What more work will be done on FC?

[Russkly]

@LukeFF

 

As the interlocutor between us users and 1C, I wonder if you could share with us, please, what work will continue to be done on FC besides the maps and aircraft already announced for FC3 and FC4.

 

• Other threads here have confirmed that no further work will be undertaken on the flight models for reasons clearly explained.
• Is the work on the damage models completed, or will there be further alterations?
• Will the AI be improved further, or are we at the end of that development cycle?
• Will there be further fixes/refinements/improvements to the career mode?
• Will improvements to the objects on the maps be worked on, or will there simply be geographical extensions at the existing level of visual quality?

 

In summary what I'm looking for here is this :

 

Beyond new planes and maps, what other aspects of FC will be further improved by 1C, or should we expect nothing more than the new maps and planes?

 

Not trying to be contentious here, but I'd like to manage my expectations given the financial outlay involved, and I think it's fair for 1C to clarify what we will get, might get or won't get.

 

Thanks in advance.

Edited October 13, 2023 by Russkly

[Trooper117]

35 minutes ago, Russkly said:

I'd like to manage my expectations given the financial outlay involved, and I think it's fair for 1C to clarify what we will get, might get or won't get.

 

They can't even tell us after a year, what the new project is, or if they are going to make it compatible with existing GB content... but I hope your requests get answered...

[Patricks]

46 minutes ago, Russkly said:

@LukeFF

 

As the interlocutor between us users and 1C, I wonder if you could share with us, please, what work will continue to be done on FC besides the maps and aircraft already announced for FC3 and FC4.

 

 

FC5

[Russkly]

1 hour ago, Trooper117 said:

 

They can't even tell us after a year, what the new project is, or if they are going to make it compatible with existing GB content... but I hope your requests get answered...

 

So do I!

 

If they say, "Look, you'll get new planes & maps with FC3 & FC4, but we're not going to do any further development work on FM, DM, AI, career mode, map visuals, etc." then that's fair enough - at least we know what we'll get for our USD80 per module and not harbour desires for further work that will not happen.

 

It would also remove the need for threads here about whether this or that aspect will get fixed/worked on or not.

 

 

Edited October 13, 2023 by Russkly

[BladeMeister]

They cannot tell you this or they would have to kill you, and they respect you far to much as a veritable cash cow to put you in that awkward of a position.

 

S!Blade<><

[LukeFF]

I'll ask as I always do and see what I can share. ?

[Flying_Anchor]

8 часов назад, Russkly сказал:

• Will the AI be improved further, or are we at the end of that development cycle

Such a big issue and frustration. AI maneuvers very bad, dogfights look like turkey shooting.

[Russkly]

1 hour ago, LukeFF said:

I'll ask as I always do and see what I can share. ?

 

Thank you, Luke.

 

I will be very interested in hearing what you can share...

[cmbishop]

Thank you Luke !

AI improvment is really needed. It's nice to add some new planes in the game (the Hanriot and the british Nieuport are coing soon) but at this point AI breaks the experience of fight.

[Knarley-Bob]

There is no profit upgrading an item already paid for.

 

They are hoping one will pay for a "New & improved" one....Hoping that it will be better.

 

Will it be better? That's the gamble you take...............

 

KB

[LukeFF]

One thing that should be fixed in the next update is the overcooled engine issue with the Nieuport 11 and 17. It's being tested right now in the current beta.

[Russkly]

14 hours ago, Knarley-Bob said:

There is no profit upgrading an item already paid for.

 

They are hoping one will pay for a "New & improved" one....Hoping that it will be better.

 

Will it be better? That's the gamble you take...............

 

KB

 

Ah, but that's the point, Bob: it's not already paid for; there are USD160 left to pay, and I think it's fair to ask what we punters might expect to get for those USD160 besides some planes and maps/seasons.

 

If it's just the latter, then fine; we know what we're getting and, importantly, what we're not getting.

 

That's the point of this thread.

[Knarley-Bob]

4 hours ago, Russkly said:

 

Ah, but that's the point, Bob: it's not already paid for; there are USD160 left to pay, and I think it's fair to ask what we punters might expect to get for those USD160 besides some planes and maps/seasons.

 

If it's just the latter, then fine; we know what we're getting and, importantly, what we're not getting.

 

That's the point of this thread.

Well that depends,

        You and I am looking at the same thing in a different way. I see each installment as a unit in itself. You see each installment as part of a larger unit, that isn't complete until all installments are put together.

        Either way one looks at it is fine. I just feel that if I am not satisfied with #1, I'm not going to be able to justify #2 or #3 and so on. Therein lies your question. I see you have volumes 2&3, I only have volume 1. Since you are asking this question, it tells me 2 & 3 can still be on the "Waiting" list, because obviously things haven't improved.

I think that should answer the question at hand.

        As far as 1C doing any improvements? That is one of the riddles of life...............

 

KB

 

       

[Trooper117]

12 minutes ago, Knarley-Bob said:

As far as 1C doing any improvements? That is one of the riddles of life...............

 

Again, all it would take is a response like, ''We intend to at some stage in the future'' or if in the negative, ''No, we don't intend to improve FC, all focus will be on the new project''. I would be happy with either response.

[Russkly]

50 minutes ago, Trooper117 said:

 

Again, all it would take is a response like, ''We intend to at some stage in the future'' or if in the negative, ''No, we don't intend to improve FC, all focus will be on the new project''. I would be happy with either response.

 

Precisely.

 

That's all I'm looking for too.

 

Obviously I'd prefer that there would be further work on FC beyond planes & maps, but, if not, good to know and good to be able to make decisions based upon that knowledge rather than based upon a bunch of (possibly unfounded) hopes or expectations.

 

I think for four modules of a game priced @ USD80 a pop, 1C owes us that much clarity at least.

 

 

[Knarley-Bob]

Agreed.........

But I'm NOT going to hold my breath.

 

KB

[Gunfreak]

What about infantry?

Trench strafing was a big part of the job for British and I assume French pilots in 1918. And during the German spring offensive. The British also straffed Germans as they were advancing along the roads, shooting up and bombing men and horses/wagons.

Generally IL2 both ww2 and ww1 needs infantry.

Edited October 18, 2023 by Gunfreak

[Russkly]

20 minutes ago, Gunfreak said:

What about infantry?

Trench strafing was a bug part of the job for British and I assume French pilots in 1918. And during the German spring offensive. The British also straffed Germans as they were advancing along the roads, shooting up and bombing men and horses/wagons.

Generally IL2 both ww2 and ww1 needs infantry.

 

I don't think that's ever going to happen for Il2 GB or FC

[Trooper117]

5 hours ago, Gunfreak said:

What about infantry?

 

They are bringing in new missions for the WWII side... supporting attacking troops, plus support missions for defending troops.

However, these missions will not have 'troops'... lol!

They will have vehicles and gun positions however instead... The ability to have large groups of infantry in trenches or in the attack for WWI have no chance...

[No.23_Starling]

10 hours ago, Gunfreak said:

What about infantry?

Trench strafing was a big part of the job for British and I assume French pilots in 1918. And during the German spring offensive. The British also straffed Germans as they were advancing along the roads, shooting up and bombing men and horses/wagons.

Generally IL2 both ww2 and ww1 needs infantry.

The J18 server has little waves of infantry that you can help advance in a contact patrol situation. You can’t shoot the troops but can blast the MG guys

[No.10_Ace_Ivo]

@Russkly

 

You can actually experience that already on the "Knights of the Sky" mutiplayer server by No.10/J18 Squadron, like Waggaz said. There are infantry contact patrols where you can get infantry waves to advance to enemy lines, you can support these by firing flares when they reach enemy lines and of course by killing defensive MG positions. Of course the defending side can shoot/bomb the advancing infantry as well.

We run our main events on Wednesday and Saturday from around 6 PM GMT so feel free to stop by if you like.

 

Server manual if you want to know more: https://docs.google.com/document/d/16kl1PXw1EQ0O984zFMTTFrPtAidKsUVRsoPa1tlmPmM/edit?usp=drivesdk

[Russkly]

On 10/19/2023 at 8:52 AM, No.10_Ace_Ivo said:

@Russkly

 

You can actually experience that already on the "Knights of the Sky" mutiplayer server by No.10/J18 Squadron, like Waggaz said. There are infantry contact patrols where you can get infantry waves to advance to enemy lines, you can support these by firing flares when they reach enemy lines and of course by killing defensive MG positions. Of course the defending side can shoot/bomb the advancing infantry as well.

We run our main events on Wednesday and Saturday from around 6 PM GMT so feel free to stop by if you like.

 

Server manual if you want to know more: https://docs.google.com/document/d/16kl1PXw1EQ0O984zFMTTFrPtAidKsUVRsoPa1tlmPmM/edit?usp=drivesdk

 

Thanks @No.10_Ace_Ivo - Might give it a try some time, although I haven't done MP for years. I found it was either getting picked off by skilled and patient players swooping down from obscene altitudes, or being restricted by timings flying with a virtual squadron.

On 10/13/2023 at 5:57 PM, LukeFF said:

I'll ask as I always do and see what I can share. ?

 

So, what have you got for us, @LukeFF?

[LukeFF]

Nothing new to share at the moment. The team is busy trying to get the next update ready for release.

[Russkly]

23 minutes ago, LukeFF said:

Nothing new to share at the moment. The team is busy trying to get the next update ready for release.

 

Thanks @LukeFF.

 

I imagine that there's a very comprehensive project plan for FC3, FC4, GB and the new thing.

 

Scrum, Agile, MS Project or whatever tool is used, the available resources, inc. people hours, will all be allocated and assigned appropriate milestones, timelines and objectives.

 

All I'm looking to understand is whether the FC franchise, beyond the modules themselves with their pre-announced content, will attract programming resource for elements such as AI, FM, DM and career mode.

 

I would guess that, at this stage, resources will either be allocated to such work or not.

 

That's all I'm trying to establish with this thread.

 

No judgement either way - just want clarity, please.

 

If you say, "That's it chaps - you'll get the FC modules as announced, but there is no further work on FC included in the current 1CGS/Ugra Media project plan", then we can live with that and make decisions accordingly.

 

 

[Red_Von_Hammer]

On 10/21/2023 at 7:27 PM, Russkly said:

I would guess that, at this stage, resources will either be allocated to such work or not.

 

That's all I'm trying to establish with this thread.

 

No judgement either way - just want clarity, please.

 

If you say, "That's it chaps - you'll get the FC modules as announced, but there is no further work on FC included in the current 1CGS/Ugra Media project plan", then we can live with that and make decisions accordingly.

 

 

Career isn't that bad when you run it without icons, there's PWCG too, then there's WoFF with arguably the best campaign since RB3D.
And not to state devs don't care: They've fixed of bullet dispersion, FFB, etc, and other bugs.
So that's where we're at.


The back'n forth on FM's for anything WW1 (minus SS.DIV & Snipe, new additions) is no secret, and has been a regular theme for 10 years now.
Last time I was here, assurances/promises were made for FM's, to be specific, they wanted to "take their time" and saying they'd "look at" Holtzauge's book, not wanting to "repeat" what happened to RoF, etc.
Of course, that was while Petrovich & Jason_Williams was still here, like many here I'm buying FC modules pell-mell anyway, but still took that in good faith/for good fish.
A year ago, Holtzauge speculated Petrovich's departure might spell disaster for FM improvements, I thought nothing of it at the time.
Fast forward a bit:

Which basically says they 180'd on FM promises, so Holtzauge was dead-on about that one.
What makes it a bit sad is it happened after a good deal of people, some of which are following FM discussion on forums, actually bought FC3 more or less on the premises of improved FM's.
People, or at least I, was led to understand, RoF's FM's were, for all intents and purposes, supposed to be temporary.
FC is toted as a new product, webstore states "re-imagined", not "re-using" RoF elements, so this, omitting sugar coating, is a pretty big overall lapse in communication.

And before authorities head me off right about here, yes, promises made on forums aren't legally binding, but that's a 2-way street which protects and enables loyal customers like me (which I am, check my purchases) to say communication could be better ?

Obviously funds are an issue, but hasn't FC's survival been held hostage over our heads for years now?
Feels like we're all just sitting here waiting for a miracle, maybe we need to seize our own destiny.
Chiefly because there's no documentation on how many sales are even needed to make FC sustainable until someone else picks up the batton, by implementing the following:
1) Hisso overcompressed engine option for SE5a.
2) Higher top-speed & lower-turning rate for Alb, even Wikipedia's article on it coincides with what was found when comparing FC with @Holtzauge .
3) Overcompressed engine options for Alb (to a degree offsets the heavier weight) & normal D7 (which is already quite good).
4) Better turn-rate for N-28.

5-A) Return Dr.1 FM to early FM from RoF (before it got nerfed).
Or 5-B) New Dr.1 FM.

A) Is there a way to figure out how much is needed to achieve this, and if they received said funding, would they be willing to do so?
B) If 1C won't do it, would the 3rd party developer that pumps out the RoF planes be willing to do so, and if so, how much do they want?
C) Can the community i.e the paying customers, be allowed to assist? For instance, modders could tweak FM's in close cooperation with the guys that tested Holtzauge's data.
Test server could then run mods (I certainly wouldn't mind pitching in) to test these new FM's at the very limit (FC has some of the best virtual pilots I've ever seen) and kinks be worked out until they reach such a stage that the mods are officially incorporated.

In general, can anything be done/worked out to alleviate the issue?

[Russkly]

1 hour ago, Red_Von_Hammer said:

Career isn't that bad when you run it without icons, there's PWCG too, then there's WoFF with arguably the best campaign since RB3D.
And not to state devs don't care: They've fixed of bullet dispersion, FFB, etc, and other bugs.
So that's where we're at.


The back'n forth on FM's for anything WW1 (minus SS.DIV & Snipe, new additions) is no secret, and has been a regular theme for 10 years now.
Last time I was here, assurances/promises were made for FM's, to be specific, they wanted to "take their time" and saying they'd "look at" Holtzauge's book, not wanting to "repeat" what happened to RoF, etc.
Of course, that was while Petrovich & Jason_Williams was still here, like many here I'm buying FC modules pell-mell anyway, but still took that in good faith/for good fish.
A year ago, Holtzauge speculated Petrovich's departure might spell disaster for FM improvements, I thought nothing of it at the time.
Fast forward a bit:

Which basically says they 180'd on FM promises, so Holtzauge was dead-on about that one.
What makes it a bit sad is it happened after a good deal of people, some of which are following FM discussion on forums, actually bought FC3 more or less on the premises of improved FM's.
People, or at least I, was led to understand, RoF's FM's were, for all intents and purposes, supposed to be temporary.
FC is toted as a new product, webstore states "re-imagined", not "re-using" RoF elements, so this, omitting sugar coating, is a pretty big overall lapse in communication.

And before authorities head me off right about here, yes, promises made on forums aren't legally binding, but that's a 2-way street which protects and enables loyal customers like me (which I am, check my purchases) to say communication could be better ?

Obviously funds are an issue, but hasn't FC's survival been held hostage over our heads for years now?
Feels like we're all just sitting here waiting for a miracle, maybe we need to seize our own destiny.
Chiefly because there's no documentation on how many sales are even needed to make FC sustainable until someone else picks up the batton, by implementing the following:
1) Hisso overcompressed engine option for SE5a.
2) Higher top-speed & lower-turning rate for Alb, even Wikipedia's article on it coincides with what was found when comparing FC with @Holtzauge .
3) Overcompressed engine options for Alb (to a degree offsets the heavier weight) & normal D7 (which is already quite good).
4) Better turn-rate for N-28.

5-A) Return Dr.1 FM to early FM from RoF (before it got nerfed).
Or 5-B) New Dr.1 FM.

A) Is there a way to figure out how much is needed to achieve this, and if they received said funding, would they be willing to do so?
B) If 1C won't do it, would the 3rd party developer that pumps out the RoF planes be willing to do so, and if so, how much do they want?
C) Can the community i.e the paying customers, be allowed to assist? For instance, modders could tweak FM's in close cooperation with the guys that tested Holtzauge's data.
Test server could then run mods (I certainly wouldn't mind pitching in) to test these new FM's at the very limit (FC has some of the best virtual pilots I've ever seen) and kinks be worked out until they reach such a stage that the mods are officially incorporated.

In general, can anything be done/worked out to alleviate the issue?

 

All very fair points, @Red_Von_Hammer.

 

@LukeFF Should your silence be taken as an eloquent one (I fully understand that you're constrained by what 1C will allow you to say, but you're the messenger in the absence of direct comms from 1C on this)?  Don't want to be a PITA, but 1C wants us to chuck a fair amount of money at FC3 & FC4, so I think it's fair to outline what we can and can't expect.

[ST_Catchov]

On 10/22/2023 at 3:27 AM, Russkly said:

"That's it chaps - you'll get the FC modules as announced, but there is no further work on FC included in the current 1CGS/Ugra Media project plan"

 

It is unlikely Luke would ever say this, but it is likely to be the truth. 

[LukeFF]

9 hours ago, Russkly said:

All very fair points, @Red_Von_Hammer.

 

@LukeFF Should your silence be taken as an eloquent one (I fully understand that you're constrained by what 1C will allow you to say, but you're the messenger in the absence of direct comms from 1C on this)?  Don't want to be a PITA, but 1C wants us to chuck a fair amount of money at FC3 & FC4, so I think it's fair to outline what we can and can't expect.

 

Well, sometimes surprises are sprung, but in that case (WWI FMs and AI, but especially the former), what Jason originally said is still the stance the team is taking. Gavrick - who is very much the equal of Petrovich and even said so before he departed - is very busy on his own with developing the FMs for all the new WWII content being developed, in addition to training other engineer(s) on the team to do the same sort of work. So, unless a gap somehow opens up in his schedule, don't expect any FM revisions to take place (side note: that's how/why the Nieuport 17 GBR was originally created - there was a gap in the team's development schedule that allowed it to be developed).

 

AI - the fact of the matter, as I've said before, is it's very hard to find good AI coders to come and work for the team, because they are in such high demand in all sorts of fields. One of the developers recently said either on here or on Discord it's not difficult to find 3D artists, but finding good coders is much, much more difficult. It's not for lack of trying that they've not been able to find more reinforcements in that area.

 

5 hours ago, ST_Catchov said:

It is unlikely Luke would ever say this, but it is likely to be the truth. 

 

We'll see. ?

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

Previously we were push away from FM changes because the argument was - show us the data, now when community has it in the book made  by professional author, who also offered assistance , time and resources are holding us - really?  I'm not sure about that. It feels like there is no will to do any FM changes and  the new politics is not to said anything because it's the same as making promises which sometimes devs fail to deliver.

Wy have the data , now we  can only  make a pressure hoping that someone form devs  would at last said  if  they gonna try to make those FMs changes or not. 

 

Edited October 30, 2023 by 1PL-Husar-1Esk

[Russkly]

5 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

Well, sometimes surprises are sprung, but in that case (WWI FMs and AI, but especially the former), what Jason originally said is still the stance the team is taking. Gavrick - who is very much the equal of Petrovich and even said so before he departed - is very busy on his own with developing the FMs for all the new WWII content being developed, in addition to training other engineer(s) on the team to do the same sort of work. So, unless a gap somehow opens up in his schedule, don't expect any FM revisions to take place (side note: that's how/why the Nieuport 17 GBR was originally created - there was a gap in the team's development schedule that allowed it to be developed).

 

AI - the fact of the matter, as I've said before, is it's very hard to find good AI coders to come and work for the team, because they are in such high demand in all sorts of fields. One of the developers recently said either on here or on Discord it's not difficult to find 3D artists, but finding good coders is much, much more difficult. It's not for lack of trying that they've not been able to find more reinforcements in that area.

 

 

We'll see. ?

 

@LukeFF Thanks for getting back to us.

 

At least we now know that we are unlikely to see further changes to FC's FMs and AI.

 

Shame 1C can't outsource FC AI coding to another team such as OBD, as WOFF's AI is excellent.

 

 

[No.23_Starling]

1 hour ago, Russkly said:

 

@LukeFF Thanks for getting back to us.

 

At least we now know that we are unlikely to see further changes to FC's FMs and AI.

 

Shame 1C can't outsource FC AI coding to another team such as OBD, as WOFF's AI is excellent.

 

 

I wondered this too. The partnership with Team Fusion has worked really well.

 

The OBD guys not only focus on overall engaging AI but also ww1 specific behaviour. Their campaign system is also first rate; it’s the janky old engine that holds it back.

[dannyGrim]

As a guy who grew up on chuck yeagers air combat and old ww1 games like wings of glory, Red Baron etc I’m a bit shocked at the ai in flying circus. I purchased volume 1 recently and have been having fun in VR doing a campaign run. 
 

Suffice to say I currently have no interest in purchasing more volumes due to the fact the ai is not engaging in the least. They’re really, really bad. 

 

I mostly play single player content as I don’t get good ping to any of the popular servers in most sim games. Engaging career stories, ai that is well rounded and challenging are a must. 

 

I still have very fond memories of the wings of glory campaign storyline. Very interactive for its time with the pilots lounge scenes between flights, losing characters as the war progressed, hunting the ace that killed your friend etc. very engaging and that was a DOS game!! 
 

Sorry to say I can’t recommend this game to friends in the current state, at least or single player engagement. 

[Red_Von_Hammer]

 

8 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

Well, sometimes surprises are sprung, but in that case (WWI FMs and AI, but especially the former), what Jason originally said is still the stance the team is taking. Gavrick - who is very much the equal of Petrovich and even said so before he departed - is very busy on his own with developing the FMs for all the new WWII content being developed, in addition to training other engineer(s) on the team to do the same sort of work. So, unless a gap somehow opens up in his schedule, don't expect any FM revisions to take place (side note: that's how/why the Nieuport 17 GBR was originally created - there was a gap in the team's development schedule that allowed it to be developed).

 

AI - the fact of the matter, as I've said before, is it's very hard to find good AI coders to come and work for the team, because they are in such high demand in all sorts of fields. One of the developers recently said either on here or on Discord it's not difficult to find 3D artists, but finding good coders is much, much more difficult. It's not for lack of trying that they've not been able to find more reinforcements in that area.

 

 

We'll see. ?

The way you worded that is a little bit word-chess'y, because it makes it look as if FC FM positively "will" when in reality it just "might" (in a 10:1 odds kind of scenario) receive priority once all the WW2 stuff is done.
Sorry, but I've seen that happen too much, at the time it was stated as "won't repeat the same mistake" and "will take a look at" etc.
So you'll just simply have to excuse me if I don't accept anything other than a legally binding & signed PDF document provided with a statement that that's exactly what's going to be the road forward.
And even that's got a legal loophole, such as, profits no longer viable and GB is shut down in favor of the new sim, I can instantly see WW1 getting the boot in favor of WW2, because there's precedence, Rise of Flight vs GB, and not before Rise of Flight got effectively "forever-slept" with bullet dispersion.
Further, why wasn't existing FM's prioritized, such as regular Nieuport 17?

Do we have public data on FC sales done to date? Do we have ANYTHING to explain why FC's sustainability & survival has been effectively held hostage for so many years now?
Can't FC's FM be outsourced to a team who's both willing and able? How much will this cost?
Can modders make FM adjustments based on Holtzauge's book & overall historical data, be tested on servers running mods and vetted by all currently active pilots, then be submitted to 1C for official incorporation?

Edited October 30, 2023 by Red_Von_Hammer
Edited for typo.

[Trooper117]

I think we will probably be left with a lame duck, sad to say... maybe the dev's would like to do something to make the game everything it could be, but realistically they have to go where the money is, and I suppose that will be the new project.

If that's the way it goes then so be it... but it may have an impact on sales for FC4, as there will be people who won't want to buy into something further if it won't be fixed.

[Russkly]

9 minutes ago, Trooper117 said:

I think we will probably be left with a lame duck, sad to say... maybe the dev's would like to do something to make the game everything it could be, but realistically they have to go where the money is, and I suppose that will be the new project.

If that's the way it goes then so be it... but it may have an impact on sales for FC4, as there will be people who won't want to buy into something further if it won't be fixed.

 

Agree with your points, and this was precisely why I asked the question @Trooper117: a further USD160 for a few planes and a bit more map and (finally) some autumn/winter seasons; but beyond that no further improvements to the core components FM & AI (and I'm guessing Career Mode, which has many already-reported issues).

 

At least now people can make their purchasing decision armed with all the facts, but I'm finding the final two modules now look very over-priced.

 

Annoyed I pre-ordered FC3 now. I would not have done so had this thread been out there beforehand.

 

 

[Trooper117]

25 minutes ago, Russkly said:

but I'm finding the final two modules now look very over-priced.

 

I said that awhile back... FC1 and 2, 10 aeroplanes, FC3, only 8 aeroplanes, and I'm assuming that's still the plan for FC4.

I don't want to sound too disheartened though as there could always be a change to the circumstances, you never know... I have stupidly hung on so far hoping for a light at the end of the FC tunnel...

[Red_Von_Hammer]

27 minutes ago, Russkly said:

 

Agree with your points, and this was precisely why I asked the question @Trooper117: a further USD160 for a few planes and a bit more map and (finally) some autumn/winter seasons; but beyond that no further improvements to the core components FM & AI (and I'm guessing Career Mode, which has many already-reported issues).

 

At least now people can make their purchasing decision armed with all the facts, but I'm finding the final two modules now look very over-priced.

 

Annoyed I pre-ordered FC3 now. I would not have done so had this thread been out there beforehand.

 

 

The more I think about it, the more gutted I get.
I knew we wouldn't get the same amount of planes, worst case scenario in so far as I knew, and I said as much.
Given the price point I was thinking "we won't have to live with RoF's flawed core mechanics, Career, AI and FM here in under, totally worth it".
I came back thinking FM's may have been improved, then learn not only is it still the same, but even revised/new FM's are off the table.

"sry guys it is what it is" didn't become common knowledge on forums and in the community until after FC3 became available for pre-order, nothing was mentioned in the news department & social media, or, more importantly, webstore about >reusing< flawed RoF core mechanics.
It was probably lapse in communication, but it still shouldn't have occurred.
How and where did it all go wrong exactly?

[LukeFF]

2 hours ago, Red_Von_Hammer said:

Can't FC's FM be outsourced to a team who's both willing and able? How much will this cost?
Can modders make FM adjustments based on Holtzauge's book & overall historical data, be tested on servers running mods and vetted by all currently active pilots, then be submitted to 1C for official incorporation?

 

Given that flight models have never been outsourced going back to the days of RoF, don't count on that happening now. 

 

21 minutes ago, Red_Von_Hammer said:

"sry guys it is what it is" didn't become common knowledge on forums and in the community until after FC3 became available for pre-order, nothing was mentioned in the news department & social media, or, more importantly, webstore about >reusing< flawed RoF core mechanics.
It was probably lapse in communication, but it still shouldn't have occurred.
How and where did it all go wrong exactly?

 

I thought Jason made it pretty clear to everyone that there would be no FM changes coming when FC was first announced, but I don't have the time at the moment to try to go back and see what exactly he said about no more FM updates coming. But, for sure it wasn't some comment buried in an obscure topic. ?

[Red_Von_Hammer]

1 hour ago, LukeFF said:

Given that flight models have never been outsourced going back to the days of RoF, don't count on that happening now.

Again, news to me, was unaware it even being a factor.

 

 

1 hour ago, LukeFF said:

I thought Jason made it pretty clear to everyone that there would be no FM changes coming when FC was first announced, but I don't have the time at the moment to try to go back and see what exactly he said about no more FM updates coming. But, for sure it wasn't some comment buried in an obscure topic. ?

Again, news to me.
Not demanding you do go dig it up, but alluding to the fact that it is on a forum or 3/4th's the way down on an article is the scary bit.

You can't possibly expect customers to delve into ages old announcements & forum posts to find out & stay ahead of these things?

Webshop currently states:

And:

Where does it say outdated Rise of Flight core mechanics will be re-used?

Reality is we're subscribing/buying into a neigh on 10 year old FM that was flawed already at it's original conception, even wikipedia articles on bottom-line/broad aspects of handling characteristics (backed up by excerpts from pilot testimony) for most of these planes are more accurate (Alb D.V/D.Va & N.28 for instance) than what FC currently portrays them to be.
There's a Youtube video (and the small matter of Mccudden's testimony) of a Dr.1 w/Rotary engine doing things FC currently portrays to be utterly impossible.

So again, news to me, and it'll legitimately & literally remain news to anyone who currently buys FC based just off what is stated on the webstore.

Am I demanding noggins roll because I personally don't get my FM's? No, not what I'm about.
I bought FC3 and I'll buy FC4 having a pretty good idea what the score is, and I'll keep buying WW1 sims because it's just... what I do.
(and not forgetting, it's not my private little game).
But in ethical terms, different ballgame, the matter of archaic & unhistorical FM's (which is what they are), & other flawed aspects, ported over from an inferior title, to a modern-day sim (as GB is indeed advertised, might I add), should absolutely have been communicated clearly on the webshop/steam shop pages.
Customers, both old & new, right from the very get-go, should have been informed via web/steam shops, years ago.

Clarity in that regard, as outlined above, for the reasons stated above, would have come in handy for, amongst others, people like @Russkly whom expressed signs of regret for their purchase exactly because of it.

Ow well, too late for that now anyway.

You're a CM/Admin keeping a tight ship, in keeping with the highest standards anyone can ask someone in your position.
And you deserve accolades for that (and I for one, wouldn't have it any other way).
But you're not a magician, and (unless you knew long before this "blew up", but I'm not in any way suggesting nor expecting that you did) you're certainly not to blame for anything.

Edited October 30, 2023 by Red_Von_Hammer
Things escalated.

[Trooper117]

For me, problems with FC were highlighted by game updates and changes to the WWII side of the game, which then had an impact and caused problems for FC in the WWI world... If FC could have been made separate those problems would not have manifested into WWI.

I think that side of it has been corrected (I might be wrong) but it shows that regardless of what was said originally, the dev's should still keep making an effort to make FC a stellar part of the GB world, otherwise new people will buy into a game that still has flaws that they were not aware of, and may not have bought into FC if they knew the full picture and circumstances of why it was introduced...

Does it say on the store page that FC has been a port of the aeroplanes from RoF? Plus that there may be no work on improving the FM, you buy and you get what you get?