PDA

View Full Version : My suggestion to Dev team. user feedback wanted...



XyZspineZyX
09-06-2003, 06:26 PM
Dev team, why don't you fix the 109 and FW-190 first? It's only 2 planes. Get those right and then don't touch them again. Move onto the many VVS flight/damage models that have issues (Lagg3's that take damage like IL2's, Rocket climbing P39's). At the same time a flight model is fixed the corresponding damage model should be fixed. Go 3 or 4 planes at a time, and in no time everything will be performing close to as it was and in proportion to each other. Now what is happening is that too much is trying to be done at once, and something is always broken in the process of fixing another. Things need to be set in proportion again, and it's going to take individual focus on certain aircraft to do it, not wholesale changes that break as much as they fix.

Fix a plane, test it's performance vs. existing data, tweak it. Shoot it up with every weapon, get the damage model to feel right (mind u it could never mimic all the possible variation of real life, but do a good approximation). Once you finish that plane, LEAVE IT ALONE!!
Move to the next aircraft. Take the methodical approach. In the end, if you applied the same standards to everything and stayed methodical, things should be in historical proprtion.

How is it that the user community seems much more willing to test flight parameters out than the developers? Maybe UBI should hire some of the hard core contributors here as testers. I am sure they ( or I, I fly the K ) would not have let the K slip through with no rudders http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

This rushing to fix everything at once in one big patch may just lead to always missing or messing up individual components. Dev team, how about every week you focus and fix 2 aircraft? Do testing comparison and then issue final version of flight/damage model. Release that in a micro patch. Start on the most popular planes first and work down. That would be sure to fix the problems. Be methodical because surely you have not been yet.....

I do see progress in certain areas and input from user community being used in correcting some issues. I think that you are trying, but just not quite going about it in the right way.....

My 50cents


Kalo

XyZspineZyX
09-06-2003, 06:26 PM
Dev team, why don't you fix the 109 and FW-190 first? It's only 2 planes. Get those right and then don't touch them again. Move onto the many VVS flight/damage models that have issues (Lagg3's that take damage like IL2's, Rocket climbing P39's). At the same time a flight model is fixed the corresponding damage model should be fixed. Go 3 or 4 planes at a time, and in no time everything will be performing close to as it was and in proportion to each other. Now what is happening is that too much is trying to be done at once, and something is always broken in the process of fixing another. Things need to be set in proportion again, and it's going to take individual focus on certain aircraft to do it, not wholesale changes that break as much as they fix.

Fix a plane, test it's performance vs. existing data, tweak it. Shoot it up with every weapon, get the damage model to feel right (mind u it could never mimic all the possible variation of real life, but do a good approximation). Once you finish that plane, LEAVE IT ALONE!!
Move to the next aircraft. Take the methodical approach. In the end, if you applied the same standards to everything and stayed methodical, things should be in historical proprtion.

How is it that the user community seems much more willing to test flight parameters out than the developers? Maybe UBI should hire some of the hard core contributors here as testers. I am sure they ( or I, I fly the K ) would not have let the K slip through with no rudders http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_frown.gif

This rushing to fix everything at once in one big patch may just lead to always missing or messing up individual components. Dev team, how about every week you focus and fix 2 aircraft? Do testing comparison and then issue final version of flight/damage model. Release that in a micro patch. Start on the most popular planes first and work down. That would be sure to fix the problems. Be methodical because surely you have not been yet.....

I do see progress in certain areas and input from user community being used in correcting some issues. I think that you are trying, but just not quite going about it in the right way.....

My 50cents


Kalo