Again, flight users pay to enjoy the flight. Even only once they have been suspended from an enjoyable session is frustrating enough. You cannot depend on appeal system and say by removing the violation it is the same experience.
Users don’t care about how many violations they have if they can still play the game. Of course it is ideal when there is no violation and no appeal, but ultimately the feeling of being wronged is enough. It’s just like saying, Apple can produce bad quality items as long as there is free maintenance. Does that give equal experience when the quality is good?
The subscription does not include Expert Server access.
Even if you’re banned from Expert for all eternity, you’re still technically getting what you paid for.
I know it sounds in a certain way but it’s technically how it is.
Sure. There’s 100 views over 15 days, which is not very effective at passing on the information, at least compared to this thread which easily went over 700 views.
Further to that, this does little to hold back individual IFATCs from being more cautious. It’s like saying, we can put on the data of total violations received by all players, and that will be the same at telling players to fly better when compared to displaying their number of violations individually? Clearly not.
That is the job of supervisors, you don’t have to worry about it.
Sir, you are taking a simple violation too seriously.
Well as everyone says, we are not that strict to give a violation as soon as you make a honest mistake.
And if there’s so much problem, simply don’t fly to controlled airport, or even expert server, right?
Honest mistakes happen from pilots, and it does happen from controllers side too.
Just follow the simple instructions given by IFATC, and you will be all good.
This is a service that you get, by a group of volunteers, we aren’t paid to do the job
Only because you mentioned a question, that you are wondering why IFATC penalty is currently perceived in the community as what I mentioned - minimal penalty. I see that you agree with partly what I was saying, so I want to provide information for improvement.
Certainly not as harsh as in banning from control. But a valid scale could help tell IFATC what to do or what not. Again, pilots do make minor mistakes IRL, and ATC does not have a role, in any circumstance, to punish the pilot. Instead they guide the pilots to fly safe and arrive at destination in whatever way to help solve their mistake. Of course this might be too much for IFATCs considering the entertainment side of a game, but you see the direction I’m pointing.
This is already something many are trying to do. But circumstances doesn’t always allow that.
Generally I wouldn’t say any of this is a problem.
In most cases when we see public topics where they blame the IFATC and what not, the one posting the topic is in 99% of the cases in the wrong and the violation was given correctly. It’s been the same for the past 10 years.
It’s people that were in the wrong to begin with but can’t fathom the fact that they were, that are the loudest ones.
I see, from that appeal thread, that ignoring ATC commands is the main reason for the violation. I agree this is not ideal given the age base and attention level of the players. As a fellow player, I can’t generate a solution instantaneously that solves this issue perfectly enough. I see how the devs are pushing toward a balance through optimization and ensuring all players are generally satisfied.
It’s good that you have your stance, but you’ve also heard from your users. You agreed that there is a problem and I hopefully illustrated how that caused discrepancies. Of course, you will have more data than me and probably will decide that the loss of user interest is not as significant to the extent I suspected. I also have no ability to judge and make an impact on how the game would develop, but hopefully, you understood some customer’s POV from talking to your potential customer.
I’m not sure if it is beneficial for IF to point this out and I don’t have the ability to delve into the legal aspects. But what I didn’t easily find is a list of items that I am guaranteed to gain access to by subscribing, and since you’ve pointed this out, I and other users might feel more confused and less trusting.
I agree. I have been playing since 2016 and I’ve heard about that. It’s just because I had some thinking, which are not deep and not mature enough when compared to the devs’ on the game, I wished to share it from a POV of a player. It is indeed a minor thing but could be escalated in the sense that 2% of all subscribers may not feel good. When you have a user base towards the millions, even a small fraction of loss may be impactful. Besides, when we don’t talk about data, even when there are only 0.1% of situations when a player feels chagrin because of a false violation, he is indeed feeling bad. In fact, this fraction is 36% of all, a total of 108 people that indeed were issued a false violation in January, thankful for the disclosed data.
I acknowledge I am taking this very far. But it is to perfect the game, as you see, I am offering different perspectives and potential solutions that is not mainstream.
Again, I have reinforced that this is not my private matter, and don’t even mention the volunteering. It sounds to me like I need to be thankful to another player who equally entertained themselves through using their disposable time in a way they are willing to choose, despite I DO RESPECT the effort at all times. It’s just that IFATCs have no right to dictate how others think just because you have chosen to spend time as ATCs. I hope you understand what is an obligation and what is an offering from the player, although I always appreciate the effort.
I certainly had done and will do. We are dealing with the minor circumstances, as constrained by dozens of posts in this thread that you’ve probably forgot to read, and as illustrated as a particular case in the thread starter’s case.
Thank you all for the attention for making me reflect on what I experienced and read from a number of years of engagement. I wouldn’t be in the place to suggest anyone to react in a certain way, and given the other excellent advantages of IF over other apps and activities, I understand there will be different opinions. I think I have provided as much as I can provide as a minor stakeholder to help with this minor issue, plus another few queries. Apart from this, it is the developer’s judgment whether the issue is significant enough from a rational and human affection perspective.
After all, I, personally, in my opinion, from my experience, had the emotions of grievance, dissatisfaction, and slight disservice when I payed (no matter what I payed for), and got removed from server wrongfully, even I know I can successfully appeal for it. I am taking this quite seriously indeed, but this is what it takes to make IF a more competitive game.
More mature people will step away from the game; Less mature people will argue emotionally. I might have made a bad decision at spending time on this minor issue, but I wholeheartedly presented a reasonable issue.
Also take into account the 46 “One Time Courtesies”. The total of false violations comes out to 56. There were also 41 “Simple Pilot Errors” and only 12 “Controller Errors”. It could be argued that the “Simple Pilot Errors” are not technically false reports. I’m not sure how that stat is counted though.
There is a spectrum of degrees of error. Not all are detrimental which ATCs may deal with given they can do so, nor everyone will think this classification is justified, as you said.
Doesn’t matter. It still causes inconvenience even if it is reversed afterward.
This is the same idea that in an unserious circumstance, I would not care whether I paid for ES or not. I just paid so I could do anything that I perceived to be offered in the advertisement. If a user can’t, especially when it is not their fault, they feel bad. When they feel bad, you gradually get less subscriptions. When you argue from a legal perspective, they feel even worse when they feel deceived. This is the maximum effort normal customers would spend arguing. I am an anomaly apparently.
Avoiding and training ATCs to deal with at least, starting with this portion, would make a positive impact.
Okay.
Lets just move on, at the end, I don’t feel there is any kind of issue just like seb said, weather be it violations or quality ( Both of them are constantly monitored by Supervisors).
I think we can forgive sometimes , the point of saying “we are volunteers” wasn’t showing that we are imp omg, we are doing big favor, no!
Mature people won’t take a violation too seriously when they know it can be appealed if it was a honest mistake by the controller, a busy airspace and the pressure on controllers.
This is great. But the most frequent response I get from IFATCs, whether a veteran or a novice, is such “volunteering” argument, making other users hard to argue otherwise and feel inferior when they shouldn’t have to.
Most people are forgiving. But that doesn’t mean they do not experience dissatisfaction. Most people can heal from a knife wound, but that doesn’t mean we can neglect their pain, and neglect the precautions that knife holders must be educated for. This is what I mean.
Violation is not important at all and certainly nobody mature enough would take it seriously. It’s not anything in real life. The most you can lose is your few dollars. I have lost way more than that because of Trump in the last few days . Only reason I am doing this is I want to practice my English and typing skills, plus I do have some thoughts from years before, plus there is a thread, plus I think it is useful comments.
, the point of saying “we are volunteers” wasn’t showing that we are imp omg, we are doing big favor, no!
. Only reason I am doing this is I want to practice my English and typing skills, plus I do have some thoughts from years before, plus there is a thread, plus I think it is useful comments.