Friday Development Update - November 18, 2011

[Pluto]

Originally Posted by Robert

You're no Tree.... that's for certain.

... never intended to be one ...

[Osprey]

Just read the thread from start to finish. It's no wonder Luthier doesn't do updates, who can blame him? There's always a few bellends about, like Pluto here, who are willing to make braindead comments which add absolutely nothing. To respond to them, as Oleg used to, simply digs the hole further and wastes even more development time. The sad thing is that posts from these morons rubs off on the rest of us.

[NLS61]

Originally Posted by Osprey

Just read the thread from start to finish. It's no wonder Luthier doesn't do updates, who can blame him? There's always a few bellends about, like Pluto here, who are willing to make braindead comments which add absolutely nothing. To respond to them, as Oleg used to, simply digs the hole further and wastes even more development time. The sad thing is that posts from these morons rubs off on the rest of us.

Here here!

And besides that not to long ago they moved to larger offices.
Anybody who reads this forum regularly would know this.
Then anybody in his right mind will not move to a to small workspace.
So they had room to spare and have hence filled that.
Good for them.
So this sim wasn’t finished on delivery, but the developers are at work to remedy that.
That they will is evident as they did the same with their last product.
A product so strong that it is still actively played off- as well as online, a rarity after so many years after release.
And to all you nai sayers, they stood by that product for a long time.
Now they have stopped support but there is a strong third party developing that now.
Yes I paid the high price to standby the developer, I strongly believe that if we wouldn’t have done that then this sim would be in a sorry state, so I see it as a long term investment, when this sim goes along the same path as the last then it would prove to be a very good investment as well.
So wine along and don’t look back keep asking for what you want need or must have for you to endorse the sim.
For my part all the whiners deserve a lolly so they can be kept sweet.

Cheers,

Niels

[AKA_Tenn]

I'm going to do whatever i can to support this game... if you want to support the devs, just send in your crash dumps and keep letting the devs know their appreciated, and give them the time and space they need to make a quality product... the more you tell them to hurry up, the more chances they'll make even more mistakes... don't rush them... i got another 40 years or so before my simming days are done so i'll wait.

[klem]

Originally Posted by Osprey

Just read the thread from start to finish. It's no wonder Luthier doesn't do updates, who can blame him? There's always a few bellends about, like Pluto here, who are willing to make braindead comments which add absolutely nothing. To respond to them, as Oleg used to, simply digs the hole further and wastes even more development time. The sad thing is that posts from these morons rubs off on the rest of us.

Yes, we should ignore nonsense like that and anything else that isn't to the benefit of the CoD development.

I don't mean ignore genuine complaints clearly explained or first disappointments expressed in reasonable language but all those diatribes and trolls, don't fall for them. 'Ignore' is your friend.

[MD_Zebo]

Originally Posted by Vonte

Good on you Luthier and the boys.

I for one will be like an expectant father waiting see if his new born hasn't got the dreaded Launcher exe gene. Joking apart, thanks for you and your teams stalwart efforts. As I've said before, the Champagne is still on ice.

Regards

Vonte

Me too... had to have genes tested, she's a runner
Congrats

Thanks for the update team, please go out and have a drink at least one night one weekend.

As for the P.C specs in signature why? someone next week will have something better. is it boasting or am i missing the point?
have a pretty good spec... i'll leave you wondering

[KG26_Alpha]

Originally Posted by MD_Zebo

As for the P.C specs in signature why? someone next week will have something better. is it boasting or am i missing the point?
have a pretty good spec... i'll leave you wondering

The point is when reporting bugs or problems other forum members can see the system specs immediately and offer advice.

Also if members have a smooth running error free CoD its easier too see what system specs are making it.

It's not meant as bragging.

[Insuber]

Originally Posted by ElAurens

Insuber, you know better sir.

The only aircraft that currently hit their real world numbers, or even come close are the Hurricane and the Spitfire IIa, and in the case of the IIa it doesn't really matter because no one will put it in a plane set.

Even the lowly Fiat G.50 cannot hit even it's pathetic real world performance.

This isn't a Red vs. Blue thing, even though there are those that are trying very hard to make it that.

It's about having a simulation that actually simulates the real world performance of the aircraft involved as accurately as possible.

Give the planes their real numbers and let the chips fall where they may.

That is all that should matter.

El,

My dear friend, why do you think that I disagree with your statements about having an accurate sim, or the impartial nature of FM flaws? The "maybe" in my post was real irony, since I have not seen yet a single test for any CoD plane vs. the historical performance. If you have them I will be glad to give them a thorough read.
Among my many defects, I'm a rationalist and I use to run away from qualitative statements, as it is saying that A is undermodelled or B is overmodelled.
On the other hand we can comfortably say that the Hurri has a speed and climb advantage on the Emil, which was not the case back in 1940.
We can also say that the Emil can continue to fly without 2/3 of the right wing, as it happened to me last week on ATAG. And also that full speed dives on the Emil followed by a strong stick pull never do the slightest damage to the frame. And you can list many other flaws. Therefore, in this complete FM mess, I would be *very* surprised that the Hurri or any other plane is "close" to the real performances, in terms of climb rate, ceiling, top speed, stall speed, Vne, turn rate etc.

Ah btw I couldn't care less about the "blue vs red" thing.

have fun,
Insuber

[ElAurens]

Thanks for the clairification Insuber. We really don't disagree here, well perhaps on the speed of the Emil, as I have never been able to catch one in level flight, though from a position of height advantage I have, but only for a short time.

See you in the virtual sky soon.

S!

[Pluto]

Originally Posted by Osprey

Just read the thread from start to finish. It's no wonder Luthier doesn't do updates, who can blame him? There's always a few bellends about, like Pluto here, who are willing to make braindead comments which add absolutely nothing. To respond to them, as Oleg used to, simply digs the hole further and wastes even more development time. The sad thing is that posts from these morons rubs off on the rest of us.

...nice, nice, ... ok, that`s your opinion,... to everyman his own opinion.
You keep yours, I keep mine. This is not a sympathy contest, so I actually dont care what you guys think about my comments. This is a public forum with very different opinions of very different people who have sometimes only one thing in common, their passion for "good" WW2 flightsims. So let`s keep it that way.