Latest Patch HURRICANES NOT STARTING AGAIN???

[planespotter]

Poop. I love my Hurricane...it takes more hits before going down!

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by MadTommy

Ok i take it back, i will respond.

Please look at my posting history and quote me once ever talk about broken promises or similar or any reference to these supposed held beliefs. I think you must be getting me confused with someone entirely different.

No need, In that my post was not directed and you and you alone.

As for the phrase 'broken promises' is interchangeable with other forum statements..

The phrase broken promises is just the one I see used the most, but feel free to replace it with any of the following..

For example, many here say they feel 'ripped off' or 'lied to' or 'cheated' etc.. etc.. its all the same

[Catseye]

Originally Posted by planespotter

Ok, back to thread topic...sorry to be boring...what is best solution for starting RAF machines. Has way found to spawn warm? Can fmb be used to start warm?

Colander over at ATAG is looking into getting aircraft to spawn warmed up at some airfields. As I understand it, it is proving to be difficult but he is still looking at ways to accomplish this.

The RAF aircraft that do not start unfortunately are broken in the release and the only solution to date is provided by ATAG with airstarts at Eastchurch on a couple of models.

Once the startup and mixture issues are resolved, including the more obvious graphic glitches corrected, I think that we will have a playable sim to carry us on until the sequel.

[Catseye]

Originally Posted by planespotter

Poop. I love my Hurricane...it takes more hits before going down!

Me too! Especially the 100 oct.

This is one of the airstart aircraft at Eastchurch on one of the maps on the ATAG server.

[MadTommy]

Originally Posted by ACE-OF-ACES

For example, many here say they feel 'ripped off' or 'lied to' or 'cheated' etc.. etc.. its all the same

I agree.. such terms are clearly childish. I have never posted any such views or comments. Hell $50 on a video game is pocket change... Just don't tarnish me with that crap. Stop bloody trolling.

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by MadTommy

I agree.. such terms are clearly childish.

Agreed 100%

Originally Posted by MadTommy

I have never posted any such views or comments.

If that is true, than please forgive me! In that I must have you confused with someone else!

Originally Posted by MadTommy

Hell $50 on a video game is pocket change...

Agreed 100%

Originally Posted by MadTommy

Just don't tarnish me with that crap.

See above!

Originally Posted by MadTommy

Stop bloody trolling.

As I told you before

I was done!

Can not help those whos minds are closed!

I have proved my point

No need to prove it over and over!

Nuff said! Unless you got more to say about it?

[Chivas]

Originally Posted by Catseye

Chivas,
I don't think you should be too quick to denigrate the "community" in general terms of lacking logic.

Looking back over the posts on this thread, I find some well placed, erudite and very logical points or comments in general from all sides.

What I am seeing though, is the arguments being placed from two different perspectives. One perspective is that of a Beta tester. The other perspective is one of a client who has purchased a product.

Both perspectives have their valid points. However and regrettably, the process that 1C has chosen to improve on Cliffs and prepare for the next release, is to dump Beta versions into the community and expecting coordinated and factual results.

This would be similar IMHO, to having a community leader present a scenario to a town hall meeting. You surely will see a mix of logic, emotions, passions, variations, suggestions and outright insults ensue.

A solution that comes to mind eminates from managing customer expectations and implementing procedures in a more streamlined approach. To me, the solution is the process of formal inside and outside beta teams. I've had the good fortune in the past to be on the Falcon4 outside beta team and the Flanker outside beta team.

Flanker IMHO was the best because: Testers had to apply, give their credentials, be chosen and issued passwords and protected download opportunities. The Flanker Devs had beta test documents on their site to be accessed directly that had to be filled out accurately. They had version control. NDA's were signed. Text was issued detailing changes made to the previous version, problems to be specifically checked for the current one and other information. Testers could access a list of issues identified previously by testers with specifics so as not to report the same already identified issue. The inside team was an exclusive group of about 10 Beta testers with specific qualifications. (They were really in the outside world - not at the Devs location.) After they had first crack at the latest version and adjustments made, that corrected version was sent out to the outside team of about 30 or so testers for verification. After that go around several times, the patch or update was issued publicly.

The reward for being on the testing teams was: Too be a part of the development of a product that I and others passionately cared about; recognition with names of all the testers printed in the manual; a GREAT T-shirt entitled - "Flanker Testing Team" with a super imprint of the Flanker in flight. To me, that was enough.

So here we are arguing amongst ourselves with our passions about a sim we all care about while approaching the arguements from different perspectives. While you may consider yourself to be a beta tester for Cliffs, I and others at this time do not. Therefore, the perspective of what is being released to the community is very different indeed.

I would consider applying to be on the tester team if that option was made available by 1C. But as it is now, I'm just a paying customer. I think that: if we all took time to be aware of the mish-mash of opinion, our own perspectives and the source of the opinions in the community that is generated by what I consider a flawed Beta system it certainly would be better for all.

I respect the opinions that you and other's more inclined to be beta testers put out. I also urge you to understand that headings in the forum that are not within the beta testers report section should not be subject to a beta testers perspective but rather should be considered to be that of the general client base instead. To that end, they are not IMHO subject to the same criteria that you or a passionate beta tester would expect to be appropriate.

Our enthusiasm and passions in the forum world will naturally foment into what we are experiencing now. Unless you belong to a specic group ie., heart specialists, plumbers, farmers, quilters or . . . . qualified beta testers - and have the same credentials, education, training, language nuances, goals - then the discourse is disjointed, dysfunctional, non-productive and generally decays to the lowest common denominator . . . . . which is personal insults.

I think we are all better than this.

I don't believe the majority are logically dysfunctional, and hope there is a silent majority, waiting with more patience and understanding of the difficulties. Like I've said many times before the development deserve alot of heat for the unfinished release, and the problems are significant enough that its certainly not necessary to misinform, exaggerate, to make a point. How the recent code changes that caused a different engine start problem can be extrapulated into the devs not doing any patch testing is not very logical. Possible but not logical.

We bought an unfinished product without doing our due diligence, relying on past history. That won't happen again. That doesn't make it right, but the developer made an apology and appeared to have every intention to make it right. They've rewritten and provided patches for the sound and graphic engine, and are in the process of rewriting the GUI, AI, SDK, etc. Unfortunately they can't do that forever and survive financially, so they will be releasing a paid Sequel with hopefully many of these fixes included. I will buy the Sequel only after doing my due diligence this time, and make sure the fixes/features I want are working and they apply to the Channel Map as well as the Russian Maps.

[Catseye]

[QUOTE=Chivas;46601
We bought an unfinished product without doing our due diligence, relying on past history. That won't happen again. That doesn't make it right, but the developer made an apology and appeared to have every intention to make it right. They've rewritten and provided patches for the sound and graphic engine, and are in the process of rewriting the GUI, AI, SDK, etc. Unfortunately they can't do that forever and survive financially, so they will be releasing a paid Sequel with hopefully many of these fixes included. I will buy the Sequel only after doing my due diligence this time, and make sure the fixes/features I want are working and they apply to the Channel Map as well as the Russian Maps.[/QUOTE]

Agree 100%
I will also be evaluating very carefully the features of the sequel prior to purchasing. As it stands now, I think that we will have a reasonably steady and flyable sim with the recent major issues fixed and noticeable graphic anomalies corrected. I have accepted the approach by the Devs to concentrate on new development and don't expect a large investment of their time to bring COD up to full completion at this time. I do expect though, that the sequel will have some form of compatibility wherein we will get to experience COD as it was intended to be from the outset.

In the meantime, I and my squadmates will enjoy flying on some of the great servers we have until the sequel arrives. I see great potential despite the current frustrations experienced by all parties.

Despite my venting at beta results and procedures, all-in-all, I'm enjoying the sim immensely.

[LoBiSoMeM]

How can i start my Hurricane, ACE-OF-ACES?!?!?!

[Chivas]

Originally Posted by Catseye

Agree 100%
I will also be evaluating very carefully the features of the sequel prior to purchasing. As it stands now, I think that we will have a reasonably steady and flyable sim with the recent major issues fixed and noticeable graphic anomalies corrected. I have accepted the approach by the Devs to concentrate on new development and don't expect a large investment of their time to bring COD up to full completion at this time. I do expect though, that the sequel will have some form of compatibility wherein we will get to experience COD as it was intended to be from the outset.

In the meantime, I and my squadmates will enjoy flying on some of the great servers we have until the sequel arrives. I see great potential despite the current frustrations experienced by all parties.

Despite my venting at beta results and procedures, all-in-all, I'm enjoying the sim immensely.

Yes, there is plenty to vent about, but COD is just a map, with some dedicated aircraft, missions, and campaigns. Everything depends on them fixing the game engine and features for the Sequel. Any fixes will apply to all maps. When you fly the COD map in the sequel, the game engine, and features won't revert back to the version of features that we have now. Yes the mission and campaigns won't change, but the community will fill that void, building much better ones with improve game features, and game engine. Although Luthier has been sending mixed messages about the business model and Sequels. Hopefully the announcement on the future of the development will be good news.