Jump to content
J5_Baeumer

Dev Diary Dissent

Recommended Posts

47 minutes ago, messsucher said:

 

Sorry, no. RNG is the best way to simulate damage in simplified combat flight sims. There is a ton of variables you can't simulate, like wind, recoil bumbs of your weapons, exact angles of hits, to name a few. RNG takes care of those, like it does in real life, and that's why some planes exploded and some just begun to smoke. It can be a matter of 1 cm difference in flight path of a bullet what happen, and no pilot can make such "skill shots".  You get that lucky head shot or explosion shot or you don't get them, but it is lucky shot, RNG, not skill in in flight sims. The more you make hits the better your chances are for the lucky shot, just like in real life, and if you make enough hits the plane is ruined, just like in real life.

Sorry but the current state of RNG is 1 hit is enough all the time.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, JG1_Butzzell said:

Sorry but the current state of RNG is 1 hit is enough all the time.

 

Ah, ok, that is very bad then 😄

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, US63_SpadLivesMatter said:

 

Oh come on, the futility and hopelessness of spitedly downvoting the dev diaries doesn't remind you of it, just a little?

Yes it does and my reply was an attempt at humor. Figured what's the point of all this, They know the problem and just don't care. 

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, let's do this one more time.

 

  • Control surfaces getting jammed into position doesn't make much sense and is likely carried over from WWII. All the other DM changes I can live with.
     
  • FC is one of the greatest VR experiences on the market today, even compared to other IL-2 modules. It's sadly too niche and expensive for someone with no prior RoF/WWI experience.
     
  • I would pay $20 for a Hanriot HD.1 collector plane. I kid, I kid. I would pay $200 for a Hanriot HD.1, but I do expect everyone else to pay $20 for it. You likely won't.
     
  • Volume 2... eh. We live in strange times. I wouldn't be surprised to see an announcement at the end of this year. Or next year. Or never.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, NO.20_W_M_Thomson said:

I'd pay $200 for a snipe. 

 

800px-Gallinago_stenura_-_Laem_Pak_Bia.j

 

Here's one in ground-attack mode. 

  • Haha 3
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, ST_Catchov said:

Someone said they'd pay $200 for a snip.

I wouldn't pay a dime for a snip, but a snipe I'd pay $200. I heard you get a hanriot with every full tank of fuel. 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, NO.20_W_M_Thomson said:

I heard you get a hanriot with every full tank of fuel. 

 

Now that's a bargain I'd find hard to resist. But resist I shall. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, NO.20_Krispy_Duck said:

Anyone else want to drag race that AA truck with a wingless SE5a fuselage?

 

I'll bet you a copy of FC2 that my wingless Albatross DVa will beat your wingless SE5a in the 1/4 mile.   Ooops, now this thread will be riddled with minutia concerning engine variants.   Sorry for getting us off topic.

  • Haha 3
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And prop pitch. ;) I wonder how that Shuttleworth thing's going?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, ST_Catchov said:

And prop pitch. ;) I wonder how that Shuttleworth thing's going?

I’ve not heard from them for a few weeks. I’m loathe to bother them again given the current situation and impending 2nd wave lockdown. Given the size of their estate and fleet I would imagine they’re highly dependent on income from large events which have been decimated this year. I’m hoping they’ll weather the storm. Fingers crossed

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, J5_HellCat_ said:

fc2.jpg

 

What is the source from this message, Facebook/youtube????  Sounds btw, good for the FC fans. 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would love FC vol 2.  That is why I bought FC vol 1.

 

Unless they fix the DM no use in buying more planes that don't work.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Dutch2 said:

 

What is the source from this message, Facebook/youtube????  Sounds btw, good for the FC fans. 

 

Facebook/

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't do facebook but whoever he is, he's talking up FC/FC2. Yet in the forums .... nothing, silence, no response. What is this? Why would this dude respond on FB yet ignore the forum? Is it Fakebook?

Edited by ST_Catchov

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, ST_Catchov said:

I don't do facebook but whoever he is, he's talking up FC/FC2. Yet in the forums .... nothing, silence, no response. What is this? Why would this dude respond on FB yet ignore the forum? Is it Fakebook?

 

It's 2020, social media presence is far more important than policing a 1990's echo chamber. It's also where a company reaches most people who are not yet customers and where you are most easily embarrassed by your existing customers. Blaming lack of FC content on other new content is silly. Jason has already said countless times that he wants FC2, in spite of pushback from 1C and poor FC1 sales.

 

Now if you could convince a popular Twitch streamer to stop playing Among Us for 5 minutes and showcase FC, then also have it magically run on a potato-grade laptop without any peripherals, costing $20 rather than $80 and somehow make WWI flightsims popular again, you'll get new customers. For now, we'll just have to wait.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, J5_Hellbender said:

Jason has already said countless times that he wants FC2, in spite of pushback from 1C and poor FC1 sales.

 

He has? Jolly good for facebookers.

 

This is what we get. The last known public comment on FC that I know of. Not overly encouraging. Pity he doesn't spread the love a bit. Not hard.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, J5_Hellbender said:

Now if you could convince a popular Twitch streamer to stop playing Among Us for 5 minutes and showcase FC,

Who would that be, There's so many sim streamers out and about now. And I thought youtube was the more popular streaming app. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we just have to be patient for a pivot back to FC in the future. Personally I doubt any resources will be allocated while BoN is in development. It's funny because I feel like FC is so ripe to just take the entire RoF folks over...If money is there concern I'm pretty confident a few new planes (FC Vol. 2) and a pivot back to actively developing the module would ensure a whole new generation of IL-2 folks.

That being said I'm really pleased with the WW2 modules. Again, I think we just have to stay patient :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/27/2020 at 10:48 PM, JG1_Butzzell said:

Would love FC vol 2.  That is why I bought FC vol 1.

 

Unless they fix the DM no use in buying more planes that don't work.

 

This,  exactly. 

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think anytime you develop WW1 and WW2 titles/modules alongside one another, you run into the issue that WW2 generally has more potential revenue, more data points from which to develop, more coverage in the reviews/media, etc. Then if you layer on top of that use of a common engine, common damage components, etc., you have the WW2 side of the equation driving things as the primary. Where the planes have general similarities, or the physics are similar, that can be OK. But where they are dissimilar (e.g., materials, components, performance, etc.) you can have issues.

 

The history of WW1 flight sims going back about 30 years is that for WW1, the "big sims" have been WW1-centric efforts that may or may not have been lucrative for the developers (Red Baron series, OFF/WOFF, RoF, etc.). Some of the games grew up on their own, and some started with a WW2 engine (like WOFF/CFS3), but were themselves WW1-centric top to bottom. But where the WW1 component is just a small appendix to the main WW2 side of things, the WW2 ends up being the main driver of development and the main focus. I kind of see it as a fact of life - not that it makes me happy - but that it is what it is.

Edited by NO.20_Krispy_Duck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, NO.20_Krispy_Duck said:

I think anytime you develop WW1 and WW2 titles/modules alongside one another, you run into the issue that WW2 generally has more potential revenue, more data points from which to develop, more coverage in the reviews/media, etc. 

You say that like this has happened before, I cant think of any ww1 flying module developed alongside a ww2 one in software history beside this one. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WW1 for CFS2 comes to mind. A small team tried to use Targetware to develop Richthofen's Skies as well, but that fizzled. But FC certainly is a larger scale and more extensive attempt to append WW1 onto a WW2 project. I just suspect they are dissimilar to the extent that a standalone like RoF is more flexible for addressing the WW1 setting.

Edited by NO.20_Krispy_Duck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, NO.20_Krispy_Duck said:

WW1 for CFS2 comes to mind. A small team tried to use Targetware to develop Richthofen's Skies as well, but that fizzled. But FC certainly is a larger scale and more extensive attempt to append WW1 onto a WW2 project. I just suspect they are dissimilar to the extent that a standalone like RoF is more flexible for addressing the WW1 setting.

I remember that Krispy didnt last long.....

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/30/2020 at 3:38 AM, US63_SpadLivesMatter said:

The only pivot you'll see after BoN is finished is a pivot to the next WW2 title.

 

All this talk. Yeah it's fun to vent and debate and score points. But there's no point at all. Whether you like it or not, it's over. Finished. Kaput.

 

SLM is right.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its a shame.  I wish there had been just one classic British observation plane in the package, so that the German aircraft had a reason to exist.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not a shame at all.  Hopefully this means that more resources can be put into Tank Crew 2.  We need the Stug3.  We need the Firefly.  We need the T-34/85.  

29 minutes ago, Feathered_IV said:

Its a shame.  I wish there had been just one classic British observation plane in the package, so that the German aircraft had a reason to exist.  


If FC is dead hopefully they’ll give you a supply truck that you can drive around in TC2.

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, BraveSirRobin said:

Not a shame at all.  Hopefully this means that more resources can be put into Tank Crew 2.  We need the Stug3.  We need the Firefly.  We need the T-34/85.  


 

You say that like TC has been a big success, player base looks just as bad to me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Tycoon said:

You say that like TC has been a big success, player base looks just as bad to me.

 

I didn't actually say anything of the sort.  But they've certainly done a lot less whining about being "ignored".  And since Catchov has declared the FC situation hopeless, I'm just trying to point out the bright side of that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, BraveSirRobin said:

 

I didn't actually say anything of the sort.  But they've certainly done a lot less whining about being "ignored".  And since Catchov has declared the FC situation hopeless, I'm just trying to point out the bright side of that.

Because they don't get ignored...

 

These are just from the last to patches:

 

Quote

Player controllable tanks improvements
15. New control mode allows aiming a tank gun using a joystick (or buttons);
16. Aiming the tank guns and machine guns with the mouse is more convenient;
17. Fixed cameras added to tank visors and other observation devices. Loader viewing devices are, most often, can be used from the gunner's station. You can cycle the views using LShift + V keys;
18. The target marking cursor when giving orders as a tank commander is visible at any settings;
19. The current sight or observation device is indicated;
20. In multiplayer, a connected player in someone else's tank will correctly see the messages from the loader and see the ammo information in the HUD;
21. The time required for repairing the tank systems outside the service areas is doubled;
22. The projectiles correctly penetrate the armor if they hit certain extremely thin areas of the object's surface (a rare issue);
23. Ferdinand: the inverted direction of inclination of the panoramic viewing devices has been fixed;
24. An SPG AI gunner correctly fires at an invisible target by the order of the SPG commander (using the direction and range);
25. Fixed the issue where the AI gunner did not follow the commander's instructions to choose the ammo type in certain situations;
26. Pz-III-M: the KFF 2 binocular periscope is functional (when using the camera selected by LShift + V);
27. SU-152 commander can't use the panoramic sight when unbuttoned;

 

Quote

Player controllable tanks improvements

19. IMPORTANT: all player-controllable tanks have detailed descriptions of their equipment, general control and functionality recommendations and individual lists of input commands accessible from the in-game Esc menu;
20. All the player-controlled tanks have animated and audible MG and main gun traveling locks;
21. Important information on sighting and radio communication equipment has been added to all tank help screens;
22. The powered turret traversing drives (where available) are automatically switched to manual mode at low turn speed for precise aiming and from manual to the powered mode drive for turning the turret fast;
23. Pz.III Ausf.M, Pz.IV Ausf.G, Pz.V Ausf.D, Pz.VI Ausf.H1 and M4A2 have functioning gyrocompass course director (controlled by the LShift + Z / LShift + X keys);
24. DT machineguns (T-34-76UVZ-194 and KV-1s) and M2 .50 AA machineguns (M4A2) iron sights can be adjusted for range (RAlt + Semicolon / RAlt + Period keys);
25. All tank radios have audible umformers (electro-mechanical converters) sounds;
26. Pz.III Ausf.M, Pz.IV Ausf.G, Pz.V Ausf.D, Pz.VI Ausf.H1 have audible gyrocompass sounds;
27. SU-152 and KV-1s: the control levers are locked in the parking position by the corresponding buttons;
28. Enabling and disabling a parking brake is reflected in the technochat;
29. To view a correct fuel reading on the KV-1s and Pz.III Ausf.M tanks, it is necessary to pump the fuel gauge first using the F key;
30. KV-1s: it’s possible to switch the fuel gauge indication between the different tanks with the LShift + F key;
31. M4A2: it’s possible to switch the fuel gauge to display the oil level as well as switch between the different tanks with the LShift + F key;
32. You can raise and lower the M4A2 commander visor;
33. M4A2 engine clutch lock buttons are correctly animated in case of a clutch failure;
34. You can use the loader visor when playing as the gunner on M4A2;
35. M4A2 AA machinegun can be shot off;
36. SU-152, Sd.Kfz.184, Pz.III Ausf.M and Pz.IV have functioning gun recoil indicators;
37. Pz.V Ausf.D ready to fire signal lamp has been corrected;
38. Pz.V Ausf.D gun mantlet armor has been corrected (its upper and low parts became more detailed);
39. All crew members who did not have access to tank intercom equipment are correctly displayed without headphones and microphones;
40. MGs and main guns won’t move a little in a stowed position;
41. The German tank commander model as been corrected (he is easier to hit in the unbuttoned position).
42. The crew models won’t appear and disappear when the camera moves in the cockpit (except the no-restrictions mode in VR);
43. The lateral aiming correction marks were corrected on German tanks;
44. It’s no longer possible to control tank weapons from certain crew stations that did not have access to them;
45. The ‘no ammo left’ message shouldn’t be repeated many times anymore;
46. AI-controlled SPGs turn to face the target when ordered to engage it;
47. The ‘fuel system repaired’ message shouldn’t be repeated many times anymore;
48. The ammo counter correctly displays the remaining rounds when certain ammo load-outs are selected;

 

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Tycoon said:

You say that like TC has been a big success, player base looks just as bad to me.

Spend most of my time killing AI in TC.  Hope both FC2 and TC2 get green lit.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...