PDA

View Full Version : To the modeller of the trains



Franzen
06-12-2004, 04:15 AM
Hi

I don't know who is modelling the trains and how important accuracy is but if you are interested please send me a private message. So far I haven't seen any German locomotives but rather British and what looked Italian. I would be happy to supply pics and advice of war time locomotives and cars. The trains of that period are very easy to tell apart.

Fritz Franzen

Franzen
06-12-2004, 04:15 AM
Hi

I don't know who is modelling the trains and how important accuracy is but if you are interested please send me a private message. So far I haven't seen any German locomotives but rather British and what looked Italian. I would be happy to supply pics and advice of war time locomotives and cars. The trains of that period are very easy to tell apart.

Fritz Franzen

p1ngu666
06-12-2004, 12:36 PM
bit off topic, but atleast its not ugly modern box trains.
i scanned a ton of pics at work of them, beatiful landscapes but UGLY trains http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

http://www.pingu666.modded.me.uk/mysig3.jpg
<123_GWood_JG123> NO SPAM!

Franzen
06-12-2004, 08:00 PM
My father has been modelling HO scale German, Austrian, and Swiss railways(steam to diesel era)since he was 16. He's now 61. His running layout is 7X17m and obviously occupies most of the house. Since I started playing IL-2 it has always kinda bothered me about the train models in the game. The game has really evolved and the details are wonderful, except for the trains. While looking at the update I noticed the locomotive was uniquely UK. I was hoping to see some of the German steam enter the game. They were beautiful.
Germany also had a few huge cannons mounted on specially designed railway cars. These could add to an interesting seek and destroy mission.

Fritz Franzen

VVS-Manuc
06-13-2004, 02:36 PM
At least the trains in BoB are looking much better than this childish fantasy steam engines in IL-2/FB

avimimus
06-14-2004, 04:49 PM
Finally, someone is looking after this!

Sometimes I wish Oleg had more fun. I wonder if we could lobby to make some engines fly-able in BOB! Too bad the 5MT is a postwar tank...

Athosd
06-14-2004, 11:30 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by avimimus:
Finally, someone is looking after this!

Sometimes I wish Oleg had more fun. I wonder if we could lobby to make some engines fly-able in BOB! Too bad the 5MT is a postwar tank...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That would make for an interesting in game player list:

Madjohn 200ms 109E3
Killernoob 130ms Spitfire II
Avimimus 210ms 12:15 to Southhampton (Express)
Snapp3r 180ms 110C4

http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Salute

Athos

Over the Hills and O'er the Main,
To Flanders, Portugal and Spain,
The Queen commands and we'll obey
Over the Hills and far away.

Foo.bar
06-20-2006, 05:46 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Madjohn 200ms 109E3
Killernoob 130ms Spitfire II
Avimimus 210ms 12:15 to Southhampton (Express)
Snapp3r 180ms 110C4 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

JG301_nils
06-20-2006, 05:54 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Foo.bar:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Madjohn 200ms 109E3
Killernoob 130ms Spitfire II
Avimimus 210ms 12:15 to Southhampton (Express)
Snapp3r 180ms 110C4 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Hey Foo.Bar that red roundel on your sig, change that to a red locomotive wheel, it's appropriate to you the master of trains!
Wonderful job you do with your models http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

JamesBlonde888
06-20-2006, 08:43 PM
The fat conductor with quad 20mm. Thomas the SPANK engine. I like it.

LEXX_Luthor
06-21-2006, 04:10 AM
Oleg get rid of Fancy Trains and start modelling *real* clouds and their effect on air warfare ... or combat flight sims will always be mainstream market failures -- what we flight simmers Proudly call "niche" but its not "niche" but mainstream failure.

Put the first class Train Modders onto modelling clouds for first class air warfare simulation.

Foo.bar
06-21-2006, 06:46 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Put the first class Train Modders onto modelling clouds for first class air warfare simulation. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Excellent idea! Take the butchers for baking bread.

Capt.LoneRanger
06-21-2006, 06:55 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

KOM.Nausicaa
06-22-2006, 07:32 AM
I love those train dev. shots. They don't worry me, in the contrary, I take them as a sign that everything in this sim will have outstanding quality, at least as far as models of planes, vehicles and objects. Of course, for the rest I am very optimistic as well. Luthor is right though: Clouds and Sky is what the pilot sees most, it's the environment in which he fights. They deserve extra special attention.

Foo.bar
06-22-2006, 09:11 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Luthor is right though: Clouds and Sky is what the pilot sees most, it's the environment in which he fights. They deserve extra special attention. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


Without any question, this is right. But let the modellers make what they can do best.

wookey2007
12-25-2006, 06:09 AM
hi everyone,

Foo bar, i saw this on the german thread, http://forums-de.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/3751020023/m/2181080123/p/37

I noticed some new pictures of British stock on there, are you doing those as well or are those by someone else? i only ask as i remember you saying your main area of interest was in German stock, i was very impressed with your A4 though, http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

grifter2u
12-25-2006, 07:18 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Without any question, this is right. But let the modellers make what they can do best. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

hear, hear !!

you are doing some amazing work !

LEXX_Luthor
12-26-2006, 01:05 PM
Its wasted work for generating sustained customer interest in the simulation over long periods of time, sustained interest that would see further purchases of later addon products, instead of the customers abandoning the sim on the shelf after making one or two screenshots of perfect train models.

There is hope, but some confusion remains...

Foo.bar:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> KOM.Nausicaa:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Luthor is right though: Clouds and Sky is what the pilot sees most, it's the environment in which he fights. They deserve extra special attention. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Without any question, this is right. But let the modellers make what they can do best. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Aussom! Lets explore the concept of "this is right." I see we are having difficulty in understanding the nature of PC air warfare simulation, and how to keep paying customers interested in simulating their air warfare and keeping them interested in paying for more, as opposed to, say, PC train warfare simulation -- like the old Western movies that re-enact train robbers attacking train on horseback. Such a western-theme Train Robber sim could use very nice Train grafix indeed.
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Foo.bar
12-26-2006, 03:52 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by wookey2007:
hi everyone,

Foo bar, i saw this on the german thread, http://forums-de.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/3751020023/m/2181080123/p/37

I noticed some new pictures of British stock on there, are you doing those as well or are those by someone else? i only ask as i remember you saying your main area of interest was in German stock, i was very impressed with your A4 though, http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I only made the models as be seen on page 1 of that thread. Including A4 class LNER. All other british stuff on DVD bonus material is made by another modeller wich I don't know.

I only get geometry and skin specification from MG (policount and skin sizes). And I do my best to keep the limits.

Well, they were searching after someone who can make german railway vehicles. I just do them. So what's wrong with it?<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img463.imageshack.us/img463/4436/gutelandungtr9.jpg
Watch my SoW dedicated railway efforts (http://forums-de.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/3751020023/m/2181080123/p/1)

LEXX_Luthor
12-26-2006, 10:09 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I just do them. So what's wrong with it? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Foo-bar, that's you? Nice models. I'm just whining about the sorry state of flight sims that have offered few real overall advances in ten years except for increasing polygons which the customers only see in screenshots and never see from their cockpit, and the polygons can't compete with the polygons in the dedicated ground shooter or train robber games http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif where the customer *does* see the perfect polygons during gameplay. That is one area where the developers and the publishers are making their collossal business blunders.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

KarlKartoffel
12-27-2006, 03:18 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
[QUOTE]That is one area where the developers and the publishers are making their collossal business blunders. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

If Oleg wants his simulation, to compete with all following simulation during the next 5 years, they just can't only think about the airplanes! That is simply narrow-minded. Just as the person who believed, that no one needs personal computers in the future.

LEXX_Luthor
12-27-2006, 09:03 AM
KarlKartoffel:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">If Oleg wants his simulation, to compete with all following simulation during the next 5 years, they just can't only think about the airplanes! That is simply narrow-minded. Just as the person who believed, that no one needs personal computers in the future. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

(1) Example. LOMAC developers "wanted" their superHuDjetfighter sim to "compete" over the years, and it cost them the first critical months of game sales as people learned the game would not run with the crippled grafix engine -- which was never fixed for at least a half a year, and is still crippled in many ways. Recall the poaster here who, during copy protection discussion, told us that game devs and pubs depended crucially on their first few weeks of game sales -- if they miss those first sales, they miss the success.

(2) Future perfect fancy grafix required for "competition" (with what?) over the years are best made...over the next years, not now. We are not talking about the perfect polygon aircraft, which is debatable how important grafix are for aircraft. With ground objects, there is no debate how low importance ground object details are for air war simulation, or even Maddox style dogfight shooter gaming (if the plan is an integrated air/ground shooter sim, well that's another story).

The problem we see is the developers get caught with their pants down every time trying to copy the perfect polygons of the ground shooter games, and at the same time fail to offer the customers far different grafix details required to model air warfare, and thus can never offer air war simulation (or even a decent dogfight shooter simulation). In a way, the devs have let themselves get painted into the position where they are "expected" to do compete with the dedicated ground shooter sims in ground grafix. And of course they must stumble every time, for they must attempt to compete with the detailed ground modelling of ground shooter games and train robber simulations. Yet, these other games never offer air war environment grafix that is comparable to their ground warfare environment grafix. Shucks, the sky or air combat arena beyond the little 1km map is usually a static background painted on the horizon in these ground combat sims, or ship combat sims for that matter.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

LEXX_Luthor
12-27-2006, 09:09 AM
Now, before you (Karl) accuse others here of being "narrow minded" ... you may be somewhat correct. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

If as offered above, there is a much larger picture developing with Oleg planning to integrate ground combat simulation into his flight sim, then the trains, tanks, rifles, aircaft, etc...all must have comparable grafix attention. Oleg did talk about a possible future ground/air integration, although working with another dev/ publisher (I think).<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

BadA1m
12-27-2006, 03:02 PM
The fact is Lexx that there is a guy at 1C who has spent the last two years doing nothing but imputting information on various weather effects and cloud formations (from ilya-oleg interview) and as far as I know Foo isn't getting paid for his work. It seems to me that everyone has there priorities perfectly straight. I expect a lot of us will spend a lot of time just cruising around "checking things out", then go back to killing each other later. Call me what you will but I can't see that harming the flight sim community or industry.

BTW I am not disagreeing as to where the priority should be, I just believe Oleg and crew (including the third party volunteers) will let us have our cake and eat it too.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

There is only one tactical principle which is not subject to change. It is to use the means at hand to inflict the maximum amount of wound, death, and destruction on the enemy in the minimum amount of time."
- General George Patton Jr

BadA1m
12-27-2006, 03:07 PM
Oh yea, and Foo..... your trains rock the house big time!<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

There is only one tactical principle which is not subject to change. It is to use the means at hand to inflict the maximum amount of wound, death, and destruction on the enemy in the minimum amount of time."
- General George Patton Jr

LEXX_Luthor
12-27-2006, 03:31 PM
BadAim:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">BTW I am not disagreeing as to where the priority should be, </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Aussom

Granted, Oleg may have different priorities than what the combat flight sim community is looking for. Oleg has indicated he may move to Online Pay-To-Play ground/air integrated gaming, and Perfect Train models would be a successful contribution to Oleg's plan of BoB And Beyond becoming a Hollywood TV media content creation tool. So I'll have to back up a bit and allow that Oleg may be focusing on a new and potentially successful product but not focused entirely or even primarily towards air warfare simulation.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

BadA1m
12-27-2006, 10:26 PM
I think that you might have missed my point entirely, Lexx. I am the last one to call for a train simulator or whatever else it could turn into, but I certainly don't think that the flightsim community is only or even largely made up of "Damn the graphics, full flight model ahead types" and even so, what's wrong with having really nice trains to shoot up, if it doesn't hurt the quality of the flight model and damage model, etc? I certainly am not interested in getting into an argument about this but it might warrant some discussion. It seems quite a few people are excited to see the level of detail in SOW but I'm sure no one wants to go backward in other areas.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

There is only one tactical principle which is not subject to change. It is to use the means at hand to inflict the maximum amount of wound, death, and destruction on the enemy in the minimum amount of time."
- General George Patton Jr

Foo.bar
12-29-2006, 04:17 AM
In my eyes all improvements have to go hand in hand. I don't want to have a military sim where planes, clouds, weather effects etc. are modelled best and other things aren't.

A military flight sim isn't just flying around and kill each other in 8000 meters of height.

I love to fly in low heights and watch for targets on ground. And I want them to look like such. Only when all aspects of BoB will be on a high level, it will be a really good flight sim.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img463.imageshack.us/img463/4436/gutelandungtr9.jpg
Watch my SoW dedicated railway efforts (http://forums-de.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/3751020023/m/2181080123/p/1)

ImpStarDuece
12-29-2006, 06:01 AM
Loco's, along with tanks, trucks, cars, AT guns, AA guns, bunkers, and all the other myriad of ground objects, are essential for the development of the SoW series in the future.

I, for one, am glad that Foo.Bar and others are taking the time now, when its available, to do it PROPERLY.

And besides, I like trains http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

After playing IL-2, a sim originally based around a G/A aircraft, for almost 5 years, I have learnt a few things about my likes and dislikes in flight simes:

1. I'm a horrible fighter pilot.

2. Ground attack is way more fun, and significantly more dangerous, than dogfighting.

3. Without a variety of targets, ground attack just isn't that interesting (witness the PF ships debarcle).

The variety that the IL-2 series offers - logistics and POL supression in Normandy, ship straffing in the Pacific, bombing railroad bridges in Germany or attacking tank cloumns in Russia - this is what keeps me coming back to this flight sim (well that and my love of big, fat, radial engine aircraft).

Any boob can stooge around at 26,000 feet, doing 400mph and diving on unsuspecting targets. But it takes a different breed of pilot to brave it at 250 mph, in the weeds, with AAA below you and fighters above you.

I want to see proper period trains pulling into sidings as I speed my Bf-109E-4/B along the tracks and bomb the local interchange.

I want to see double decker busses, Morris motor cars and trucks and Vickers .303 AAMGs manned by the Home Guard in the same area, going about their daily business. What I want is a LIVING simulation in a living world, not something that is static and cold.

I don't really care if the clouds are modelled better, or there is the right kind of air turblunece under them (although these things are nice). For me, the ultimate goal of a flight sim should be the closest replication of the fight conditions of pilots in its period, whether its WW1, WW2, Korea, Vietnam or wherever.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

ImpStarDuece,

Flying Bullet Magnet... Catching Lead Since 2002

"There's no such thing as gravity, the earth sucks!"

"Every form of addiction is bad, no matter whether the narcotic be alcohol, morphine or idealism."
-Carl Jung

LEXX_Luthor
01-01-2007, 11:02 PM
BadA1m::<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I think that you might have missed my point entirely, Lexx. I am the last one to call for a train simulator or whatever else it could turn into, but I certainly don't think that the flightsim community is only or even largely made up of "Damn the graphics, full flight model ahead types" and even so, what's wrong with having really nice trains to shoot up, if it doesn't hurt the quality of the flight model and damage model, etc? I certainly am not interested in getting into an argument about this but it might warrant some discussion. It seems quite a few people are excited to see the level of detail in SOW but I'm sure no one wants to go backward in other areas. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
We may also say, equally sloganistic but equally true, that the cfs community is not made of the "Damn the flight models, full grafix model ahead types."

The problem with "really nice trains to shoot up" is that the customer never sees the Perfect Train Model during gameplay, but mainly in screenshots (gaming review websites for example). Most likely, the customer sees from his/her cockpit the less detailed 2nd or 3rd LOD or "Level Of Detail" train model, but its the gameplay that causes the combat flight sim community to maintain over time interest in any computer game software purchase. There have been many discussion at this webboard, among the few remaining flight simmers, on how *other* types of PC games offer nothing but Fancy Grafix and how boring these games become after little gameplay. It is apparent that discussing this game design problem with respect to flight sims is not a desirable activity on a flight sim webboard.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

LEXX_Luthor
01-01-2007, 11:14 PM
Foo.bar, if you know already, at what distances will the lower detail train models be used?

Foo.bar:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">In my eyes all improvements have to go hand in hand. I don't want to have a military sim where planes, clouds, weather effects etc. are modelled best and other things aren't.

A military flight sim isn't just flying around and kill each other in 8000 meters of height.

I love to fly in low heights and watch for targets on ground. And I want them to look like such. Only when all aspects of BoB will be on a high level, it will be a really good flight sim. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I'd say that most "first person" computer combat games, of which combat flight sims are one example, only need to model a short distance gaming world. The flight sims have to model a very large distance gaming world along with the short distance gaming world, on a development budget far less than the fancy grafix games? The very short distance grafix, with the exception of the aircraft model itself viewed from the cockpit, will not be seen in any detail at the combat speeds and distances found in WW2 air warfare. The combat speeds and/or distances are not comparable to those found in the ground shooter simulator games. Air combat simulation must focus on the air warfare environment to spark the interest of the customers. Surprisingly, we find an example of this right here in the above poast by ImpStarDuece, although he/she probably doesn't know it (because he/she never asked? http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif )

ImpStarDuece:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I don't really care if the clouds are modelled better, or there is the right kind of air turblunece under them .... For me, the ultimate goal of a flight sim should be the <span class="ev_code_yellow">closest replication of the fight conditions</span> of pilots in its period... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Exactly. ImpStarDuece's contradiction is an example of what the combat flight sim community is looking for, but does not know how to <span class="ev_code_yellow">ask</span> for it. I'd guess the reason is because the normal WW2 computer games on the market do not cause computer gamers to think on the scales needed for air war simulation, and so far neither do the WW2 combat flight sims that are offered. Another reason is the sky itself is not normally observed closely by people or computer gamers, with the exceptions of weather people, astronomers, and...pilots.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Foo.bar
01-02-2007, 12:22 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Foo.bar, if you know already, at what distances will the lower detail train models be used? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Sorry, i can not say anything about this at the moment. Just because I don't know it http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

But my opinion about the LODs is the following:

In case of a e.g. A4 class LNER steamer, only a A4 can look like such - in LOD0 or LOD2/3. I hope you understand what I mean - we can proceed diskussion in german http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif
What I want to say is: look trains in IL-2. They are ugly and unrealistic in all LODs. So it isn't a matter of LOD but of the model itself.
When I make a train model it has to look like the original in all LODs, not only in highest.
Maybe no one will ever see one of my train vehicles very close. But how many of us will ever see a 50.000 faces He-111 in full real from very close?
I think that LOD0s will be seen quite very rare in all aspects. If trains, cars, buildings or even planes.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img463.imageshack.us/img463/4436/gutelandungtr9.jpg
Watch my SoW dedicated railway efforts (http://forums-de.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/3751020023/m/2181080123/p/1)

LEXX_Luthor
01-02-2007, 04:57 AM
Thanks foobar. I figured the Moscow Buruea have not told you about BoB+ LOD render distances, just the basic model requirements.

Foo.bar:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I think that LOD0s will be seen quite very rare in all aspects. If trains, cars, buildings or even planes. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
There is one major exception, striking to the heart of customer satisfaction -- The player's plane, at least parts of it, will always be seen with great detail when viewed during gameplay from the cockpit.

IL2 trains may not be pretty, but they are my kind of not pretty, and they don't need Perfection to be made more pretty than they are now. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

The customer requires -- Focus on the air war simulation.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Foo.bar
01-02-2007, 05:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">IL2 trains may not be pretty, but they are my kind of not pretty, and they don't need Perfection to be made more pretty than they are now. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I really wonder what you will say after seeing a BoB battleship... http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img463.imageshack.us/img463/4436/gutelandungtr9.jpg
Watch my SoW dedicated railway efforts (http://forums-de.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/3751020023/m/2181080123/p/1)

LEXX_Luthor
01-02-2007, 05:40 AM
You as a 3D object modeller should know, Battleships were, in general, historically much larger than train locomotives. Indeed, one may say that battlehships approach the scale of smaller c.umulus clouds...but the c.umulus clouds will probably get the shaft too in Oleg's Next Sim.

Oleg is an underwater photographer, and we may Be Certain that Oleg's next Sub Simulator will have fully modelled undersea combat environment, with Perfect Tuna models. If only Oleg was a weather photographer. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

On his own initiative, Kelly Johnson of Lockheed began development ... okay "lockheed" is a bad name in this community, so...

On his own initiative, at his own bureau's expense, Pavel Sukhoi developed the Su-15 after Yakolev killed the potentially successful Su-11, and it worked, as Su won the top interceptor slot in the 1960s because of that gamble.

Foo.bar, on your own initiative, start modelling a 3D c.umulus cloud and send it to Moscow. I am thinking that the only way combat flight sims will ever get an immersive air war combat environment is by having 3D object models with skins for giant c.umulus clouds. Some very simple game coding will make AI see such clouds in the game, so it won't be a player only feature as we see in almost all sims. Think about "mountains" as 3D objects on the terran map. Think about clouds as part of the air war terrain, like a Perfect Train locomotive is a core element in the ground combat simulations. Players crawl through and under and hide behind the detailed train model, shooting at each other. Flight simmers should someday fly through, above and under, and hide inside clouds during shooting gameplay. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

LEXX_Luthor
01-02-2007, 05:44 AM
ACK!!! the word censor is censoring "***ulus clouds"

They don't want the customers to talk about ***ulus clouds, as that would require combat flight sim developers to create new advances in the sims. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Foo.bar
01-02-2007, 06:40 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEXX_Luthor:
Foo.bar, on your own initiative, start modelling a 3D c.umulus cloud and send it to Moscow. I am thinking that the only way combat flight sims will ever get an immersive air war combat environment is by having 3D object models with skins for giant c.umulus clouds. Some very simple game coding will make AI see such clouds in the game, so it won't be a player only feature as we see in almost all sims. Think about "mountains" as 3D objects on the terran map. Think about clouds as part of the air war terrain, like a Perfect Train locomotive is a core element in the ground combat simulations. Players crawl through and under and hide behind the detailed train model, shooting at each other. Flight simmers should someday fly through, above and under, and hide inside clouds during shooting gameplay. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


No. Because: perhaps did you read what I've written some posts above?

I make german train models because

- I know them,
- I know what I'm talking about,
- MG was searching for someone who can make it.

I don't know anything about clouds. That's why I will not waste my time for making something I have no idea of. Railways are a really small aspect in a flight sim, yes. But it's the only aspect in this sim wich I know very well, perhaps better than any other member here around - if we speak about the german railways.

To say it again: they (MG) give me the model specifications, I do it. Keeping the limitations, beeing as precise as possible. Nothing more. I can't see any bad in it.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">
Thanks foobar. I figured the Moscow Buruea have not told you about BoB+ LOD render distances, just the basic model requirements.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

You should know that after all it depends on client graphic/detail settings.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img463.imageshack.us/img463/4436/gutelandungtr9.jpg
Watch my SoW dedicated railway efforts (http://forums-de.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/3751020023/m/2181080123/p/1)

LEXX_Luthor
01-02-2007, 08:14 AM
Foobar:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">No. Because: perhaps did you read what I've written some posts above?

I make german train models because

- I know them,
- I know what I'm talking about,
- MG was searching for someone who can make it.

I don't know anything about clouds. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I read, and I suggest also taking yourself beyond the limitations of what you "know" and make your own new advance in combat flight simulation, and see if Oleg goes for it. Somebody has to make advances in combat flight sims, and the developers generally aren't doing it. It seems we have to do it for them. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif But that's how artistic products work I guess. For example, I had to make my own flat (artificial, only 2 dimensional) cirrus clouds for the air war grafix environment, so I had to do it myself, in another sim (StrikeFighters) which has some areas open to modification. We are both "artists." I focus on the air war simulation first, or as BadA1m says, priority, where Oleg may not be doing so as much as possible.

ie...be the First. Of course, large cumulus clouds as 3d objects may not work -- its Art after all, and the game programmers will have to program the AI to see the clouds, but that's a trivially easy task, although programming AI to make offensive use of clouds is more tricky, but that's called working to make advances in combat flight simulation. Someday, somebody with a 3D MAX package working with an advanced thinking developer will find out if the idea can work.

http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d178/Lexx_Luthor/Siberian%20Sky/img00003.jpg <div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Choctaw111
01-02-2007, 12:47 PM
I have much more faith in Oleg than to believe that he will go backwards in ANY aspect of SoW:BoB. At the very least he will keep SOME things the same and improve MOST others. I truly expect that he will totally surprise us with things that we are not even anticipating. He has done this already has he not? I for one am eagerly awaiting what this this next year will bring.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

Alienware P4 3.2 EE
2 Gigs RAM
Intel D875PBZ MoBo
GeForce 7800 GS
CH Fighterstick, ProThrottle, ProPedals
TrackIR3 w/ 6DOF

avimimus
01-03-2007, 08:19 PM
I don't know, I think well modeled trains could be a selling point...

Oleg's planning on making drivable vehicles so why not ones that run on rails?

I could see an easy to produce niche title offering something that cannot be provided by TrainZ or Railsim:

Engineers in Combat: Battle of Britain the railmans perspective

I would order a copy http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Mysticpuma2003
01-04-2007, 04:36 AM
Adding my thoughts to this thread, I have to say that in the current version of IL2, the trains are disappointing. As some of you heard in my interview with Oleg and Ilya, I really enjoy 'train-busting' missions.

When I see guncam footage of trains being strafed, and then plumes of steam erupting from the burst boiler, I wish that it could be modeled for IL2.

I saw this happen in GSX Media's "Shockwave" add-on for CFS3, where trains got strafed and each pass made more steam come out of the boiler. It showed that damage was being caused and that you had successfully hunted down your target.

At the moment in IL2, you shoot a train, and then there is a one frame animation from the train rolling along the track, and the next frame shows it smoking and stationary, a blackened wreck.

In the P-47, my favourite ride, I love ground attack mission (probably as much as P-38'rs too), and strafing trains was a great way of destroying supply lines in enemy territory.

I really hope that BoB incorporates train damage, with maybe track damage so that trains can de-rail.

Sound like a bit of an anorak on this, but it's the immersion factor involved, where we don't (as has been said) all enjoy the 8000m club exclusively, some of us enjoy ground-pounding more, and the detail of destructible ground objects just adds to the overall sense of realism.

Good luck with the trains guys, cheers, MP.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.aqqm31.dsl.pipex.com/Mysticpuma.jpg

major_setback
01-04-2007, 05:02 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Franzen:
Hi

I don't know who is modelling the trains and how important accuracy is but if you are interested please send me a private message. So far I haven't seen any German locomotives but rather British and what looked Italian. I would be happy to supply pics and advice of war time locomotives and cars. The trains of that period are very easy to tell apart.

Fritz Franzen </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


In case you missed this, the BoB railway thread on the German forum, which has loads of train modells that we might get to see in BoB.

http://forums-de.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/3751020023/m/2181080123/p/1

Thanks to all you hard working modellers - Love those trains and buildings, they will really add life to the sim!<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/Signaurepic004BESTframe014small.jpg
<span class="ev_code_PINK">My Aim is True.</span>

Foo.bar
01-04-2007, 10:56 AM
@mysticpuma2003: when you did the interview with Oleg, wich I really enjoyed, Oleg pointed to something on the screen. Was it a railway track insterted to the alpha engine or am I wrong?

Tater-SW-
01-04-2007, 12:00 PM
I love more detail in appropriate ground objects (read: targets), and I want to see FAR more detail in the DM and AI of ground objects (particularly ships).

Flying an airfield attack mission in Il-2 is pretty anti-immersive to me. Shoot shoot shoot, BOOM, same ole broken static plane model. Exciting. Not. Do the same mission with AI planes allowed to land first. With the exception that they now bounce all over the place, which didn't happen before Pe-2, it is infinitly more satisfying. Looks more real, feels more real. Ditto with train DMs, or ships. Attacking ships in il-2 would be hugely more fun if they had the same AI and DM (number of parts to hurt) as a bomber.

What if trucks, etc, would swerve off the road and crash instead of just blwing up and being a static wreck? It all adds to the immersion, IMO. besides, if the ground targets are too easy (they are in il-2), then the whole balance of the airwar is screwy.

tater

Mysticpuma2003
01-05-2007, 02:37 AM
Foo.Bar, If I remember correctly, it was a rail line that actually had altitude, by that I mean that the track followed the contours of the land so that tracks followed the new hills as they rise and fall.

I will watch the sequence again and see if this is correct on my part, but I think that was it.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.aqqm31.dsl.pipex.com/Mysticpuma.jpg

ManicGibber
01-06-2007, 04:53 PM
I for 1 agree with you Lexx, seems like nobody else cares or understands what your saying. Until flight sim devs produce atmosphere in their 3d creations, we simmers will always be left with cartoon like graphics of the ground we fly over. Atmosphere doesn't start up in the sky at 8000 meters you people, it starts right at ground level, go outside and open up your eyes for pete's sakes. Atmosphere was the reason for a ground pounding missions success or failure. Until atmoshere is modeled in the 3d computer animated realm we will always come up sadly lacking in pc gaming advancement, so boring.
Please Oleg be the first to do something in this area of sim development. This is my opinion, and I feel any real pilot would agree, no atmosphere, no realism period.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
My intention was not to bump. Due to unforeseen circumstance beyond the scope of control of the poster. IT'S THEIR FAULT, Blame the Website.

LEXX_Luthor
01-08-2007, 10:20 PM
Thanks Manic.

ManicGibber:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">I for 1 agree with you Lexx, seems like nobody else cares or understands what your saying. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
But they are saying the same things that I'm saying...butt...they don't know how. Computer gamers don't know how to ask for features that have never been done before -- when they try, it comes out as something garbled like "better models" (more polygons) or something that spiritually represents their desire for more gameplay immersion.

Take for example mysticpuma. Nothing he/she asks for requires high polygon models, which again, will never be seen beyond the first LOD detail level which will probably never be rendered beyond the distance to the pullout during a train strafing.

Mysticpuma2003:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Adding my thoughts to this thread, I have to say that in the current version of IL2, the trains are disappointing. As some of you heard in my interview with Oleg and Ilya, I really enjoy 'train-busting' missions.

When I see guncam footage of trains being strafed, and then plumes of steam erupting from the burst boiler, I wish that it could be modeled for IL2.

I saw this happen in GSX Media's "Shockwave" add-on for CFS3, where trains got strafed and each pass made more steam come out of the boiler. It showed that damage was being caused and that you had successfully hunted down your target.

At the moment in IL2, you shoot a train, and then there is a one frame animation from the train rolling along the track, and the next frame shows it smoking and stationary, a blackened wreck. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
All that's needed here is "steam" pouring out of the old FB train models, and maybe, some in-between state damage train model LODs. Note how the Shockwave addon CFS3 3D polygon train models are "good enough" in this case and have no complaint -- the desire of mysticpuma is for air warfare effects beyond the static model.

On the other hand, if Foo.bar's fantastic 3D models can be equalled by Oleg's programming genius - fine! However, I will assume that's not the case. I have no problem with Foo.bar's modelling, but a lack of attention to development of the air warfare environment in equivalent detail as Foo.bar's perfect models, and programming this air warfare environment is not a job for the 3D artists. Also, as avimus poasted, Oleg may be wanting ground shooter sim quality train models for the propheted merge of BoB and...The Sims. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Philipscdrw
01-09-2007, 08:45 AM
I'm a semi-retired railway enthusiast, and I must say that the train models in Il-2 never really bothered me. Apart from the way that railway carriages explode when you fire two rifle-calibre rounds through them. That was quite strange...

I'm alarmed by one aspect of the BoB shots though - the Pullman carriages (the brown and cream ones) were all put in store somewhere in the north of England at the start of the war, but someone's modelling them for FB. Trains in the south of England should be green in 1940, brown and cream (not Pullman though) west of London, maroon in the north-west and teak in the north-east, as far as I know...<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

------------------------------------------------------------
PhilipsCDRw

PF_Tini's Simple Guide to Switching 4.04m, 4.05m, and 4.07m. (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/7351046415)
Flying on Hyperlobby as EAF_T_Dozer

Foo.bar
01-12-2007, 03:42 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">and I must say that the train models in Il-2 never really bothered me. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Just because they never looked like real trains. It seems like the modeller didn't had a glue how trains have to look like. I try to change this. The amount of faces is another question, but in a historical flight sim even the train objects should have historic examples.

Tbag_13
01-12-2007, 05:32 AM
What was that thread about..well, nevermind, i hope to see Franzen in Foo's thread in the future so that he can probably add his knowledge to the developement of these great train models. Even though it seems that Foo doesn't need much help anyway.

@Lexx: I also think that clouds and other weather phenomena are very important (not only talking about the visual part) - for me! It's all a point of perspective as you have already pointed out somewhere. I think Oleg puts a lot of effort in the clouds and the dynamic weather is a huge step forward IMO. But if your not satisfied with that, what about making some clouds yourself? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

LEXX_Luthor
01-12-2007, 07:45 PM
Tbag:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">But if your not satisfied with that, what about making some clouds yourself? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I did make some clouds myself, I had to. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d178/Lexx_Luthor/Smileys/thumbs.gif <div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Jutocsa
01-13-2007, 02:34 AM
So as I see there are two possibilities. One is Oleg and team making everything, obviously having less time for precious clouds, two is giving away some of the jobs, like trains, freeing up some of their own time to focus on what you call the essence of a flight sim. I dont get it why would be the second so wrong but maybe its just me. Anyway, still nice job Foo.bar, keep it up http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://img12.photobucket.com/albums/v30/Jutocsa/Jutocsa.jpg

Philipscdrw
01-13-2007, 03:33 AM
Just for the record, I'm delighted with the effort going into the new train models for BoB. Now when I'm flying an Il-2 - sorry, a Blenheim - on ground attack missions, I can fly right down next to the train and say "Well, I don't have a clue what type of locomotive that is, but it looks very realistic!". Then I'd blow it up. But feel slightly ashamed as I do so. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

------------------------------------------------------------
PhilipsCDRw

PF_Tini's Simple Guide to Switching 4.04m, 4.05m, and 4.07m. (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/7351046415)
Flying on Hyperlobby as EAF_T_Dozer

Foo.bar
01-13-2007, 03:40 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Well, I don't have a clue what type of locomotive that is, but it looks very realistic!" </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Everytime I shoot an enemy plane I say the same http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif

LEXX_Luthor
01-13-2007, 06:09 PM
Jutocsa:: <BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">So as I see there are two possibilities. One is Oleg and team making everything, obviously having less time for precious clouds,... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
We can stop there Jutocsa, and empower you to learn about successful product development. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

A combat flight sim without a core focus on making immersive air combat environment for the customer is like a ground combat sim with the following features...

Ground combat sim with no trees.

Ground combat sim with no hills.

Ground combat sim with no streets.

Ground combat sim with only one (1) type of building object for players to interact with -- this would be the equivalent of the industry standard combat flight sims -- every one of them a natural market failure* -- that offer only one over simplistic static cloud type. And yes, we shall soon enough see what Oleg has plans for BoB And Beyond, as it does sound like we may be seeing some real cfs advances here.

This, among many other reasons besides precious clouds is why combat flight sims have lost popularity over the decades, as the up-close detailed objects in the ground combat games mean something to the player in terms of gameplay interaction with other objects in the ground combat game world. Given that men and women, we may just call them customers for simplicity, have always wanted to fly, and to fight, for thousands of years, something has to explain the failure of combat flight sims.


* footnote added later -- Microsoft's combat flight sims, at least CFS3, may not be naturally successful, as the product may depend largely on the heavy name "Microsoft" to maintain shelf presence in the game stores.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

LEXX_Luthor
01-13-2007, 06:21 PM
Oh, and Foo.bar, very nice models. I just wish they were made for a ground combat sim, so I could see them during gameplay, and interact with them. You may take that as the highest complement offered in this thread. I would love to see your models while playing a game, in all detail, up close. But that won't happen in a combat flight sim. Have you talked to a ground combat sim developer about modding for them?<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

__________________
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif Flyable Swedish "Gladiator" listed as J8A...in FB Gold...and...Aces Expansion Pack

"You will still have FB, you will lose nothing" ~WUAF_Badsight
"I had actually pre ordered CFS3 and I couldnt wait..." ~Bearcat99
"At the altitudes this community flies at, diving is not an option." ~Stiglr
"Gladiator and Falco, elegant weapons of a more civilized age" ~ElAurens
"109Z flew briefly, after being hit by a bomb. Go-229 also saw combat, when the factory was overrun." ~pingu666
:
"Where you did read about Spitfire made from a wood?
Close this book forever and don't open anymore!" ~Oleg_Maddox http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

grifter2u
01-14-2007, 03:54 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Foo.bar:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Well, I don't have a clue what type of locomotive that is, but it looks very realistic!" </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Everytime I shoot an enemy plane I say the same http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

the trains and other ground object you are making are extremely good, thank you for all that hard work, most of us will really appreciate it !

is something better/different being done about the relative scale of various objects in BoB ? compared to our current problems in il2 ? at the moment some objects like houses or trucks can be way to small compared to the relative sizes of other objects, and the pilot for ex often seems to have the profile of a midget sitting in the cockpit it seems.

is anything being done with the models being develloped for bob to ensure the same problem doesnt exist ? i notice you deliberately use some scale models of a man, women, and child next to some houses and buildings, but is this also being done by other designers who work on other objects than yours ?

FritzGryphon
01-14-2007, 05:27 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">but is this also being done by other designers who work on other objects than yours ? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>


All models are made to scale in 3Dsmax. If you check the objects with the grid, almost all are the correct size. I've checked many tanks and cars, and they are all the correct length, +/- 5% or so.

Tanks and cars are very small compared to airplanes. Even small houses are easily less than a fighter's wingspan. There may be some things the wrong size, but I haven't found any yet.
---------

On the original topic, I am very glad that knowledgable, motivated individuals are working on models for BoB. After all, only such good people will work for so little money http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

If anyone thinks that nice trains have anything to do with clouds not being to their liking, they are deluded. As far as I can see, MG is really pushing weather in general for BoB. And making clouds is not as simple as making a 3d model and sticking it in the game as a static object.

Foo.bar
01-14-2007, 05:50 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">You may take that as the highest complement offered in this thread. I would love to see your models while playing a game, in all detail, up close. But that won't happen in a combat flight sim. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Thank you Luthor http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content"> Have you talked to a ground combat sim developer about modding for them? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
I am not interested. My trains are dedicated exclusively for SoW series, just because I loved IL2 series and I will love SoW series. I just try to help to make SoW the most realistic flight sim ever - in all aspects http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif even if my aspect is a very small one and uninteresting to some.


@grifter2you: AFAIK there will be no compromises left anymore with object scalings in SoW series.

grifter2u
01-14-2007, 07:57 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Foo.bar:
@grifter2you: AFAIK there will be no compromises left anymore with object scalings in SoW series. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Foo.bar,

can you in any way comment on some of the reasons for some of the existing scaling and size ratio problems in il2 ? it is a complex issue that impacs on several levels.

major_setback
01-14-2007, 08:42 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">If anyone thinks that nice trains have anything to do with clouds not being to their liking, they are deluded. As far as I can see, MG is really pushing weather in general for BoB. And making clouds is not as simple as making a 3d model and sticking it in the game as a static object. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes. And I think oleg said (in the Mystic Puma interview?) that he had someone working full time on the weather modelling for BoB.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y129/major-setback/Signaurepic004BESTframe014small.jpg
<span class="ev_code_PINK">My Aim is True.</span>

Foo.bar
01-14-2007, 10:50 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">can you in any way comment on some of the reasons for some of the existing scaling and size ratio problems in il2 ? it is a complex issue that impacs on several levels. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

sorry, i am neither the right person to comment any il2 modelling issues, nor have an idea why the models are scaled wrong in some ways. in my opinion the modellers just didn't had right measured reference drawings. or even none of them.
that's not my way to make models. without proper measured drawings no model.

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Philipscdrw
01-14-2007, 11:24 AM
Let me disambiguate again - I'm very pleased with the work that's being done on the trains for SoW! I won't be able to identify them because I know very little about railways in WW2 and nothing at all about railways outside of Britain, but I will recognise the high-quality and accurate models!

(By the way, the LNER A4 might need to be in wartime black livery, and I look forward to seeing it at Kings Cross shed and on the East Coast Main Line out of Kings Cross, but hopefully it won't appear too often on the south coast...<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

------------------------------------------------------------
PhilipsCDRw

PF_Tini's Simple Guide to Switching 4.04m, 4.05m, and 4.07m. (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/23110283/m/7351046415)
Flying on Hyperlobby as EAF_T_Dozer

Foo.bar
01-14-2007, 11:36 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">By the way, the LNER A4 might need to be in wartime black livery, and I look forward to seeing it at Kings Cross shed and on the East Coast Main Line out of Kings Cross, but hopefully it won't appear too often on the south coast... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's very interesting to me as I do know about the A4 only a little bit. I asked in british forums a lot about her coloring and all of them answered to me she (Sir Ralph Wedgwood) should be in blue in 1940. Would be great to get more informations by you, philipscdrw http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I decided to model the A4 when i realized that MG didn't had a heavy express train steamer in its program wich could be compared to the famous german BR01. It was a really hard desicion to me because I said from the first day on that I only will do german stuff. I don't know anything about british railways but I tried to give my best.

What I really still need are british signal semaphore references. Can you help?

Mysticpuma2003
01-14-2007, 12:41 PM
At last I found the train attack video clip I was looking for, and I posted it in this thread on General Discussion.

This is the clip that made me yearn for the same in IL2, but now I would love to see it in BoB.

Please view;

http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=23110...021036425#1021036425 (http://forums.ubi.com/eve/forums?a=tpc&s=400102&f=23110283&m=1021036425&r=1021036425#1021036425)<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.aqqm31.dsl.pipex.com/Mysticpuma.jpg

Foo.bar
01-14-2007, 01:45 PM
Thank you Mysticpuma http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Mysticpuma2003
01-14-2007, 03:51 PM
It's a pleasure Foo, I just hope it gets some attention, I really do!

Cheers, MP.<div class="ev_tpc_signature">

http://www.aqqm31.dsl.pipex.com/Mysticpuma.jpg

Foo.bar
01-23-2007, 01:24 PM
Last page of this thread can be found in Google's cache (http://72.14.221.104/search?q=cache:kNd3U1J3Bn0J:forums.ubi.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/63110913/m/188106364/p/4+ubi+forum+modeller+trains&hl=de&gl=de&ct=clnk&cd=2) for some time.

FritzGryphon
01-24-2007, 12:19 AM
Some further arguments for detailed ground objects in BoB.

1. The BoB will be partly a ground sim, with the playable Flak, and perhaps other vehicles in the future.

2. Maybe there will be playable Flak on the trains! BoB will break into the mainstream market as a rail shooter.

Clouds, 100% important. But no one really 'models' a cloud. They're made up of particles, which are made up of semitransparent sprites. If I modeled a cumulous cloud, I'd end up with a weird looking, lumpy shell with a cloud texture on it. Like a floating white rock of sorts.

Mysticpuma2003
01-24-2007, 12:41 PM
As I posted before the forums crashed, I would love to see this type of damage model included (with BoB graphics of course!)

I found this a while back on the net, but after searching for ages to track it down again, eventually I have.

When I first saw this, I straight away thought how cool it would be in IL2, but that was blown straight out of the water when you see that as you shoot an engine in IL2, there is one frame of animation before the train stops and turns black....realistic! Nuh uh

So, although it's never going to happen in IL2, I would love to see similar effort put into train attacks, this to me (if you watch the video) is immersion in a combat sim. Steam bursts from the side of the boiler on each different pass of the attacking plane, really excellent.

Now with better graphics, this could be a ground attackers heaven!

Anyway the link is here, it's .wmv (so no codec issues) and is a tiny 1.6mb (I would advise not enlarging it above it's default size), perfect for the 56k/rs

BTW, exactly the same would be great on ship attacks, with a much more dynamic smoke and steam (think Silent Hunter III).

http://www.aqqm31.dsl.pipex.com/trainattack.zip

Your views please.
Top Reply

Aaron_GT
01-24-2007, 01:18 PM
Well with all the calls to combine a ground sim, and strategic elements (such as ground control) maybe we need to have a Fat Controller in the game (no, NOT Goering!) too. You could have strategic online games and taunt the Luftwaffe by announcing that you will be running the Flying Scotsman and dare them to try and shoot it up! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Obviously the online chatter needs to be changed to Betjeman for the occasion. Friendly bombs falling on Slough optional.

Foo.bar
01-26-2007, 06:36 AM
Looks like everything is ok again http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif All replies are back AFAIK.

Foo.bar
01-27-2007, 06:56 PM
At least almost...