Jump to content

II./JG1_Etzel

Members
  • Content Count

    15
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

13 Good

About II./JG1_Etzel

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

213 profile views
  1. I think any event can more or less directly tied to a pilot: For recon missions it is the pilot who fly over a specific area under certain conditions and land the plane undamaged... => the landing of the pilot after all other conditions are fullfilled would be the event to grant points. In an arty mission it might be not so easy, as the pilot is only directing the arty fire and the completion event is triggered by the artillery then; but even then you could use the workaround, to tie each pass over the target and over artillery area to an objective that grants e.g. only 1 Point. But as u need to do anyhow several passes, the points for an arty mission are accumulated until it is finally complete... the more passes are necessary, the more risk you need to take the more points are granted.... In WW2 scenarios you can use those objectives e.g. for parachute or cargo dropping to log the events and grant some rewards.... So I would say in any thinkable mission type flown by a human pilot that fullfills any specific object there must be any kind of action or event that can be tied to such an objective...
  2. Just to make it clear: It is not about the confirmation that I've killed someone or I have been killed by someone (latter one I will recognice anyhow), it is only about to know who was the one involved in the action around. E.g. on Sunday after a hard fight I bumped a camel from behind as we were in a hard pull up and due to low speed I lost the effect of my rudder and elevater... sure, I send my apologies via chat simply "...to the camel" but I would have preferred to be more polite and name the pilot I've collided with (esp. as in the logs it turned then out it was a JG1 team-mate I bumbed into 😳) But well, from the immersion point of view it makes sense to turn off kill notifications, no doubt on that... And finally: 1st it's your server, thus your decisions and 2nd is anyhow only a very minor side topic => so thanks very much for your prompt answers and explanations πŸ™‚ Salute!
  3. And exactly that is the (or one of the) point(s) that 1GCS should change in game to make FC more complete and add something that was not available in RoF (they should not add it only for FC but the complete IL2 series, but IMHO in WW1 its more important): In analogy like the game logs the damage of objects or the take off and landing of a plane they should also implement an option to log addtional events. As I would think about it the engine could be extended by a set of just a few generic event objects, in the code simply called "Objective 1", "Objective 2", etc. and they are fixed to different point-values. (I think 5 different types would be by far enough) Mission builders then should be able link the fullfillment of any conditions (as they are using now already for generating of sub-titles and activation or de-activation of other objects) to any of this generic objetives and the game thus should log "Player abc completed "Objective x"... No one needs to read in the info that it was a Recon or Arty Spot or spy pick-up that was completed, as it would be enough to inform via server info and/or mission info which objective type is connected to which specific mission on that specific map or server. As it is already now possible to generate very complex mission logic that is recogniced directly in the game correctly (e.g. as the game is able to provide specific sub titles only after specific conditions are fullfilled) I cannot see any reason why it would be such a big impact for engine to also write 1 line in the log then....?
  4. No, for sure not... I had several engagements Se5s and Camels yesterday; but that flight was the only one with the D.VII and I remember clearly that I did fight against these 2 enemy planes and that I crashed on the ground.... So even that it could be true (even that I deem this as unlikely) that both of them did not put a single bullet in my plane during the dog fight, I am absolutely sure that at least the info on the plane status (with no damage indicated) is wrong!
  5. ....maybe already mentioned in an earlier post on this topic, but anyhow: What I would like to see in a future FC version is the possibility to grant points for recon and arty spotting missions!!! ... or to say it more general: The possibility for mission builders to define object completion conditions that are recogniced by the server log and can be considered in stats-pages then (In-Game points would also be nice, but not that inportant from my perspective)
  6. Hey guys, first I want to take the chance and drop a big THANK YOU for hosting and developing the maps for the comunity! It's a pleasure to fly WWI birds on pretty crowded servers again.... πŸ™‚ Only thing I would like to ask is why are the kill notifications disabled on your server? I personally would like to know who are the pilots I am fighting with... πŸ˜‰ (And sorry if this Q was already answered anywhere else) Salute Etzel
  7. hmm.... I cannot say anything specific about theis invisible thing, I many times have issues with spotting planes, but I am pretty sure that most of the times the problem is simply my poor spotting skills. That a plane appeared suddenly direct next to me in the middle of my screen did not happen to me so far. BUT there is a strange thing with the D.VII: Yesterday (Sunday) evening I did only one flight with a Fokker D.VII; I spawned at the air start point right next to front... It was a short flight as very soon I met a S.E.5 and a Camel close to the ground. The fight ended quickly as I crashed in the ground and wrecked my plane completely... allthough that I don't know every single detail of this fight I am pretty sure that I was hit by bullets from both of them and that the pilot was heavily hurt after the crash..... And here is what the Stats are telling of that flight: http://162.248.94.112:8000/de/sortie/log/9652/?tour=6 The logs on all other Sorties I did fly yesterday are looking absolutely plausible, both on the damadge I received as well as distributet by me; only the Log of the flight with the D.VII is totally empty... I don't know if that issue is connected to the invisible one and maybe it is not connected to the plane type but to the spawning option (in that way that air-spawned planes are not recognized correctly by the server and/or parser.... I have no clue), but that we have an issue here seems to be evident....
  8. Well, 9 km is really huge distance for fighters. I checked now on google maps the area where I use to fly IRL to see the distance of 2 landmarks I know exactly now and must confirm: Spotting small planes (like 2 seaters for example) IRL on a distance of 9 kms is really damn hard up to nearly impossible; so from that perspective I have no problem with that behaviour as it seems realistic to me... But the question is: Is that distance fixed, no matter which type of plane pops up? Because when I think of HE-111, A20 or Ju-88 I would say the distance when they pop in should be at least 25% more than for fighters.... ...if this is not the case I would be a little disappointed πŸ€”
  9. Well, basically my opinion is, that the alternate visibility has several minus points as I experienced: 1st: It is very very irritating that you spot some plane in the distance, and when u zoom it's not getting better and sometimes even dissapears 2nd: Where is the advantage when u spot something and u have neither the chance to identify if its enemy or friendly nor any clue which direction it is moving nor how far exactly this plane is away? Worst case would be that u detect friendly plane in 20 kms distance that moves away while you are trying to follow just to identify it... => pure waste of time for nothing 3rd: It's simply unrealstic, thus it has a negative impact on emersion and atmosphere.... 4th: Can the Micro-Stutters that many players report after online flying maybe be caused by this mode (as the server simply must send more information to more clients)? BUT: Before I would vote now on J5_Matthias poll there is still 1 point I am not sure about: When this mode is turned off, does this mean that everything is working the same way as did prior to 3.201? As far as I understand, they invested a lot in the new spotting system and believe I did somewhere read that the spotting range for planes was anyhow increased by some kilometers, even when this mode is turned off, but I am not sure as I don't find that posting anymore in all the stuff on this topic... And what about this sun glistening effect: That for sure makes an important difference on the spotting capability in a distance of 5 kms as well => is this effect bound the alternate-vis-mode too? Salute Etzel
  10. Ok, maybe that's that point: I cannot say that Buzz or me had dropped the 1 big bomb close enough on a pillar... nevertheless I would find it strange, that the small bombs do not cause any damage at alle (not even 0,1%) Well, anyhow: As the durability is lowered now the issue might be solved anyhow, let's see 😁 Thanks for your answeres Gamecock and Trupo....πŸ˜‰
  11. Bridge 2 seems to be undestroyable at all... 3 Halb-flights put all the bombload on it (meaning at least 3x 50 kgs) and it remained undamaged.... I flew another sortie for bridge 1 and it was destroyed in the first pass where I dropped 1 big and 2 small bombs, probably 1 bomb would have been enough..... This is the sortie-log of the attack on Bridge 2: 162.248.94.112:8000/de/sortie/log/310/?tour=1 ...no % damage to see, but definitly I saw some explosions by my bombs and also Butzz had plenty of good hits And here the sortie log of the other flight to Bridge 1: 162.248.94.112:8000/de/sortie/log/328/?tour=1 Never the less not to forget: Had fun in the test runs, thanks for your work, salute!! 😁
  12. Hi Guys, first of all: Thanks a lot for this great Server! I have just a short question for clarification: In the first posting there is still the rule outlined: * You may fly only on one side during the whole campaign! Now to avoid any rule breach and to be clear: This rule is not valid any more as to the update of 10.02.2017 and to the actual server rules that say: Registration is obligatory. You may have one account for Allied side and/or one account for Axis side ...thus when axis side is full it is absolutely allowed to change account name and join allied side instead (...well, after waiting the 10 minutes coalition change penalty ...) => Is this interpretation correct? Salute Etzel
  13. Thanks a lot for this advice, I tried now the Login to coconut Server and simply go afk (to be sure not to touch or move anything), and when I came back some minutes later I finally was logged in; after dozens of unsuccessfull attemps before since release of 3.001. So good to know that online flying is finally still working for me, but anyhow slightly annoying bug that hopefully will be fixed with next update
  14. Seems the stats server pages are down (both normal and expert)
×
×
  • Create New...