Why Does The Player's Aircraft Always Land Last?

[KodiakJac]

Has 1C ever explained why they think the player landing last if under AI control when arriving at an airfield enriches the player's simming experience?

[ShamrockOneFive]

I always land first. ATC doesn't even complain about it.

[I./JG53_BlackJaguar]

I was just thinking exactly the same thing. I just stared flying recently after a longer break. No matter what is position in the squadron, my plane always lands last. I also  noticed that when my plane lands (I use AI for the landing procedure), sometimes the slats on my Bf 109 E-7 get damaged and the AI uses power too much and makes some silly movements...

[LukeFF]

2 hours ago, ShamrockOneFive said:

I always land first. ATC doesn't even complain about it.

 

What he said. ? There is nothing that keeps you from jumping the line and landing before the AI. Been doing that myself for years.

[jeanba]

3 hours ago, ShamrockOneFive said:

I always land first. ATC doesn't even complain about it.

I never land, I am always shot down before

[Monty_Thrud]

A Player will land first, AI players Plane lands last as it dosent park in the same spot but next/near to AI spot so you can stop it/avoid collision with objects near by, I guess.

[Gambit21]

3 hours ago, ShamrockOneFive said:

I always land first. ATC doesn't even complain about it.

#shammyhacksrock

 

 

 

 

[KodiakJac]

2 hours ago, LukeFF said:

 

There is nothing that keeps you from jumping the line and landing before the AI. Been doing that myself for years.

 

That's what I have also been doing for years.  But why should we have to?  It often feels unrealistic having to duck and weave through a crowded landing circuit.  I land my plane myself about 50% of the time (and always if my plane is damaged, as I stand a better chance of landing safely than with the AI).  But the other 50% of the time I love landing under AI so I can watch my flaps and gear drop with the F2 view, and then use the F3 fly-by view to watch the flare, etc.  But you pay a dear price if you want to do that, as you often have to wait 20 minutes or more in the circuit before your plane lands last.

 

And my question is why has 1C done this?  In PWCG missions the player's plane always lands first.  But I also enjoy the IL-2 Career mode, other than your aircraft always landing last.

 

Has 1C ever explained why they have done this?  What is the benefit of doing so?

 

Edited March 13, 2024 by KodiakJac

[Billsponge1972]

If my plane is damaged I will land as fast as possible.

I don't think the AI lets damaged planes land first. 

And I don't ever use autopilot but sometimes my wingmen land first because they arrived at the airfield first.

Edited March 13, 2024 by Billsponge1972
Grammar

[Missionbug]

If I make it back to the airfield, I also land myself first before the rest get in the way, sometimes I get a little over zealous though and come in a little too fast after skipping the que.

 

Take care and be safe.

 

Wishing you all the very best, Pete.

[KodiakJac]

My question isn't how to circumvent the fact that the player's plane always lands last under AI control, but rather if 1C has ever explained why they have done this.

 

And if not, then I'm asking 1C "Why does the player's plane always land last when under AI control?"

[Gambit21]

16 minutes ago, KodiakJac said:

My question isn't how to circumvent the fact that the player's plane always lands last under AI control, but rather if 1C has ever explained why they have done this.

 

And if not, then I'm asking 1C "Why does the player's plane always land last when under AI control?"

It should be fairly obvious, it’s due to how airfield logic is hard coded.

All aircraft land, taxi, then park in the same spot, then get deleted.

 

So…what would happen if the AI player aircraft didn’t land last? Is the logic supposed to delete the player aircraft? Not possible, or desirable.

 

The question you should be asking is when will airfield logic be overhauled with individual parking spaces etc.

 

 

Thus eliminating the single waypoint park/delete logic.

Airfield logic is very flexible for takeoff, but not so much upon landing.

[Missionbug]

13 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

The question you should be asking is when will airfield logic be overhauled with individual parking spaces etc.

 

 

In the early days of the old IL-2 it was the same as now where each aircraft dissapeared, I hated it, they did alter it eventually though I think with Forgotten Battles so I wonder why they opted again for this method in the modern iteration as no liked liked it in the first one and it was changed then.

 

Was/is it a case of resources?

 

I like to land and taxi in with other aircraft as it makes the whole experience far more life-like with each going to their own parking space on the airfield, I am an off-line player so cannot say about how things are in Multiplayer but it is sorely needed, however, are the team likely to change it now so many years into the life-span of this sim I very much doubt especially with a new product supposedly in the pipeline.

 

Why are the same mistakes repeated time and again?  It baffles me, they have been a part of this community for so long now that they should understand from the get go what the player enjoys and does not.

 

Take care and be safe.

 

Wishing you all the very best, Pete.

[Yogiflight]

27 minutes ago, Gambit21 said:

The question you should be asking is when will airfield logic be overhauled with individual parking spaces etc.

 

 

Thus eliminating the single waypoint park/delete logic.

[Zooropa_Fly]

Yep, assignable parking spots would be great. 

I've always tought there should also be some kind of formation landing command, where whatever's left of the group land one behind each other.

Apart from solving the OP problem, would help get objects out of the game much quicker. And in a game where resources can be an issue, that reason alone could be seen as justification to implement quicker ways of getting planes down. 

As a side, I think ww1 planes use the same routines as ww2 - it's torturous watching those crates circle a 5km radius and land at a rate of 1/circuit. A bit ott !  

[KodiakJac]

1 hour ago, Gambit21 said:

It should be fairly obvious, it’s due to how airfield logic is hard coded.

All aircraft land, taxi, then park in the same spot, then get deleted.

 

So…what would happen if the AI player aircraft didn’t land last? Is the logic supposed to delete the player aircraft? Not possible, or desirable.

 

Nope.  With PWCG missions the player aircraft lands first when under AI control.  And I've sat there and waited.  When the next AI aircraft in my flight lands, it parks near to me, but doesn't run into me.  It's fun watching it come in and taxi up next to me.  It then disappears so the next AI plane doesn't crash into it when it parks, I guess.  But an AI aircraft will not collide with the player's parked aircraft after landing and taxiing under AI control.

 

And since the player's aircraft lands first with PWCG missions, it means it would only be a small tweak of a variable to do the same with the IL-2 Career missions, not a huge code change.  That's why I'm curious why 1C hasn't already done it.  I can't think of any reason why the player's aircraft landing last under AI control is a benefit.

[Gambit21]

17 hours ago, KodiakJac said:

Nope.  With PWCG missions the player aircraft lands first when under AI control.  And I've sat there and waited.  When the next AI aircraft in my flight lands, it parks near to me, but doesn't run into me.  It's fun watching it come in and taxi up next to me.  It then disappears so the next AI plane doesn't crash into it when it parks, I guess.  But an AI aircraft will not collide with the player's parked aircraft after landing and taxiing under AI control.

 

And since the player's aircraft lands first with PWCG missions, it means it would only be a small tweak of a variable to do the same with the IL-2 Career missions, not a huge code change.  That's why I'm curious why 1C hasn't already done it.  I can't think of any reason why the player's aircraft landing last under AI control is a benefit.

Well then Patrick is doing something clever.  Not sure what.

[Panzerlang]

17 hours ago, Gambit21 said:

Well then Patrick is doing something clever.  Not sure what.

Patrick also has AI planes with different pilot abilities, while the game's own career gives them all the same level. I've often wondered why they didn't pay/employ him to make it over.

[Lusekofte]

8 hours ago, jeanba said:

I never land, I am always shot down before

Don’t mind these amateurs, they don’t know how to use a plane to the fullest. 
I bet they even have fuel and ammo left

[Gambit21]

16 hours ago, Hetzer-JG52 said:

Patrick also has AI planes with different pilot abilities, while the game's own career gives them all the same level. I've often wondered why they didn't pay/employ him to make it over.

That’s just standard, available editor settings in that case though - easy to do.

 

[jeanba]

6 hours ago, Lusekofte said:

Don’t mind these amateurs, they don’t know how to use a plane to the fullest. 
I bet they even have fuel and ammo left

What ?

It is a shame, they are coward

I will report their lack of dedication to Soviet Union to the party !

 

[EAF19_Marsh]

I had forgotten that you could fly your aircraft as AI. I use auto-level when am doing a bit of sight-seeing or messing about with my controls, but this is news to me.

 

Also, landing is fun. I would not let anyone do it for me. When I used to do GA it was always one of my favorite bits as it required precision to hit the runway with elegance.

Edited March 15, 2024 by EAF19_Marsh

[KodiakJac]

@EAF19_Marsh

 

I also like landing my plane.  I do it about 50% of the time.  But I also like watching my flaps and gear drop in the F2 view, and then watching the approach on final and the flare in the F3 fly-by view.  Both are lots of fun!  But waiting for the AI to land my plane last is a pain!  It often takes about 20 minutes flying in the circuit before it lands, and I've never understood why the players plane always lands last in Career mode knowing it lands first in PWCG missions when you are the flight leader.  So it should be very easy for 1C to change. ?

 

Edited March 15, 2024 by KodiakJac

[jollyjack]

On 3/14/2024 at 2:17 AM, Lusekofte said:

Don’t mind these amateurs, they don’t know how to use a plane to the fullest. 
I bet they even have fuel and ammo left

 

Scout's honor, while i am deep into Icky's terrific Kuban Wall campaign right now, i actuality tried to jettison all on landing but myself.

Could not find the right toilet chains just yet for IL2 planes. Always these friggin' bombs reappear when un-limited ammo is on.

[EAF19_Marsh]

3 hours ago, KodiakJac said:

But I also like watching my flaps and gear drop in the F2 view

Yep, there is that part. I like putting on the techno chat (but nobody listens to techno) and seeing how deep into the red I can get on approach.

 

Also, I quoted you because that sounds somewhat kinky and I laughed.

[AEthelraedUnraed]

You're assuming that 1CGS is making a conscious decision to make the player always land last. I think this is a flawed assumption.

 

On 3/13/2024 at 7:27 PM, KodiakJac said:

And my question is why has 1C done this?  In PWCG missions the player's plane always lands first.

I think the question is rather *if* 1CGS has done anything. PWCG missions don't use any different AI than career missions. Nor does any mission logic exist that allows one to directly determine the order in which planes land, while both PWCG and the Career use the same mission logic building blocks. I therefore think it's highly unlikely that 1CGS has some kind of nefarious conspiracy going on to make people wait.

 

Now supposing that any statistical difference between PWCG does indeed exist, this might be caused by for example the location at which the landing command is triggered, e.g. directly overhead the airfield, or 10km beforehand. Or it might have to do with how the airfield taxi paths are configured, including some unlucky timing of the circuit and any planes that may still be on the runway. Which means that it could also be an airfield-specific thing, in which case the only difference between PWCG and the career might be that they use different airfields.

[KodiakJac]

2 hours ago, AEthelraedUnraed said:

You're assuming that 1CGS is making a conscious decision to make the player always land last. I think this is a flawed assumption.

 

I think the question is rather *if* 1CGS has done anything. PWCG missions don't use any different AI than career missions. Nor does any mission logic exist that allows one to directly determine the order in which planes land, while both PWCG and the Career use the same mission logic building blocks. I therefore think it's highly unlikely that 1CGS has some kind of nefarious conspiracy going on to make people wait.

 

I don't think it is a nefarious decision by 1C to make the players plane land last, but it is a programmatic decision.  The player's plane lands last in every IL-2 Great Battles Career mission.  And the player's plane lands first in every PWCG mission (with the only exception being those planes in the flight that have broken out of the flight to return home early).  I've got IL-2 GB careers and PWCG careers going that are flying out of the same airfield, and the behavior never changes.  I've flown hundreds and hundreds of IL-2 Career and PWCG career missions on a multitude of airfields and the behavior never changes. 

 

It should be a very simple thing for 1C to change, as I've never talked to anyone who likes the fact that the player's plane lands last in Career missions.  It should be a crowd pleaser for 1C to do with very little effort on their part. 

[AEthelraedUnraed]

17 minutes ago, KodiakJac said:

 

I don't think it is a nefarious decision by 1C to make the players plane land last, but it is a programmatic decision.  The player's plane lands last in every IL-2 Great Battles Career mission.  And the player's plane lands first in every PWCG mission (with the only exception being those planes in the flight that have broken out of the flight to return home early).  I've got IL-2 GB careers and PWCG careers going that are flying out of the same airfield, and the behavior never changes.  I've flown hundreds and hundreds of IL-2 Career and PWCG career missions on a multitude of airfields and the behavior never changes. 

 

It should be a very simple thing for 1C to change, as I've never talked to anyone who likes the fact that the player's plane lands last in Career missions.  It should be a crowd pleaser for 1C to do with very little effort on their part. 

The thing is; career missions use exactly the same mission format as well as exactly the same AI, as PWCG does. It therefore cannot have been a programmatic decision.

 

I think it likely wasn't any decision at all, but find it much more believable that any difference in behaviour is an unintended side-effect of something else.

 

Neither do I think Patrick has made any deliberate effort to make player aircraft land first, although @PatrickAWlsonperhaps can elaborate?

[PatrickAWlson]

56 minutes ago, AEthelraedUnraed said:

The thing is; career missions use exactly the same mission format as well as exactly the same AI, as PWCG does. It therefore cannot have been a programmatic decision.

 

I think it likely wasn't any decision at all, but find it much more believable that any difference in behaviour is an unintended side-effect of something else.

 

Neither do I think Patrick has made any deliberate effort to make player aircraft land first, although @PatrickAWlsonperhaps can elaborate?

 

No.  I set the formation sequence correctly and expect landing sequence to be the same as takeoff sequence.  There is nothing in the ME that controls landing sequence that I am aware of.  Control tower logic is not visible.  If a developer comes on and says "this is how our code determines landing order" then maybe I can do something.

[KodiakJac]

I always fly as the leader in both Career and PWCG missions.  In Career mode I never land first under AI control.  In PWCG I always land first under AI control.  So there is somehow a difference between the two mission types.  What I haven't tried, is taking the 2nd position in a flight with PWCG to see if I land 2nd instead of first.  What I do know, is that with the IL-2 Career mode, no matter my position in my flight, I land last under AI control if we all arrive back at the airfield together. 

 

Here is a PWCG mission I made for Juri to take a look at.  It is a "no contact" mission so you won't have to fight.  Just fly all the waypoints manually or with the autopilot, then turn on the autopilot "A" when you are between the Egress waypoint and the Approach waypoint and watch your plane land first before your 4 wingmen.

 

When this came up about 6 months ago, someone who was a mission or campaign creator said a "Wait" command is issued to the player's aircraft when it arrives back to an airfield with its flight, thus causing it to land last.  But I don't know anything about how that works or why it's being done.

 

PWCG Mission - Player Lands First.zip

Edited March 15, 2024 by KodiakJac

[KodiakJac]

This is huge!  @Juri_JS tested a PWCG mission where the player's plane lands first under Autopilot "A" control, and this is what he found...

 

"I've tested the PWCG mission to see what caused the player plane to land first. The surprising result is that the player lands first when the planes are not enabled at mission start, but rather activated/spawned. When I enabled the planes at mission start, the player would no longer land first."

 

As I said above, when this came up about 6 months ago, someone who was a mission/campaign creator said a "Wait" command is issued against the player's aircraft on Career missions when it arrives back at its airfield with its flight, thus causing it to land last.  I'm guessing 1C did this for testing purposes, and it has since been long forgotten.  If 1C removes the "Wait" command issued against the player's aircraft as it enters the landing pattern in Career missions it will stop landing last!

 

Thank you Juri!

 

cc: @PatrickAWlson 

 

[AEthelraedUnraed]

4 hours ago, KodiakJac said:

As I said above, when this came up about 6 months ago, someone who was a mission/campaign creator said a "Wait" command is issued against the player's aircraft on Career missions when it arrives back at its airfield with its flight, thus causing it to land last.  I'm guessing 1C did this for testing purposes, and it has since been long forgotten.  If 1C removes the "Wait" command issued against the player's aircraft as it enters the landing pattern in Career missions it will stop landing last!

There does not exist any "wait" command. I'm sure you must've misunderstood what this guy meant (whoever it was). Your theory also directly contradicts the findings by Juri_JS, which indicate that the landing order is already determined at the mission start rather than when the player arrives back at the airfield.

 

It's still a very interesting discovery though. @Juri_JS let me get this straight; the player lands first if the player aircraft is enabled from the beginning while all other aircraft are spawned in later? In that case, it sounds as though aircraft land in the order they are created. If so, one would expect that it's also possible to influence the landing order by changing the ID; i.e. planes would land in order (either descending or ascending) of the ID code. Do you happen to know if this was indeed the case for your test mission?

[Juri_JS]

22 minutes ago, AEthelraedUnraed said:

It's still a very interesting discovery though. @Juri_JS let me get this straight; the player lands first if the player aircraft is enabled from the beginning while all other aircraft are spawned in later? In that case, it sounds as though aircraft land in the order they are created. If so, one would expect that it's also possible to influence the landing order by changing the ID; i.e. planes would land in order (either descending or ascending) of the ID code. Do you happen to know if this was indeed the case for your test mission?

In the PWCG mission posted above all aircraft are not enabled at mission start.  Instead the player aircraft is activated and the wingmen are spawned. When this is the case, the player aircraft will land first. When I had edited the mission and enabled all aircraft at mission start, the player landed last. I haven't checked what happens when only the player is enabled and the other aircraft are activated or spawned.

 

I've also checked if the ID code has any influence, but a lower number for the player aircraft has no influence on the landing order.

Edited March 16, 2024 by Juri_JS

[KodiakJac]

On 3/16/2024 at 12:57 PM, AEthelraedUnraed said:

There does not exist any "wait" command. I'm sure you must've misunderstood what this guy meant (whoever it was).

 

If that is the case, then I'll change my comment to "wait" programming.  There is code of some kind that forces the player's aircraft to land last if the player's aircraft has been enabled rather than activated/spawned at the inception of a mission as Juri has explained.

 

Thanks!

[AEthelraedUnraed]

4 hours ago, KodiakJac said:

If that is the case, then I'll change my comment to "wait" programming.  There is code of some kind that forces the player's aircraft to land last if the player's aircraft has been enabled rather than activated/spawned at the inception of a mission as Juri has explained.

 

Thanks!

Well, there is definitely something in the code that determines which aircraft lands when. But that doesn't mean that it needs to be *explicitly* coded, nor does it have to be in the game code rather than the mission code or mission generation code. As I said, it can also be an unintended side-effect of something else.

 

Which I suspect it is in this case. I did some testing. Custom made mission, 7 aircraft (Yak-9), Lapino map. I numbered them 1 to 7 according to their number in the formation (1=formation leader, 7=last wingman). I noted down the order of their mission code ID numbers, which is *not* equal to their order in the formation. Waypoint a short while ahead, directly followed by a Land command. Player is in one of the aircraft; I switched on auto pilot as soon as the mission loaded. I made several flights, every time changing one thing compared to the first one:

 

Test results:

Spoiler

Test one

-Order of in-game mission code IDs: 1 3 2 5 4 7 6

-All aircraft enabled on mission start

-Player was no. 4 (ID order 5)

Landing order: 1 3 2 5 4 7 6 (equal to order of mission code IDs)

 

Test two

-Order of in-game mission code IDs: 1 3 2 5 4 7 6

-All aircraft disabled on mission start, enabled after 3 seconds

-Player was no. 4 (ID order 5)

Landing order: 1 3 2 5 4 7 6 (equal to order of mission code IDs) - No difference

 

Test three

-Order of in-game mission code IDs: 1 3 2 5 4 7 6

-All aircraft enabled on mission start

-Player was no. 5 (ID order 4)

Landing order: 1 3 2 5 4 7 6 (equal to order of mission code IDs) - No difference

 

Test four

-Order of in-game mission code IDs: 1 3 2 5 4 7 6

-All aircraft enabled on mission start except 5 and 6, which were enabled after 3 seconds

-Player was no. 4 (ID order 5)

Landing order: 1 3 2 5 4 7 6 (equal to order of mission code IDs) - No difference

 

I tried switching the flight leader mission ID too, but the Editor had the nasty habit of re-ordering the IDs in such a way that the flight leader always ended up first.

Conclusions so far:

• There is no difference for player aircraft compared to AI aircraft
• There is no difference for spawned aircraft compared to those enabled at mission start
• The aircraft land in order of their mission code IDs
• The Editor re-orders mission IDs in such a way that the flight leader is always the lowest ID.

 

I suspect that this re-ordering is done by the Editor itself instead of the mission compiler (converting .mission to .msbin). In that case, this would not happen for the mission generation algorithms of either PWCG or the Career. If such, I suspect the root cause of this difference is that PWCG generates (or at least numbers) the player aircraft first, before generating all other aircraft, while the Career generates/writes the player aircraft last.

 

Some more experimenting and looking at generated mission files is needed to confirm this theory, but it's getting late here so I'll leave that to someone else. I think we've grown quite a bit bit wiser already about how the game determines the landing sequence

Edited March 18, 2024 by AEthelraedUnraed

[KodiakJac]

On 3/17/2024 at 7:05 PM, AEthelraedUnraed said:

Well, there is definitely something in the code that determines which aircraft lands when. But that doesn't mean that it needs to be *explicitly* coded, nor does it have to be in the game code rather than the mission code or mission generation code. As I said, it can also be an unintended side-effect of something else.

 

Which I suspect it is in this case. I did some testing. Custom made mission, 7 aircraft (Yak-9), Lapino map. I numbered them 1 to 7 according to their number in the formation (1=formation leader, 7=last wingman). I noted down the order of their mission code ID numbers, which is *not* equal to their order in the formation. Waypoint a short while ahead, directly followed by a Land command. Player is in one of the aircraft; I switched on auto pilot as soon as the mission loaded. I made several flights, every time changing one thing compared to the first one:

 

Test results:

  Reveal hidden contents

Test one

-Order of in-game mission code IDs: 1 3 2 5 4 7 6

-All aircraft enabled on mission start

-Player was no. 4 (ID order 5)

Landing order: 1 3 2 5 4 7 6 (equal to order of mission code IDs)

 

Test two

-Order of in-game mission code IDs: 1 3 2 5 4 7 6

-All aircraft disabled on mission start, enabled after 3 seconds

-Player was no. 4 (ID order 5)

Landing order: 1 3 2 5 4 7 6 (equal to order of mission code IDs) - No difference

 

Test three

-Order of in-game mission code IDs: 1 3 2 5 4 7 6

-All aircraft enabled on mission start

-Player was no. 5 (ID order 4)

Landing order: 1 3 2 5 4 7 6 (equal to order of mission code IDs) - No difference

 

Test four

-Order of in-game mission code IDs: 1 3 2 5 4 7 6

-All aircraft enabled on mission start except 5 and 6, which were enabled after 3 seconds

-Player was no. 4 (ID order 5)

Landing order: 1 3 2 5 4 7 6 (equal to order of mission code IDs) - No difference

 

I tried switching the flight leader mission ID too, but the Editor had the nasty habit of re-ordering the IDs in such a way that the flight leader always ended up first.

Conclusions so far:

• There is no difference for player aircraft compared to AI aircraft
• There is no difference for spawned aircraft compared to those enabled at mission start
• The aircraft land in order of their mission code IDs
• The Editor re-orders mission IDs in such a way that the flight leader is always the lowest ID.

 

I suspect that this re-ordering is done by the Editor itself instead of the mission compiler (converting .mission to .msbin). In that case, this would not happen for the mission generation algorithms of either PWCG or the Career. If such, I suspect the root cause of this difference is that PWCG generates (or at least numbers) the player aircraft first, before generating all other aircraft, while the Career generates/writes the player aircraft last.

 

Some more experimenting and looking at generated mission files is needed to confirm this theory, but it's getting late here so I'll leave that to someone else. I think we've grown quite a bit bit wiser already about how the game determines the landing sequence

 

"Anyhow, if you have any further comments or questions about the issue, I suggest taking it back to that thread again rather than going off-topic here."

 

Start a Pilot Career as Squadron Leader.  Fly a mission and tell me in what order you land under AI control.  You will land either last, or second to last in every mission.

 

Start a Pilot Career not as Squadron Leader.  Fly a number of missions and tell me in what order you land under AI control regardless of your position in the flight.  You will land either last, or second to last in every mission.

 

This is why other players are confirming what I'm saying in this poll...

Do you like the fact that the player's plane always lands last? 

It happens to all of us in Pilot Careers...landing last or second to last in every mission without regard to your position in the flight.

 

[AEthelraedUnraed]

It's possible the career mission generation code is written in such a way that in career missions the player always lands last. However, that is not what you are claiming. You claim that "in IL-2 Great Battles", i.e. in general, the player always lands last. And that is simply not true as can be easily tested. You yourself have acknowledged that in PWCG missions, the player always lands first.

 

Asking why such a thing would be the case in career missions, and especially asking "why [1CGS] think[s it] enriches the player's simming experience" is a completely moot question, since it:

1) assumes it's a conscious decision made for gameplay reasons, and

2) assumes there was any - explicit or implicit - decision about this in the first place.

 

I think neither is the case.

 

2 hours ago, KodiakJac said:

This is why other players are confirming what I'm saying in this poll...

Do you like the fact that the player's plane always lands last? 

It happens to all of us in Pilot Careers...landing last or second to last in every mission without regard to your position in the flight.

What's your goal with that poll anyhow? Put pressure on the Devs by having many players vote that they don't like it? If so, I find a grand total of 12 votes hardly convincing that this is a major issue that 1CGS should spend a lot of time/money on. Also, no-one in that poll is confirming anything. None of the comments in that thread besides your own show that people find it a major issue. Furthermore, as Ghost666 correctly points out, the poll itself is flawed since it misses an "I don't care" option, thereby assuming that people have a strong opinion about it.

Edited July 4, 2024 by AEthelraedUnraed

[KodiakJac]

I rest my case.