Friday 2010-11-12 Dev. update and Discussion

[philip.ed]

Maybe that's the point; not everyone will agree with everything you have to say, so don't try and argue against that?

[Solnyshko]

I think actually Phil the point is space lost to pointless banter could be better used. Constant toing and froing such as this is exhausting to wade through *cough*

And quickly responding to Klem– and not wanting to contribute further to the faff...

Originally Posted by klem

If that was aimed at me let me explain as I have asked questions that may well have been answered before...

Not at all, apologies if it came across that way. I was responding in haste (and exasperation) - but could have been clearer. It wasn’t my intention to target individuals, on the contrary I'm also keen to hear feedback on issues you've raised.

My point, a simple one was that A) Developer posts a plea asking for cooperation and restraint B) community here then launches into a confused series of interpretations – including digging up old questions raised by Oleg seeking clarification on an earlier query from us and then, although already answered in this very thread, is given a new definition which in turn opens another discussion about what in this case I think was flaprons.... Phew

(edit) It’s understandable; there is so much to get through in an update thread, and consequently a lot of repetition. But it would I think not be asking too much to exercise self-control now and again. Just taking a moment before hitting the reply button and thinking, does everyone here really want to share this? Other forums manage it

This thread has had 39,095 hits to date – I can’t believe everyone reading is moved to voice their personal take on someone else’s reply to a question already answered.

[philip.ed]

Yes, sorry, I agree, I just thought it best we try and resolve the issue in order to reach a consensus

One thing that I'd like to see is the pilots animation when wounded. Will it be the same as normal? Or will we be able to see that the pilot is wounded? Say, for example, if we attacked a formation of Heinkels head on and killed/wounded the pilot, would we see the co-pilot take his place? And, similarly, if the rear-gunner was killed, could the bomb-aimer take his place if they had completed theit bombing run?
I can't recall such a question being asked or answered.