Je ne suis pas un rampant dans l'âme, mais il faut être franc, sauter dans un char avec un copain au milieu d'une bataille de char, ça doit être ultime niveau immersion! Bon, j'avoue, j'ai regardé Fury la semaine dernière, peut être est-ce là une source de mon enthousiasme...Obelix a écrit :Mouais, bof
Intel I7 8700K / RTX 3080 / 32Go DDR4 PC21300 G.Skill Ripjaws V / MSI Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon / Cooler Master Silent Pro Gold - 1000W / Noctua NH-D14 / Acer XB270HUDbmiprz 27" G-synch 144Hz / SSD Samsung 860EVO 250Go + 1To / Cooler Master HAF X / Warthog+VPC WarBRD / Thrustmaster TPR / Track-IR v5 / Windows 11 64bits.C'est clair que ce n'est un secret pour personne que le 109 est des plus exigu question cockpit...Obelix a écrit :
Amélioration des mouvements de la position de la tête du pilote selon les avions et la vitesse...
Illustrer cet exemple avec un 109, ce n'est pas forcément heureux...
.../...
Je t'aide :Claymore a écrit :[
Et puis je sais pas vous mais j'ai vachement de mal à comprendre ce qu'ils essaient de dire avec leur illustration, décidément la com c'est vraiment pas leur point fort
Pour infodiditopgun a écrit :Cool leschars ! ça me rappel T-34 vs Tiger, c'était ultra bugué et pas fini mais j'avais kiffé faire du combat de char en mode simulation.diditopgun a écrit :Cool les chars ! ça me rappel T-34 vs Tiger, c'était ultra bugué et pas fini mais j'avais kiffé faire du combat de char en mode simulation.
Intel I7 8700K / RTX 3080 / 32Go DDR4 PC21300 G.Skill Ripjaws V / MSI Z370 Gaming Pro Carbon / Cooler Master Silent Pro Gold - 1000W / Noctua NH-D14 / Acer XB270HUDbmiprz 27" G-synch 144Hz / SSD Samsung 860EVO 250Go + 1To / Cooler Master HAF X / Warthog+VPC WarBRD / Thrustmaster TPR / Track-IR v5 / Windows 11 64bits.L'étude porte sur la possibilité de sortir la tête du cockpit, et donc les limitations liées à la vitesse de l'avion. Or, sauf erreur de ma part, il n'est pas possible d'ouvrir la verrière du 109 en vol, donc le choix du 109 pour illustrer ces modèles n'est à mon sens pas judicieux...Claymore a écrit :C'est clair que ce n'est un secret pour personne que le 109 est des plus exigu question cockpit...Obelix a écrit :
Amélioration des mouvements de la position de la tête du pilote selon les avions et la vitesse...
Illustrer cet exemple avec un 109, ce n'est pas forcément heureux...
.../...
Et puis je sais pas vous mais j'ai vachement de mal à comprendre ce qu'ils essaient de dire avec leur illustration, décidément la com c'est vraiment pas leur point fort
http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/192 ... ntry303081Jason_Williams a écrit : As you can see from the DD that adding these tanks has IMPROVED our aircraft damage model and they have no negative impact on development of our planes. As has been said by Han, this is a bit of an experiment that we think will add some excitement and new elements to gameplay without hurting our air simulation. We've been sitting on this tech for a long time so we could focus on the air simulation which will always be our main focus.
If server operators don't like the tanks they can omit them. Very simple. Maybe there will be tank only servers, who knows? Let's see what the community likes and doesn't like. If you don't like the tanks, just focus on the airplanes. I think the BF-110 and the Ju-88 are going to be awesome additions.
The 1C-777 team has been cranking out a lot lately and PWCG is also maturing rapidly headed for version 1 release which adds some really awesome SP fun. There is a lot to be happy about in Sturmovik land headed into this year's holidays. I am looking forward to what we can do in 2016. If you like BOS/BOM tell your friends who have straggled to join the fun. As with ROF this team has taken a good product that was BOS and is molding into an amazing product. This takes time, money and hard work.
Jason
http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/192 ... ntry303206=FB=LOFT a écrit : Dear friends, it looks like the tanks announce caused too much fuss. Please don't imagine anything redundant. We don't make a killer of popular MMO tank games (we don't know how to do it and our game is about completely different things), we work in different genres and for different playbases. Don't imagine anything impossible so you won't be dissapointed by the game not meeting your expectations.
We just added controllable tanks to IL-2. There are several interesting things, for example you can feel the enourmous size of the map, see what tank engagements looked like, this differs from most other tank games enormously. They differ like avia sim differs from a game about shooting planes. Distances are long, you can't see anything, etc. This kind of game can't be really popular. We didn't want to make tanks to reap $$$ from players. In the first place, we wanted to show how tank engagements really looked like for those who are interested in this. It's like a documentary, not a blockbuster.
Engine created for avia sim imposes many restrictions for tank simulation, limiting its visual epicness. Content looks less detailed (it was created to look good at a distance), trees seem too big and they don't fall, fences are ethereal - these are big no-noes for a good mass market game. We created tanks so you could experience how it was from the other side of IL-2 aiming reticle, from the point of view of its main target. It gives a whole new meaning to watching a dogfight, knowing that if a fighter loses it, then a survived Strurmovik will toast you and there is very little you can do about this. And of course it is exciting to know that all these things are controlled by real people.
We didn't spend time to invent a special balanced gameplay that would make playing in a tank interesting or rewarding, we decided to show you the WWII era warfare from another perspective. So I'm asking politely, dear customers, don't add excess hype to the mix. These are just tanks, yes, they are realistic, yes, they can move on 120+ thousands of square kilometers, yes, they have physics and interiors, yes, it is scary, etc. But this is not a game to play holding a beer by any means. This is freaking hardcore.
