Daidalos Team's Room -QUESTIONS AND REQUESTS ONLY on IL2 Authorized Addons

[Bloblast]

Is there the possibility to put the new planes in the current dynamic campaign?

[Juri_JS]

Originally Posted by Bloblast

Is there the possibility to put the new planes in the current dynamic campaign?

I have tried to add the Fokker as flyable plane to the Finnish Dgen campaign, but it didn't worked. It's disappointing that we can't use the new maps and aircraft in Dgen.
An update of the Dgen.exe file would be nice.

[kennel]

I dont think currently we will be able to use any of the new content for offline dynamic campaigns until DGEN is altered and from what I have read it doesnt sound promising.

Lowengrins DCG on the other hand may work but it will take some work with alot of trial & error.

Is the dynamic generator side of the sim being neglected because of lack of resources? Or is it considered unimportant in comparison to the online experience. There are some brilliant DGEN campaigns out there, I own BOE, Ostfront & the Last days as well as the free to the community dgen campaigns by Ian Boys, Boelcke, Veltrut, Jumo & Enjoy.( there are others but I cant remember the authors names) I have seen a definate improvement in the AI performance since the new patch & it seems really strange that 4.09 gives new planes, new maps & a better performing AI & yet currently these can only be used in static campaigns or online.

It seems strange, however you never know what is around the corner with IL2
Team Daidalus has proved that so heres hoping.

[csThor]

The problem of the DGen is that it's not a Maddox Games in-house development. It was made by Starshoy, who hasn't been seen for ages, and AFAIK there is noone around who really knows what the exe contains. And given the structure of development back then when FB was in the making I doubt anyone but him has the source code or has gotten a look at its innards (AFAIK, again).

As for the offline vs online argument. I am an offline only player. Online with its ever-present sportive dogfight-contest, fighter fixation and late-war addiction is just not my cup of tea. As such I am of course interested in giving offline players enough "meat on the bones" to enjoy that part. However, and this is my very personal opinion, I am not a fan of the so-called "dynamic campaigns" in spite of having been part of the development team of "Ostfront". I greatly prefer decent hand-made campaigns, which are IMO much better at creating immersion than the DGen/DCG products. The latter aren't dynamic in the sense I need a campaign to be dynamic - while playing a mission. They produce the same canned missions a FMB user can dish out, but regarding briefing, ground-object placement and coordination of air assets a human mission builder is just infinitely superior to either of the campaign generators.
As a result of this I have not concerned myself with dynamic campaigns for a long, long time and so I don't know about the latest developments or the state of DGen.exe (for example). I don't know if Daidalos' coders can do something about DGen, but given their workload on currently-running projects I doubt they can throw more than a cursory glance at it. If it's easy to do, I guess it's doable. But if it takes someone to really "reverse engineer" the thing I don't know if there's hope for the patient.

[Azimech]

I support JVM's trimming proposal. A whole battery of control modules in the room doesn't look very pretty and is expensive. A single button is a nice idea.

[Aviar]

For some strange reason, I also support JVM's trimming proposal. In part, because he explained it so well. He made some very valid points.

Actually, I can see it as part of the Difficulty settings...or possibly a conf parameter. This way, the players who may disagree with this option would not be forced to use it. Heck, we already have settings such as External View and No Cockpit. I don't see Auto-Trim as being any more outrageous than those options.

Aviar

[C6_Krasno]

If I didn't miss anything in the last patches, there is a little online bug which haven't been fixed yet : when, in a coop, a multi-engined plane loses one engine, the other players see all the engines down, not only the destroyed one. It is just annoying, but a fix would be nice, though I don't know at all if it is easy to fix.

[TheGrunch]

Originally Posted by Aviar

For some strange reason, I also support JVM's trimming proposal. In part, because he explained it so well. He made some very valid points.

Actually, I can see it as part of the Difficulty settings...or possibly a conf parameter. This way, the players who may disagree with this option would not be forced to use it. Heck, we already have settings such as External View and No Cockpit. I don't see Auto-Trim as being any more outrageous than those options.

Aviar

I agree, actually. I do think JVM is overstating the difficulty of trimming with a decent rotary, though, I never have any problems trimming with the rotaries on my X45. The range of HOTAS rotaries is usually far more than 45° (on the X45 it's just a bit more than 270°), and therefore it's very easy to trim. Thing is, though, the majority of people don't have a stick with rotaries, so I don't see it as any more of an unfair advantage using auto-trim than for example allowing padlock vs. people using TrackIR. I'd just prefer if it wasn't perfectly accurate at trimming every time, like it is for the AI.

[Metus]

Thank you for the new patch !

No other game fascinates me over such a long time period as IL2 does.

Is it possible to make the new airplanes viewable in the "View Objects" ingame screen?
Maybe it's just my installation but I cannot find them
I don't need the text; only want to see them if it's too much work.

Thank you.

PS: Looking forward to further patches