Please keep the realism!

[SEE]

Originally Posted by Redroach

See, that's what's really starting to P+++ ME OFF!. Could you please upload a youtube file of you, in person, flying a RL spitfire or hurricane. Please hold up a sign that reads: "[Your nick] greets the banana forum". Then focus the cam on the rpm indicator. Thank you.

In any other event, I tend to believe the developers because they FKIN INTRODUCED IT in the first place! I'm pretty damn sure that they didn't just think: "Oh well, let's just add some random dial movement, but only on the rpm gauge. This will be awsum fun guyz". Right?

Maybe this will pee you off too......quoted from TD member in the latest patch thread....take it up with him and maybe.....the pilots?



To those stating things like bring back the bouncing tacho needles etc because they were more realistic etc sorry but that is BS.

Real pilots are providing input. in this case the input comes from a current Spitfire MKVII and MKXVI pilot.

The alteration of the G cut out comes from multiple pilots, a Merlin and DB601/605 engine restorer, a current Hurricane II, Spitfire II pilot and a Hurricane I pilot. So before you start making sweeping statements like the devs are responding to 'the few' whinners then check your facts.

The devs have direct access to a number of current warbird pilots. One for instance is current on the following types:

Winjeel,Wirraway,Spitfire MKVII and MKXVI, P51D,P40E,P40F,Hudson,Harvard, and Vampire.

[Redroach]

ehmm... is this blue text some poor hoax attempt? It's BS but the same post lists the pilots the devs (WHO FKIN INTRODUCED THE BOUNCING NEEDLES FFS!) have access to?

anyways, video plx or it didn't happen and the devs win.

maybe I should just go to bed and hope not too much more will be broken by the "like-it-easy"s come monday.

[Robotic Pope]

Originally Posted by Redroach

ehmm... is this blue text some poor hoax attempt? It's BS but the same post lists the pilots the devs (WHO FKIN INTRODUCED THE BOUNCING NEEDLES FFS!) have access to?

anyways, video plx or it didn't happen and the devs win.

maybe I should just go to bed and hope not too much more will be broken by the "like-it-easy"s come monday.

And when you wake up, try not to get out the wrong side of the bed again.

[Redroach]

Originally Posted by Robotic Pope

And when you wake up, try not to get out the wrong side of the bed again.

Yeah, I'll try to.

[Codex]

There is one thing that I never see mentioned in these discussions and that is the fact that while the Devs are using input from pilots currently flying these restored aircraft, do the restored aircraft use original cockpit instruments?

While I don't doubt for one minute the input they are providing the Dev is correct, I would like to hear whether or not the aircraft they are flying have the ORIGINAL dials linked to ORIGINAL sensors, or are they using current day technology to meet the flying regulations of which ever country the RESTORED aircraft are registered in?

[SEE]

The 'bouncy needle' as you describe it is just eye candy. It didn't affect me one iota. Geoffrey Wellum adjusted his PP for RPM at 2650 before combat and left it at that untill combat was done and dusted, I don't recall him talking about RPM other than in terms of preparation. (How he managed to set the 50 with a neeedle bouncing all over the place could be questionable though....)

As for the neg G, I find it far easier to manage in CoD than the Early Spit mod packs for IL1946 which are more sensitive. The needle isn't a big issue and not worth arguing over.

[Wolf_Rider]

Originally Posted by Codex

There is one thing that I never see mentioned in these discussions and that is the fact that while the Devs are using input from pilots currently flying these restored aircraft, do the restored aircraft use original cockpit instruments?

While I don't doubt for one minute the input they are providing the Dev is correct, I would like to hear whether or not the aircraft they are flying have the ORIGINAL dials linked to ORIGINAL sensors, or are they using current day technology to meet the flying regulations of which ever country the RESTORED aircraft are registered in?

excellent point

[ChosenOne]

+1 for realism

[Skoshi Tiger]

+1 for realism!

More traing for young players to understand whats happening.

[Les]

I have no idea whether the dials and cut-out were more realistic before, but I know they seem more lifeless and uninteresting to me now after the latest patch.

If it were me I would have toned down the needles a bit, but just because I found it a little annoying the way they constantly flickered like that. But I would have left the engine cut-out like it was, if only because I found it a nice change from the old series and it made me fly more carefully.

I'm hoping that, as others have suggested, it was just a quick fix, and at some point the harder job of just toning down the effects a little will be done.

If that's the case, I'd rather the devs didn't take that more reactionary approach to changing things, and that they decide not to do that with other issues in the future. I want them to leave things how they think they should be, until conclusive proof is provided that it should realistically be some other way.

And when something is endlessly debateable, despite all the differing 'proofs', I want the devs to make the decision how it stands, not the community. I want the sim to be made according to the developers own vision, not mob rule.

That's the real issue for me.

I think the community should have as much input as possible, but at some point the developers have to also say, if it has to be done one way or another and it can't be made optional, and we just have to toss a coin to decide which way, we're not going to toss a coin, we're going to do it the way we think it should be done.

I'm trying to remember some examples from the old series where I thought the developers compromised on that too much, but I can't remember what they were. It has happenened before I'm sure, but not often. And it's not a road I'd like to see them go down more so now.

I personally do appreciate the expert input from the community, but I don't want them to run the show in terms of what's 'real' and what isn't. None of it's real at the end of the day, it's a simulation, of things that are often just too variable and inconsistent to be able to make definitive statements on.

I'm not saying the developers are infallible and that they can't make mistakes. But if and when they do, that's when the community can provide irrefutable proof to correct them, as has been done.

But, again, and finally, when there's no conclusive proof on some infinitely arguable aspect of this sim (and I'm not even saying that was the case in this instance, I'm talking more generally), I'd rather see the developers version of how they think things should be, not the version according to what some vocal element of the community wants or thinks is right.