Answers to Community Questions

[luthier]

Originally Posted by Falstaff

Luthier, your replies would qualify as a guilty pleasure if you were only a junior developer. As things stand, they are magnificent...a kind of traditional New Orleans jazz funeral dancing down the street, trombones blowing....

Thank you, wonderful analogy. This is exactly how I feel.

I see no reason to be polite to people who are going out of their way to be rude to me.

The game sold two and half copies in the last month and had 74 returns (I just pulled those numbers out of thin air by the way). Honestly, if I just replied witha picture of me mooning and flipping off the questions thread, the net result would be pretty much the same.

The situation sucks. I see no reason to sugarcoat it with bull. I don't want to go make empty promises or try to prove that black is white. We released a faulty game. We did more than even seemed possible to fix its faults and add improvements, but in the end it was not enough. There has to come a point where we begin to focus on the future, and Cliffs of Dover just becomes something we can all learn from.

I am sincerely very sorry we didn't do enough to keep you guys happy. Everyone in the team feels exactly the same way.

[SlipBall]

Originally Posted by luthier

Thank you, wonderful analogy. This is exactly how I feel.

I see no reason to be polite to people who are going out of their way to be rude to me.

The game sold two and half copies in the last month and had 74 returns (I just pulled those numbers out of thin air by the way). Honestly, if I just replied witha picture of me mooning and flipping off the questions thread, the net result would be pretty much the same.

The situation sucks. I see no reason to sugarcoat it with bull. I don't want to go make empty promises or try to prove that black is white. We released a faulty game. We did more than even seemed possible to fix its faults and add improvements, but in the end it was not enough. There has to come a point where we begin to focus on the future, and Cliffs of Dover just becomes something we can all learn from.



I am sincerely very sorry we didn't do enough to keep you guys happy. Everyone in the team feels exactly the same way.

Well speaking for myself, I enjoy the sim very much for my off-line use of it. Lots of pimples, but still there is a lot there to enjoy.

[MusseMus]

Originally Posted by SlipBall

Well speaking for myself, I enjoy the sim very much for my off-line use of it. Lots of pimples, but still there is a lot there to enjoy.

+1

I really really love this sim and even though some things are still broken I have a great time with it. I spent some 400 hours of playing it. I payed some 20 £ for it=what I pay for beer on a wednesday night out. A product that gives me the same pleasure as beer for 1/100 of the cost can't be bad!

Thank you for honest answers Luthier!

[Icebear]

Originally Posted by luthier

Thank you, wonderful analogy. This is exactly how I feel.

I see no reason to be polite to people who are going out of their way to be rude to me.

The game sold two and half copies in the last month and had 74 returns (I just pulled those numbers out of thin air by the way). Honestly, if I just replied witha picture of me mooning and flipping off the questions thread, the net result would be pretty much the same.

The situation sucks. I see no reason to sugarcoat it with bull. I don't want to go make empty promises or try to prove that black is white. We released a faulty game. We did more than even seemed possible to fix its faults and add improvements, but in the end it was not enough. There has to come a point where we begin to focus on the future, and Cliffs of Dover just becomes something we can all learn from.

I am sincerely very sorry we didn't do enough to keep you guys happy. Everyone in the team feels exactly the same way.

Your are kidding, don't you? Who is responsible for this? Your customers, the community?

[MadTommy]

Originally Posted by luthier

Thank you, wonderful analogy. This is exactly how I feel.

I see no reason to be polite to people who are going out of their way to be rude to me.

The game sold two and half copies in the last month and had 74 returns (I just pulled those numbers out of thin air by the way). Honestly, if I just replied witha picture of me mooning and flipping off the questions thread, the net result would be pretty much the same.

The situation sucks. I see no reason to sugarcoat it with bull. I don't want to go make empty promises or try to prove that black is white. We released a faulty game. We did more than even seemed possible to fix its faults and add improvements, but in the end it was not enough. There has to come a point where we begin to focus on the future, and Cliffs of Dover just becomes something we can all learn from.

I am sincerely very sorry we didn't do enough to keep you guys happy. Everyone in the team feels exactly the same way.

Fair play.. can't be more honest than that. Hope the future is fruitful for all.

[Kurfürst]

Regarding trees, I understand that there are way too many trees on the map to make them collidable. That was so since the original Il-2 beta, and was decided there. It was also not much a concern, given the maps were mostly for Russian steppes.

However, I am curious if collideable trees could be done (limited) within the near vicinity of airfields, where they may make a role?

[EAF92_Brigstock]

But you got so close with the last patch....

This new one shows lots of promise too. It just needs a little more care.

I pre-ordered Cliffs of Dover but ended up buying the Russian version too, when it came out, just so I could get a first look. I bought the game twice, because I wanted it so much. To see it finally coming together just as the plug is pulled is heart breaking.

I sincerely hope the RC gets the bugs in it fixed for the steam release. Especially as the last Beta patch brought in so many of the game owners who had given up on it ever coming good.
That includes myself and at least a dozen of my Squad mates. I'd not be surprised to see that reaction from across the entire customer spectrum.

[Flanker35M]

S!

Well, Battle of Britain was a major battle in WW2 and especially to Brits and it's allies it was a show of strength and determination. It had large scale aerial battles all over southeast England and ultimately over London. It decided the fate of Britain and possibly outcome of WW2. So no wonder some members might be a "bit" pissed off when CoD came out in a state it was in and now the sequel decipting Great Patriotic War with features CoD will never see, adds to the insult. Does it warrant rudeness? No, but no need to go with the crowd and dish out more rudeness

Anyways interesting info filtered out there from the intended puns and all. Bring on the next series of answers.

[Kwiatek]

Have you addressed the bugged Mixture issues in the RAF types?
Have you addressed the Engine Overheat issues in the RAF types?
Have you addressed the issue of the Spitfire under performing in terms of relative top speed compared with the 109 (e.g. see graphs in 1st post in this recent thread http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=34115)? Thank you.

Originally Posted by luthier

We keep working on aircraft performance, and hopefully the most recent patch showed some improvement in that respect.

Sry Luthier but performacne and FM of CLoD fighters still is crap. I checked british fighters with beta RC and they are still too slow ab. 20-30 mph (like before) at the deck not mention high alts flying. 109 was too slow in CLOD at ab 20-30 kph but British fighters are too slow much more -20-30 mphs ( 32- 48 kph).

Make correct low level speeds and you will get more accurate high alts speeds - that its work in old Il2.

You really need make it better.

[MusseMus]

Originally Posted by Kwiatek

Quote:
Sry Luthier but performacne and FM of CLoD fighters still is crap. I checked british fighters with beta RC and they are still too slow ab. 20-30 mph (like before) at the deck not mention high alts flying. 109 was too slow in CLOD at ab 20-30 kph but British fighters are too slow much more -20-30 mphs ( 32- 48 kph).

Make correct low level speeds and you will get more accurate high alts speeds - that its work in old Il2.

You really need make it better.

The speed gauge is showing the wrong IAS speed on all aircrafts I tested. The brit fighters show a value some 15% lower than they accualy go. The gauge in the 109 is better and only show some 5% a lower value. So the problem is not so much the aircraft's performance but the IAS gauge