Pdubya
-
Posts
108 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
11
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Gallery
Downloads
Posts posted by Pdubya
-
-
I am all for the idea with a small caveat - that if Nyerges and FT have any kind of standard(s) regarding the skins, whether it be as mundane as file size or format, fidelity, etc. that those standards or guidelines be agreed upon and adhered to by the contributors.I am sure that others would agree we can't have problems cropping up in the game due to different opinions on what makes a custom livery "good" or not. If that is not going to be a concern, then full speed ahead I say.Correction - my misunderstanding on what was referred to here - sorry. I think it would be great to do this.
-
Pete:
Craig and others can shed some more specific light on this issue, but I have routinely found that Arrivals tend to exit to the Terminal side of the runway, but not always. Sometimes they listen to your command to "Vacate Runway" R/L, many times you get a "negative" response. I personally have not found any rhyme or reason to the behavior. It's exceptionally irritating for me to say the least.
Others may have a few workarounds or best practices to minimize the problem. If memory serves, KSFO is a bit wonky right now. I have it, but have only played it occasionally.
-
1
-
-
I can understand wanting the 8 hour continuity in the game flow. I am that way when it comes to immersion. But unless Vic can come up with a solution on the next version with the whole available gate issue, I really don't see the point. It is dragging down the rest of the game and the overall experience.
I am pretty confident he can come up with a better way. I think it was just a result of choices made last time around... unintended consequences if you will. I will be interested to see what Vic has in mind for this next version- actually pretty excited when thinking of the possibilities, regardless of how far away release is likely going to be.
-
1
-
-
5 hours ago, winsaudi said:
I agree with Craig. I think the 8 hour session “requested by users” has never been requested via this forum and I think it spoils the game for everyone else.
Wayne
Wayne:
Can't help but agree. Personally, I am lucky to get through a couple hours before stress relief or cramping sets in. Wouldn't a reduction in loaded hours help with load times and "solve" some related issues as well? I would think so. Seems there should definitely be a happy medium to be found somewhere between 3 and 8. Looking at the logs, I wonder how many cycles are chewed up by the game regularly dealing with no available gates. CPU time better spent doing other more important stuff.
I imagine this is on Vic's laundry list for Tower3D Next.
-
1
-
-
Pete:
Well, Craig and I have chatted about the next release recently. Unfortunately, other than some info Vic gave in response to my "Brotherly Love KPHL" thread, there is very little real info on the next version. Check out that thread if you are interested. We remain hopeful an announcement is forthcoming; the first item will likely be Vic opening up a Suggestions thread when he is ready.
-
1
-
-
Hmm... those Brits won't be escaping the heat and humidity in Orlando! 😳
Perhaps they plan on staying inside at Disney in the A/C.
-
1
-
1
-
-
On 7/31/2018 at 8:47 AM, CL30 said:
No, I don't. I'm usually so pissed off at the traffic for making me work hard that I just want to get rid of them ASAP, lol.
Yeah, I know what you mean CL30. Unfortunately, games never quite completely capture all the aspects of the subject they are about. Sucks. But, thinking about an alternate "me" without gaming in my life just gives me the shivers. So I would rather curse at my screen, delete the save game and start all over if that's what it takes. I find that I tend to be an "experience" gamer, not a "completionist". It has its downsides for sure.
Maybe one of these centuries we will have something close to virtual reality with enough parameters to fool our brains completely. Of course I will likely be carbon ash by then...
-
1
-
-
Well... guilty as charged. I seem to remember it entering the lexicon a few decades back. Of course, Wikipedia is always right, right? Figured it was OK along with Terminal, Ramp and Apron ya know.
Consider me chastised. ⚠️
-
Good topic guys. Lots of interesting views and ideas, so thanks to all.
I try and take a multi-pronged approach to keeping things moving on the
tarmacground.A bit like 707FAN mentioned, I tend to look at pushback gate locations and then pick the lighter planes to go to an alternative runway like 9 at Boston or 17/35 at Philadelphia. Generally I find it saves me some congestion issues if can do it. Of course it is rather "seat of the pants" decision making along the way, but I find that is part of the fun to Tower3D.
Another tactic mentioned I make good use of is clearing for takeoff on intermediate taxiway connections to the major runways. For instance, in Boston, I tend to send CAFE GA planes straight out Charlie and give them a CFT on 4L pronto to get them going ASAP. Their slow speed can be a real challenge if you can't find a space to fit them in. I also send the smaller jets to 9 to split up the waiting in line for 4L takeoffs. At Kennedy, 13R/31L is so long at 14,511 ft. that I find I end up using PA, MC, MB for 13R and K, KE for 31L.
Looking forward to some more thoughts and ideas, keep it up guys.
-
I am truly hopeful this is one annoyance that the new version will eliminate. Perhaps a check of which version, Plain or Pro is installed and then a default for that directory. I have to say this has caused harm to FT's reputation due to the confusion surrounding installation for new players. It sets a bad precedent in my opinion and gets many people off on the wrong foot.
It is high on my "Wanted" list.
-
1
-
-
Just for the record:
I'll make an analogy for Tower3D Pro with another 'niche' game of mine, Out of the Park Baseball. Now, OOTP as it's known has been around since the early 90's and has grown over the years bit by bit, each year a new release with varying amounts of progress and new features. It now has an official MLB and Players license which opens up all sorts of capabilities like doing justice for the Negro Leagues, etc.
For someone looking for a detailed simulation of being a General Manager and/or Manager of a Franchise, real or fictional, there is really no other game in town. Yet, on their forums posters get all bent out of shape about matters they have very little ground to stand on protesting.
Seems to me Tower3D Pro is in the exact same boat. I don't know of any other ATC simulator that does all that this game does with the support we enjoy. Now, some of you may laugh at that statement, but REALLY... stop and think about it. Where else are you going to go if you want a detailed ATC game? Hmm? If there is a better alternative, don't you think many of us would be elsewhere than this board discussing and tactfully expressing our desires for features and improvements??
Folks who open their mouths and spout off before they really take in the situation with this game really need to adjust their attitude.
Do all of us get frustrated with the pace of progress from Vic and Co. and Gabor as well? You Betcha.
Would we all rather see monthly releases of patches and upgrades to existing versions of the game and the individual airports? You're damned right we would!
However, most well-adjusted, mature individuals here temper their content, questions and comments in the knowledge that FeelThere and Nyerges have limited resources of time, money and manpower to apply to Tower3DPro. More importantly, we understand that continually "whipping the horse" to go faster will eventually result in him lying down rather than going any faster. There is always the risk of killing the golden goose, so to speak.
So, let's all be careful not to over-do it when it comes to vitriol and hard lines getting drawn in the proverbial sand. Making demands doesn't help our cause, and may actually hasten a quicker end to the life of Tower3D.
/rant off
-
2
-
1
-
-
14 hours ago, crbascott said:
Saw the tongue, not the wink. Darn reading glasses - sucks getting old! 😜
They are a bit small, aren't they?! Yep, getting old sucks. Boy, does it ever. Better than the stone cold alternative I suppose.
-
1
-
-
Nice bit of Sherlocking there DeltaVII, good job!
-
Nah... you didn't see the wink with tongue stuck out? I was kidding as well. Agree on upcoming version. Excited to say the least!
-
I think you'd have to prove it to me that it happens on a regular basis. Suppose I would counter with items 7 and 8 then. 😜
-
ElPasoJoe:
Welcome to the community! Enjoy the game, it can be a real challenge at times.
-
7 hours ago, FeelThere said:
When the time will come we'll open a wishlist topic for sure. We have an internal list and anything from the wishlist make sense and we can add it to the next version will likely make it.
Thank you for the good vacation wish 🙂Vic
Thanks Vic, Have a pleasant holiday and recharge dude!
-
Food for thought on vacation Vic:
Changes to existing game mechanics that are a MUST IMO:
1. Smoother transition from arrival glide-path (air) movement to landing animation (halt/jerkiness issue) and ensuing (ground) taxiing and its appearance in-game.
2. Parameter in-game to calculate first available exit taxiway for arrivals; and- higher allowable taxi speeds from touchdown to braking zone for said exit taxiway. i.e., A/C are slowing down too quickly and clogging the runway for following A/C on final approach.
2A. Unrealistic mega-braking on runway and subsequent 90 degree turn into taxiway for exit. i.e., A/C are moving much too fast for possible exit in some cases.
3. Some way to avoid arrivals ignoring ATC orders to exit specific taxiway; in other words, keep aircraft from nose-to-nose results due to aforementioned ATC order rejection.
4. Elimination of tendency of arrivals to exit on Terminal side of runways, regardless of ATC orders.
5. Elimination of loophole of holding A/C at taxiway short of runway, then once Continue Taxi order is given, A/C ignores STOP at all runway rules.
6. Some way to inform ATC that due to weather conditions, Departures are not possible on Runway n, n1, n2, etc. I would also like to see a real-time change in this parameter when the closure is no longer in effect.
Some nice to have items:
7. The ultimate fix - A/C moving slow enough (taxiway speeds) have ability to stop short of objects in front of them, regardless of angle of approach.
8. A new ability to route A/C that are "stuck" with object in front of them manually in order to re-route taxiing A/C to terminal or runway without resorting to DELETE AIRCRAFT.
-
1
-
1
-
-
Vic:
It's kind of funny in a way- before I decided to write you about involving the community I had a definite pause myself; for certain- this isn't something to take lightly, particularly with this board's history. It's a shame that people on the internet can't behave themselves better but we are all stuck with it. As you say, it would require a lot of thought about how to present the idea and what format it would take. The last thing you want is expectations getting out of hand and a virtual Frankenstein torch and pitchfork scene occurring.
I would hate that more than the alternative.
Honestly, anything I think of to promote community involvement is rife with places and opportunities for Aviation Grognards (French term for grumblers borrowed by gamers long ago) and other ill-wishers to punch big holes in it.
Perhaps as VenturaGuy101 mentioned above, a closed test of some kind.
Cheers,
P.
-
Vic:
Well, as they say - the proof's in the pudding. I appreciate the effort to maybe agree to include more pre-existing (aka older) airports under the initial release; that helps a lot with feeling better about money being well-spent, at least from my personal point-of-view. However, I would expect there will be a hefty group who will voice displeasure at needing to buy airports they have purchased in the previous version(s). It's just human nature I suppose.
Reading between the lines, it sounds like you envision a new game that brings at least a few new approaches (see what I did there?) to pushing tin, whether it's capabilities we currently do not have at our disposal, or information available, or even a whole new feature I haven't thought of yet.
Also Vic- I sincerely hope FeelThere will seriously consider Early Access Alpha or Beta with existing customers to help provide you feedback on the direction you are headed. I know it can feel a bit stifling creatively, not to mention a royal PITA at times; but it is a great way to connect with your core customers and garner not only their support in making a good game great, but also provide a sense of "ownership" for those who contribute. If nothing else it's a good exercise for you to think about and fit into an alternative development plan timeline with a cost-benefit analysis.
I am only one guy, and a single guy who tends to spend a lot of money on my games, so maybe I don't represent a large majority here, so there is that too. Best of luck going forward, and I encourage you to stretch your comfort zone when it comes to development this time around Vic. You might be surprised with the results!
Thanks for listening,
Paul
-
2
-
-
Problem fixed.
-
1
-
1
-
-
At this point I am moving into the "Let's get cracking on the next version" corner.
Honestly, to me it isn't worth spending too much time anymore (after the reply to my KPHL post) trying to convince FT to fix broader issues or airports. All we can do at this point is report the existing issues, which I think we have done well, and hope they build the new version to correct some underlying fundamental gameplay behavior and capabilities.
I have a mental laundry list of stuff I would like to see changed, fixed or improved upon; possibly scrapped and re-imagined or re-coded. Pretty much all the same ones you guys know about already.
So here's looking forward to the next version of Tower3D! Pro.
-
On 7/5/2018 at 10:44 AM, FeelThere said:
Thank you for the lovely report 🙂
Yes I agree KLAX, KPHL is a bit aged in Tower now, but we locked the product for now. At this moment (within the team) is about how are we going to make these airports backward compatible with the next version of Tower (I wish I'd have the freedom to tell you the so far planned list that we want to add this new version, but I can tell you that I type this with a huge smile on my face 🙂 ). At the moment we are not planning to touch the included airports as it would require an SP for Tower itself which we decided not to do. IF we come up with some solution of updating the included airports without touching Tower then it is possible we'll send out an SP but it's not a promise.Thank you
Vic
Vic: Thanks for answering first off; also for being honest about your company's intentions. I can get behind the idea of moving on to a new version. Of course it would hurt if I had to buy all the airports again, but sometimes life insists on providing you lemons, so you make lemonade, eh?
Keep truckin'.
-
Vic and Co.:
I am a big fan of KPHL in Tower3D Pro, yet I am regularly frustrated while playing it due to its age (and issues) compared to other airports. Is there much of a chance in getting an update to Philadelphia in celebration of the Eagles championship? 😜
Here are some issues I see with the current version:
1. Airport ground image needs updating along with updated taxiways. Foxtrot taxiway (which doesn't exist in current ver.) would be extremely useful for "around the horn" (one end of the terminal to the other) aircraft movements that are necessary in most KPHL configurations. Additionally noted image of far upper taxiway to runway 17 is grass, not concrete. The glide path to 17 seems pretty unrealistic as well, lots of trees and buildings quite close to the north end.
2. Tendency of arrival aircraft to exit runway 27R to the right even though they are cargo planes and you tell them to "vacate runway left @ X" and it gets acknowledged, only to be ignored a moment later. This regularly results in head-on situations at taxiways M/K3 and N with planes headed to 27L for departure. Very easily repeatable.
2A. Repeatable issue of arrivals ignoring your commands to exit at a specific taxiway. This is not always a problem, but it happens enough to make one gun-shy about bringing taxiing aircraft south of taxiway Kilo for fear of an arrival exiting 27R directly into them. This ends up making your ATC less efficient when it comes to keeping everyone moving when doing a "Juliet East/Kilo West" taxi configuration.
3. Taxiing aircraft using Tango will always stop short of taxiway Papa after being told to cross runway 9L/27R. I don't know why the sim is doing this, but anytime I give a plane "continue taxi" from the terminal side of runway 27L on Tango, they will stop short of Papa. Can't remember if it happens when taxiing towards the terminal via Uniform or not.
Vic, if you really need it, I can run the batch file and compile some data for you. However, most of these issues have been talked about here for quite some time, even in my short time on the forums (1 yr). Here is hoping a refurbish job for KPHL is on the to-do list at FeelThere.
Show Philly some love brother!
Thanks,
P.
p.s., I'd appreciate the community providing feedback on this, whether you agree or not.
Ancient bugs on SP3
in ATC Simulators
Posted
Yes, that is what Vic has implied; a new version written from the bottom up using his experiences with the current version as a means for improvement. AJ, Vic did mention he would like (no guarantee) to include more airports with the release version of the new game than the current sim had to increase the value we would receive for purchasing.
Personally, it is a easy buy for me as there are many small and a few large items needing better solutions or implementations. I am excited for when he makes an official announcement.