Request to the Blond Knight's and Ivan's

[Y-29.Silky]

 
One could imagine what this would look like in the real war. It looked like a formation of 5 Stuka's attacking an airfield with 3 escorts while my Russian comrades frantically scramble.

Although this particular airfield had absolutely zero impact on the mission, wasn't an objective, and had unlimited aircraft spawns, events like this is why I love IL-2.
I sat helplessly parked on this airfield waiting for the sirens of doom, ready to admire the death and destruction that would seal my fate and make me fall in love with this game all over again!
But it wasn't to be, all 8 of them were Bf-109's. They were constant, there were never less than 3-4 109's over the airfield at all times - Which lead to this..


 
And eventually this.. 


 
Just imagine a newcomer who just spent $50 on this game and this is what happens to them, they're probably not going to play it again for months and I wouldn't make this post if it weren't such a common occurrence.
People play this game because they want to fly and enjoy themselves with the little free time they have, not to get seal clubbed to death because someone wants to
circle jerk to their kill/death ratio or as the popular excuses go.. "all is fair in love and war, it happened in real life." - Except first of all, this is not war, this is a video game.
Secondly, no, it did not happen in real life. I promise you that Erich Hartmann never risked his men to go strafe an airfield to boost kill counts or left a Ju-87/He-111 go unprotected.
If there were no vulching, the battle would happen over the objectives, kind of like in real life! Simulator working as intended.
For those who are just going to say, "Spawn at another airfield!", well let me tell you out of experience that yes, that is the obvious answer, if airfield A is being vulched into oblivion, spawn at airfield B.
But here's the twist, the vulchers will notice no one is spawning at airfield A and realize the obvious answer is to then go to airfield B.
Many of us have been playing flight sims for a long a time and know that in IL-2 1946/DCS, vulchers get kicked and everyone enjoys themselves.

I know for a fact that this mentality originates from Cliffs of Dover, I ask people to kindly to keep this garbage there.

I'm not trying to tell people how to play a game they paid for, I'm just saying with your already superior aircraft, you Blond Knights of Flight Simulators,

and the easier to deal with but still annoying Ivan Kozhedub's in your flappy Yaks -

If you guys want someone to fight against, you will have to cut the vulching... Just my observations.

 

This is a video game, not war.

Play Fair and everyone enjoys themselves.

Edited September 7, 2015 by Y-29.Silky

[[CPT]milopugdog]

+100,000,000

[Willy__]

Take off from the rear/far away airfield or one that isnt being attacked. Problem solved.

[Y-29.Silky]

Take off from the rear/far away airfield or one that isnt being attacked. Problem solved.

 

I knew someone was going to say that without reading the whole post.

or those who are just going to say, "Spawn at another airfield!", well let me tell you out of experience that yes, that is the obvious answer, if airfield A is being vulched into oblivion, spawn at airfield B.

But here's the twist, the vulchers will notice no one is spawning at airfield A and realize the obvious answer is to then go to airfield B.

 

Edited September 7, 2015 by Y-29.Silky

[Wulf]

I don't remember any blanket bans on airfield attacks in '46.  As I recall individual servers set their own rules - and some more than others.  But this sort of approach typically leads to problems or crazy, perverse outcomes; like people turning their lights on or claiming they were on finals in an effort to avoid being shot down or to endless arguments as people claim they shouldn't have been shot down in the first place.   And then there are those people who will just disregard any rules or who'll attempt to operate right on the edge of what is or isn't 'okay'.  And on top of that there's the issue of 'regulatory creep' as everyone demands interventions to address their own pet issues.  If you're just suggesting that people should be more mindful of others when planning online operations then I agree absolutely but I don't like the idea of 'restrictions' at all.

 

One possible solution to the issue you describe might be to significantly beef-up the Flak defenses around spawning bases - either by making the flak gunners dead-eye dicks or increasing the number of emplacements.     A heavily defended airfield should be an almost suicidal proposition to anything but the most well coordinated of attacks.

[SYN_Mike77]

Wulf is right.  but can we deal with the inevitible whining by the vulchers?

[Sokol1]

 

 

Just imagine a newcomer who just spent $50 on this game and this is what happens to them,

 

I bet that this newcomer will take a Bf 109/Fw 190 (You know, the German aces have 300+ kill in then) and go strafe the nearest enemy airfield, in favor of tier K/D. 

[[CPT]milopugdog]

I bet that this newcomer will take a Bf 109/Fw 190 (You know, the German aces have 300+ kill in then) and go strafe the nearest enemy airfield, in favor of tier K/D. 

Yeah, they'll pull a WT.

[6./ZG26_Emil]

Might help....might not but how about

 

1. Make missions longer with more ground target (or possibly spawning in new targets after others get destroyed).

 

2. Reduce numbers of fighters

 

3. Make it a victory condition that the team that runs out of fighters first loses

 

4. Increase flak even more

 

5. Put airfields slightly further apart  

I don't remember any blanket bans on airfield attacks in '46.  As I recall individual servers set their own rules - and some more than others.  But this sort of approach typically leads to problems or crazy, perverse outcomes; like people turning their lights on or claiming they were on finals in an effort to avoid being shot down or to endless arguments as people claim they shouldn't have been shot down in the first place.   And then there are those people who will just disregard any rules or who'll attempt to operate right on the edge of what is or isn't 'okay'.  And on top of that there's the issue of 'regulatory creep' as everyone demands interventions to address their own pet issues.  If you're just suggesting that people should be more mindful of others when planning online operations then I agree absolutely but I don't like the idea of 'restrictions' at all.

 

One possible solution to the issue you describe might be to significantly beef-up the Flak defenses around spawning bases - either by making the flak gunners dead-eye dicks or increasing the number of emplacements.     A heavily defended airfield should be an almost suicidal proposition to anything but the most well coordinated of attacks.

 

 

There were a lot of servers that had no vulching rules.

 

Also it was never the done thing to shoot taking off/landing aircraft and people would be called out for such behaviour.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

I played '46 for a very long time but never with a no vulching rule. Strafing rules, yes, but once airborne AC are traditionally fair game. I sometimes scramble from a field just to see if I can get away. Gun it and evade at low level toward friendly fields before climbing for a challenge.

 

If you have played flight sims for more than a day you know to spawn at another airfield and then attack the vultures from a position of advantage. Secondly, hook up with a friend and defend this airfield. Fly CAP, help your friends and run your score up. Most, but not all, vultures resort to vulching tactics due to a lower skill level in the first place.

Edited September 7, 2015 by [LBS]HerrMurf

[=EXPEND=Tripwire]

Another consideration - stop feeding the vultures. With the radar that is in place take a look at whether the field is likely to take fire before you would be able to provide any valuable assistance. Don't just spawn/respawn and feed them further.

 

It is smarter to relocate to another airfield than performing a desparate/heroic attempt at revenge taking off from an airfield under fire. You will give them exactly what they came for and incentive to repeat it.

 

Whilst not the answer you wanted, the typical vulture wants quick easy kills and not having to look for the enemy. Relocation stops feeding them and makes them have to travel further and look for you.

[Finkeren]

Mission designers can do something about this too.

 

Double the amount of AAA at the airfields and put it on highest skill level. Then design the objectives so that they don't overlap the 'zone of death' around the airfields.

 

If the mission requires airfield attack, make the airfield objective at an airstrip that isn't being used as a spawn point and put normal AAA there.

[von_Tom]

I knew someone was going to say that without reading the whole post.

 

Seems to me he did.  He said spawn at the rear base or one that isnt being attacked [sic].

 

The real magic is that it takes time for people to fly from base A to base B!  Even better, you have local radar effect to tell you which base is clear.  Airfield A is being vulched, spawn at B because the enemy won't be there yet.  Enemy heads to B, spawn at A.  Keep doing that until the vulchers get dizzy and spin into the ground.  Maybe spawn at base C for variety.

 

There seems to be a psychology involved with being vulched, which makes people keep spawning at the base they got vulched at.  It's far easier to say over chat "Spawn at base B" than to get your knickers in a twist spawning and dying and spawning and dying etc.

 

And nobody ever complains about the suicidal pilots that keep attacking heavily defended bases, ruining the efforts of some who are trying to form up and fly a mission co-op style.  Burn them, burn them I say!

 

von Tom

[coconut]

On large maps where it's hard to find planes, I can understand that many people get drawn to the few places where you know enemies are.

 

Here is an idea I would like more mission designers try: Put spotter ground units near objectives. The effect from the player's perspective is to see a radar over objectives, with enemy planes appearing as red. I know some might have an impulsive reaction against radars, but it's worth trying. It's also not completely unrealistic that people on the ground might report enemy aircraft presence nearby.

 

Other things that can be done: Spawn AI fighter patrols around airfields. That will give vulchers something else to shoot at, and if they ignore them to strafe humans that are taking off, the AI might, if it's at ace level and is in a helping mood, deal quickly with the intruders. In addition to that, ace-level invulnerable AA (61k and flak38) can also be strong deterrents, but only up to 2500m or so.

[TP_Jacko]

For now I would increase the AA for large and small calibre it should be something that is sufficient to scare an attacker into a quick hit and run. To circle a base over enemy territory should mean a lot of trouble or use an AI spawn to give them something to worry about if they are there for any number and too long using timers and counters. I do get the feeling that there is more AA over a target area than an airfield. 

[Brano]

and the easier to deal with but still annoying Ivan Kozhedub's in your flappy Yaks -

 Ivan Kozhedub did not fly yaks.La-5/7 was the ride of his choice   

[Sunde]

Quote "Just imagine a newcomer who just spent $50 on this game and this is what happens to them, they're probably not going to play it again for months"
If getting strafed on the runway is enough to deter anyone to not play for months, well then this probably is not the game for them. 

Edited September 7, 2015 by 19te.Mueller

[VBF-12_Stick-95]

Although I agree with the OP, asking the pilots that vulch for restraint is going to fall on deaf ears.  This must and, in my opinion, should be a server policy.

 

The IL2 1946 WOP server had good policies regarding vulching.  On some maps it was completely banned.  On others, there was a forward base where it was allowed (including strafing) and you took your chances.  Bombing aircraft at any airfield was not considered vulching, only strafing and rockets.

 

Perching or camping at an enemy base was also frowned upon.

Edited September 7, 2015 by VR_Stick

[6./ZG26_Emil]

Although I agree with the OP, asking the pilots that vulch for restraint is going to fall on deaf ears.  This must and, in my opinion, should be a server policy.

 

The IL2 1946 WOP server had good policies regarding vulching.  On some maps it was completely banned.  On others, there was a forward base where it was allowed (including strafing) and you took your chances.  Bombing aircraft at any airfield was not considered vulching, only strafing and rockets.

 

Perching or camping at an enemy base was also frowned upon.

 

As was shooting people with gear down, taking off and landing...I guess times have changed

[Alkyan]

I don't think vulching/attacking bases is such a problem when the numbers of players are balanced. You can take off elsewhere and its even a valid way to win the game as it indirectly protects your bombers. What bother me is when sometime there is 3 times more axe players.

Playing VSS becomes really frustrating,

Playing axe ridiculously boring.

 

However I found the gameplay and the balance better since the introduction of the 64 limit. This game rocks !

[Bullets]

Mission designers can do something about this too.

 

Double the amount of AAA at the airfields and put it on highest skill level. Then design the objectives so that they don't overlap the 'zone of death' around the airfields.

 

If the mission requires airfield attack, make the airfield objective at an airstrip that isn't being used as a spawn point and put normal AAA there.

 

+1

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

1. Removing GPS on full real servers should keep the no skillers away. These people basically take off, point the nose at the target indicated on the map and just steer to an easy target.

Most of these couldn't find their wa y around a pig pen even if they had a map, compass and a lamp and a piece of string to find out.

Keep the "Learners" (PC) on the Normal Servers, because most of the Vulture-Jocks aren't even capable of Friend/Foe recognition and thus too are the ones teamkilling people constantly.

Someone who can't find his way around, isn't gonna vulch, someone who can is already at a skill level high enough to participate in a simulated airwar.

 

2. I quite liked the system in CloD, in which the spotters on the ground gave you an approximate position via radio about altitude, heading and approximate position. A similar system would be great in my opinion for BoS.

It's a practical, simple and realistic.

 

[TRA_Rogue]

It's equally stupid of those 2-3 friendlies on the right side chasing the same plane while they should be defending their airfield.

[Y-29.Silky]

Do you guys not get what I'm saying? Spawn at another airfield, sure you'll get up once or twice but only until the vulchers go to that airfield and do it again (oooooh let's just switch airfields and repeat the process!) and there's been many times I've spawned in that other airfield and an enemy was already there. It's sure as hell easier to not understand when you only fly Germany.
I've flown 1946 ever since it came out and in every popular expert server, they roughly all had the same rules, no one can tell me otherwise. And the mission editors have already doubled the AAA but like I said in the OP I would have loved to see a Stuka strike, too much AAA and that would be suicide for them, not the figthers, and have even made an airfield a target, an airfield that no one can spawn in, you can't up your k/d there though. Whatever guys.

Edited September 7, 2015 by Y-29.Silky

[BlitzPig_EL]

Only some servers had silly rules like that.

 

If you can't put up a good airfield cap, why are you playing a simulation in the first place?

 

Whine, whine, whine.

 

It's been the same since I started playing in 2001.

 

And one of the reasons I no longer do.

 

I'd like to virtually fly again, but all this "total immersion" nonsense has taken all the fun out of it.

 

All the "full real", "full difficulty", "expert" types have clamored and badgered the developers to constantly make "sims" ever more difficult, more difficult in fact than real flying, all because the hard core player base needs an ever more challenging "fix" for their online habit.

 

You guys have ruined the genre, taken all the fun away, and you don't understand what it is you have done.

[Matt]

Just add airstart further away from the objectives/airfields.

 

AAA is pretty useless against vulching fighters and in turn way more effective against non-fighters attacking an airfield and might even be counter-productive.

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

Only some servers had silly rules like that.

Like No Teamkilling and other silly stuff like that.

 

If you can't put up a good airfield cap, why are you playing a simulation in the first place?

For Destruction of actual Ground Targets, Intercepting and Escorting and other general Co-op missions

 

Whine, whine, whine.

Troll, Troll, Troll

 

It's been the same since I started playing in 2001.

Never Progressing past easy mode.

 

And one of the reasons I no longer do.

Due to never progressing Skillset.

 

I'd like to virtually fly again, but all this "total immersion" nonsense has taken all the fun out of it.

Well, there are simple shooters out there looking for people exactly like you. Enjoy fictional events in fictional universes.

 

All the "full real", "full difficulty", "expert" types have clamored and badgered the developers to constantly make "sims" ever more difficult, more difficult in fact than real flying, all because the hard core player base needs an ever more challenging "fix" for their online habit.

There is still normal mode where the Fighter Jocks can freely enjoy pointlessly shooting down one another.

 

You guys have ruined the genre, taken all the fun away, and you don't understand what it is you have done.

People like you shouldn't be playing Sims if you don't looking for FRIGGIN SIMULATION. Go and play War Thunder Arcade, it will fulfill all your dreams.

 

[Edited]

 

And that is why Normal Servers exist.

Edited September 9, 2015 by Bearcat

[BlitzPig_EL]

Going personal right out of the gate, how typical, and you call me a troll.

 

It's folks like you that have nearly killed flight simulation.

 

Take a look around, how many people are playing now compared to the early days of the real, original IL2?  Not very damn many.

[von_Tom]

 

Lots of misplaced elitism there Klaus_Mann. In my opinion anyway.

 

Silky yes I understand, but why should people fly/play the way you want them to? Pretty much nobody flies as they did historically so why expect history to repeat itself in the virtual environment?

 

Personally if I thought vulching a base would give my team an advantage by tying up lots of enemy fighters I'd probably do it. That's tactics in a virtual environment for you. The only time I've attacked red bases on Jabo runs I (and those with me) have usually been faced with a rapid reaction force spawning in. Or appearing out of nowhere.

 

Seems to me it's a storm in a tea cup and not a real problem. I appreciate it's annoying but next time go and get a drink and the fuss will be over when you get back.

 

von Tom

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

Going personal right out of the gate, how typical, and you call me a troll.

Yeah, sorry for that. With 700 posts I feel you are dedicated to the wrong game genre anyways.

 

It's folks like you that have nearly killed flight simulation.

I feel it's a bit odd to say: "You Simmers, always looking for realism, ruining the fun for the simple folk like us".

 

Take a look around, how many people are playing now compared to the early days of the real, original IL2?  Not very damn many.

I don't really give too many sheets about quantity as long as the quality is right. I like my Il-2 as a game for a few, dedicated players, willing to pay the price for a great game.

If I wand mindless fun I have a ton of F2P games like War Thunder.

[[CPT]milopugdog]

Going personal right out of the gate, how typical, and you call me a troll.

 

It's folks like you that have nearly killed flight simulation.

 

Take a look around, how many people are playing now compared to the early days of the real, original IL2?  Not very damn many.

Well, those server rules aren't really immersive; and how is coming on here to yell about something that isn't even the topic NOT trolling?

 

Immersion in a simulator. Dear god. Someone stop them!!!

 

Over saturation probably killed flight sims.

 

Most people from the original IL-2 probably have gotten lives and families. Those two things make it kinda hard to play video games, but what do I know? I'm not even out of school. 

Edited September 8, 2015 by milopugdog

[6./ZG26_Gielow]

War is Hell 

[[CPT]milopugdog]

War is Hell 

Well yes, but this is a video game 

[Brano]

Well, those server rules aren't really immersive; and how is coming on here to yell about something that isn't even the topic NOT trolling?

 

Immersion in a simulator. Dear god. Someone stop them!!!

 

Over saturation probably killed flight sims.

 

Most people from the original IL-2 probably have gotten lives and families. Those two things make it kinda hard to play video games, but what do I know? I'm not even out of school. 

Yep,if I only had so much time as I did back 10 years ago.I know many old sturm pilots who resigned from flying due to more important real life issues and some of them also due to burnout.And from time to time you can meet this burnouts on flightsim forums spreading their doom theories

[6./ZG26_Gielow]

Well yes, but this is a video game 

It is a WAR flight simulator.

 

 

If you dont use your brain you will be killed.

 

I am here to destroy the enemy by whatever means available.

 

If you are in a fair fight you are doing something wrong.

 

Jungle! !!!

[Finkeren]

It is a WAR flight simulator

 

I am here to destroy the enemy by whatever means available.

! !!!

This, in my view is a mistaken view of what air war is about.

 

If you are solely concentrating on destroying enemy aircraft, even as a fighter pilot, you're not really simulating war.

 

In a real war the mission always takes priority over the destruction of enemy aircraft (and the mission itself is seldom the destruction of enemy aircraft - though there are exceptions)

 

The role of a fighter aircraft is to deny the enemy airspace, destruction of aircraft comes second.

 

If you wanna play at war: Concentrate on the mission.

[Bearcat]

Silky you are 100% correct.. and contrary to what some have said about that "it is simulated war " nonsense.. From my understanding most basses did not have the resources to cap their own bases extensively while they were also flying missions. In this simulated environment where you may have twice as many of one

 

 
One could imagine what this would look like in the real war. It looked like a formation of 5 Stuka's attacking an airfield with 3 escorts while my Russian comrades frantically scramble.

Although this particular airfield had absolutely zero impact on the mission, wasn't an objective, and had unlimited aircraft spawns, events like this is why I love IL-2.
I sat helplessly parked on this airfield waiting for the sirens of doom, ready to admire the death and destruction that would seal my fate and make me fall in love with this game all over again!
But it wasn't to be, all 8 of them were Bf-109's. They were constant, there were never less than 3-4 109's over the airfield at all times - Which lead to this..


 
And eventually this.. 


 
Just imagine a newcomer who just spent $50 on this game and this is what happens to them, they're probably not going to play it again for months and I wouldn't make this post if it weren't such a common occurrence.
People play this game because they want to fly and enjoy themselves with the little free time they have, not to get seal clubbed to death because someone wants to
circle jerk to their kill/death ratio or as the popular excuses go.. "all is fair in love and war, it happened in real life." - Except first of all, this is not war, this is a video game.
Secondly, no, it did not happen in real life. I promise you that Erich Hartmann never risked his men to go strafe an airfield to boost kill counts or left a Ju-87/He-111 go unprotected.
If there were no vulching, the battle would happen over the objectives, kind of like in real life! Simulator working as intended.
For those who are just going to say, "Spawn at another airfield!", well let me tell you out of experience that yes, that is the obvious answer, if airfield A is being vulched into oblivion, spawn at airfield B.
But here's the twist, the vulchers will notice no one is spawning at airfield A and realize the obvious answer is to then go to airfield B.
Many of us have been playing flight sims for a long a time and know that in IL-2 1946/DCS, vulchers get kicked and everyone enjoys themselves.

I know for a fact that this mentality originates from Cliffs of Dover, I ask people to kindly to keep this garbage there.

I'm not trying to tell people how to play a game they paid for, I'm just saying with your already superior aircraft, you Blond Knights of Flight Simulators,

and the easier to deal with but still annoying Ivan Kozhedub's in your flappy Yaks -

If you guys want someone to fight against, you will have to cut the vulching... Just my observations.

 

This is a video game, not war.

Play Fair and everyone enjoys themselves.

 

You are 100% correct .. IMO at least.

 

Take off from the rear/far away airfield or one that isnt being attacked. Problem solved.

 

That never works... not for long.

 

I don't think vulching/attacking bases is such a problem when the numbers of players are balanced. You can take off elsewhere and its even a valid way to win the game as it indirectly protects your bombers. What bother me is when sometime there is 3 times more axe players.
Playing VSS becomes really frustrating,
Playing axe ridiculously boring.
However I found the gameplay and the balance better since the introduction of the 64 limit. This game rocks !

 

 

 

Only some servers had silly rules like that.

If you can't put up a good airfield cap, why are you playing a simulation in the first place?

Whine, whine, whine.

It's been the same since I started playing in 2001.

And one of the reasons I no longer do.

I'd like to virtually fly again, but all this "total immersion" nonsense has taken all the fun out of it.

All the "full real", "full difficulty", "expert" types have clamored and badgered the developers to constantly make "sims" ever more difficult, more difficult in fact than real flying, all because the hard core player base needs an ever more challenging "fix" for their online habit.

You guys have ruined the genre, taken all the fun away, and you don't understand what it is you have done.

 

I don't think it is a silly rule at all... No B&Z? That is a silly rule... but camping out over bases.. which is what he is really talking about.. should not be allowed. It isn't even the vulching perse but the camping that makes it an unpleasurable experience. If I get into a fight and I am limping home... and my opponent chases me.. or even if I got spotted by someone and they come for me...  as I am landing... that is not so bad.. Or if a enemy flight is specifically tasked with attacking my airbase ... and I get caught on the deck... that is understandable but what really sucks and is totally unrealistic regardless to what anyone may say and always has been, is the guy who just sits there... and as soon as you start to move he pounces.. He takes off.. flies straight to your base... and sits there and tags anyone coming in.. That is nonsesne and we should try to not justify that behavior by making excuses for it.

[6./ZG26_Gielow]

This, in my view is a mistaken view of what air war is about.

If you are solely concentrating on destroying enemy aircraft, even as a fighter pilot, you're not really simulating war.

In a real war the mission always takes priority over the destruction of enemy aircraft (and the mission itself is seldom the destruction of enemy aircraft - though there are exceptions)

The role of a fighter aircraft is to deny the enemy airspace, destruction of aircraft comes second.

If you wanna play at war: Concentrate on the mission.

I think generals Doolittle and Galland would disagree...

[SCG_Space_Ghost]

I think generals Doolittle and Galland would disagree...

 

+1

[SteelValkyrie]

The playerbase that frequents the popular expert servers are obviously a mixed bag. Last night a saw 3 stuka's head out to the front line and an he111 on it's way to a target, there are plenty of posts about how LW don't play the objectives.

 

Likewise, I think those that decide to vulch often are a select few culprits who usually have limited success. With the playerbase as scarce as it is, I think enforcing server rules against it will only divide up the community. Although vulching can be tricky to deal with, there is generally always a quieter airfield to take off from. 

 

I think defending AI will clutter airspace, maybe increasing the flak would be a way to go. Spawning from the forward base and having to scramble to avoid being strafed by a rogue fighter can definitely spice things up a bit (though organised bombing runs would be even more intense)

 

It may not be the most honourable tactic, I can live with it though. I think strafing airfields/people taking off/landing should be down to personal choice, not server.