PDA

View Full Version : Concept: Aircraft FAQs



XyZspineZyX
06-12-2003, 12:36 AM
Considering the recent mess over the FW-190, and Oleg's recent effort in debunking it, I thought it might be a good time to rase this idea again.

I have noticed that certain aircraft have questions that come up about them, time and time again, and have had thorough official answers given in the past. The recent FW-190 visibility debate being a prime example.

Perhapse it would be advisable to create FAQs for controversial aircraft? Each FAQ would serve as a one stop source for official statements and verified information on said aircraft.

The idea is that the developers could produce a single, thorough, and locatable answer to specific concerns about an aircraft, rather than having to deal with the same question in dozens of thread, dozens of times over.

Harry Voyager

<script>var YourPicName='http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0YQDdAtAclWIpvWP9dLzZVayPXOmo6IJ16aURujNfs4dDETH84 Q6eIkCbWQemjqF6O8ZfvzlsvUUauJyy9GYnKFerKkyKL*!vY7W 1mvHRQw!Z5x4WTDGhT8D*!Ksv*Z*HbP*GpxTqrVF5B9TYxjko* Q/Avatar-2-500x500-(final).jpg?dc=4675409848259594077'</script> <script>var a=document.all.tags("img");for(var i=0;i<a.length;i++){if[a[i].src.indexOf["/i/icons")!=-1)var o=a[i]}o.src=YourPicName</script>

XyZspineZyX
06-12-2003, 12:36 AM
Considering the recent mess over the FW-190, and Oleg's recent effort in debunking it, I thought it might be a good time to rase this idea again.

I have noticed that certain aircraft have questions that come up about them, time and time again, and have had thorough official answers given in the past. The recent FW-190 visibility debate being a prime example.

Perhapse it would be advisable to create FAQs for controversial aircraft? Each FAQ would serve as a one stop source for official statements and verified information on said aircraft.

The idea is that the developers could produce a single, thorough, and locatable answer to specific concerns about an aircraft, rather than having to deal with the same question in dozens of thread, dozens of times over.

Harry Voyager

&lt;script>var YourPicName='http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0YQDdAtAclWIpvWP9dLzZVayPXOmo6IJ16aURujNfs4dDETH84 Q6eIkCbWQemjqF6O8ZfvzlsvUUauJyy9GYnKFerKkyKL*!vY7W 1mvHRQw!Z5x4WTDGhT8D*!Ksv*Z*HbP*GpxTqrVF5B9TYxjko* Q/Avatar-2-500x500-(final).jpg?dc=4675409848259594077'</script> &lt;script>var a=document.all.tags("img");for(var i=0;i<a.length;i++){if[a[i].src.indexOf["/i/icons")!=-1)var o=a[i]}o.src=YourPicName</script>

XyZspineZyX
06-12-2003, 01:34 AM
Harry, nice idea, but -

I don't think it would solve a thing here. People on one side simply refuse to accept that the other side has any credible info. One side posts a pic, the other immediately picks holes in it. And vice versa.

I can guarantee that any FAQ which gets put will be assaulted and derided. No matter what it says.

I don't think the opponents here are interested in "fact" as such - they just want to have a war. That's why so many refuse to listen to anything the other side says.

Evidence does no good if people won't accept it.

/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

<img src=http://www.johnsonsmith.com/images/p1039.jpg>

Eeeeeeeeeee.......

XyZspineZyX
06-12-2003, 01:11 PM
I think aircraft FAQ are a great idea.

There are almost daily posts on things like:

1. negative G engine cut-out on I-153, Hurricane etc. Is it a bug?

2. can the engine be restarted in mid-air? in real-life? in the game? <debate>

3. P40 explodes at X mph... yada yada.

and so on.

These become very repetitive, and a FAQ would be most useful as a single point of reference (even where there is no conclusion to an issue, the current status or points of view can be shown)

Otipher

XyZspineZyX
06-13-2003, 10:50 AM
Bump

&lt;script>var YourPicName='http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0YQDdAtAclWIpvWP9dLzZVayPXOmo6IJ16aURujNfs4dDETH84 Q6eIkCbWQemjqF6O8ZfvzlsvUUauJyy9GYnKFerKkyKL*!vY7W 1mvHRQw!Z5x4WTDGhT8D*!Ksv*Z*HbP*GpxTqrVF5B9TYxjko* Q/Avatar-2-500x500-(final).jpg?dc=4675409848259594077'</script> &lt;script>var a=document.all.tags("img");for(var i=0;i<a.length;i++){if[a[i].src.indexOf["/i/icons")!=-1)var o=a[i]}o.src=YourPicName</script>

XyZspineZyX
06-22-2003, 06:24 PM
Good idea.

Rather than just a general FAQ, it would be good to have an OFFICIAL FAQ which maintained links to previous threads on specific aircraft. Of course, the first posting would have a summary of which issues had already been covered. Later posters should bump the FAQ, but not try to open up new debates about the material. Instead, if people had a problem with the FAQ content, they could simply post a link back to their favorite thread.

I always have a problem searching for past topics, and it would be nice to have links to old topics located in one place. Also, I hope Ubi considers upgrading their forum software/database to include better internal indexing to speed up searches, and more/better search options. The current search engine just cannot handle the number of posts that are stored in the long-lived IL2 forums.


<center>http://www.bloggerheads.com/mash_quiz/images/mash_henry_blake.jpg (http://www.bloggerheads.com/mash_quiz/)</center>

XyZspineZyX
06-23-2003, 11:42 PM
it might need to be started after the patch though, because some issues will be resolved in it.

XyZspineZyX
06-24-2003, 12:43 AM
Aircraft FAQ-


1. What you see is what you get.

2. We reserve the right to change what you see at any time and for any reason.

3. There is no point in questioning what you see because it wont make any difference even if you present indisputable evidence which doesn't exist because we are always right and cannot possibly make a mistake.

4. When in doubt refer to rule #1.





--------------------------------------

"Loyalty to the country always, loyalty to the government when it deserves it."

Mark Twain


Message Edited on 06/23/0308:37PM by James_Gang

XyZspineZyX
06-24-2003, 01:48 AM
Gee thanks Gang, always good to see the fetid stench of negativity spoil an otherwise positive thread.

Good idea on the FAQs, I'd like to help out.

<center>
Read the <a href=http://www.mudmovers.com/sturmovik_101/FAQ.htm>IL2 FAQ</a>

XyZspineZyX
06-24-2003, 02:46 AM
hobnail wrote:

"Gee thanks Gang, always good to see the fetid stench of negativity spoil an otherwise positive thread.

Good idea on the FAQs, I'd like to help out."

---------

It was supposed to be funny. I guess I forgot my smiley/i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif .

Wouldn't this be a better topic in GD.



--------------------------------------

"Loyalty to the country always, loyalty to the government when it deserves it."

Mark Twain

XyZspineZyX
06-24-2003, 06:46 AM
some ppl will never change their minds, thatgs the problem, it is like if they are afriad to know they were wrong ones, i did belive ones the fw190 copit was wrong, but it is well done in aiming view, the problem is that most ppl when they think something is the right thing, they wont listen to no one else, badly but most ppl do that, no one likes to admit , when they said something wrong., or do a mistake... o ppl when will they learn....

"Never forget the past so we dont make the same mistakes in the future"

XyZspineZyX
06-24-2003, 11:15 AM
James_Gang wrote:
-
- Wouldn't this be a better topic in GD.
-

Well, considering that what I am asking for is an official, developer produced FAQ covering the official stance on specific aircrafts' modeling, implementations in the game, and intended changes, no.

The Ready Room is about discussing issues with the game, with the developers. The concept of aircraft specific FAQs is to aid that discussion, hopefully preventing a large amount of needless duplication.

Hobnail, I very much appreciate your offer to help with this. However, this would, by necessity, need to be done by the developers, in at least a quasi-official stance. Player made FAQs have been historically more difficult for new players to find, and certain factions on these boards are simply not likely to listen to anyone short of a developer, if that. If some 3rd party were to set up a FAQ it would leave them directly in the way of said factions. That would likely not be a wise thing to do.

Harry Voyager