A pic of hyperlobby in better days :)

[gavagai]

Yeah, but all in separate games. I hope some day BoS will be more like Aces High - capable of 350+ players in one world/server.

 

+1

 

Il-2 heyday was great, but the servers were so balkanized.

[AX2]

If CloD is to move forward it needs publisher support (no chance),  at least 10 new flyable aircraft,  new maps, and lots of new ground content.

You have to be able to simulate a ground war to fight for.  I don't see it happening.

 

It's a real pity as the game engine is basically good, and the feeling of flight is the best encountered so far in a WW2 sim.  But it's just too complicated

for a small volunteer group to add content to fast enough to save it.

 

 

+1

[Georgio]

Judging by how well BoS is shaping up in such a short time frame, I would expect it to pretty much dominate the WW2 scene when we get to experience it.

Good as CloD is now that TF have given it the kiss of life, it will only survive if it can offer something different to the other offerings out there. The Channel map is pretty much dead in the water unless a campaign can be designed that actually features a viable invasion fleet aka Sea Lion.

Only then will the much needed gameplay element be added which is currently so lacking.

The upcoming Malta patch might achieve the same result and I for one would be sucked back into CloD just for this one scenario.

Time will tell but the important thing is that we have some choice.

[Crow]

Honestly, between Falcon 4 and IL-2, we haven't seen a superior flight sim product released in over a decade. If IL-2: BoS can tap the reasons why IL-2 was successful it will fill a void in the market that has existed for a long, long time and perhaps we'll have another very popular Hyperlobby room.

[Revvin]

Yeah, but all in separate games. I hope some day BoS will be more like Aces High - capable of 350+ players in one world/server.

I spent a lot of time in Warbirds, moved to Ace High and then later WWIIOL. It makes me wonder how those sims will survive as players are able to buy sims like IL-2, Rise of Flight etc and host their own servers where anyone can log in for free, player limits will just go up and up and the only thing missing is a decent persistent universe like those MMOG's have with their basic strategic elements. In terms of flight modelling and visuals I couldn't go back to any of those MMOG's now. I can't wait to get online with IL-2: BoS

[6./ZG26_Emil]

Honestly, between Falcon 4 and IL-2, we haven't seen a superior flight sim product released in over a decade. If IL-2: BoS can tap the reasons why IL-2 was successful it will fill a void in the market that has existed for a long, long time and perhaps we'll have another very popular Hyperlobby room.

 

 

CO-OPS

[Bearcat]

I assume everyone has gone to WT! Not sure where the '20' figure comes from, in CoD I play SOWC twice a week that is 45-50 a side with people queueing up to get in! I actually think numbers look low because a lot of people have moved away from the public dogfight servers, which get old real quick. It sure would be nice to see the 1000+ I used to see in HL again, but I'm not sure they will come back now to flight sims.

These days people seem to look down on HL.Personally I think it went a long way towards keeping il2 going for as long as it did. Online war coops were just so easy to set up, there were hundreds of people just playing those 7 days a week, most of whom you would never see on any dogfight server.

 

I think HL was instrumental in the longevity of IL2.. That and the dedicated server SW and the way missions could be run. IP to IP basically.. Even through HL it was still an IP to IP kind of connection.. HL served as a place foe the community to gather. That is one thing that killed off CFS3.. there was no sense of community.

 

Honestly, between Falcon 4 and IL-2, we haven't seen a superior flight sim product released in over a decade. If IL-2: BoS can tap the reasons why IL-2 was successful it will fill a void in the market that has existed for a long, long time and perhaps we'll have another very popular Hyperlobby room.

 

Not one that grabbed folks by the joystick.. We have seen a bunch of individual flashes.. even RoF as good as it is.. it is a niche theater and a small niche at that.. WWII is a much better and more wide open theater as far as potential content even though some say it has been done to death. When it comes to modern day sims I don't see much touching Falcon & DCS at the moment.

 

CO-OPS

I agree.. COOPS had a lot to do with IL2's success.. and hopefully even if not initially eventually and sooner rather than later BoS will be capable of IL2 style COOPs, DFs.. and/or a hybrid MDS type of mission..

[Crow]

CO-OPS

Never played 'em much myself. I'm too competitive and like to have human competition, but I can definitely see why others would enjoy it. I knew lots of people who specifically played co-ops only.

[Sokol1]

In "old" il-2 CO-OPS don't mean only player versus AI,  can be also PvP&AI, P&AIvP, P&AIvP&AI, and even only PvP if mission have defined objectives that are not just dogfight, depends on mission design.

 

I think we see this in BoS, but in "Bo$ way" not a "cut& past" from old il-2 like people demand...

 

 

 

The upcoming Malta patch...

 

I fail in understand we a Malta map "improved" Cl*D - if Malta campaign is basically a mini-BoB: axis bombing, "few" fighters defending... Western Desert should by more appropriated, with ground war.

 

Sokol1

Edited September 12, 2013 by Sokol1

[gavagai]

even RoF as good as it is.. it is a niche theater and a small niche at that.. WWII is a much better and more wide open theater as far as potential content even though some say it has been done to death. 

 

WW2 is like a movie sequel: bigger and more explosive, but much less interesting than its predecessor.  Half the reason why WW1 is niche is because the event is barely taught in American public schools.

[ImPeRaToR]

In "old" il-2 CO-OPS don't mean only player versus AI,  can be also PvP&AI, P&AIvP, P&AIvP&AI, and even only PvP if mission have defined objectives that are not just dogfight, depends on mission design.

 

I think we see this in BoS, but in "Bo$ way" not a "cut& past" from old il-2 like people demand...

 

 

 

 

I fail in understand we a Malta map "improved" Cl*D - if Malta campaign is basically a mini-BoB: axis bombing, "few" fighters defending... Western Desert should by more appropriated, with ground war.

 

Sokol1

Except the COOP missions will run in DF mode

[Lord_Haw-Haw]

CO-OPS

That depends, I have flown with the German JG5 a few co ops, but since they enjoy flying against AI it is sort off.....

 

Not one that grabbed folks by the joystick.. We have seen a bunch of individual flashes.. even RoF as good as it is.. it is a niche theater and a small niche at that.. WWII is a much better and more wide open theater as far as potential content even though some say it has been done to death. When it comes to modern day sims I don't see much touching Falcon & DCS at the moment.

The thing about done to death, is because almost every one repeats the same theatres, it can get boring, few seem to have the courage to take up a new theatre!

Just need to think of north Africa, that no one has done yet, the most we had was a bit Malta and Sicily.

Edited September 12, 2013 by Lord_Haw-Haw

[14/JG5_Adrifter]

How many years ago? Maybe 8 years ago.

 

That was good times.

 

 

Good times indeed.

 

By the looks of it I'd say that is a bit more recent though. Probably sometime in 2008 (or even early 2009), based on the servers running.

 

Skies of fire only started in 2007, after the big top and 334th were going downhill. Then skies of valor was started about a year later.

 

I had played Il-2 for a few years on and off before then, but when we ([RS] squad at the time, later to split into FS~) started Skies of fire is when I got hooked for good.

[6S.Manu]

WW2 is like a movie sequel: bigger and more explosive, but much less interesting than its predecessor.  Half the reason why WW1 is niche is because the event is barely taught in American public schools.

Eh eh.

 

It's probable, Gavagai, but it does not worj that way for me and other pilots I know.

 

Personally I like to think I'm there, inside the cockpit with a 1600hp engine in front of me. It's a powerful engine and I'm in a very fast and heavy plane; it's more technologically advanced than a WW1 plane but most of its control is still on my hands (with no CPU to help me).

 

When I think to WW1 against WW2, I like to compare scooters with superbikes, or a Fiat 500 with a NASCAR Cup Racecar.

 

You know...

 

 

My squad is not flying RoF because of this, but still most of my teammates own the sim and many planes (as they own also DCS and ... sigh... CloD)

Edited September 15, 2013 by 6S.Manu

[FS_Fenice_1965]

Who here used to play on Skies of Valor?

 

Me and Valisk of course...still play there a lot...the server is alive and well..during these holidays is often peaking 50 players

Edited January 2, 2014 by FS_Fenice_1965

[71st_AH_Mastiff]

You know who placed that TrackIR ad? 

 

Jason

? you?

[6./ZG26_Emil]

That depends, I have flown with the German JG5 a few co ops, but since they enjoy flying against AI it is sort off.....

The thing about done to death, is because almost every one repeats the same theatres, it can get boring, few seem to have the courage to take up a new theatre!

Just need to think of north Africa, that no one has done yet, the most we had was a bit Malta and Sicily.

 

You flew with us did you?

 

Never heard your name and we always flew against human opponents....

[Bearcat]

WW2 is like a movie sequel: bigger and more explosive, but much less interesting than its predecessor.  Half the reason why WW1 is niche is because the event is barely taught in American public schools.

I don't think that is it. I think WWII is so popular because it is the sweetspot between the modern fly by wire and the up close and personal classic dogfights. I think that sweetspot extends up to Korea then things start to morph into the whole fly by wire air combat of the post Korea era. WWI like modern air warfare are both niches within a niche at least I think so... which of course does not make them any less relevant.

 

  

That depends, I have flown with the German JG5 a few co ops, but since they enjoy flying against AI it is sort off.....

 

The thing about done to death, is because almost every one repeats the same theatres, it can get boring, few seem to have the courage to take up a new theatre!

Just need to think of north Africa, that no one has done yet, the most we had was a bit Malta and Sicily.

This is why I still think iL 2 will go down as the big daddy of flight Sims. I have no doubt that BoS will be a game changer .. but it's fanbase is only but so big (meaning the overall pool of simmers). IL2 had such success because it was so scalable, had such a different dynamic to it, even in the beginning when the theater set and plane set was so limited... but as it grew you had a growing base that regardless to whether it's fliers preferred the full switch treatment or scaled back settings up to and including arcade, they were all still being played on one product in one lobby so you could even go from one extreme to the other with a few mouse clicks. In it's current state especially with Td and the mods you can fly from WWI to Vietnam... and granted .. it is long in the tooth but I don't think we will ever see that flexibility in one product again. I also do not think that Cod is going anywhere and with DCS coming on the horizon... I think the pool will be diluted somewhat but I do think that BoS has the best chance of becoming the primer WWII sim if it can just garner the support and stay viable and grow into other theaters. I think the choice of theaters will be crucial to it's future success.

[Georgio]

 I also do not think that Cod is going anywhere and with DCS coming on the horizon... I think the pool will be diluted somewhat but I do think that BoS has the best chance of becoming the primer WWII sim if it can just garner the support and stay viable and grow into other theaters. I think the choice of theaters will be crucial to it's future success.

Agreed on the theaters. As good as Stalingrad will be as a sand-box, simmers will want to move onto the next installment for their next fix.

As always it's the follow-up record that's hard to follow especially with DCS taking Normandy...  

Maybe something further afield like the Pacific might be worth a revisit.

[dburne]

 

Maybe something further afield like the Pacific might be worth a revisit.

 

Bring it on!!

[6./ZG26_Emil]

I don't think that is it. I think WWII is so popular because it is the sweetspot between the modern fly by wire and the up close and personal classic dogfights. I think that sweetspot extends up to Korea then things start to morph into the whole fly by wire air combat of the post Korea era. WWI like modern air warfare are both niches within a niche at least I think so... which of course does not make them any less relevant.

 

  

This is why I still think iL 2 will go down as the big daddy of flight Sims. I have no doubt that BoS will be a game changer .. but it's fanbase is only but so big (meaning the overall pool of simmers). IL2 had such success because it was so scalable, had such a different dynamic to it, even in the beginning when the theater set and plane set was so limited... but as it grew you had a growing base that regardless to whether it's fliers preferred the full switch treatment or scaled back settings up to and including arcade, they were all still being played on one product in one lobby so you could even go from one extreme to the other with a few mouse clicks. In it's current state especially with Td and the mods you can fly from WWI to Vietnam... and granted .. it is long in the tooth but I don't think we will ever see that flexibility in one product again. I also do not think that Cod is going anywhere and with DCS coming on the horizon... I think the pool will be diluted somewhat but I do think that BoS has the best chance of becoming the primer WWII sim if it can just garner the support and stay viable and grow into other theaters. I think the choice of theaters will be crucial to it's future success.

 

The game changer will happen if we get a lobby and easy way to have coops...until then many people are staying with IL2 1946

[=AVG=Zombie]

CLoD isn't going anywhere. Granted it sucked when the developers abandoned it but TF has done an incredible thing for the community, they took a half ass game and made it awesome. All these people that don't like it I am  guessing never tried the TF patches or their computer sucks to bad to run at max settings. I see all the time 70 to 90 people in ATAG'S server. It is full switch server so that would just be another reason that people bash the game over here. 

 Who here can remeber the 1.22 UBI com dogfight servers back in the day for IL2? 

[FS_Fenice_1965]

CLoD isn't going anywhere. Granted it sucked when the developers abandoned it but TF has done an incredible thing for the community, they took a half ass game and made it awesome. All these people that don't like it I am  guessing never tried the TF patches or their computer sucks to bad to run at max settings. I see all the time 70 to 90 people in ATAG'S server. It is full switch server so that would just be another reason that people bash the game over here. 

 Who here can remeber the 1.22 UBI com dogfight servers back in the day for IL2? 

 

One of my thoughts was that CLOD has always lacked an alternative to full switch and ATAG (which is a great server no doubt). I suppose that if strong communities of the Lobby, like - as an example - Battlefield servers or even the one that I belong (FS with the Skies of valor server) would have supported a CLOD server with different settings, the crowd following that sim would have been a lot wider.

Not everyone wants to fly full switch and many between those that arrive to full switch arrive there passing between intermediate settings. Variety in the choice is essential to approach a wider community.

Problem is that some of those communities lack the human resources to follow in appropriate way more than just one sim. It's not easy to find people well inserted into a squad able to build missions, follow the server and his setup, admining the room, answer in the forums etc...  and having the time to do that. This is a greater problem now that IL2 is in the sunset era and many simmers are out of duty...

 

 

Skies of fire only started in 2007, after the big top and 334th were going downhill. Then skies of valor was started about a year later.

 

I had played Il-2 for a few years on and off before then, but when we ([RS] squad at the time, later to split into FS~) started Skies of fire is when I got hooked for good.

 

[RS]_Adrifter....I think I remember you back in the times of Skies of Fire and maybe The Big Top.....You'll be happy to know that some still wear the [RS] tag...like Odissey and AceAce

Edited January 3, 2014 by FS_Fenice_1965

[Wandalen]

Now i got nostalgic   i can see my own server there NORVEGIAN_PF   . That must been a long time ago m8   

 

 

[Valisk61]

One of my thoughts was that CLOD has always lacked an alternative to full switch and ATAG (which is a great server no doubt). I suppose that if strong communities of the Lobby, like - as an example - Battlefield servers or even the one that I belong (FS with the Skies of valor server) would have supported a CLOD server with different settings, the crowd following that sim would have been a lot wider.

Not everyone wants to fly full switch and many between those that arrive to full switch arrive there passing between intermediate settings. Variety in the choice is essential to approach a wider community.

Problem is that some of those communities lack the human resources to follow in appropriate way more than just one sim. It's not easy to find people well inserted into a squad able to build missions, follow the server and his setup, admining the room, answer in the forums etc...  and having the time to do that. This is a greater problem now that IL2 is in the sunset era and many simmers are out of duty...

 

I think you hit the nail on the head there Fen.

 

Who here can remeber the 1.22 UBI com dogfight servers back in the day for IL2? 

 

Monster383's \\\LTF/// server on UBI was my introduction to IL2. Have some great memories - it was an absolute hoot.

[BeastyBaiter]

Ah good ole HL. I played IL2 there for many years, I think peak hours were still solidly 4 digits when I finally got tired of it and left. Good times.

 

Regardless, I think BoS is going to be the only real contender for the WW2 sim crowd for the next few years. CloD is dead. Really, it is and has been almost since release. No amount of effort by TF is ever going to change that. It may hang onto the handful of players it currently has but it will not grow, it's going to shrink instead. DCS WW2 is an interesting idea but as with all DCS titles, I expect it will fall terribly short on optimization and the whole gameplay aspect (career mode and such). When your minimum practical system spec is quad Nvidia Titans and your graphics look 10 years old (because they are), you've got a serious problem. And the really sad thing is they won't even admit it to themselves, never mind the players. We'll see what their new graphics engine brings, but I'm not holding my breath. They have a terrible track record with such things despite how wonderfully detailed they make their plane's systems. I do hope they get their code sorted though as I am interested in their stuff, it just has to run smoothly.

 

In any case, I hope BoS gets a nice lobby. This is something RoF is sadly missing. RoF has a nice server list but it should be sortable (player number, ping or alphabetical) and have at least a global chat room in it. I do not want to see HL try to fill the game matcher role as that was never a good thing to begin with. You should never, for any game, have to use a separate program to have a viable MP community. It should all be contained in game. That style of MP setup is terribly archaic. This isn't the 90's and we aren't using dial up modems.

[6./ZG26_Emil]

In any case, I hope BoS gets a nice lobby. This is something RoF is sadly missing. RoF has a nice server list but it should be sortable (player number, ping or alphabetical) and have at least a global chat room in it. I do not want to see HL try to fill the game matcher role as that was never a good thing to begin with. You should never, for any game, have to use a separate program to have a viable MP community. It should all be contained in game. That style of MP setup is terribly archaic. This isn't the 90's and we aren't using dial up modems.

 

:clapping: :clapping: :clapping:

[BraveSirRobin]

RoF's "lobby" is Teamspeak.

[6./ZG26_Emil]

Not good enough SR

[BraveSirRobin]

Why not?  You looking for some sort of mind melding functionality?

[6./ZG26_Emil]

a simple chat would suffice

[DD_Arthur]

 

 

In any case, I hope BoS gets a nice lobby. This is something RoF is sadly missing. RoF has a nice server list but it should be sortable (player number, ping or alphabetical) and have at least a global chat room in it. I do not want to see HL try to fill the game matcher role as that was never a good thing to begin with. You should never, for any game, have to use a separate program to have a viable MP community. It should all be contained in game. That style of MP setup is terribly archaic. This isn't the 90's and we aren't using dial up modems.

 

Agree completely.

[BraveSirRobin]

How is that better than Teamspeak (where you can actually chat)?

[6./ZG26_Emil]

Because not everyone joins TS when in game while if there was a lobby you joined automatically on entering MP everyone would be able to see the chat regardless of using third party software.

[BraveSirRobin]

What makes you think that everyone will use the BoS "lobby" (assuming such a thing is created)?  I'm always on teamspeak with the people I'm flying with.  And since teamspeak already exists, I suspect that creating another lobby is not high on the priority list.

[6./ZG26_Emil]

I don't. It was a successful and easy way to connect people together far less hassle than trying to get people's attention in a TS lobby. Worked well in HL and still works well in HL.

 

There's enough people who want some of the functionality of HL to make it worth implementing, even if we don't get a simple coop mode it would be very helpful and make it easy to find opponents without trawling forums or annoying people on TS.

[BFsSmurfy]

"Battlefield servers or even the one that I belong (FS with the Skies of valor server) would have supported a CLOD server with different settings, the crowd following that sim would have been a lot wider."

 

We tried mate, I spent hours with the boss trying to set up interesting missions with that not so friendly mission builder (current devs take note..NOT FRIENDLY MISSION BUILDER) and it was such a pita with little or no people coming to fly we put it to bed. The programme and the missions still reside on one of our servers but I bet if we fired it back up again it would see little or no custom on the old BF`s UK2 settings.

[DD_fruitbat]

Both Clod and RoF (and i presume BoS because of RoF) have one massive disadvantage over il2 1946 in my opinion, and that is the ease that anyone could/can host an il2 co-op or dogfight mission. 

 

I can host missions for the squad I fly with in il2, and people generally take it in turns on different flying nights.

 

I know i don't have fibre, but its not through choice. This however means that i just cannot host a RoF co-op mission fullstop, or a Clod mission with much going on or many people at all.

 

Now i'm lucky in that i with a squad so i have the option of being able to build our own server to remote host missions, but most people don't.

 

The more people that do not have the ability to be able to host themselves, leads to a limited number of groups controlling the online environment as has happened in both RoF and Clod. This is not to say that the said groups don't do a very good, job, i think for both games they do which is why they are the popular servers. However it limits the options of the player, particularly groups that want to fly amongst themselves, and control the environment in which they fly, and this will turn many people away.

 

I thinks it was a huge part of il2's success online, how 'available' it was for anyone to host for there friends, but wonder if we will ever see that again.

 

I hope so.

[BraveSirRobin]

I don't. It was a successful and easy way to connect people together far less hassle than trying to get people's attention in a TS lobby. Worked well in HL and still works well in HL.

 

There's enough people who want some of the functionality of HL to make it worth implementing, even if we don't get a simple coop mode it would be very helpful and make it easy to find opponents without trawling forums or annoying people on TS.

 

A chat lobby won't do anything to help you get people to fly together on a Coop server.  There aren't enough people sitting around waiting for something to do for that to work.  They're too busy flying.  You need to organize coops ahead of time in a forum like this.  Then you have to hope that they don't disappear after getting shot down early in a mission.

[6./ZG26_Emil]

Wrong but thanks for the input.