Answers to Community Questions

[jimbop]

I fully agree with the concept of providing the tools the community needs to make their own content rather than trying to build it all yourself.

There are some solid reasons as to why this did not happen for CoD - hopefully these will be fixed in the sequel or the result will be exactly the same.

Aside from the game play bugs I'm thinking FMB documentation, FMB bugs, huge disconnect between FMB and what actually happens online and coop (please don't underestimate the importance of this again).

[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.

[kendo65]

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.

Thanks for the honest answers Luthier, and for covering the questions about the map.

Can I say regarding the bolded bit from your quote above that I disagree somewhat. For sure some here will be hostile no matter what you do. Others, myself included, sometimes feel that poor communication needlessly creates antagonism - eg the delay in providing answers to these questions. A simple post on the forum saying they were delayed but upcoming would have been enough to smooth things over until they were ready.

Some of us who want to be supportive feel that the (lack of) communication here is sometimes more damaging than the issues with the game.

If that could be improved i think people would feel more involved and on your side.

----

Regarding your reply about tree collision only being possible on maps with small numbers of trees! Is this not a reason to review the use of Speedtree in the COD series in favour of an alternative that can be made to work more effectively?

[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

[ACE-OF-ACES]

Originally Posted by MusseMus

So the problem is not so much the aircraft's performance but the IAS gauge

Agreed based on what I have seen thus far, the world cord (Z_) values are closer to the real world values than the indicated (I_) values.. Where the indicated values are the values used to drive the guages.

[CaptainDoggles]

Definitely not planning to release any sequel features as add-ons for Cliffs of Dover, sorry.

Really need an answer to this. Are you saying that CLOD and the Sequel will not merge together the way Forgotten Battles and Pacific Fighters did?

[jimbop]

Originally Posted by CaptainDoggles

Really need an answer to this. Are you saying that CLOD and the Sequel will not merge together the way Forgotten Battles and Pacific Fighters did?

I guess we'll have access to the CoD maps and aircraft in the sequel. What else matters? I wouldn't miss the interface.

[Continu0]

Some really disapointing things (see Mysticpumas post) which shouldn´t come in such a tone...

Some honesty on the other side...

Better make that sequel good.

Luthier, your recent RC patch has done nothing towards fixing the netcode, please fly online one night yourself and try it, I know the game is depressing but we have to put up with why dont you have a go, you may learn something.

[Moony]

Originally Posted by Tree_UK

Luthier, your recent RC patch has done nothing towards fixing the netcode, please fly online one night yourself and try it, I know the game is depressing but we have to put up with why dont you have a go, you may learn something.

LOL TREE, you haven't even logged in to steam or played the game since the patch was released....

Dear oh dear.

Thanks for answering the questions Luthier, its good to see you havent lost your sense of humour. Good luck with the sequel, hope we hear some more about it soon!