50, i don't modify power of weapon or munition, just modify belting to have API and APIT.... no more.

Put APCR rounds for HS129 mk101 and BK37, change ROF to accurate values (160 rpm for BK37 and 230 for MK101)

Breda where dramaticaly too weak...... they were surely much less powerfull like .50, but..... not so that it was in game.... they are actually circa 40% weaker with my mod, seem to me not exagerated and corresponding to real datas.(power at muzzle was circa 10000 joules IRL and much less in game.... 0.50 had 0.97g of chemical charge, and HE breda 0.88g...

it was not the case in game for the breda. I made the rectification.

Had also the 1.17 g of chemical charge in MG131 HE, like in real life and so on...

I do no more, no less.... (BTW, i have patched my MG151/15 mod that was too strong).

SO, it isn't empirical method, just change game values when needed....

I surely don't touched anything if it was just matter on some details, but.... they are no details, just enormous differences, and strangely in wide majority of cases, for only one side.... so, i decided to make some rectifications.... i am perhaps little bit wrong for some weapons, but i sincerely think much less than original game....


Now, if you fire at short distance and with some angle, you can flamme a fw190, you can also in same conditions shoot down a spitfire with a folgore..... just as seen in guncam footages... it was often that the users of my mods said to me....

I work exactly as described in this post. and i don't want affect FM or DM, no ability to do that ..... and don't think it is a good idea.


Btw, i think a way can be find between modders and "pure-onliners"

It seems that many guys would (me too) that 4.09 final should be let clean and unmodded..... but it is sure that need polite and civilized dialog, not flamming as seen everywhere......

I am allready convinced, but, peoples need to speak and not to entranchend each side in his own bunker.....

[zapatista]

uf_josse,

thx for the explanation.

crazy-ivan a couple of weeks ago said something indicating that increasing/decreasing the weapons effect wasnt as simple as only editing the weapons files, but needed to be balanced with individual plane damage models (ivan, correct me if i am wrong)

is that something you take into account ?

and lastly, some weapons problems like .50 cal issues we have been waiting a long time to get fixed, and since oleg stated he isnt fixing problems in 1946 anymore, can you make those fixed weapons profiles available to oleg for inclusion in the final 4.09 update ?

oleg can then let his own people do some brief tests to confirm the "fix" is working realistically, which shouldnt take them much time if you have done all the hard work already.

[uf_josse]

Yes, it is a great prob and it is clear that much parameters must be taken in account, surely more as i am able to do.... so, i test much and more with a set of "natural ennemies"......

Clearly, no interest to test 0.50 on IL2....... but, i had two plane sets like pacific (zéro, ki61, betty, ki84 and so on) and one for western front (me109, fw, ju88....) and i try to compare my datas and values with ww2 guncams..... and...... result is not so far at them.......

For breda, i used spit, hurri, tomahawks and I16, IL2, lagg3......

I have not modified DM of the planes, because it is not simple and actually too complex for me..... and i know that we can see P51 chasing IL2 on HL but, no interest for me .

My work is surely not perfect, far of that, but it is the best i can do.... i don't think that Oleg can be interested by my work..... he has another things in sight, and don't care, IMHO on weaponry prob in IL2....


All my work is transparent for those that want to know what i do....

Fianlly, my best test is when testers give me an opinion of what they saw in game, comparated to what they saw in documents...... and when they find no great difference....

[BSS_Sniper]

That's actually pretty interesting work and by far the best I've seen/read. I wish we could get stuff like that standardized so it wasn't coming from 200 different people and everyone could have the same thing.

[Rama]

Originally Posted by uf_josse

i don't think that Oleg can be interested by my work..... he has another things in sight, and don't care, IMHO on weaponry prob in IL2....

That's something you can't know if you don't ask.
How can you know Oleg's oppinion about your work if you don't submit it to him?

[uf_josse]

I have transmitted some of my work, sometimes, and.... generaly, never answerd the only thing i do and was taken care was the skinpack for the corsair for release of PF....

[X]

I temporarily went off of the mods because of the furor they caused, and because they seemed silly to me---I wasn't concerned about whether my engine sounded exactly like the correct one or not, and I was indifferent to using a great number of former AI aircraft now fitted with ad hoc cockpits. I was unable to get the 6 DOF mod to work. Well, a friend sent me a note which told me the 6 DOF mod was perfected and easily installed. I reinstalled 46, which bored me to death, installed the sound mod, and installed the 6 DOF mod.

Simply put, you would have to be totally insane to not use this. You would have to be the the most reactionary diehard in the world to want to go on using the standard sight emulation system. With 6 DOF 46 is a brand new, nearly state-of-the-art combat flight sim. Now I love IL-2 again---it is my favorite flight sim. My favorite 46 airplane is the I-16. Prior to 6 DOF you were dead blind aft---totally, completely unrealistic. This was one very big reason I threw 46 off of my HD---without 6 DOF it was ludicrous---a dated product. 6 DOF is not a gimmick. It is not a luxury. It is not fun. It is the core of a flight sim. Without it your situational awareness is massively reduced. Without it your relationship to your gunsight is artificial. Without it all the beautiful modeling of the effects of the telescopic sights is wasted. With 6 DOF in 46 you have to depress your virtual head to squeeze your eye into the F2A-2's tele sight. You do not lose SA while using a tele sight because you can quickly glance left and right out of the sight to track your target. Tracking targets is much easier. People who have never used 6 DOF cannot have a conception of what it means. You can ID a target by quickly moving your head closer to the windscreen. Your visual activity is natural, not artificial.

Thus, the mods are doing some great things, but I place this at the top. You recall, we were "authoritatively" told 6 DOF was impossible in IL-2.

I wonder if Oleg let things come to a boil just to see how inventive the IL-2 people are, how creative, how imaginative? The online people wanted IL-2 frozen. Now it is wide open in an explosion of creativity. IL-2 will live for years now rather than being "Oleg's first essay---now obsolete thanks to BOBSOW."

[Billfish]

Originally Posted by uf_josse

Yes, it is a great prob and it is clear that much parameters must be taken in account, surely more as i am able to do.... so, i test much and more with a set of "natural ennemies"......

Clearly, no interest to test 0.50 on IL2....... but, i had two plane sets like pacific (zéro, ki61, betty, ki84 and so on) and one for ....

Tell me please uf_josse......
What guncam film did you use to set up your mod to validate your changes of a .50 vs. the Ki-61-I?
Which version of the Ki-61-I was it, including serial number as the armor varied greatly throughout the series and only a specific s/n will give thicknesses and locations?
What was the energy the .50 cal. round was producing?
What was the hardness of the armor and its chemical composition as well as associated manufacturing processes to determine hardness and how brittle the armor was.
At what deflection angle and through what outer components did the round pass first?
What actual TAIU or other test reports did you use to confirm your findings?
etc.?

Naturally I'm sure you're doing the same with each and every aircraft, type of round, type of MG, considering each and every deflection, range, energy state, pass through, round deformation and so on....

K2

[BSS_Sniper]

Originally Posted by uf_josse

Hummm, for answering and clarify my work, i work directly in java code of the game...

Weapons have allready really usefull and good choosen properties, like weight, speed, type of munition, type of power, ability to penetrate and so on..... game engin is really well done for weapons.

When i had a look, i compare many things to doc (books, net and so on).

For example..... did you know that IAR81A used same 303 as the spit and MG131 in game?

Did you know that HS129 antitank guns had no APCR rounds ?

I manage to modify mg131 to have FN-browning 13.2 with accurate datas... no more (impossible at this stage to put FN-Browning in 7.92 instead 303 because it impact other planes, like spitfire and i don't modify in FM because i don't want to give more possibilities to cheat at those to download my mods..so, probably never put 7.92 on IAR-- sad).

Mg151/15 had no explosive shells... i gave it, but much less powerfull than mg151/20)

For the .50, i don't modify power of weapon or munition, just modify belting to have API and APIT.... no more.

Put APCR rounds for HS129 mk101 and BK37, change ROF to accurate values (160 rpm for BK37 and 230 for MK101)

Breda where dramaticaly too weak...... they were surely much less powerfull like .50, but..... not so that it was in game.... they are actually circa 40% weaker with my mod, seem to me not exagerated and corresponding to real datas.(power at muzzle was circa 10000 joules IRL and much less in game.... 0.50 had 0.97g of chemical charge, and HE breda 0.88g...

it was not the case in game for the breda. I made the rectification.

Had also the 1.17 g of chemical charge in MG131 HE, like in real life and so on...

I do no more, no less.... (BTW, i have patched my MG151/15 mod that was too strong).

SO, it isn't empirical method, just change game values when needed....

I surely don't touched anything if it was just matter on some details, but.... they are no details, just enormous differences, and strangely in wide majority of cases, for only one side.... so, i decided to make some rectifications.... i am perhaps little bit wrong for some weapons, but i sincerely think much less than original game....


Now, if you fire at short distance and with some angle, you can flamme a fw190, you can also in same conditions shoot down a spitfire with a folgore..... just as seen in guncam footages... it was often that the users of my mods said to me....

I work exactly as described in this post. and i don't want affect FM or DM, no ability to do that ..... and don't think it is a good idea.


Btw, i think a way can be find between modders and "pure-onliners"

It seems that many guys would (me too) that 4.09 final should be let clean and unmodded..... but it is sure that need polite and civilized dialog, not flamming as seen everywhere......

I am allready convinced, but, peoples need to speak and not to entranchend each side in his own bunker.....

Hmmmmm hmmmmm lol