A question on comments by Loft

[Rolling_Thunder]

 ...

 

Look at Eagle Dynamics, they never talk to their people what gonna be released when or how. They need 4 years to develop a new engine while everyone is playing a version thats full of bugs and problems and expensive stuff (well i own all aircraft and helos but ... nervermind) and nobody complains...

 

Oh people do complain. They get their posts deleted and banned forever. That's why it takes them forever to release anything and it all seems so disjointed. No aircraft in the dcs universe is really compatible with the next. They don't listen to complaints. They don't listen to their customers. Half the modules are still in beta with no sign of fixes.

The devs here at least appear to listen to their customers. Some things get fixed, there's some signs that there will be a big change, development this week. They listen. They have made some bad decisions yes, but at least they listen and are very active on the forums.

Some folk get banned but only for 30 days at most. I really believe this company is heads and shoulders above Eagle Dynamics and way more classier.

[SharpeXB]

I definitly like the RoF career and have many many hours on it. I hope the dev team doesn't misinterpret the usage data. Of course QMB is going to get more hours because it's easily accessible for quick sessions. But even if a player has fewer opportunities for longer more immersive action in the game doesn't mean that it is unappreciated. I really hope something like it becomes available for BoS.

[unreasonable]

I have obviously been critical of elements of the SP campaign but I have tried to be constructive since I do not wish to be dismissed as a whiner or hater. Last try.....

 

It is obvious reading the comments over the years that one of the main issues in both BCareer and BoS SP campaign is that people have very different preferences for how much action they will see in a given sortie in a campaign.  This is a different issue from options for settings, aids, icons etc which 1CGS have provided.

 

I do not mind no contact sorties, but I can quite understand that many people are short of time or just find them boring. Some people want frantic action every sortie, others want a mix.

 

Pat's generator is historically immersive and scalable. The user can choose how much action he generates, even how much flak, with a few tick boxes.  It is popular.

 

BCareer is historically immersive, but not scalable. It is not so popular, but not derided.

 

BoS SP campaign is not historically immersive nor is it scalable.

 

I confess I find it difficult to be sure, although it is fun to speculate, why a company that has done so much outstanding work in most other aspects of its product undermines its own campaigns in this way. Leaving that aside, these problems are not especially difficult to fix, especially when you get the community to do most of the research for you. Plenty of historians here.

 

Campaign "action intensity" slider for both BCareer and the new historic BoS SP Campaign, please.  Pretty please...?

[dhillr]

I'm sitting on my new mountain-bike and I know it's the most beautiful and powerful machine ever I had but there're no mountains or bike trails around to get this shiny thing dirty. I know it's not appropriate metaphor but you know what I mean. :D  no?

Edited February 6, 2015 by dhillr

[Bearcat]

That would be nice but why don't you work on an upgrade to DX 11 or 12, Zak?...

For me the priority would be a new DX Engine instead of a DX9 with SSAO ... would be more  worth it to wait ...

 

That is probably a massive undertaking that is just not going to happen and if it were to happen it would stop all other work and the sim would die in it's tracks. I don't think DX9 is the problem.

 

 

Hey Potenz. I'm gonna simply quote Loft, if you don't mind:

1) There's a number of combinations of video settings that can cause serious performance issues, which always serves as a ground for very agressive feedback. We prevented the possibility of such combinations;

2) There's no one who knows our own technology better than us. And we are offering optimal variants. A PC that doesn't run the game on presets well won't perform better without the presets;

3) Comes from p.1 - we would need to find out all possible week points that could crash the game, cause memory to leak, etc. It would have taken very long to test the project, but as you know we didn't have much time.

Yeah, I think it'll be public in March. TBC.

 

The ROF AI is not broken in the Career. The issue lies in the mission design. Pat just told the AI to fight all the time that is why you see a difference. Maybe he is smarter than us. Pat is not bound to deadlines or budgets so he has had infinite time to build his PWCG and it's great. I tell people to play it all the time if they don't like ours. And there are those that enjoy our ROF career and those that don't. This is an old story. I've requested changes to the ROF Career many times, but budgets, usage stats resources all play a role in what we focus on. But we find ways sometimes to improve things by working with others like Luke who has taken time on our behalf and tweaked different parameters to improve the ROF Career. That's all that has been possible on that front. Loft and I differ on many things in ROF and BOS and are arguments over the years have been brutal, but I am not the final say on design. This has been known for a long time. Out of it comes compromises that help solve problems and improve our titles over time. This community needs to lighten up a bit and stop attacking us and calling us names for making decisions we feel are best for our company. If Loft simplifies things its because it's caused a headache for us in the past and he's trying to make the team more efficient to allow the team to focus on other items we see as more crucial. Having you guys complain on a forum takes no time out of our day, but having to explain to users why their game is running slow does and costs us money.

 

Jason 

 

 

No, we're forced to choose between trying to make a simpler system that doesn't generate support tickets or endless tinkering which gives a predictable performance result for the vast majority of users or having some in the community not like the changes we made to avoid those tickets. Problems either way. So please don't take my comments out of context. I was giving you a rationale as to why sometimes decisions are made in a certain way. Loft's job is to balance budget, time, resources and achievable features and content for you. Nothing unbelievable there.

 

I see lots of suggestions we invest in this or that technology. Well, that takes money and time. We have to make a calculated guess on what will work and what will not. The forum only tells part of the story and those that yell loudest do not always represent the majority. I get lots of positive emails and PMs that say we are doing a good job and to stay the course and those users purposely stay off the forum because it is so negative and angry. And I've said it before, our slow death as some really want to happen has lasted almost 6 years now and 2 major products with more coming and many updates and tweaks etc. Just an example, some were comparing some Steam stats against other titles. It looked like no one was playing BOS, but we looked at it using our internal system and it was 10X the other titles for the day. So, we have lots of happy users and some loud upset users. Would I change a few things? Of course and some changes and new things are coming, but as we saw with ROF it is a marathon and not a sprint. 

 

Jason

 

As far as the presets go... just a suggestion ... Couldn't you just reinstall the graphics options along with the presets? With an option to choose one or the other at any given time and just add a disclaimer basically saying basically... If custom settings gives you problems on your system revert to the presets, because for the most part they work, that is why we put them there and we won't be dealing with issues cause by not using them.... You really don't have to spend a lot of time with support tickets behind this if you do it right. There will more than likely be more people who will be glad to have those options, even if for some it does not work and they have to just revert to the presets. For many it is the lack of options that gets them twisted the most... They would rather have the option to vchoose whether or not to take a frame hit for better eye candy.. or loose the candy for a smoother look. Granted.. they can do that with the presets .... some folks just like to fine tune where they can.

 

The campaign and the unlocks and all that, well.....  hopefully that will be resolved to some degree soon as promised (I have very high hopes and expect them to be fully realized.. ), although for me it is now largely a moot issue since I have about 98% of it done.. and the last two percent is not an issue for me at all.. If I never had those last two skins on 7 of the 10 aircraft left in my hangar I really could care less...  but IMO the unlocks are tied to the ME... since locked content cannot be used in any user made missions IIRC yes? So once the ME is released to the public, as long as the unlocks issue is satisfactorily  resolved, I believe we will see an explosion of great stuff mission and campaign wise about 30 to 90 days later and beyond.. from community folks who have the tools and the skills to use them. Some will get the tools and not use them at all.. it's a given.. It happened with the IL2 FMB..  There are folks who to this day have never used it beyond their first few attempts.. and that's cool. There are others who will get the ME and not use it well..  and their missions may never see the light of day beyond their own PC... but there will be a group of folks who will get the ME and use it very well...and 1CGS and the BoS community will be the beneficiaries of what their creativity produces... so the ME being released to the general public is crucial as long as the unlocks issue is resolved. I like many others wait to see what is coming..

 

I have a hard time though understanding some of the tone and the malice that so many seem to harbor towards this sim, this forum and this team. It has been said that some folks want to see this sim fail. That is what some do want.. they have said it and done everything in their power to bad mouth the sim, slander it's developers and hold every misstep up like a soiled bloody cloth. This sim still has legs regardless and I think it can sprout wings (no pun intended) with the right decisions from the entire team..

 

For us this is something we do.. but these guys have invested a lot of time, a lot of hard work, a lot of sweat and personal fortune into this endeavor... so in my opinion they have the right to move forward in all this as they see fit. There are things going on behind the scenes that we cannot possibly know as customers and end users... Granted .. we can offer up valid suggestions.... and hope that they are at the very least considered, if not used... but we are not in a position to second guess this team as to why they do what it is they do, even if we do not like all of their decisions. Nor are we in a position to demand anything.

 

Honestly? We flight simmers are largely a spoiled, petulant lot. Not all of us but many of us are. It was that way in every single sim I have ever been involved in. It was like that in MSCFS, it was certainly like that in IL2... It was definitely like that in CoD and  RoF and it is like that here as well. I don't know how it was in WoP.. because after my initial investment, and my additional investment in the failed add ons... I walked away once I saw no ME was coming and that their answer was WT.. I have not been back to their forums in any minimal way since..

 

Pardon my rant in this thread... I had to get it off my chest.

 

Having said that hopefully we will see very soon what this new offering is... It has been interesting reading all this.. based on some of what I read here I now want to go and try the RoF campaign. The BoS campaign was the first one that I actually finished.. ever.

[Force10]

As far as the presets go... just a suggestion ... Couldn't you just reinstall the graphics options along with the presets? With an option to choose one or the other at any given time and just add a disclaimer basically saying basically... If custom settings gives you problems on your system revert to the presets, because for the most part they work, that is why we put them there and we won't be dealing with issues cause by not using them.... You really don't have to spend a lot of time with support tickets behind this if you do it right. There will more than likely be more people who will be glad to have those options, even if for some it does not work and they have to just revert to the presets. For many it is the lack of options that gets them twisted the most... They would rather have the option to vchoose whether or not to take a frame hit for better eye candy.. or loose the candy for a smoother look. Granted.. they can do that with the presets .... some folks just like to fine tune where they can.

 

 

 

+1

 

 

No, we're forced to choose between trying to make a simpler system that doesn't generate support tickets or endless tinkering which gives a predictable performance result for the vast majority of users or having some in the community not like the changes we made to avoid those tickets.

 

 

      I would be interested to know how ROF managed to survive...support tickets about graphics settings didn't seem to slow the progress of churning out a massive amount of content.

 

I've been simming for a couple decades now, and I have never once generated a support ticket about graphics settings...ever. Plenty of lean years in there where my hardware was lagging and I had issues getting games to run smoothly. While flight sim fans seem to argue with each other on many subjects...there is always someone willing to help another with settings to try and get a title to run smoothly. I just wouldn't think the "support ticket" issue would be that bad given that you have about a thousand volunteers who are willing to help someone with settings issues.

[Jason_Williams]

You mean found the right person to work on fmb?

 

We already have a programmer working on the FMB. I'm talking about something completely different.

 

Jason

[HBB*Hunger]

The ROF AI is not broken in the Career. The issue lies in the mission design. Pat just told the AI to fight all the time that is why you see a difference. Maybe he is smarter than us. Pat is not bound to deadlines or budgets so he has had infinite time to build his PWCG and it's great. I tell people to play it all the time if they don't like ours. And there are those that enjoy our ROF career and those that don't. This is an old story. I've requested changes to the ROF Career many times, but budgets, usage stats resources all play a role in what we focus on. But we find ways sometimes to improve things by working with others like Luke who has taken time on our behalf and tweaked different parameters to improve the ROF Career. That's all that has been possible on that front. Loft and I differ on many things in ROF and BOS and are arguments over the years have been brutal, but I am not the final say on design. This has been known for a long time. Out of it comes compromises that help solve problems and improve our titles over time. This community needs to lighten up a bit and stop attacking us and calling us names for making decisions we feel are best for our company. If Loft simplifies things its because it's caused a headache for us in the past and he's trying to make the team more efficient to allow the team to focus on other items we see as more crucial. Having you guys complain on a forum takes no time out of our day, but having to explain to users why their game is running slow does and costs us money.

 

Jason 

 

 

Jason, you and your team are doing a great job, thats all I can say. 

[Jason_Williams]

I heard the same but was not sure about the source of that information. Maybe there are other developer who made great campaigns. Maybe its also a question to share the right amount of the revenue to convince Thomas Voss :D

 

I'm not interested in working with people who want to make payware missions. I'm interested in working with people who want to make apps to manage free mission content from users who want to make cool historical type missions. Similar to what pat did with PWCG. This is the only way the community will get the kind of extremely detailed campaigns and missions they want. The answer has to come from the community like it did with the original IL-2. Our mission technology can be used to make some great stuff as Pat did. And we did a payware Campaign with ROF. Been there and done that. Mixed results. Desastersoft people approached us in the beginning, but it was not a good match for a variety of reasons.

 

Jason

[Tektolnes]

- The company is forced to do choices and sacrifices

 

or

 

- The company dies. No more very accurate and realistic warbirds simulators anymore...

 

I think that part of the problem seems to be that the devs give us an impression that these are almost binary options. Unlocks end up applying to everybody which doesn't make sense. Graphical options are apparently going to generate too many support tickets so everybody can only get very basic options. 

 

It was always clear that there were virtually free, middle ground solutions available to these clearly contentious design choices. However time and again we were told that there was nothing wrong with unlocks and that they would be staying. It's taken a lot of debating and griping to get us to the point where these virtually free fixes are going to be considered. A ton of trouble could have been avoided if unlocks didn't apply to those who paid full whack and some limited graphic settings such as SSAO on / off added (which was already coded in earlier versions of EA). Anyway it seems like we're maybe moving towards some middle ground so hopefully things can get a bit more conciliatory in general. 

[Zmaj76]

Update.

There's a chance that when we have time/resources such things as SSAO and post contrast may be made optional. So, someday maybe, yep. When the big things are released and when there's time before the next big ones.

Thanks Zak. The SSAO has one of the biggest, if not the biggest impact on performance. Remember back then when I tried alpha version that without SSAO I had much much better performance overall (not talking only about FPS). The simmilar is also true for ROF, but there we can untick that setting.

Edited February 6, 2015 by Zmaj76

[Veteran66]

Jason you know Desastersoft make more like Campaigns

[Brano]

This is my plan. I have just not found the right person yet.

 

Jason

Good to hear Jason.As Rumcajs suggested,if there is basic structure/template for campaign creation integrated into/alongside FMB,community can do all that fancy thingies around.

[Alkyan]

Maybe it's not relevant, but one advantage of looked settings is that you can't abuse graphic options to help you with spotting. In War Thunder, you can freely change all the settings, and some settings make enemies planes render at longer distances in an obvious way. But it makes your game look horrible. So you have to choice between ugly and competitive, or beautiful and be at a huge disadvantage. 

But maybe it's War Thunder design flaw, and it would not apply to BoS !

[=]VLA[=Ravonmith]

Oh people do complain. They get their posts deleted and banned forever. That's why it takes them forever to release anything and it all seems so disjointed. No aircraft in the dcs universe is really compatible with the next. They don't listen to complaints. They don't listen to their customers. Half the modules are still in beta with no sign of fixes.

The devs here at least appear to listen to their customers. Some things get fixed, there's some signs that there will be a big change, development this week. They listen. They have made some bad decisions yes, but at least they listen and are very active on the forums.

Some folk get banned but only for 30 days at most. I really believe this company is heads and shoulders above Eagle Dynamics and way more classier.

 

Ah sorry you might got me wrong my thought was not " oh ED does a better job." It was more like : Look at the crap they do and how much money they charge for the years of beta,bug and bullshit and how dull the community kept in order to save the peace. This in mind i think we can be happy about what is going on here and how everything is developing. We just need to be patient and kind. 

 

Not that i dont like dcs. I love some of the plains althoug in beta and i live with the bad performance and bugs but that was not the point :D. Was just talking about what they get and what we get and that the il 2 community should be happy how everything is working at the moment (always room for improvements i know )

I'm not interested in working with people who want to make payware missions. I'm interested in working with people who want to make apps to manage free mission content from users who want to make cool historical type missions. Similar to what pat did with PWCG. This is the only way the community will get the kind of extremely detailed campaigns and missions they want. The answer has to come from the community like it did with the original IL-2. Our mission technology can be used to make some great stuff as Pat did. And we did a payware Campaign with ROF. Been there and done that. Mixed results. Desastersoft people approached us in the beginning, but it was not a good match for a variety of reasons.

 

Jason 

Thanks for the reply . Good to know. Iam looking forward for some 20-40 mission campaigns with manageable crews and achievements/ medals , perma death etc etc. 

But IF you charge money for something like that, i would pay iam sure a lot of people would.  Iam not looking only for missions with a fancy story , its more the system around for the immersion. Iam not capable of programming such things but got millions of ideas :D

[steppenwolf]

I've never tried this before, but just out of curiosity can a video game be returned for a refund? 

This was actually an honest question. I was thinking about what BlueHeron said:

 

"Customers have the right to buy the product... or not.   Enough said."

 

Most products can be returned if the customer is not satisfied. So can BoS be returned? Seems to me that the keys could be invalidated and the customers money returned. Then maybe some people wouldn't feel so mad about the game. 

[dburne]

This was actually an honest question. I was thinking about what BlueHeron said:

 

"Customers have the right to buy the product... or not.   Enough said."

 

Most products can be returned if the customer is not satisfied. So can BoS be returned? Seems to me that the keys could be invalidated and the customers money returned. Then maybe some people wouldn't feel so mad about the game. 

 

There have been a couple of instances I have seen, where they did refund the money for BOS.

While it is rare, some have managed to do so.

[steppenwolf]

Thanks dburne. I wonder if one day software returns will become more akin to returning other consumer products.   

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

The ROF AI is not broken in the Career. The issue lies in the mission design. Pat just told the AI to fight all the time that is why you see a difference.

 

AI is not broken, but it is too much repeatable and dose't take adventege of plane type. This is common knowledge for person who plays or reads ROF forums. Does "spiral down to deck" ring the bell?

[Bearcat]

I'm not interested in working with people who want to make payware missions. I'm interested in working with people who want to make apps to manage free mission content from users who want to make cool historical type missions. Similar to what pat did with PWCG. This is the only way the community will get the kind of extremely detailed campaigns and missions they want. The answer has to come from the community like it did with the original IL-2. Our mission technology can be used to make some great stuff as Pat did. And we did a payware Campaign with ROF. Been there and done that. Mixed results. Desastersoft people approached us in the beginning, but it was not a good match for a variety of reasons.

 

Jason

 

That was one of the big things that set IL2 off in such a big way. IL2 Stab, Lowengren's DCG,Mat Manager, Mission mate, The U.Q.M.G., Sturmolog,Hardball's Viewer,IL2 Compare, IL2 MLR,IL2 manager and countless other utilities helped to make IL2 what it is today. Not to even mention the skins, missions, templates, campaigns, backgrounds and so much other user made stuff. I am certain that there are some very talented members of this community who have the skillsets needed to carry this on... the thing is will they? Hopefully they will because BoS is a great piece of kit that is worthy of the same level of attention.. it just needs a chance to bloom.

 

Regardless to what some say about BoS using the RoF engine and all that.. the bottom line is this sim is a few months old. No sim that I know of outside of IL2 (and I say this because I was not there for the first 10 months of it's life.. I came to IL2 in September of 2002 so I cannot objectively say but when I got there some utilities were already there) has had this much to offer in it's first 3 months of life. The other hand full of "new sims" I have experienced since my first run in with IL2 have all been much much more problematic than BoS has been and it deserves more credit than it gets IMO.

[Guest deleted@30725]

A company has to a large extent ignore the negativity on the forums otherwise they would never get any work done. I think most of the people that like the game don't bother to rate it on steam or comment on forums.

 

People make dramatic exits like it's the most important thing in life to ever happen and it's just a game. It's not a big deal. There are others. No one forces people to play. I don't play every day or every week, but it's on my computer, paid for and I find it a fun experience with the known problems. I'm glad it exists. It at least adds to the history of the IL2 franchise. History in 5 years time will write the real story.

 

The important thing with BOS in my mind is that the core game is good and I can appreciate the work. At it's heart there is a great flight sim. It just needs a little fleshing out. But money does not grow on trees and even when it's a huge pot (ea), it can still be wasted (bf4) and take over a year to fix.

 

I wish we could all learn to be a little more patient, but this is the now generation and everything must be done yesterday apparently.

 

There will be plenty more forum drama queens to come.

Edited February 8, 2015 by deleted@30725

[Feathered_IV]

What the community wants isn't always what the community actually needs.

 

The default skins are a perfect example.  The Devs ask the community to nominate the skins they'd like to see made for the Battle of Stalingrad.  The community then suggests a veritable mardi gras of Norwegian, African, Channel Front and 1945 paint schemes that have no historical association with the battle itself.  Hardly any can even get the season right.

The Devs go,  Er... Oookay.  and codes these freaks and peacocks into the game as requested.  Community then complains that they don't like the selection of skins...

[D_Konig]

What the community wants isn't always what the community actually needs.

 

The default skins are a perfect example.  The Devs ask the community to nominate the skins they'd like to see made for the Battle of Stalingrad.  The community then suggests a veritable mardi gras of Norwegian, African, Channel Front and 1945 paint schemes that have no historical association with the battle itself.  Hardly any can even get the season right.

The Devs go,  Er... Oookay.  and codes these freaks and peacocks into the game as requested.  Community then complains that they don't like the selection of skins...

 

"These are the skins the community deserves, but not the ones it needs right now." - James Gordon, Stalingrad 1942

[ShamrockOneFive]

What the community wants isn't always what the community actually needs.

 

The default skins are a perfect example.  The Devs ask the community to nominate the skins they'd like to see made for the Battle of Stalingrad.  The community then suggests a veritable mardi gras of Norwegian, African, Channel Front and 1945 paint schemes that have no historical association with the battle itself.  Hardly any can even get the season right.

The Devs go,  Er... Oookay.  and codes these freaks and peacocks into the game as requested.  Community then complains that they don't like the selection of skins...

 

That was a PP of mine right from the start of that process. I pointed out a few historically relevant and interesting skins but those didn't get much attention. I kind of wish the focus there was a little more on skins for the battle itself (of which there were plenty of interesting ones for both German and Russian). I do hope that with an eventually expanded focus that those other skins will be ok.

[Brano]

No need for special skins at all.We need proper standard camo for LW/VVS (winter,summer) and working decal system.This way you can put aside completly skin download problems and also this anoying bug of disappearing skin when winter paint is loaded over summer camo.I am not going to download gigabites of skins just to see others online.I want to be Red 17 again like I used to be in old sturm

[Bearcat]

What the community wants isn't always what the community actually needs.

 

The default skins are a perfect example.  The Devs ask the community to nominate the skins they'd like to see made for the Battle of Stalingrad.  The community then suggests a veritable mardi gras of Norwegian, African, Channel Front and 1945 paint schemes that have no historical association with the battle itself.  Hardly any can even get the season right.

The Devs go,  Er... Oookay.  and codes these freaks and peacocks into the game as requested.  Community then complains that they don't like the selection of skins...

 

+1 .... but that was a mistake from the jump.

 

No need for special skins at all. We need proper standard camo for LW/VVS (winter,summer) and working decal system.This way you can put aside completly skin download problems and also this anoying bug of disappearing skin when winter paint is loaded over summer camo.I am not going to download gigabites of skins just to see others online.I want to be Red 17 again like I used to be in old sturm

 

Exactly... No need for any of this. As I said... simmers don't need "incentives" .. the incentive is getting it right. Taking off.. Not muffing the landing.. RTB in one piece... Yeah there will always be point whores in anything that has points... but for the most part simmers want the sim. Even when gamers come in and start out as gamers.. eventually the sim wins out.. because at the end of the day games get finished.. or beaten... or worn out. A sim on the other hand .. one that allows users to make content..  particularly missions and campaigns... pretty much guarantees that there will be an endless supply of content.. so all the developers have to do is create the platform for the community to do it's part.. and continue to add content in the form of maps and aircraft... alll for a price of course... and as long as the platform is worthy..... the community will be there.. and everyone will be happy. The devs can eat and pay their bills ... and the community can get it's kicks. There are enough theaters in WWII alone to sustain this for at least the next 5+ years... give or take. Any game developer who gets into this expecting a longer run needs either a very good plan or their head examined. In this genre a "good plan" would involve maintaining the base you have and expanding upon it. There are 4 years of war to build upon... more than that if you consider the pre 1940 era or the post 1945 era...

 

I'm just sayin.................

[Trooper117]

If something isn't done to get everyone onside we may never see all of those theatres or years of war... sadly.

[Zmaj76]

SSAO was there as option in beta, custom video settings was there also...I dont see why we need to wait so long for having that back again...

Edited February 9, 2015 by Zmaj76

[Sokol1]

No need for special skins at all.We need proper standard camo for LW/VVS (winter,summer) and working decal system.

 

 

This. If at  least the Dev's change the default skins for ones appropriated for the scenery (Winter) all these fantasy and custom "skate" skins don't matter.

[Russkly]

 There were several famous aces who practiced such suicidal "against all odds" tactics

We do not request walls of text about history of units or background of operations.Everyone interested can find tons of

info on internet and in dedicated books.

 

We want to have the same we had in old sturm:

- to choose side for which to fight

- to choose carrier of fighter or bomber pilot

- to choose specific unit.Does not have to be exhausting list of all units.Just those most significant.

- to fly semialternative campaign = you can not change flow of history,you just get generated missions with simple

templates for scramble,bomber intercept,recon,CAP,bombing etc.

Again,noone is requesting walls of text to be inserted into process.That is absolutely not necessary.

- to have own pilot avatar who can get promoted and rewarded within real ranks and awards+leadership functions

 

Basic element is allready there - mission generator used in current groundhog day concept.All that needs to be done is

insert those points above into it.

My 2 cents

 

Hallelujah.

 

Please join 1C/777.