column5

The info on getting rid of the radar box can be found in this KB article: http://forum.combatace.com/index.php?showtopic=8786 I know Dave had at one time written up a nice tutorial on the CAT extractor. If we can find it, it definately needs to be in the KB.

WOE right now but WOI is coming up...

S'allright. I'll make a note of that for when I present the final report, after all the polls are done.

Yeah, what we have now is pretty much "Basic" although there is some coop capability. For each selection, the assumption is that the implementation would work well, so even if someone chooses Basic, they will be getting a system that does what it is supposed to do reliably and with good performance.

One thing I think it is important to remember is that we all enjoy these sims because they are fun, not because they are realistic. Changing that equation could be dangerous. In my own opinion, fun should always trump realism--even while we are trying to increase realism, nothing should be implemented that isn't fun or interesting to do in the game.

For this poll, please select the MINIMUM level of multiplayer support required for you to invest $50 in preordering a community-financed sim. Assume that the single-player aspect of the game is EXCELLENT and meets all of your single-player requirements.

Since this discussion has turned out to be pretty interesting, I'm going run a couple of polls...

Mohammed! Do not touch it ther-- KABOOM!

The Producers

:blush2:

You know, in hindsight I should not have said anything. There was no need to single anyone out. I did see a person who has been a great friend for the past 5 years very frustrated over the matter, and that is why I made my comment. I think you would have to work hard on a mod and release it to public scrutiny to know the feeling. You want it to be perfect but you are only human so it can't be perfect. Each time an imperfection is pointed out, it cuts. Hell I feel that way when some of my MF projects are scrutinized internally. You can get really emotional when you devote so much time a hobby you are passionate about.

The interesting part to me is this: They intercepted them only 50 miles out?

A really interesting idea. My only concern would be that managing programmers is sort of like herding cats...

Note that I used the endearing "n00b" form, not the derogatory "newb" or "n3wb" forms. ;)

Dude, we come up with the best weapons.

Woah! Look who is CA's latest moderator! Congrats!

Well, the first thing it would offer, and by far the most important, would be the same moddability that SF enjoys. In fact, my concept is that the SF engine would be used, but with new DLLs necessary to support whatever new features are added. That way, you could add any SF/WOV/WOE planes to the new sim, albeit at a lower fidelity than the F-4 or whatever the study plane turned out to be. Modders could make their own high-fidelity planes if they were so inclined (Mirage Factory). I think it would offer other things over Lock-On as well. Nostalgia, for sure. But also the fact that so many countries have or still fly the F-4, it should have a lot of appeal throughout the world. Finally, no one has found the magical combination of fun, playability, and realism that I personally would consider optimal. SF and its brothers are a little too light, Falcon is way too heavy. Lock-On...it never grabbed me enough to delve into it and find out. Plus I don't trust Russians to accurately model US aircraft.

No, this is purely hypothetical, although I am serious about the idea.

I don't now how to explain this, but when you work on a project and have to make sacrifices due to game limitations, its frustrating because you want your work to be as accurate as possible. I know that the F-22 team wanted the bay doors to be automatic, but they ran out of animation slots and had to make a choice. They explained the situation in the readme, and its frustrating to have people continue to ask about it both becasue its repetitive but also because it keeps reminding them that the finished product is not "perfect" which is like a poke in the eye.

This doesn't have anything to do with you, so don't get worked up over it.

http://www.militarytimes.com/multimedia/vi...ocoptergunship/

You may very well be right, but perception is 9/10 of reality and this sort of thing is pissing people off. Occasionally in this community--especially after an influx of n00bs--we seem to have to have a Come to Jesus moment to get everyone on the same page.

Some of you guys should consider enjoying new things for a couple of weeks after they are released instead of complaining. I know that some of the people involved with the F-22 are very frustrated because they had to make tradeoffs in designing the plane, they explained those tradeoffs in the readme, and people are still making posts like this. Just a suggestion.

Yeah, I don't think everyone would be able to agree. That's why a small group would have to come up with the specifications in cooperation with TK, and then it would be up to each individual to consider whether they want to support it. It definately could not be done by comittee. I do think though that the majority of demands could be accomodated to one degree or another, and of course moddability (it would be a ThirdWire sim, after all) would allow for some of the off-the-wall stuff to be added by the community.