Is that it, the only criteria?
I group my aircraft by manufacturer and type, would love to be able to search by typerole, and assign multiple typeroles to aircraft. Is this capability gone?
I’ve asked repeatedly, along with many other people, to have multiple criteria to sort aircraft by. And to be able to add multiple typeroles, just like an aircraft can be assigned to multiple types of parking spots. Including by favorite. Will Asobo EVER consider this?
An aircraft can be a single engine prop AND amphibious, yet, currently, I can only assign one. What if I want to look at my “vintage” aircraft, and choose something from that list?
A very typical user has over 100 aircraft to choose from; this is a horrible choice of sorting. I don’t really care who the author is, why would I want to sort my aircraft by author? Sure, sometimes I’d like to show aircraft created by a certain author, but I don’t want my library sorted that way. I rarely care who the author is except when understanding what the quality of the plane I’m about to purchase is going to be like, it plays a role there. But, after I’ve purchased it, I don’t really care who the author is (no offense). Why would anyone want to sort their library by author? How will I possibly find the aircraft I want to fly? By memorizing who created it?
What happened to sorting the library by ui_manufacturer, ui_type, ui_variation, and ui_typerole?
And while we’re at it… Why is ui_typerole restricted to so few choices? In FSX, I could assign any ui_typerole I wanted. Granted, I was still stuck with one choice back then, but, at least I could create them. In combination with ui_manufacturer, ui_type, ui_typrole added a very powerful method of sorting my library since by having the same ui_manufacturer and ui_type, since having a different ui_typerole created a new slot for variations, it was very powerful way of setting up my library view like I liked. And, yes, I liked the way the FS2020 and FSX library view showed a page of aircraft at a time.
I’m sorry, but, choosing ui_createdby was an absolutely ridiculous UI choice. WOW. I usually accept design choices, unwillingly sometimes, but, life is what it is sometimes, but this one literally makes me angry.
BTW, one of the major reasons I’ve chosen not to purchase from the Marketplace in the past was because Aircraft.cfg files are typically created willy-nilly with all sorts of incorrect values, and I go through and edit nearly every single one to keep my library organized and consistent. That way I can make sure manufacturer and type names are consistent, icao_model is correct and consistent, etc… It’s been one of my pet peeves for decades. Now my ability to manage my library has literally been blown out of the water by this UI design choice.
While I totally agree that ui_createdby is an important field to give credit where credit is due, it is not in ANY WAY a field I would ever consider using for sorting my library.
And, no, this ticket cannot be closed. Or maybe a new one needs to be created. If authors willy-nilly start changing the icao_model so they can control where their plane shows up, how is model matching going to work? icao_model should ABSOLUTELY NOT be used for laying out where a plane shows up in the list. It should be correct for every single aircraft so it can be properly model matched. This choice leaves it open for authors, again, just choosing whatever they want. It should be chosen from the icao list (which is already confusing anyway, since the same plane and model can have multiple icao_model names). It’s like when the ui_manufacturer is used by authors with their own names instead of the actual manufacturer. I realize this might cause licensing issues, however.
There are so many issues with this UI Design choice I just can’t believe it. SMH.
