Jump to content

I know devs are busy...


TheAngryGamer
 Share

Recommended Posts

TheAngryGamer

But, I seriously don't see why one or two can't be tasked with addressing what a large part of the player base says are "broken" aspects of the game. The 50's for example. Simply fixing the velocities of the rounds and the simple fixes one talented coder has already done the work on. Yeah, don't make them act like cannons because that's completely unrealistic in the opposite direction. The engine on the P40. It couldn't have possibly been so fragile or they would have fallen out of the air before the enemy had a chance to shoot it.

 

And the survivability of the 109 after being completely hosed down with shells. They often act like they were never hit. I have seen many german flyers completely ignore the plane shooting them from behind because they know the ammo will just tickle the plane from the 6 position. 

 

We players in general have paid good money and I think in large we appreciate a lot of the new content coming. And I do realize the devs may he a but buried with current circumstances.  But I don't think a couple dev's addressing the current problems would really kill anyone. What is doing harm is the stubborn, arrogant attitude towards the players concerns they feel they are getting. I have noticed a huge drop in online players. And I can't imagine they've all gone to single player as the AI can barely fly a plane. 

 

And the AI, omg. I flew a quick mission in a 109 against the AI in a 51. Set to 3 respawns. Ai set to face I believe. Whatever is the highest. All 3 drilled into the ground before I could even 6 them. It was ridiculous.  

 

I am not trying to bust anyone balls. I am not trying to start an argument among players that's been going on for 6 months to a year. I am singularly addressing the dev's with a very simple request to have a couple address the issues after they are completed with their current task instead of moving on to another release that possibly could wait just a little.

 

I myself am really excited for the P51 b and c. But I would willingly wait just to get some of the old issues resolved. 

Just to expand,  I have been a member of multiple squads that came completely inactive on IL2 because the enjoyed the other sim more. I personally don't.  But I am also tired of searching for new people to fly with because everyone gravitates to DCS. 

 

And with talk of the changes coming to DCS, I am hearing more and more people preferring it over IL2.

  • Haha 4
  • Upvote 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eisenfaustus
40 minutes ago, TheAngryGamer said:

And the AI, omg. I flew a quick mission in a 109 against the AI in a 51. Set to 3 respawns. Ai set to face I believe. Whatever is the highest. All 3 drilled into the ground before I could even 6 them. It was ridiculous.

Entirely not my experience with current AI - can’t imagine why that would happen to you. 

 

41 minutes ago, TheAngryGamer said:

And I can't imagine they've all gone to single player as the AI can barely fly a plane. 

It is regularly stated on this forum that the vast majority mainly plays SP. I‘m certainly among them. 
 

And what you state as broken (.50‘s and P40 engine) seems to be quite debated by the community - many seem to like the current setup. 
 

What seems to be agreeable by most is we need incendiary ammo simulated at some point and engine timers in general should be a separate difficulty option. 
 

But I think neither of us can judge how much work this would be and how Jason’s resources are spent to best effect as we lack the necessary knowledge. 

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BCI-Nazgul
1 hour ago, Eisenfaustus said:

What seems to be agreeable by most is we need incendiary ammo simulated at some point...

There is no guarantee at all that that would solve the .50 (AP) issue.   There is much more going on with the various weapon implementations than a single fix is going to solve.  All AP ammo is a problem right now and many think the HE ammo has problems as well.

Edited by BCI-Nazgul
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Eisenfaustus
20 minutes ago, BCI-Nazgul said:

and many think the HE ammo has problems as well.

That is what I meant - the problems with the different projectiles are nothing everyone agrees upon. And I think even for the devs it is hard to determine wether something is the opinion of the majority of the player base or if it is stated by a loud minority. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TheAngryGamer

Why do they view every question about their work as a complaint? If I was complaining it probably won't have been as mild as I tried to keep it due to trying to be respectful

The aim better is completely expected but also the stupidest freaking reply I can imagine.   Last night I went up on the finished server in a Bf109.  I easily took down 2 spitfires in the 1st 10 to 15 minute.  After that with no work at all I was able to down a Russian IL2 with ease. And I doubt the plane made me a better pilot with better gunnery skills. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BraveSirRobin
13 minutes ago, TheAngryGamer said:

Why do they view every question about their work as a complaint? If I was complaining it probably won't have been as mild as I tried to keep it due to trying to be respectful

 

1.  They don't.  The person who responded "aim better"  isn't a developer.

 

2.  Calling the developer arrogant probably isn't as respectful as you think it is.

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

TheAngryGamer
30 minutes ago, BraveSirRobin said:

They don't.  The person who responded "aim better"  isn't a developer

I was referring to the fact that it was moved to complaints when I was suggesting task a minimal amount of resources to addressing the issues. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Enceladus

Also, the long-lingering parachute bug where the pilot instantly dies when touching water, no matter how close he is to shore, is something that greatly needs to be fixed. Wasn't really an issue before the Kuban map was released, but even after BoK and patches released afterwards like 3.002 - 3.006, this bug still lingered. Now that the devs are doing the Normandy map which includes the English Channel, it makes sense what they'll fix this bug during BoN development.

 

For the record, it was this bug, and particularly ~ a year after patch 3.006 was released that it still wasn't fixed nor addressed by the devs, that made me give up on this game (until BoN was announced) and say that if IL-2 Great Battles ended after Bodenplatte, I'd be indifferent ☹️

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TheAngryGamer
4 hours ago, Eisenfaustus said:

And what you state as broken (.50‘s and P40 engine) seems to be quite debated by the community - many seem to like the current setup. 

The only people I talk to that like the set up is the people who fly primarily German. They love it. There is an entire discord about the dm. Everyone in my squad seems to hate the way things are at the moment. As stated, 2 other allied squads I was in just pretty much quit. You can tell me different all day long, I will believe what I see before what you say 7 days a week. 

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

BraveSirRobin
22 minutes ago, TheAngryGamer said:

I was referring to the fact that it was moved to complaints when I was suggesting task a minimal amount of resources to addressing the issues. 

 

Well, you're complaining about their priorities. That's why it was moved to complaints.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

TheAngryGamer

Actually, I really wasn't. I seriously don't know if people need a dictionary, glasses, or what. But nobody seems to be able to accurately comprehend what they read any more.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1CGS
Jason_Williams

I love when someone with the handle TheAngryGamer tries to say he's not complaining. LOL

 

Jason

  • Like 3
  • Haha 11
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

gimpy117

this thread is a rant sure, and his name might be ironic, but he does have some legitimate concerns, some that I obviously share. 

 

I certainly think that the current engine timers on the P40 are far to conservative, compared to historical combat data that the engine MFGR.  reported. Me as an A&P mechanic seems to latch onto this data, because, from a regulatory standpoint the equipment manufacturer is one of the primary sources for an engine -if they say an engine can do something it's pretty much gospel. and they cleared that engine for higher power outputs. 

 

detractions from this fact are often "well it wouldn't be fair to have the P40 having almost 1500HP" and I feel that's a red herring. The P40 is a pretty heavy wallowing pig in it's current state. allowing a little more out of it's power plant would put it in a better position against some earlier German aircraft, but would not make it a world beater. The other smoke screen i've heard is "bad Russian gas". If we wave out hands and claim this is the reason, they we would open a huge can of worms on late German aircraft.   

 

as to the .50 problem, I also agree that something is clearly wrong. Mostly, I think it's the Gap towards HE rounds performing at their absolute apex (or possibly far beyond in some cases) and AP ammo being on the lower side of Historic. It really makes a weapon system be more of an RNG situation (where you have to hope you hit that critical system) vs. a "one and done" 20mm cannon round you can just lob in anywhere. 

 

I think some of this could be handled by the community, on a submission basis. the Devs could only pick what they feel is appropriate on a "no guarantees" basis. maybe nobody can put out a "fix" that feels correct, but It won't hurt to let the community have a go IMO  

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

VBF-12_Snake9

I'm not angry, just kind of sad.  Its been really long with the 50s being sub par  Most my squad stopped flying and I took a break too.  I did not purchase BON and don't plan on buying anything until the 50s are looked at.  

I know, I'm just one player, part of one squad and it don't mean sh@@.  

Just my feelings.  🙂

  • Upvote 5
Link to comment
Share on other sites

DD_Arthur

All these things become utterly insignificant when you watch the women’s beach volleyball 😍

 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1CGS
Jason_Williams
51 minutes ago, VBF-12_Snake9 said:

I'm not angry, just kind of sad.  Its been really long with the 50s being sub par  Most my squad stopped flying and I took a break too.  I did not purchase BON and don't plan on buying anything until the 50s are looked at.  

I know, I'm just one player, part of one squad and it don't mean sh@@.  

Just my feelings.  🙂

 

If you don't like our .50s go play with the mod someone made for them. No one is stopping you from that while you wait for us to find the time to yet again change weapons performance. 

 

Jason

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

VBF-12_KW
Just now, Jason_Williams said:

 

If you don't like our .50s go play with the mod someone made for them. No one is stopping you from that while you wait for us to find the time to yet again change weapons performance. 

 

Jason


Which sadly isn’t an option in multiplayer, without enabling any potential mod a player might have.  The ability to “whitelist” specific mods on a server would at least make this a feasible near-term workaround.  
 

I understand that the past year hit you guys hard, and I want to keep supporting IL-2, because it’s got a lot of great content and features.  But after watching multiple squads give up on this game it’s getting harder and harder to stick with it.   I had $60 to burn this summer on flight sim stuff, and ended up spending it on a competitor instead of the latest collector planes, which I would never have even considered a year ago.  But that same competitor who shall not be named just announced they are going to implement API belts.  🤷‍♂️

 

People aren’t posting on here and repeatedly bugging you guys about this stuff because they dislike you or your product or to cause trouble.  They’re posting because it’s an issue that is killing their enjoyment, and they want to continue to be your customers.

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 3
  • Upvote 7
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Barnacles
6 hours ago, Eisenfaustus said:

That is what I meant - the problems with the different projectiles are nothing everyone agrees upon. And I think even for the devs it is hard to determine wether something is the opinion of the majority of the player base or if it is stated by a loud minority. 

IDK, he specifically referred to Yak Panther's mod, which literally just puts historical referenced information (penetration, muzzle velocity) into the game files. 

 

Are you really suggesting a significant proportion of players would rather the game didn't use the historical values for those attributes? 

 

As for the workload, you're quite right, it's the project manager's decision. But it would seem quite an easy win imo. 

6 hours ago, QB.Creep said:

Have you guys tried DCS?

Yeah it's almost as good as star citizen. 

  • Confused 2
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Jason_Williams said:

 

If you don't like our .50s go play with the mod someone made for them. No one is stopping you from that while you wait for us to find the time to yet again change weapons performance. 

 

Jason

I would love to but it's not an option in multiplayer as mods are all or nothing. It makes sense from a cheat prevention point of view. So I have to accept the lesser of two evils there.

 

If you haven't had a chance to try Yaks suggestion/mod, I would urge you to do so if you ever have a moment, it felt just minty. It really gave the Allied birds some teeth but didn't feel ridiculous.

 

Hope you are enjoying your vacation!

Edited by Denum
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

TheAngryGamer
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Jason_Williams said:

 

If you don't like our .50s go play with the mod someone made for them. No one is stopping you from that while you wait for us to find the time to yet again change weapons performance. 

 

Jason

 Here's the way I see it. It wouldn't have to be changed yet again if it had been gotten correct the 1st time . If I have to redo something at work because I screwed it up I don't think I would get butt hurt about it because I screwed it up.And I definitely would never get away with more or less telling my customers to go fly a kite. Maybe everybody should just throw their support behind team fusion or eagle dynamics instead. I don't know about eagle dynamics attitude but team fusion seems to have a pretty good one.

4 hours ago, Jason_Williams said:

I love when someone with the handle TheAngryGamer tries to say he's not complaining. LOL

 

Jason

Again, someone with a weak grasp on the english language. Keep laughing jason while so damn many people are laughing at you. If only you knew how low you are regarded in my circles. 

Edited by TheAngryGamer
Link to comment
Share on other sites

-332FG-drewm3i-VR

I too am sad about the state of the sim/game currently because there it is a double-edged sword where there are so many things to like/love, but also many things that literally break the gameplay, especially only when human pilots learn to game the game to get kills in was that are both historically unrealistic and impossible in real life.

 

Here is but one example: 

 

 

And yet, there are also so many things done right in IL2 that it doesn't make me want to give up on it like mostly good flight models minus some bugs (typhoon pitch/ roll coupling, UFO tempest, etc.) and far too generous low speed handling (it is very hard to stall in il2 even under 100 mph in most planes), beautiful cockpits and 3d plane models, textured ground surfaces, adequate clouds, a great and accessible gui, a very good multiplayer menu and environment, tons of ww2 and ww1 planes, tanks all under one roof, easy to set up controls, ai that uses the same g-force model and flight model that can now kick your ass if you dont pay attention, etc.

 

But there are also so many glaring issues like the damage model which has many issues in itself such as:

as:

 

-AP M2 .50s with improper velocity, mass, and convergence (point convergence instead of box convergence which means it is fast or famine, which effects all allied planes primarily due to wing mounted guns).

 

-HE rounds that have an absurd blast radius and amount of shrapnel damage (they are currently like grenades) which results in one hit and a crippled plane that can barely stay in the air.

 

-Lack of API rounds, which were very effective at shredding planes structurally, destroying systems like control cables, hydraulics, etc. (which are not modeled in il2 which exacerbates the .50 issue), and causing some aerodynamic skin damage.

 

-Then there are also some bugs like the 190 horizontal stabilizer which can be blown half off with the plane retaining its ability to control itself and fight.

 

-Similarly, fire damage does not kill the pilot quick enough according to accounts where cockpits could instantly reach even temperatures in a matter of seconds...online pilots on fire sometimes keep fighting for a few minutes which is far too long.

 

-Engines can run (109) as if undamaged when streaming coolant and never seize even in combat mode for 10-25 minutes...this is unlike clod, dcs, etc.

 

-Another glaring issue is the ground handling where the 109 for example is easy to land (landing gear was prone to collapsing IRL), whereas the spitfire can almost not land without ground looping due to weak brakes.

 

Also engine timers which absolutely cripple my beloved p-40, which was a good fighter in 1941 with good firepower, handling, and speed at low altitude because it ran upwards of 60 inches (sometimes over 70" as in NA per the Allison memo) and over 3000 rpms. The Allison was a very durable engine. In game it is made of glass. This also effects the p39. In game, Hurricanes cover p-40s, in real life p-40s covered hurricanes in NA because the p-40 was FAR superior in every way minus sustained turn. We really need to move to a heat based engine model like DCS or CLoD. Timers should only matter for planes with water/methanol injection, or perhaps planes with known problematic engines like the k4.

 

There are also other gamey aspects that ruin immersion like the star wars tracers and lights that are visible from like 5 miles away. Online these are exploited which leads to airquake, instead of air combat.

 

Furthermore, the game engine is also aging and so limited. I just spent $2.5k on a PC (ryzen 5600x@4.85ghz, 32 gb 3800mhz, rtx 3080, 1 tb ssd) upgrade and I still have time dilation and slow downs in heavy scenarios (vr) offline because the ai uses far too many cpu resources for one core, while not properly loading others. These leads to small engagements with a few dozen units, unlike dcs or clod where campaigns have 100 regularly which is very cool. The game really needs to move to DX12 or Vulkan to improve multithreading and vr performance in particular. Also, the lack of real heavy bombers (like the b17 and b24) an ai radio command system that works and is interactive and intuitive (I would settle for something like what 1946 had) really puts me off single player. Online (on Finnish in particular), there are lots of odd bugs and stuttering due to the huge frontline with lots of units and older netcode which does not seem to support huge online battles.

 

The graphics engine is also showing its age, particularly in the terrain where it really does not look much better than RoF. The tree render distance and fire effects are really poor for 2021 for example (compared to DCS or even CLoD). Also, the Rheinland map for me is a huge disappointment because it is so desolate and is nothing like Western Europe (no farmhouses, livestock, windmills, fences, few roads, few trains, no birds or civilian traffic, no landmarks outside of the cities, no coal mines, etc.). Even with the modded textures and river color that the developers should totally patch into the base game, the landscape is so sterile and lifeless after flying over the Channel Map in DCS (which I only bought into out of frustration with the state of IL2 GB). The IL2 Rheinland is such a downgrade from Kuban and Stalingrad it is not even funny. Performance is not an excuse for the map as the map looks like it is from 2010 (really even CLoD's map that came out in 2011 is miles better). The sounds (especially flyby), color palette, clouds (need more layering) and lighting are also sorely in need of updates to keep up with the bar being set by DCS. Do not get me started on the 2d dancing trees and grass which were fine in 2014, but in vr in 2021 are really noticeable.

 

I wish the developers would use the passion of the modding community to their advantage to improve the maps like they have with other things in the past (4k cockpits for instance): there are great texture mods and retextures for all the maps that would really improve the look of the terrain. I use these offline, but cannot online which is a pity. There is also an upcoming prop texture mod, there are other mods for clouds, vr banding and aliasing fixes, etc. that should be vetted and integrated into the base game. Of course there are also dispersion and ballistics data fixes for the m.2 without using HE rounds that could be patched in as a temporary hotfix. We have so much passion for this game and want it to succeed, not just now, but into the future! The reason people get on here and whine is they care...us ww2 air combat do not have many options these days and every option is flawed which is okay in so far as feedback (especially that with data) is heard and implemented if found to be accurate. We ask for progress and happily support the game and its developers as long as we feel they are working in that direction.

 

 

 

 

 

  • Upvote 9
Link to comment
Share on other sites

FTC_Q_Walker
13 minutes ago, TheAngryGamer said:

And I definitely would never get away with more or less telling my customers to go fly a kite.

Considering how many .50 topics have been endlessly opened, despite Jason saying that they don't have the time to do it, I could understand his frustration with having to deal with the endless opening of posts that have been answered. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

-332FG-drewm3i-VR
20 minutes ago, TheAngryGamer said:

 Here's the way I see it. It wouldn't have to be changed yet again if it had been gotten correct the 1st time . If I have to redo something at work because I screwed it up I don't think I would get butt hurt about it because I screwed it up.And I definitely would never get away with more or less telling my customers to go fly a kite. Maybe everybody should just throw their support behind team fusion or eagle dynamics instead. I don't know about eagle dynamics attitude but team fusion seems to have a pretty good one.

Again, someone with a weak grasp on the english language. Keep laughing jason while so damn many people are laughing at you. If only you knew how low you are regarded in my circles. 

I understand your frustration, but please let's not get personal... @Jason_Williams

Is by all intents and purposes a good guy who cares deeply about this sim (like us) and wants it to succeed both in terms of popular acclaim and sales. I understand his position too because he feels that the product that he and his team pour their heart into is being unfairly attacked. The dvrs likely don't sit around and play IL2 every day online like we do, so they probably do not recognize its flaws and shortcomings as readily as we do.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

III/JG52_Otto_-I-

 

11 hours ago, TheAngryGamer said:

But, I seriously don't see why one or two can't be tasked with addressing what a large part of the player base says are "broken" aspects of the game. The 50's for example. Simply fixing the velocities of the rounds and the simple fixes one talented coder has already done the work on. Yeah, don't make them act like cannons because that's completely unrealistic in the opposite direction. The engine on the P40. It couldn't have possibly been so fragile or they would have fallen out of the air before the enemy had a chance to shoot it.

Cal.50" pilot´s killer or Bf-109 armored glass headrest fake??, gummy 30mm HE shells, UFO´s Typhoon, Tempest, etc. , Yaks magic flaps, and all Vfo (flaps operation speed) not modelled, Bf-109 neutral trim mistaken, out-controlled crazy ground loops with wheel brakes on, pilots drowned when bail out over sea, etc
 ...there are many unfinished things in this game/simulator, but we learnt that it is not useful to winning for all in the forum.
I hope they could fix the most important bugs soon instead of deliver more unfinished content.

Edited by III/JG52_Otto_-I-
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

QB.Creep
1 hour ago, Barnacles said:

Yeah it's almost as good as star citizen. 

Hmm… I dunno about that comparison. IL2’s FM (flap abuse, unrealistic AoA, no P-factor/torque, low speed controllability), has a lot more in common with SC (jousting turrets in space!) than DCS does. DCS lacks polish but the core aspects of the sim (FM and DM) are far better than IL2 is right now. And that is more important to me. That and the fact that API is implemented and it is effective. It is such a great feeling bouncing a 109 in a 51, putting a solid burst of 50s in him, and setting him ablaze. I haven’t had that experience in IL2 for over a year and a half.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

III/JG52_Otto_-I-
1 hour ago, =AW=drewm3i-VR said:

Engines can run (109) as if undamaged when streaming coolant and never seize even in combat mode for 10-25 minutes...this is unlike clod, dcs, etc.

The radiators cut-off valves of the Bf-109F, G and K series are NOT modelled in game, but the Bf-109 pilots could closed the cut-off valve of the damaged radiator in a wing and fly only with the other good at cruise power.
By the way i think that neither airplane in game have a realistic draining times, for coolant radiators, oil radiators, fuel or oil tanks, punctured.
 

1 hour ago, =AW=drewm3i-VR said:

-Another glaring issue is the ground handling where the 109 for example is easy to land (landing gear was prone to collapsing IRL), whereas the spitfire can almost not land without ground looping due to weak brakes.

The Bf-109 landing gear was and is very strong, absorbing vertical forces typical of hard landings, because the landing gear legs are fixed in the fuselage/engine trunnion and firewall bulkhead.
The most of the accidents that landing gear of BF-109s suffer colapses occurs with strong lateral forces in crosswind landings. That don´t mean that the landing gear was weak, or prone to colapse more than other contemporaneous fighters.
By the way, unlike Bf-109,the Spitfires and P-51 were very prone to sink the nose on ground when braking, and we haven´t this modelled in game.

Edited by III/JG52_Otto_-I-
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

-332FG-drewm3i-VR
3 minutes ago, III/JG52_Otto_-I- said:

The radiators cut-off valves of the Bf-109F, G and K series are NOT modelled in game, but the Bf-109 pilots could closed the cut-off valve of the damaged radiator in a wing and fly only with the other good at cruise power.
By the way i think that neither airplane in game have a realistic draining times, for coolant radiators, oil radiators, fuel or oil tanks, punctured.
 

The Bf-109 landing gear was and is very strong, absorbing vertical forces typical of hard landings, because the landing gear legs are fixed in the fuselage/engine trunnion and firewall bulkhead.
The most of the accidents that landing gear of BF-109s suffer colapses occurs with strong lateral forces in crosswind landings. That don´t mean that the landing gear was weak, or prone to colapse more than other contemporaneous fighters.
By the way, unlike Bf-109,the Spitfires and P-51 were very prone to sink the nose on ground when braking, and we haven´t this in the game.

Good post and thank you for correcting me.

 

I would say that pilots would likely not know which radiator was damaged easily and that I wish the deficiencies of all planes ground handling/landing were more accurately modeled. I find the 109 a breeze to land to be honest, but I know it was something of a death trap at times. The spit brakes similarly need a massive strengthening as you point out. 

Edited by =AW=drewm3i-VR
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dakpilot

What a bunch of entitled rude muppets

-you know who you are, actually you probably don't realise or are not aware-

 

I write this with six very broken ribs and a fairly mangled arm waiting  to go for an opp so bare with me. 

 

How can people write what they do and not see how self entitled and rude they are being? Do they even see what is going on around them (pandemic) 

 

Sometimes I am embarrassed to be associated with many of this community 

 

Cheers, Dakpilot 

 

 

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

ST_Catchov

 

1 hour ago, Dakpilot said:

I write this with six very broken ribs and a fairly mangled arm waiting  to go for an opp so bare with me. 

 

Omg what happened man? 

 

But don't stress out. You couldn't buy this kind of entertainment. And you have more important issues to deal with. Like, real life. All the best with it.

 

I do get the feeling though that we may not see TheAngryGamer around for at least 30 days. I'm not sure why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, TheAngryGamer said:

I have noticed a huge drop in online players.

Its the middle of summer dude, people are going outside.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Luftschiff

I see absolutely nothing wrong with that video at all, you miss your shots, overshoot and the pilot, knowing you have the energy advantage to turn things around on him again if he lets you go pulls up after you and fires, he clearly has little control over where the round goes, but you have bad luck and get tagged by several 20mm shells. 


He could have chosen to try to flee, and you could have chosen to go evasive, you could have had better luck but there's absolutely nothing out of the ordinary here.

 

Edited by Luftschiff
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

JG77_Knipser
15 minutes ago, Luftschiff said:

I see absolutely nothing wrong with that video at all, you miss your shots, overshoot and the pilot, knowing you have the energy advantage to turn things around on him again if he lets you go pulls up after you and fires, he clearly has little control over where the round goes, but you have bad luck and get tagged by several 20mm shells. 
He could have chosen to try to flee, and you could have chosen to go evasive, you could have had better luck but there's absolutely nothing out of the ordinary here.

 

Totally agree, thats just another example of someone trying to blame the game for his lack of pilot skills.
Spitfire pilot doesnt hit good, Focke Wulf evades his attack without losing too much energy, spitfire overshoots with just a little higher speed than the Focke and then he maneuvers himself directly in the gunsight of the Focke which puts the nose up and gives him a few hits with 20mm mineshells from a very steep angle, and those 20s are not overmodeled, doesnt matter if those things are fired  from 50 or 500m away, if they hit, its usually over.

Edited by JG77_Knipser
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

TheAngryGamer
Posted (edited)

You know, I should have known this would happen. I posted this in suggestions. Suggesting what I thought seemed like a reasonable way to get things fixed that I hear a ton of people saying is wrong with the game. Followed by reasons why. Specifically for the devs. Then it gets moved to complaints. Then everyone starts jumping on. Then Jason caps off and starts with pointless personal quips. Real professional by the way. This is why I don't like people. A simple suggestion spirals into a stupid, pointless argument mainly because people JUST CAN'T READ. You know, leave the damn game busted. Run it into the ground. I will just fly DCS and pay the money there I would have paid here. And when Team Fusion fixes the shit show that was left behind by 1C, I may support them. But this clown show,. I don't want to support any longer. 

Edited by TheAngryGamer
Typos
Link to comment
Share on other sites

AEthelraedUnraed
30 minutes ago, TheAngryGamer said:

I posted this in suggestions. [...] Then it gets moved to complaints. [...] pointless personal quips.

Ahem (put in a spoiler for readability)...

Spoiler
19 hours ago, TheAngryGamer said:

"broken" aspects of the game. [...]  stubborn, arrogant attitude towards the players [...] It was ridiculous.

So far for this being a suggestion rather than a complaint....

 

13 hours ago, TheAngryGamer said:

I seriously don't know if people need a dictionary, glasses, or what. But nobody seems to be able to accurately comprehend what they read any more.

 

15 hours ago, TheAngryGamer said:

stupidest freaking reply I can imagine.

 

8 hours ago, TheAngryGamer said:

Again, someone with a weak grasp on the english language. Keep laughing jason while so damn many people are laughing at you. If only you knew how low you are regarded in my circles. 

 

30 minutes ago, TheAngryGamer said:

people JUST CAN'T READ.

...and so far for pointless personal quips.

 

Jason has said multiple times that the Devs are looking into the weapon damage, and based on past issues, it will be changed at some point. However, expecting the Devs to focus their attention on something just because *you* think it's a pressing issue, sounds rather arrogant and entitled IMO.

 

As for the issues themselves, I think people are seriously underestimating the amount of work required. 50cal and HE damage? There is plenty of documentation about the current in-game effects of ammo on planes as it is in game right now, but I have seen very little historical or simulated data/tests, instead mainly just people saying it's "clear" it's "not right" and "everyone can see it". The Devs can't base the game on just someone's opinion of what is right or not. If they want to fix the weapon damage issues once and for all, they need to gather trustworthy historical statistical data from both sides as well as dig up and read through lots and lots of scientific papers. That's something that takes time, and a lot of it. Expecting the Devs to fix all your issues and fix them now isn't going to get you anywhere.

Edited by AEthelraedUnraed
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

LR.TheRedPanda

I really think it's time to have patience and have peace with the DM FM and whatever (even if you do not agree with it accept it). Covid really made things difficult as mentioned repeatedly. Let the Devs continue to work hard and meet their deadlines. When more detail and gameplay is introduced it will shake things up and things get ironed out along the way.

 

Panda

 

(Aim better :crazy:)

Edited by LR.TheRedPanda
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

TheAngryGamer

Panda, they can have all the time in the world. But there is a whole different conversation going on else where about just not spending on this company anymore. And I agree. I am really regretting preordering the Norway expansion. I got it for the other P51. But wish I hadn't.  But, like others, my wallet will not be opening for anything from these guys again. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Jason_Williams locked this topic
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...