Forums occupy 10-15% of my time. My main work - the design of missions and historical research.

The sequel is developed on the same engine as CloD. We can't release sequel until it will repair the engine.

We are not ready to announce now that will go into the final version of the patch. Sorry.

Ok understand about the patch, but do you know if the fixes are not in this final patch, will there be more patches to fix the problems with CLOD before BOM.

Thanks again for the information and reply's.

It's to be expected. You're dealing with people who are disappointed. Many of us see the release of BoM previews as a confirmation of the continued work on CoD and the longevity of this series. Others are insulted and think that the work on CoD has been foregone to work on BoM without the CoD issues fixed. I see both sides of the coin.

I personally think showing BoM previews was a good thing. I don't feel work on CoD has been abandoned and I don't feel hood winked by 1C.

I DO think 1C is smart enough to realize that if basic functionality isn't fixed for CoD, that future sales of BoM will.... well.... BOMB. To me it's pretty simple and there's no need for the charade of agony displayed by us members.

furbs. These questions are important, but they are really moot. 1C's future success resides with BoM. BoM's success resides with how well CoD is fixed. I don't think any of us are going to settle for things like insuficient RAM at game shows as to why the game doesn't run well. None of us are going to accept place holders for sounds like we did back last January. Cute little videos of Luthier playing "I dropped a Bomb on You" with nothing in his visual vacinity will not fool the community. I believe most of us will examine BoM closely and base our future purchase on how well CoD is optimized and made playable. This has to happen before BoM is released to the public. We're going to want a stable game... NOT PROOF af a stable game through video or updates, but to OWN a stable working CoD in each of our hard drives. I know my future purchase lays with that logic and performance by 1c. So, in essence (to me) your questions don't matter (at least not knowing doesn't bother me). And being that 1Cs future success resides with BoM, it is logical to me that the things you question are being worked on by the development team.


And seriously? Can you imagine the uproar if 1C said that things won't be fixed or gave bad news? The proof will be in the pudding. Not updates and answered questions.

@Blacksix
Maybe you could help me (missionbuilding), i try to assemble an industrial building i put the 4 parts together and if i try to save i get a error message
'Building "Bld_0" has unlinked hooks' so what are these hooks? And how to get them to work. Or is it not possible at the moment.

Now this is impossible, it is our fault. The only option - try to put on a completely flat surface. But I can not promise it will work.

Ah ok thanks, so i will not longer try it ;)

I'm curious. Does that mean you'll be responsible primarily for the single missions, online mission templates etc for the new release? What is your view on what a makes a good mission? How far into the details do you go when researching and building? :)

(not to you personally, Furbs, but to your statement, which many have in mind...)

Do you realise why things take time? its because of fixing problems. WIll the problems be fix? It depends on developing the fixes... which goes back to the question of why do things take time.

DO you see what's happening? You're hassling for information you know is difficult to answer... why? (answer) because things take time.

Now there's no need to go getting on the firey steed and running amok, cutlass in hand, taking heads... things do not happen instantly (to the chagrin of many, be sure) they take time and will take as long as necessary.

There's no point in hassling, harrassing, threatening and blackmailing... things will be ready WHENthey're ready and not before, be sure.

Equally, I'm sure, there is limited response from the developers... well, for one, because of the utterly inane mindset (problem kiddies, not getting their way for example) or (minute by minute, line by line update info demands) some have here.

What do peop[le want each and every Friday? YESsss, the patch is being worked on and YESsss its coming together? oops, one fix has lead to another problem revealed, so more testing and writing? Friday after Friday after Friday. What the &$^#%!$ else would you really expect to get on patch progression updates? oh, hang on... I know - the patch is ready for public testing (only for people to again carry on like Attilla the Hun in forward charge, sword swinging) but that bit won't happen until its ready... FOR PUBLIC TESTING

For crying out loud... get off their backs, let them get on with and (importantly) treat them with the same respect you demand they show you !


/rant

Thank you for your posts Blacksix.

Yes, I'll have to do missions in sequel.

A good mission is this: a detailed study of the historical time period required, a detailed mapping of the front line and the deployment of troops, the living world around the player (he must see events not related to his job), testing and selection of the balance.

It is easy to show by examples, but my campaign were published in Russia only.
http://games.1c.ru/il2_roads_of_war/
http://games.1c.ru/warroads2/
http://games.1c.ru/chuzoe_nebo/
You could only see my work "VVS'46" in IL-2:1946, but this is a hypothetical scenario of the war. Bad example, but there you can see details of airfields and ground war to the requirements of 2006.

In MG I work in the fall of 2003, but I did the mission on other people's scripts for the AEP and PF. For versions 4.05 and 4.06, I only supervised over creation of campaigns. It was a strange situation, I do not know why Oleg Maddox has chosen this way

I try to search the most detailed information and recheck everything. It's a long story...