Time to List your BOBII want list, Problems, and issues

[Swanton]

Hi all, long time player (10 yearsish) and lurker here but as you've asked I thought I'd chip in with a request, which quite simply is to keep up the outstanding redesigning of the targets. How about a few fighter targets lurking around the blast pens, maybe the odd comms Anson, and some bombers (Wellingtons, Hampdens, Whitleys) on the bomber fields? It may be a bit more risky, but strafe is most fun at 10 feet over the field going for another ac...

I was browsing Flypast magazine the other day at work and spotted this http://shop.keypublishing.com/product/V ... tCode/B347 - I don't know whether it would be of assistance or not, but on one of the threads someone commented on the lack of relevant material to assist with target redesigning. Another good book out quite recently is Patrick Bishop's Day-by-Day Chronicle, which besides the breakdown of the fighting has all sorts of interesting sidebars covering things like night fighting, the Air-Sea Rescue organisation and shadow factories, as well as the more usual stuff about radar, personalities and Orders of Battle (both sides).

As for AI requests, they've all been covered by previous posters. A big thanks to all on the team, the game has changed out of all recognition over the years - long may it continue! Right, I'm off to see if I can spoil OC Northolt's afternoon with a bomb through the door...

[Racoon]

Also it would be nice to have the Ju-87 bomb load corrected. Currently it can only carry one 250 Kg bomb under fuselage. In reality it carried either one 500 Kg or a 250 Kg bomb under fuselage and 4-50 Kg bombs under it's wings (two under each wing).

It would be nice to have Me-109 E4B Jubo as well, if it's not too much trouble to add a bomb rack under it's fuselage!

Another issue that I've noticed is the rear gunner's firing direction in both Me-110 and Ju-87 when flown by player. He simply shoots forward and up over pilot's cockpit (at RAF aircraft flying in front and above his Me-110 or Ju-87) instead of firing from strait line to 45 degree high elevation (firing cone) behind his aircraft! Again this "reversed" firing direction happens only in player's Me-110 or Ju-87 and not the AI flown aircraft.

One more Me-110 related glitch that I've found during campaign missions; is that they always carry bombs regardless of their mission as escorts or Jabos.
To see it for your self, during a campaign, assign some Me-110s as escort fighters and start your mission, you wouldn't see any bombs, but if you frag out and then frag in again the bombs become visible (that's another glitch, they don't show the first time when flying as Jabos neither unless you frag in and out).
The point is that even as escorts, the Me-110s carry bombs but they're not visible (in a campaign mission) unless you frag in and out at least once.

Thanks again for all your attention and great work.
Cheers.

[stickman]

Raccoon,

All very good and often heard complaints of BoBII follies.
These things will need a 3D man and a coder to fix them, I think. Surely I have not the skills or knowledge.

About the Stuka bomb loadout, the BoBII Stuka carries a 1,102 lb. (500 kg) SC500 bomb.

There is nothing in the models folder for individual bomber AC, that pertains to type of bomb load out. That must be hard coded somewhere.

BoBII uses the Ju87B-2 Stuka variant.
The Ju87B-2 was first produced late 1939 at Weser.
In parallel production at the Weser factory then was the Ju87R-2 (a long range anti-shipping variant of the Ju87B-2). Sacrificing bomb load for wing mounted external fuel drop tanks.
I have no knowledge of any exact numbers of which variants were involved, Bof B, but would guess that most were new Ju87B-2, with some older Ju87B-1, and some Ju87R-2 variants.

My limited research indicates these bomb load capabilities of the different variants. (I am no expert here):

--------

Ju87B-1
Maximum bomb load capacity = 500 kg. (many resources)
Possible bomb loads:
1 each (1,102 lb.) 500 kg bomb under fuselage,
or
1 each (550 lb.) 250 kg bomb under fuselage, and 4 each 50 kg bombs under the wings.

Ju87B-2
Maximum bomb load capacity = 700 kg. (two resources)
Possible bomb loads:
1 each (1,102 lb.) 500 kg bomb under fuselage, and 4 each 50 kg bombs under the wings,
or
1 each (550 lb.) 250 kg bomb under fuselage, and 4 each 50 kg bombs under the wings.

Ju87R-2
Maximum bomb load and external fuel capacity = 700 kg. (maybe some kilograms less than the Ju87B-2?)
Possible bomb loads:
1 each (1,102 lb.) 500 kg bomb under fuselage, if not using external fuel tanks,
or
1 each (550 lb.) 250 kg bomb under fuselage, and 4 each 50 kg bombs under the wings? if not using external fuel tanks,
or
1 each (550 lb.) 250 kg bomb under fuselage, using external fuel tanks.

---------

I'm not even sure if the Ju87R-2 variants were fitted with wing bomb racks for little 50 kg bombs, if not using drop tanks.

Rowan modeled four different bomb types. The sim uses only two types, the SC500 (500 kg), and the SC250 (250 kg).
All bomber aircraft use the SC500, except the Me110C-4 which uses the SC250.

Here is a pic that I made, mostly for own benefit, that shows all bomb objects:


That BOMB2 object is actually 2 bombs together as one single object, not 2 individual bomb objects.
It does seem that Rowan had the intention of using these as SC50 (50 kg) bombs for use on the Stuka's wing bomb racks, but never had the time to fully follow through with the idea.
They probably settled with having the Ju87B-2 carry a single SC500 bomb for simplicity, and compromise.

I have no idea what the little bitty BOMB object was intended for.

You see here that the Stuka has a bomb with a yellow nose. That is a BM1000 object representing the SC500.


As per the external bombs not showing up when they should, also the ME110 having bombs when in a fighter role.
it may be that Rowan coded some kind switches in to prevent the additional objects appearing in game to help frame rate performance?
If such code switches exist, it may possible to fix them.

[Racoon]

stickman, thanks for your detailed reply. I think I failed to explain the external bombs on Me-110s in fighter role clearly!

What I meant is that the Me-110s are carrying bombs even when assigned as escort fighters (in fighter role during campaign missions) but you don't see the bombs (there fore nothing would look out of ordinary) unless you frag in and out at least once to see escort fighters are carrying bombs they shouldn't have!

I mentioned about the bombs not showing (until the player frag in and out once) as a reason why you may not realize that the Me-110 escort fighters are unnecessarily carrying bombs

Also it would be great if the tail gunner's firing direction in player's Me-110 and Ju-87 could be corrected. Currently the tail gunner in player's Me-110 and Ju-87 has a "reversed" firing arc ( he's shooting over the pilot's cockpit instead of the tail).

Thanks again.

[Buddye]

Another issue that I've noticed is the rear gunner's firing direction in both Me-110 and Ju-87 when flown by player. He simply shoots forward and up over pilot's cockpit (at RAF aircraft flying in front and above his Me-110 or Ju-87) instead of firing from strait line to 45 degree high elevation (firing cone) behind his aircraft! Again this "reversed" firing direction happens only in player's Me-110 or Ju-87 and not the AI flown aircraft.

I just wanted to let you know that I have tested this issue many times. I test the issue again today.

Mission was IA Dog Fight Random Advantage with me (the Player) flying a ME110 against the Spits. I placed my A/C in auto pilot (control+A) to watch the rear gunner. The rear gunner only fired toward the target when permitted by gun angle. The gunner did not fired toward or over the cockpit. I also used printouts so I could review the data each time the gunner fired. I just did not see an issue.

I understand that it may be my testing but over the years I have not found an issue as yet.

How are you watching the rear gunner?

The bombs will require a model change and maybe some code changes. We do not have a 3D person working on the bombs. We have never had options for bomb load out. Maybe some day. I have always wanted to be able to man the rear gunner position for the JU87 and ME110.

[Racoon]

Hi buddye, Thanks for your reply. I noticed this issue when I was editing my Me-110 video more than a year ago while using replay for external views. And I remember seeing Spits wouldn't get shot at (by the gunner) until they flow past my Me-110 and climbed, that's when I saw (during video replay) tracers fired from the rear cockpit of my fighter at the climbing Spitfire at 12 o'clock high.

I never used auto pilot during that mission, therefore I think it happens when the aircraft is actually manned by player (no AI or Autopilot mode).
I don't have BOB installed on my PC at the moment, so I can't even look for my old vids. I'll keep you posted as soon as I got my BOB up and running

Thanks again.

[Buddye]

Sorry, but Replay is not a good way to watch as it has some issues which are Replay specific.

BOBII replay needs some major work to sort out all the problems which are complex.

When you get setup and playing BOBII again try my method of watching the Players ME110 rear gunner.

[ShadowShooter]

I have always wanted to be able to man the rear gunner position for the JU87 and ME110.

I've wondered about that. Assuming that the necessary new modelling were available for the rear gunners' internal views, from a coder's perspective do you think it might be theoretically possible to "fool" the program into temporarily regarding the me-110 [or ju-87] as "non-flyable" (or whatever is the category that it groups the heinkel, ju-88 and dornier under) and so be able to tap into the existing programming that runs gunners' positions in the heavy bombers? In that way you would be simply adding a couple of new examples rather than having to create a whole new feature.

[Racoon]

Sorry, but Replay is not a good way to watch as it has some issues which are Replay specific.

BOBII replay needs some major work to sort out all the problems which are complex.

When you get setup and playing BOBII again try my method of watching the Players ME110 rear gunner.

Sure Buddye, will do.

What made this convincing to me was the rear gunner's silence every time I was tailed by a RAF fighter, but once it climbed over my head I could hear (as I was piloting the Me-110) him firing his gun (with no other RAF fighter on my 6) and when I saw tracers going at the Spitfire at 12 o'clock high during replay, I thought I found the problem with the rear gunner's not shooting at the fighters at 6 o'clock!

By the way, how practical is to have Me-109 E4B fighter bomber version?

[cyclonobby]

It's unfortunate but I have had 3 pcs over the last 7 years and never been able to load this game to my frustration. I was hoping with the latest update 2.12 I might succeed using a Windows 7 PC 64bit with 8 GB of Ram and over 200gb of hard disk space and an NVidia Card. The update has been loaded, the machine restarted and the game attempted to be loaded as an administrator as well as normally. I have tried to change the resolution down to lower just incase still with no joy.

I'm never sure whether I should or should not use FFDShow in the startup screen, so tried both, still with no joy.

Also when I do get the game to load I now get a fatal error that I have never seen before.
Fatal Error:
Failed to Find Requested Curve COMM1.0_2927 TailCIFatal Error:
Failed to Find Requested Curve COMM1.0_2927 TailCIFatal Error:
Failed to Find Requested Curve COMM FinCI

When I start either a training mission or full mission the screen goes blank and I never see anything and I guess the program crashes. I have been patient and left it for 5+ minutes incase it takes time to load settings on a first run.
When I do force the program to close I get the message "Battle of britain text is not responding"

I get to the initial screens but never into the game itself - be it training or mission status? Is there something i am missing?

I would dearly love to get this game going even once to see how good it really is.

[Spitfire76]

I don't know if it's a problem with the graphical engine, or something wrong at my end but even on maximum ground detail, buildings seem to 'pop up' or occasionally disappear - that makes it damn tricky to find your way back to base if the base doesn't have a concrete runway; satellite RAF stations are basically a field in a mass of fields - same colour. Speaking of which, at sector stations, the concrete runways themselves could be more visible.

Is there anything that could be done to make the bases more visible, without making them stick out like a sore thumb?

[PV]

cyclonobby, I will copy your post to a new thread
in the BoB2 tech support forum and reply to it there:
http://www.a2asimulations.com/forum/vie ... 17&t=38658

[stickman]

Spitfire76,

I don't know if it's a problem with the graphical engine, or something wrong at my end but even on maximum ground detail, buildings seem to 'pop up' or occasionally disappear

This is a known issue with the way that building objects are drawn in the graphics engine. They may appear when you get close enough for them to appear in game, then as you approach,
they disappear for a few seconds.
I forget exactly why this happens, but there is no fix for it as I recall.

Speaking of which, at sector stations, the concrete runways themselves could be more visible.

I was told that the concrete runways were camouflaged during the B of B. We made them a bit dirty and hard to see because of that.
However, I don't like these very dirty runways and painted the concrete textures a bit more light and creamy.
My modification can be found here:
http://www.a2asimulations.com/forum/vie ... 20#p255963

This also has a DITHER file fix for the concrete textures which stops a funny looking "wave" effect while land or taking off from concrete runways.
If the runways are still too dark, I can lighten them a lot more.

OT:
Also see here for some fixes to v2.12 that I offer.
http://www.a2asimulations.com/forum/vie ... 20#p256400

These are not modifications, but repairs that I suggest you use.

[Spitfire76]

Thanks Stickman.

I guess this would be a big job, but maybe clearly visible perimeter fences wouldn't be a bad idea to make the satellite fields stand out better. As I said though, it sounds like a lot of faffing around.

[Spitfire76]

As discussed a while back in another thread, it's far too easy to collect German bullets in your engine courtesy of German bombers - will v2.13 do anything about that?