Trees are never destroyed?

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

I'm going to invoke the ignore function.

 

Sigh.

[Gambit21]

With the same respect Gambit I'm very surprized you find "ironic" and "out of point" my answer to your previous statement: just to clear you my answer  is very serious and was referred to your distortion to my previous post where I never talked about -DCS campaigns- as you stated. 

And if DCS is another product but cover the same purpose is logical to compare both, don't know why not.

 

The point was that you can't even fly an actual WWII mission in DCS as the proper aircraft, map, ground units etc, etc, etc are not present to allow you to do so.

That said I don't want to get embroiled in a circular discussion here on the subject.

 

There's 'free subject' forum for this sort of thing, and I think this subject is better suited for that space.

[Finkeren]

With the same respect Gambit I'm very surprized you find "ironic" and "out of point" my answer to your previous statement: just to clear you my answer is very serious and was referred to your distortion to my previous post where I never talked about -DCS campaigns- as you stated.

And if DCS is another product but cover the same purpose is logical to compare both, don't know why not.

But see Fox, that's the point. DCS doesn't "cover the same purpose" as BoX. DCS aim first-and-foremost to be a study-sim with very accurately modeled avionics and other instrumentation and has no concise plan to cover specific historic battles but is satisfied making a bunch of content that sorta fits together if you are willing to overlook a large number of things. BoX on the other hand aims to be a historically grounded combat sim with high emphasis on recreating historic or historically plausible scenarios within a limited timeframe concentrated around a few interconnected battles of one conflict.

 

The two sims are very, very different. It makes much more sense to compare BoX to its predecessor ClOD.

[216th_Jordan]

Yes, it is clear you mix apples and orange...or for shure you haven't never play DCS WWII. Try it and may be you will change your opinion but if you have enough skill to judge and compare flight sims games.

This is not about experience, although I play both sims But if you just want to believe in your impressions I will leave it at that.

[Lusekofte]

I appreciate DCS more than BOX at the moment, personally. But that is for totally different reasons than this topic is about.

When it comes to the little things, the logistics behind, triggers and the whole package. (DCS do nit  get a package it is just a mess or mix from 60´s to 80´s and whatever you choose flying you got to fight the F 15.)

 

Personally the first thing I really fell in love with this game was the bending of tree when hit it, I also like the way planes brake up. But the DM visual model for penetrating shell on the fuselage are hideous . This is things that need to be addressed to get to best possible quality. As a bomber pilot I would like the roads to be destroyed for the duration of the mission, or to some triggers say it is fixed, same with runways, when several bombs hits the runway it should be disabled. 

Personally I think this will never happened, I think the developers give a shit as long as the community only focus on new planes, they do not even have to answer post like this, they got forum gurus here dismissing any proposals for them

[unreasonable]

 they do not even have to answer post like this, they got forum gurus here dismissing any proposals for them

 

"Forum gurus" - says the man with 1811 posts as of now.

 

Of course they do not have to answer, I doubt they even read the thread - but if you want a developer answer all you have to do is ask a specific question in the "Questions for developers" thread.

 

Han gives straight answers when given a clear question.

[coconut]

 

 

same with runways, when several bombs hits the runway it should be disabled.

 

It's already possible and up to mission makers. For MP, detect bomb hits -> disable spawn for a set time. For SP, detect bomb hits -> mission success.

It's pretty rough, but some servers have had it, like DED Random Expert. Not sure if it's still being used. From a game design perspective, in MP, it can be problematic, since you are preventing people from playing. As a server owner, you have to be careful with any kind of game restrictions, as the "victims" might simply move to another server.

[EAF_51_FOX]

I appreciate about the fact that discussion now is driving into a more respectful road in the answers and opinions between all people that are partecipating in the discussion. About this I take the occasion to remember that sometimes my answers may appears rude, but this is just because english isn't my native speech and write isn't the same than talk directly in person.

[BraveSirRobin]

 they do not even have to answer post like this, they got forum gurus here dismissing any proposals for them

 

The "forum gurus" aren't doing anything of the sort.  They're posting their opinions on what features should be given priority.  Same as you.  Only the developers can dismiss proposals made on this forum.

[Lusekofte]

I do not exclude myself from the forum guru. But I stopped argument against other wishes quite a while back. By doing the developers work I mean those not expressing their opinion but only say no to a suggestion and use developers resources as a reason for it. Like the developers need a nanny. 

That is not expressing a opinion, that is in my book obstruct a fellow community member his right to get a opinion.

Edited February 12, 2017 by 216th_LuseKofte

[BraveSirRobin]

But I stopped argument against other wishes quite a while back.

Resources are limited. They can't make every change that is requested. If your view is "just add every feature that people want", then you're not really adding anything to the discussion.

[Lusekofte]

Well, everybody want something, I wished we had the I 153 and HS 123 before moving on to BOK. I hope these will be available as bonus planes later on, now when we get mountains a Odessa map with these planes would be awesome. And some wants burned trees. I think Developers know where their budget is, and we do not. you do not add anything by saying "no" either. 

I believe people would be more happy for all these small things , more objects , more beacons for navigating. More evolved environment .

Look at the JU 52 , they gave us that and so much more added than we asked for, I think they will in long run earn their money back by refine this sim more than new planes. 

And the Pasific, I bet the pacific theatre will bring a lot more people

Edited February 12, 2017 by 216th_LuseKofte

[EAF_51_FOX]

Resources are limited. They can't make every change that is requested. If your view is "just add every feature that people want", then you're not really adding anything to the discussion.

Sorry I don't agree with your statement at all: Forums games are up also for give developers feedback as customer-player about bugs game, software interface problems, but also for give suggestion to developers to render better and better the game for new aircraft they whish play, for graphic ehinancements they whish see introduced ingame and so on.

[BraveSirRobin]

you do not add anything by saying "no" either. 

 

Saying "no" gives the developers a good idea of what people want and what they don't think is worth the effort. Saying "yes" to everything tells them absolutely nothing.

[Finkeren]

Resources are limited. They can't make every change that is requested. If your view is "just add every feature that people want", then you're not really adding anything to the discussion.

Nah BSR, that's not my view. Every contribution to the discussion that's not downright trolling is welcome and valuable.

[BraveSirRobin]

Nah BSR, that's not my view. Every contribution to the discussion that's not downright trolling is welcome and valuable.

A person who says "yes" to every single suggested idea is adding nothing. The developers can't include every idea. What do the developers learn from someone who says yes to everything?

[Finkeren]

A person who says "yes" to every single suggested idea is adding nothing. The developers can't include every idea. What do the developers learn from someone who says yes to everything?

Who says yes to everything?

[BraveSirRobin]

Who says yes to everything?

Lusekofte. According to him, people who say "no" to requested features "do not add anything". So he either says "yes" to everything, or the "don't say no" rule applies to everyone but him.

[Yogiflight]

You understand, there is quite some space between saying 'yes' to everything and saying 'no' to everything?

[BraveSirRobin]

You understand, there is quite some space between saying 'yes' to everything and saying 'no' to everything?

I have no idea what you're talking about. No one is saying "no" to everything. Lusekofte is upset that some people say "no" to anything.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

It's not particularly difficult to extrapolate what is doable, realistically possible or feature creep either. Reading Jason's and other DEV's statements give us a ballpark to work within. You can ask for blue cows on the moon. A reasonable person will, in fact, tell you NO and it doesn't take a DEV answer to make it a reasonable response. Destructible trees, particularly at this juncture, = blue cows.

[EAF_51_FOX]

... Destructible trees, particularly at this juncture, = blue cows.

Excuse me, Why? Are you part of dev team? seem not to me: so your words of judgment about what can be implemented or not in the game sound mute to me, you simply can extrapolate your opinion, but you have to keep in mind that everyone else  can extrapolate exactly the contrary.

Edited February 13, 2017 by EAF_51_FOX

[Gambit21]

Fox - we've been around a while, we know the developers.

We know their goals and we've listened to them talk over and over again about sticking to a plan.

 

We've seen them deliver over and over again by not allowing feature creep to delay release.

It's that simple - we've been down this road before.

 

That said there's always little features that surprise us that we didn't know were coming. 

We doubt destructible trees are one of those things based on our experience.

 

No bold bold emphasis necessary, no reason to get worked up or to beat this into the ground.

Edited February 13, 2017 by Gambit21

[Lusekofte]

 

 

Excuse me, Why? Are you part of dev team?

No but he knows what he is talking about, and he is right. But there might be something similar possible.

It has always been a wish for a dynamic war in servers, and many tries to build that into their server missions. But it is only so much that is possible.

Herr Murf answered fair and square , and respect that. I have problems with answers that say:

" no , this will prevent them to build what I want"

If you have a sincere question or request do it in the topic made for such 

[EAF_51_FOX]

So the reveal is that here in the 1C forum  there are secret agents from Dev team that have the assignment to filter the request/whish of players in this forum? Is it so?

 

Fox - we've been around a while, we know the developers.

We know their goals and we've listened to them talk over and over again about sticking to a plan.

 

We've seen them deliver over and over again by not allowing feature creep to delay release.

It's that simple - we've been down this road before.

 

That said there's always little features that surprise us that we didn't know were coming. 

We doubt destructible trees are one of those things based on our experience.

 

No bold bold emphasis necessary, no reason to get worked up or to beat this into the ground.

 

 

No but he knows what he is talking about, and he is right. But there might be something similar possible.

It has always been a wish for a dynamic war in servers, and many tries to build that into their server missions. But it is only so much that is possible.

Herr Murf answered fair and square , and respect that. I have problems with answers that say:

" no , this will prevent them to build what I want"

If you have a sincere question or request do it in the topic made for such 

Edited February 13, 2017 by EAF_51_FOX

[LukeFF]

So the reveal is that here in the 1C forum there are secret agents from Dev team that have the assignment to filter the request/whish of players in this forum? Is it so?

Do you really not think that people from the team would read the forums to see what people want or don't want?

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

Shhhhhh, it is all just a great conspiracy to deny people what they so desperately want in their deepest of hearts..........................................

[Lusekofte]

Wow, I have to learn not to type........

[Gambit21]

So the reveal is that here in the 1C forum there are secret agents from Dev team that have the assignment to filter the request/whish of players in this forum? Is it so?

Google "non-sequitur"

[Danziger]

Just another troll from DCS?

[EAF_51_FOX]

Just another troll from DCS?

No, be shure, look at my number of posts here before joke. thank you.

[EAF_51_FOX]

Do you really not think that people from the team would read the forums to see what people want or don't want?

It seem really not. There is clearly that many people here just talk in substitution of team guys." this can be done, this not .. this may be..this will request too many efforts by 1C developers..this feature is not prioritarie..." all this answers from guys here that seem to me NOT part of 1c company  nor of dev team of BOX, read all the topic and you'll take an idea about this.

Edited February 13, 2017 by EAF_51_FOX

[curiousGamblerr]

FOX, three different threads you've used this argument. Someone disagrees with you, you say "are you a mod? are a you a dev? no? then your opinion doesn't matter." 

 

All we're saying is, after spending some time with this game and this (fantastic) dev team, what you're looking for is unlikely to come along. We're not secret spies, we're just reasonable people with some experience with this game and/or software development and understand the limitations of this team's time and the engine on which they develop. In light of this experience, we would prefer other things to be prioritized.

 

It's perfectly okay that we disagree on what should be prioritized, because as you keep reminding us, none of us are on the dev team, so maybe they say "Hey, this FOX guy has great ideas! Let's put off carrier ops in the open ocean for a few months and develop a tree DM instead!" Wouldn't that be an interesting turn of events...

[Fliegel]

Yesterday I had to land on a field.

When I looked back, I found that there is long line, as my plane slide over the ground, where grass have been removed.

Couldn't be trees removed in the same way after a bomb explosion?

[Scojo]

I do not exclude myself from the forum guru. But I stopped argument against other wishes quite a while back. By doing the developers work I mean those not expressing their opinion but only say no to a suggestion and use developers resources as a reason for it. Like the developers need a nanny. 

That is not expressing a opinion, that is in my book obstruct a fellow community member his right to get a opinion.

I'm sorry but this is extremely silly....

 

Every operation has limits, whether it's 1C or a big name game studio like Blizzard.

 

No matter how much resources they have at their disposal, I want them to work on many more things first than destructible trees or more realistic tree models.

 

Just because it goes against your opinion on the matter doesn't mean that we're saying you can't have an opinion.

 

You're in every way free to say you want destructible trees and explain why you think that as I am free to say no we don't need it, or at least don't need it right now.

[Lusekofte]

 

 

I'm sorry but this is extremely silly....   Every operation has limits, whether it's 1C or a big name game studio like Blizzard.   No matter how much resources they have at their disposal, I want them to work on many more things first than destructible trees or more realistic tree models.

 

Silly ?

So you can have a opinion and not me. Who is really being silly? 

[DD_Arthur]

Yesterday I had to land on a field.

When I looked back, I found that there is long line, as my plane slide over the ground, where grass have been removed.

Couldn't be trees removed in the same way after a bomb explosion?

 

Quite possibly but it would require some coding work.  What people have been trying to point out is that given the schedule the devs are working to it is unlikely to happen anytime soon.

 

The best place to ask about this sort of thing is in the "Questions for developers" thread.  You will get an answer from Han eventually.

Edited February 14, 2017 by DD_Arthur

[Scojo]

Silly ?

So you can have a opinion and not me. Who is really being silly? 

NO ONE EVER SAID YOU CAN'T HAVE AN OPINION!

 

JUST BECAUSE WE STATE OUR OPINION DOES NOT MEAN WE ARE SAYING YOU CANT HAVE AN OPINION!

 

It's like you're not actually reading my posts

[EAF_51_FOX]

FOX, three different threads you've used this argument. Someone disagrees with you, you say "are you a mod? are a you a dev? no? then your opinion doesn't matter." 

 

All we're saying is, after spending some time with this game and this (fantastic) dev team, what you're looking for is unlikely to come along. We're not secret spies, we're just reasonable people with some experience with this game and/or software development and understand the limitations of this team's time and the engine on which they develop. In light of this experience, we would prefer other things to be prioritized.

 

It's perfectly okay that we disagree on what should be prioritized, because as you keep reminding us, none of us are on the dev team, so maybe they say "Hey, this FOX guy has great ideas! Let's put off carrier ops in the open ocean for a few months and develop a tree DM instead!" Wouldn't that be an interesting turn of events...

 

Dear curios,

I've never talk that other people opinion doesn't matter, in fact is just the opposite: may be you have not understand well what I wrote in my above posts, read better another time if you want give here a resonable reply.

And just to clarify, I'm not a all-cost-substainer of destructable trees or other new features I or other gamers whish see introduced in this game: I just start to point to everyone here in forum (like you) that whithout beeing a 1C team mate or developer take the arrogance like you to say "yes" or "no" or "may be in future" about suggestions or whishes to implement this game. And there is not any resonable reason or "light of experience" of you in respect to me to say that: you like me are simply a gamer of this game, your words: "I'm a more experienced gamer than you and I'm guru software that know limits of the engine of this game..so I prefer other things to be priorized.." .

So may be better you turn on your "light of experience" into the right respect about other people (that you even don't know if their experience in software development or understand of game limitation may be way superior compared to your one). Regards.

Edited February 14, 2017 by EAF_51_FOX

[DD_Arthur]

You really like using this word "arrogant" don't you Fox?   Since English is not you're first language - but nevertheless very good   - perhaps it might be better to substitute another word for what you are trying to get across.

 

In all honesty the only posts in this thread that come across as arrogant are your own.  I'm pretty sure thats not what you are trying to be but............