In case anyone missed it, the Pacific just became a possibility for CloD

[Mysticpuma]

[IckyATLAS]

It is so vague and so far in the future that for me such a statement has no value at all, except to create some buzz and catch some flies in the light.

This statement has no real value to me, because the effort to do the Pacific of the quality that we can expect nowadays, is so huge that I just can't see how this could be done, otherwise that by a huge financial investment and a dedicated team of devs working day and night. Maybe an Asobo team if Microsoft would be willing to finance and restart their Combat Flight Simulator but in the Pacific theater this time, that would be absolutely credible and incredible and would get a warm applause from my side.

 

[BOO]

I put that down to someone getting carried along on a little wave of positivity to be honest. 
 

im not ruling out appearing on Strictly Cone Dancing but the chances of it happening have not increased by me saying it. 

[Mysticpuma]

Allies: 

SBD Dauntless

B25

Other aircraft already available in Clod for now. 

 

2 carriers/3 destroyer types

 

Axis

 

Ki61

Ki67

A6M

G3M

 

2 carriers/3 destroyer types. 

 

10-12 Islands with runways. 

 

Generis buildings

 

Ocean

 

Just to start with

[Thundercracker]

I admire your optimism, I look forward to my great grandkids reading the official announcement.

[BOO]

12 minutes ago, Mysticpuma said:

Allies: 

SBD Dauntless

B25

Other aircraft already available in Clod for now. 

 

2 carriers/3 destroyer types

 

Axis

 

Ki61

Ki67

A6M

G3M

 

2 carriers/3 destroyer types. 

 

10-12 Islands with runways. 

 

Generis buildings

 

Ocean

 

Just to start with

Quick, call the doctor, Pumas come over all Jackfraser!! 

[Mysticpuma]

17 minutes ago, BOO said:

Quick, call the doctor, Pumas come over all Jackfraser!! 

More Jack Reacher ???

[9./JG52_J-HAT]

Really wasn‘t expecting the PTO suddenly being an option down the path.
 

But who knows what the future brings, maybe TFS can get some more hands on developing CloD, maybe less voluntary and more game studio like? And start picking up the pace and release modules at a faster rate, sort of what we got in BoS atm. A PTO module (TF7) would be done by what, 2024/2025 like this? And TF6 next year by this time?

 

Yeah…. Let‘s wait and see. I won‘t hold my breath though.
 

Edit: I‘ll be happy when I get the VR/Graphical Update… at least as a first step. We‘ve been waiting what, some 15 months?

 

Edited October 7, 2022 by 9./JG52_J-HAT

[343KKT_Kintaro]

If it takes three years to TFS to develop one add-on, then we need that the Pacific is planned for TF7.0, this is, the very next add-on after TF6.0 (that latter still is waiting to be annnounced).

 

All dates after 2020 are hypothetic:

 

2017: TF4.5 "Cliffs of Dover - Blitz"

 

2020: TF5.0 "Desert Wings - Tobruk"

 

2023: TF6.0 (apparently the title, theatre of operations and list of aircraft should'nt take too long to be announced)

 

2026: TF7.0... here we are, the Pacific!, I can finally take off again from the Akagi... this time in the Dover series of flight sims...

 

BUT... if the Pacific is not chosen as the third add-on in the Dover series (TF7.0), then we won't have our Pacific add-on before the late 2020s/early 2030s... maybe later than that by the mid/late 2030s... or even worse: never (which would make Padre the happiest of men).

 

Oh, by the way, please guys stop the myth that it is too expensive to develop a simulator in the Pacific theatre of operations, or that the documentation on Japanese aviation is too lacking. Read this before you pollute the thread with this new age religious fundamentalism. ?

 

 

[No.54_Reddog]

I'll also take great heart that there has been no outright denial that space could be the next addon, perhaps Team Fusion fancy competing with Star Citizen in who can release first? 

 

I think the first handful of responses here had the right of it. Until TF6 is announced as the Pacific, or TF7 is announced, or... it's all just a throwaway comment that wasn't meant to be taken that way, or an attempt to build hype (why would you try that given the current situation?) or it's just speculation on our behalf. Something I know someone here likes to do a whole lot but gets panties in a bunch if we disagree. 

 

Sadly Kintaro's timeline is unsurprisingly wrong for a number of reasons I can't be bothered to explain but those who know, know.

 

 

[343KKT_Kintaro]

Please Reeddog reread the part of my post that you seem to have forgotten: "BUT... if the Pacific is not chosen as the third add-on in the Dover series (TF7.0), then we won't have our Pacific add-on before the late 2020s/early 2030s... maybe later than that by the mid/late 2030s... or even worse: never".

 

And please stop being sarcastic with your rubbish comments about TFS going to science fiction environments. There are adult people here who read your posts.

 

[simfan1998]

47 minutes ago, No.54_Reddog said:

I'll also take great heart that there has been no outright denial that space could be the next addon, perhaps Team Fusion fancy competing with Star Citizen in who can release first? 

 

 

Space is sooo über-overrated, it's especially borring, i'd prefer some"realistic really happend in true life" scenario like this:

 

[9./JG52_J-HAT]

7 minutes ago, simfan1998 said:

Space is sooo über-overrated, it's especially borring, i'd prefer some"realistic really happend in true life" scenario like this:

 

No, no, no! That isn‘t right! Don‘t you realize USS Hornet wasn’t using that camo pattern in 1946 in that theater?! And you don‘t tell me that‘s not the Hornet!

Edited October 7, 2022 by 9./JG52_J-HAT

[No.54_Reddog]

3 hours ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

Please Reeddog reread the part of my post that you seem to have forgotten: "BUT... if the Pacific is not chosen as the third add-on in the Dover series (TF7.0), then we won't have our Pacific add-on before the late 2020s/early 2030s... maybe later than that by the mid/late 2030s... or even worse: never".

 

And please stop being sarcastic with your rubbish comments about TFS going to science fiction environments. There are adult people here who read your posts.

 

If there are adult people reading my posts, I'm sure they can make their own minds up without you trying to yet again censor me.

[343KKT_Kintaro]

Reddog, I'm telling you, for a while now I'm telling you my friend: I'm not censoring you, I simply point out the fact that you, same as a few other forum members here, regularly produce irrespectful comments against one developer and its simulator. You permantly aim to harm them. Why? I don't know... but this is what you do... and the situation has lasted too long.

 

1) "I'll also take great heart that there has been no outright denial that space could be the next addon"

 

2) "perhaps Team Fusion fancy competing with Star Citizen in who can release first?"

 

There's no humour there and you know it Reddog. All of this is nothing but disrespectful rubbish and goes nowhere if not straight ahead to a conflict. Not a conflict with TFS for they are a company in a very delicate position and thus they remain cautiously and expertly silent. No... not a conflict with them... but a conflict with me Reddog, mainly because I started to frequent the present forums a few years ago only and I'm tired of witnessing such dirty manners and rogue methods which are actually aimed at preventing TFS from repairing the damage done to Cliffs of Dover. Apparently it's a daunting task, there are serious problems in this game and it's taking time. Now, if you are not happy wit the community I belong to, the community of  supporters of TFS/Blitz/Tobruk... please leave us alone, we'll not disturb you while you play your favourite sims.

 

Move on and... adieu.

 

 

[No.54_Reddog]

22 minutes ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

Reddog, I'm telling you, for a while now I'm telling you my friend: I'm not censoring you, I simply point out the fact that you, same as a few other forum members here, regularly produce irrespectful comments against one developer and its simulator. You permantly aim to harm them. Why? I don't know... but this is what you do... and the situation has lasted too long.

 

1) "I'll also take great heart that there has been no outright denial that space could be the next addon"

 

2) "perhaps Team Fusion fancy competing with Star Citizen in who can release first?"

 

There's no humour there and you know it Reddog. All of this is nothing but disrespectful rubbish and goes nowhere if not straight ahead to a conflict. Not a conflict with TFS for they are a company in a very delicate position and thus they remain cautiously and expertly silent. No... not a conflict with them... but a conflict with me Reddog, mainly because I started to frequent the present forums a few years ago only and I'm tired of witnessing such dirty manners and rogue methods which are actually aimed at preventing TFS from repairing the damage done to Cliffs of Dover. Apparently it's a daunting task, there are serious problems in this game and it's taking time. Now, if you are not happy wit the community I belong to, the community of  supporters of TFS/Blitz/Tobruk... please leave us alone, we'll not disturb you while you play your favourite sims.

 

Move on and... adieu.

 

 

I see irony and hypocrisy are entirely lost on you. By all means take your own advice. I'll continue to post as and when and how I choose with your blessing since you state you don't wish to censor me. I would hate for anyone to blame you if I did stop.

 

Oh and humour is very much in the eye of the beholder, I tend to find those who have a sense of humour find jokes funny. 

[Dagwoodyt]

Why bring it here (?): a performance needs an audience ?

Edited October 7, 2022 by Dagwoodyt

[343KKT_Kintaro]

8 minutes ago, No.54_Reddog said:

I see irony and hypocrisy are entirely lost on you. By all means take your own advice. I'll continue to post as and when and how I choose with your blessing since you state you don't wish to censor me. I would hate for anyone to blame you if I did stop.

 

Oh and humour is very much in the eye of the beholder, I tend to find those who have a sense of humour find jokes funny. 

 

 

Are they lost on me those qualities Reddog, really? Maybe... but I hope they are not. For now please note that, as the beholder who I am, my eye sees gratuitous aggressions. But I promise, from now I'll train my eye to see other things, things that I would have missed.

 

You know what, Reddog? I'd be delighted to meet you in a pub, for example in London if I could afford the trip, which sadly I can't for now, but yes, I'd be delighted to meet you personnally (no idea if you live in or close to London, it's only an example as I loved that city when I've been to it).

 

 

[Sleepy_Fly]

4 hours ago, simfan1998 said:

Space is sooo über-overrated, it's especially borring, i'd prefer some"realistic really happend in true life" scenario like this:

 

 

Do you remember this movie?

 

[Dagwoodyt]

 

[Mysticpuma]

So back on topic.... Pacific War. 

What would be the minimum required for a successful expansion? 

[343KKT_Kintaro]

2 minutes ago, Mysticpuma said:

What would be the minimum required for a successful expansion? 

 

 

In my opinion, the minimum required this would had a consequence which is, for the first mini-add-on in the Pacific, the necessary exclusion of one of the two armed branches of the Empire of Japan, either the IJA (Imperial Japanese Army) or the IJN (Imperial Japanese Navy). Indeed, in both cases the development team would be producing one "mini-add-on" rather than a product similar to "Blitz" (47 variants and subvariants distributed in 12 types) or "Tobruk" (47 new variants and subvariants distributed in 8 new types). This kind of product would cost too much time and money...

 

Exclusion of the IJA (IJN only). For example, for a "Pearl harbor" "mini-add-on" we would have:

 

Japanese side

A6M2-21

D3A1

B5N1 & B5N2

Two carriers

Three destroyers

 

American side

P-36

P-40

PBY catalina

Two battleships (at anchor)

Three destroyers (at anchor)

 

 

Exclusion of the IJA (IJN only). For example, for a "Battle of the Coral Sea" "mini-add-on" we would have:

 

Japanese side

A6M2-21

D3A1

B5N1 & B5N2

Threecarriers

Two destroyers

 

American side

F4F

SBD Dauntless

PBY Catalina

Threecarriers

Two destroyers

 

 

Exclusion of the IJN (IJA only). For example, for a "Burma 1942" "mini-add-on" we would have:

 

Japanese side

Ki-27

Ki-43

Ki-21

 

American/British side

P-40

Hurricane

C-47

 

 

I don't know how much is known about the Ki-21, but if at the development stage, data are lacking... speculation would fill the gaps, more or less same as the frogs that had been used in Jurassic Park when dinosaur DNA was missing in a specific sequence... yup...

 

 

[Buzzsaw]

All I was saying with my comment is the Pacific is no longer a 'no go' area for TF.

 

Not that we will be releasing anything in the near future.

 

TF 6.0 will not be set in the Pacific.

 

TF 7.0 is not set yet... so yes, theoretically it could be the Pacific... assuming our scenario does not conflict with any other of 1C's proprietary titles.

 

If we did something, it would emphasize Carrier warfare, something which the CLIFFS engine is capable of.  We have already run tests showing it is possible.  Only thing preventing it right now is fully implementing tail hooks into the code... some which is relatively simple, since the IL-2 1946 code can be adapted.

 

We would not do land based Western Pacific, i.e. China/Burma/late Soviet invasion.  It would be early war, when the Japanese were competitive.

 

All the above is purely theoretical... no decision or commitment for.

[Mysticpuma]

I think it's fair to say Buzzsaw, BoB, Africa and the PTO are pretty much guaranteed money. With the PTO completely ruled out by Jason the door is open for TFS to absolutely clean up in the (it appears) most wanted, currently unavailable in a new engine, expansion that isn't in any new combat sim.  I think it's fair to say Pearl Harbor would be anticipated for the early war but as we don't know where V6 is likely to take us yet and how long after a v7 would be, I guess the success of v6 will decide if the PTO becomes a reality. 

[Mysticpuma]

47 minutes ago, Buzzsaw said:

TF 7.0 is not set yet... so yes, theoretically it could be the Pacific... assuming our scenario does not conflict with any other of 1C's proprietary titles.

 

 

Buzzsaw, after the  critical TFS work you were involved in recently, has there been any indication from 1C as to when V6 may at least be announced? I know v5, VR and Truesky are the focus now but has 1C given any indication as to when they will release details of the v6 module? 

Cheers, MP

[Buzzsaw]

We would not do Pearl Harbour... that was a one sided affair without any real competitiveness.

 

If we went there, we would either do Midway or Coral Sea.   ( ALL THEORETICAL MUSING ON MY PART !!!!!! )

 

The maps would require some changes to our code.... the Pacific is huge.

 

Multiplayer absolute historical realism is hampered in the Pacific, because of the huge flight distances, but mission builders can always set up a dogfight map with Carriers much closer than they would be historically, (say 30 kms) to allow more frequent combat.

 

Single player missions can be done even with the Pacific's long distances, because CLIFFS allow up to 16 X time compression.

 

And sure, the Pacific would sell.

 

But this is all MAYBE.

 

EDIT:

 

This is my last comment re. the topic.

 

And until you see 1C make an announcement regarding TF moving development into the Pacific, you can assume we are not doing so.  ?

[343KKT_Kintaro]

57 minutes ago, Buzzsaw said:

assuming our scenario does not conflict with any other of 1C's proprietary titles.

 

 

My two pence:

 

Time has come to reach new agreements between companies! (only a suggestion that the two companies enter in some discussions).

 

if 1CGS says

 

"any shortcomings of the carrier modeling and interaction with it, any performance and other issues that may arise become super-critical, jeopardizing the whole product. In the current situation this makes it a huge risk we can't afford to spend 3 years on"

 

and thus 1CGS drops the idea of implementing aicraft carriers in its sim...

 

...and if TFS is able to properly model carrier and carrier operations...

 

...then TFS should start the development of the five major carrier-vs-carrier battles in the 1940s, one add-on a battle:

 

- Coral Sea

- Midway

- Solomon Islands

- Santa Cruz

- Philippine Sea

 

For 1CGS and its Great Battles modules there would be plenty of non-carrier theatres of operations in Asia:

 

- Burma

- Singapore

- Guadalcanal

- Okinawa

- Iwo Jima

 

With such a distribtution of the add-ons (carrier-vs-carrier battles for TFS) and the modules (non-carrier battles for 1CGS)... this wouldn't be conflicting "with any other of 1C's proprietary titles"

 

 

57 minutes ago, Buzzsaw said:

All the above is purely theoretical... no decision or commitment for.

 

10 minutes ago, Buzzsaw said:

But this is all MAYBE.

 

Yes... sure... we know that Buzzsaw!

 

 

 

[Dagwoodyt]

1 hour ago, Mysticpuma said:

I think it's fair to say Buzzsaw, BoB, Africa and the PTO are pretty much guaranteed money. With the PTO completely ruled out by Jason the door is open for TFS to absolutely clean up in the (it appears) most wanted, currently unavailable in a new engine, expansion that isn't in any new combat sim.  I think it's fair to say Pearl Harbor would be anticipated for the early war but as we don't know where V6 is likely to take us yet and how long after a v7 would be, I guess the success of v6 will decide if the PTO becomes a reality. 

“pretty much guaranteed money” (?)

”I guess the success of v6 will decide if the PTO becomes a reality.” By what logic would “success” of a V6 assure that a PTO would follow?

 

[Hook_Echo]

8 hours ago, simfan1998 said:

Space is sooo über-overrated, it's especially borring, i'd prefer some"realistic really happend in true life" scenario like this:

 

[343KKT_Kintaro]

Puma... Dagwoodyt... the Team Fusion guys have spent so many years volunteering with no income at all... almost ten years... what does it matter if whether or not their add-ons are a commercial failure? The most important thing for us, players, is that they maintain their agreements with 1C so that they keep in touch with the code... and with the game.

 

1C is no longer interested in "IL-2 1946"... but 1C keeps it as residual income (for example: IL-2 Sturmovik™: 1946 on GOG.com ). This is how could end up our two more "modern" sims, IL2CoD and IL2GB: they'd be representing a residual income only, and they wouldn't be really commercially exploited... only nursed by nostalgic enthusiasts. If they end up like IL2-1946... who cares? Daidalos Team would keep developing IL2-1946, TFS would keep developing IL2CoD and IL2GB would be nursed by its own fans.

 

Frankly, I see no problem of continuity in the future.

 

[stburr91]

4 hours ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

Puma... Dagwoodyt... the Team Fusion guys have spent so many years volunteering with no income at all... almost ten years... what does it matter if whether or not their add-ons are a commercial failure? The most important thing for us, players, is that they maintain their agreements with 1C so that they keep in touch with the code... and with the game.

 

1C is no longer interested in "IL-2 1946"... but 1C keeps it as residual income (for example: IL-2 Sturmovik™: 1946 on GOG.com ). This is how could end up our two more "modern" sims, IL2CoD and IL2GB: they'd be representing a residual income only, and they wouldn't be really commercially exploited... only nursed by nostalgic enthusiasts. If they end up like IL2-1946... who cares? Daidalos Team would keep developing IL2-1946, TFS would keep developing IL2CoD and IL2GB would be nursed by its own fans.

 

Frankly, I see no problem of continuity in the future.

 

 

 

I does matter is the TF projects are a commercial success because there are expenses to creating these products, and I would assume that Team Fusion is paid a percentage of the sales, and that's why they still invest their time into CloD.  

 

[343KKT_Kintaro]

3 hours ago, stburr91 said:

I would assume that Team Fusion is paid a percentage of the sales, and that's why they still invest their time into CloD.

 

 

With no income at all they invested time and passion in this game for many, many years, and I now that they are an officially constituted company they have the right to a well deserved reward, I know.

 

 

 

[Mysticpuma]

15 hours ago, Dagwoodyt said:

“pretty much guaranteed money” (?)

”I guess the success of v6 will decide if the PTO becomes a reality.” By what logic would “success” of a V6 assure that a PTO would follow?

 

 

I see your point and the correlation but the PTO is a very much sought after theatre of war and I really do think that if BoX or CloD went there it would bring a lot of revenue in for being unique in 'newer' sim engines. I think we have to be realistic and say that currently v5 is going through beta testing and fixes. It is clear to see there are issues (as would be expected with beta testing) and this is taking longer than normal due to issues (already mentioned by Buzzsaw) with VR, Truesky and no doubt other undisclosed bugs.

 

Let's say (cross fingers) v5 visual update gets released around Christmas, there will no doubt be other issues discovered by the community that will require bug fixes. Speculation I know, but again let's say by Summer 2023 most of the bugs have been dealt with and fixed. I (my personal opinion) would hope that at least by Summer 2023 v6 would have been announced and a release date confirmed/speculated.

 

Now while coders would have been fixing bugs, I would think the modellers, texture workers, sound engineers, map-makers, all would likely have completed or at least be near completion of v6 content as most of the issues for v5 visual update appear to relate to coding now.

 

So v6 should likely be ready to go, however I (again personal opinion) can't see it being released before the end of next year as they have to announce it, finish coding/bug fixing on the v5 release, then get ready for v6 release. So (again, my opinion) v6 gets released in December 2023, well that's an entire year from now and that will then bring its own issues to be bug fixed.

 

TFS modellers, texture workers, sound engineers and map-makers who have completed their work on v6 can either now wait for v6 to be released, see if it is popular, worth the effort time and investment and then start work on assets for v7 (possibly the PTO), or they can start working now on assets for v7 (a possible PTO) and spend the next year building the module.

 

The thing is, being on the outside, it is hard to gauge the motivation for the team, I mean it's obvious there is a love for the sim as look how long TFS have been involved with it (10-years) and the passion eventually got them the source code. Now without going through the ins and outs of contracts, the point is, this is not a paid studio and any revenue the members of the team make, is likely just pocket money in comparison to the real jobs they have. So we just have to consider personal motivation. 5-years since the SC became available, we have had the Blitz update, v5.0 is still WiP but getting closer, v6 is unannounced but hopefully due soon to be disclosed and then we could be looking at another 1-2 years before a (possible) PTO becomes available. Now that's a long time for team members to continue, especially if v6 isn't well received, so keeping the focus and motivation for a v7 PTO I do really think depends on whether v6 is a success. Success can be measured not just by financial rewards but by actual feedback and interest from the community.

 

I guess when it comes down to it, VR and Truesky in v5 will really see if the players who have said they will come back for VR, really do have that passion and if they do, v6 (wherever it takes us) should/could be a success and this will drive the unheard members of TFS towards v7.....but as I have mentioned all along, this is just my own speculation and musings.

 

 

6 hours ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

 

 

With no income at all they invested time and passion in this game for many, many years, and I know that they are an officially constituted company they have the right to a well deserved reward, I know.

See my answer above, don't disagree with you, I think time and motivation will be the issue in the long run.

Edited October 8, 2022 by Mysticpuma

[343KKT_Kintaro]

2 hours ago, Mysticpuma said:

Let's say (cross fingers) v5 gets released around Christmas [...] v5.0 is still WiP

 

 

Hey, Puma, drop the bottle! Version 5.0 is out since August 2020! I think what you talk about is the visual update (implementation of TrueSKY, 4k etc.). That latter will be simultaneaously released, I guess, with a future version which will be version 5.0xx (the exact version number is obviously unknown for the moment).

 

 

2 hours ago, Mysticpuma said:

I think time and motivation will be the issue in the long run.

 

 

I trust their motivation won't fail.

 

I spent years before I understand that the keystone in this simulator is that his father, Oleg Maddox, wanted much more than simply a playable video game (War Thunder is a playable video game), he wanted to create the definitive masterpiece among the survey-type WWII combat flight simulators. This is why this game presented so many problems at release: it is extremely ambitious regarding both its realism and its simulation experience, which is the most noble thing you may find in a PC combat flight sim in the survey type.

 

"Cliffs of Dover" hasn't yet unveiled all its potentialities and, again, I trust the motivation among the TFS troops won't decrease with time. If what they do need for their motivation is more gate keepers and more self-appointed defense attorneys... I will go on a crusade to recruit a whole entire army.

 

Come on guys, all simmers with TFS!

 

[BOO]

That is the last thing they or any of us need. 
 

 

 

 

[9./JG52_J-HAT]

40 minutes ago, 343KKT_Kintaro said:

If what they do need for their motivation is more gate keepers and more self-appointed defense attorneys... I will go on a crusade to recruit a whole entire army.

 

Go ahead and do that. I hope it will be a big enough army so CloD will still have enough players… 

 

Hint: it isn‘t.

[343KKT_Kintaro]

4 minutes ago, 9./JG52_J-HAT said:

enough players

 

 

This has definitely become an obsession...

 

I'm sorry but I'm not interested in collective mistakes. If the masses of PC owners in the world aren't able to see the greatness of "Cliffs of Dover"... that's not my problem. I started playing combat flight sims 30 years ago exactly (September or October 1992) and I adhered to this activity not being interested in what others were doing, liking or thinking. 99,99% of my environment, especially the other adolescents in my class and in my neighborhood, were mainly interested in football and consoles. Football and consoles are fine if they like them... but for me they missed something at the time... and still are missing it for most of them, end of story.

 

Same thing now with this game: it is a masterpiece and deserves to be defended. And we'll keep defending it. We the few, the happy few, we fans of "Cliffs of Dover".

 

 

[Cloyd]

And this is why 343KKT_Kintaro is one of very few people on my ignore list.

 

I bought Clod at release when I knew that my Pentium IV wasn't capable of running it, actually, it would not even install. So, I consider myself a "fan" but I am not a "fanatic" or a member of a cult. Clod will stand or fall on its own merits. It is a game, not a religion.

[343KKT_Kintaro]

Cliffs of Dover is not my religion. Other's religion and tedious fanatism is (among a few other examples) the never-ending reminding of the number of players in Cliffs of Dover. So, the more obsessions will be brought to the Cliffs of Dover forum, the more I'll defend the game and its developers.

 

Cliffs of Dover is a flight sim and TFS its developer. The present thread, opened by Mysticpuma, deals with the possibility that someday this game goes to the Pacific. Reread the thread, Cloyd, even more: reread all the threads in the Cliffs of Dover forum, you'll find those players who aim for the game goes nowhere if not to its own disappearance (I do not include you among them J-Hat).  Those very specific players, members of these forums, may find all of this is funny... and please note I find itis is... indeed... so let's keep it this way... unless they change their attitude.

 

Oh, by the way, Cloyd, when using forums I never put people in the ignore lists. Never.

 

 

[Mysticpuma]

Got to say when it comes to the PTO I still remember this fantastic (now low resolution) video by RC_Kedik. I mean it just summarises the PTO in a cracking short film with one incredible timelapse sequence in the middle (still no idea how he did it!)