Official Fulqrum Publishing forum - making CloD a success

Official Fulqrum Publishing forum (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/index.php)

- IL-2 Sturmovik: Cliffs of Dover (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/forumdisplay.php?f=189)

- - making CloD a success (http://forum.fulqrumpublishing.com/showthread.php?t=32115)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Force10 (Post 426059)

Bliss has stated in the past that he absolutely HATES CO-OP. In the event that a proper CO-OP GUI was in place, ATAG probably wouldn't host any CO-OP servers, and more than likely lose some players to CO-OP. Not too good for a server that relies on donations I suppose. IMO

You should find a better outlet for your anger and resentment other than making a career out of being a troll.

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Hayward (Post 426069)

Organizing coops. Isn't the lack of a lobby one of the big complaints about CoD?

from who

Quote:

Originally Posted by KG26_Alpha (Post 426073)

from who

The professional complainers who post on this board.

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Hayward (Post 426074)

The professional complainers who post on this board.

Name them

Quote:

Originally Posted by KG26_Alpha (Post 426075)

Name them

Sorry, I stand corrected. No one wants a CoD lobby. They can just randomly enter Coop style mission servers and wait for them to fill up.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ATAG_Bliss (Post 426067)

The server doesn't rely on donations, obviously they help. But if the goal is met, I still pay almost $100 out of my own pocket every month regardless.

Good try though!~

Than maybe you can explain why anytime someone mentions wanting a proper GUI for CO-OP you come in with flamethrowers flowing? How is making more options and making CO-OPs more friendly bad for the game? You claim your for making the game better.

i was wondering...having a game browser list in il2 never worked.we all relied on 3rd party places like UBI and HL.

the game has had performance issues from the start.Is it possible that this game client that is built in to the game engine be causing the performance hits??The Client server has to talk to the game for each person that joines regardless of what server they prefer.This makes sence if you think about it. With all the far distance landscaping the engine needs to generate with all effects and such it seems to much for the game itself to have a server clien engine running at the same time. What would happen if that server list was gone and we relied on our old ways of 3rd party lobbies?This could free up resources in the game itself.Can someone of importance look into this please?

this is not no little sandbox or tiny call of duty maps.having the server client list removed would even help with bandwidth.who needs it if it does not have the features we need?

can a dev look into this please... thank you.

Force - My flameflowers come in when people come in and say COOPs are more realistic than a dynamic environment of the DF world. And if you could or would read anything I've said, I've always stated the more options for online the better.

I think some people read, but don't have the comprehension part down yet.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BH_woodstock (Post 426083)

This is what I've been saying all along. Servers connect as a client. I don't know of one steam game where servers do that besides IL2COD.

Quote:

Originally Posted by David Hayward (Post 426078)

Sorry, I stand corrected. No one wants a CoD lobby. They can just randomly enter Coop style mission servers and wait for them to fill up.

Hyperlobby has a CoD lobby already.

As there's no Coop mode it's dysfunctional

As the Steam Cod servers are unstable for DF servers its also dysfunctional.

Quote:

Originally Posted by BH_woodstock (Post 426083)

All the clients lists close when you join a server the same way HL closes when you are in a mission/server.
As for tracking Steam users in game ( i think your meaning this ) it has a timed refresh rate I would imagine.

.