ZaknafeinTV Posted March 29, 2015 Posted March 29, 2015 (edited) As in title. If game will be ok and smooth, maybe unlock to 64 players in MP ? S! Edited March 29, 2015 by Zaknafein 4
6./ZG26_Emil Posted March 29, 2015 Posted March 29, 2015 It will make little difference in my opinion. You need a reason for people to fly smart and in groups and not to T&B on the deck around airfields. 1
ACG_pezman Posted March 30, 2015 Posted March 30, 2015 Imo I think they should release the main map and a starter aircraft for free.
Y-29.Silky Posted March 30, 2015 Posted March 30, 2015 I don't see why it shouldn't be unlocked if there's no performance issues.With that said, there probably are performance issues otherwise they would allow it. They had it before and the furballs were quite entertaining to watch from a distance. It sure brought out the worst in everyone's flying xD
StG2_Manfred Posted March 30, 2015 Posted March 30, 2015 It will make little difference in my opinion. You need a reason for people to fly smart and in groups and not to T&B on the deck around airfields. Our squad regulary can't join a server due to lack of slots. So first you need enough slots then you can get groups in formations
6./ZG26_Emil Posted March 30, 2015 Posted March 30, 2015 Our squad regulary can't join a server due to lack of slots. So first you need enough slots then you can get groups in formations But there is more than one server so join another one. I've had much better fights in TWB when there was less than 15 people online compared to DED which is just a furball server with airfields right next to each other.
Roo5ter Posted March 30, 2015 Posted March 30, 2015 (edited) Imo I think they should release the main map and a starter aircraft for free. I absolutely agree but I am not sure the timing is right. I can see just the Yak or the Lagg for the Russians but Im not sure which capable fighter they would give out for the Germans, G2 maybe? Maybe better to just give the Stuka and LaGG so they can try out the ground attack and the air side. Things dont always have to be symmetrical. This sort of move of course would water down the quality of the community but considering we desperately need numbers I think it comes into reason. Maybe doing this coinciding with the release or early access of BoM would be good. Your idea Volc0m, so Im going to ask, do you mind if I cite you and open a thread on this idea? It's pretty off topic on this thread so I think it is a good idea to give it the proper discussion to the topic that it deserves and be respectful to Zaknafein for not derailing his thread. Edited March 30, 2015 by Roo5ter
KoN_ Posted March 30, 2015 Posted March 30, 2015 The reason you have no players is because the founders put money into a flight Sim and didn't get what they hoped and paid for . Simple truth really . I fly as much as i can , but it does need some thing to bring it back to life . As for BOM what makes you think people will invest after whats happened. Yes the hardcore fan base maybe but you may not get what you had at the beginning of BOS. And if this is struggling already what chance has BOM got . You have Dcs - EDGE coming out very soon , and also cliffs - TF 5. 5
KoN_ Posted March 30, 2015 Posted March 30, 2015 I was online later today and there was 8 of use flying in a server with in 30 mints of flying i didn't see anyone , there are no ground indicators for people to fly towards , No comms with ground control which i find very strange to ask were combat is taking place , you do get the odd flash message that train station is being attacked , by the time you have opened your extra large full screen map to locate the place and fly towards it by the time you get there the threat has long gone . So many things need changing and yet so many basic things have been left out to make things easier for the pilot . Where has the smoke gone that used to be around the battle sites ..? Where is the comms channel to speak to control tower and ask for help . ? Where is the mini map like ROF had.?
6./ZG26_Emil Posted March 30, 2015 Posted March 30, 2015 (edited) I kind of wonder if MP is simply just way down the agenda for the developers or even barely on it at all. I'm not trolling with this statement but there are so many little things that would make it a more in depth and interesting experience but the more I go back through simhq and the ROF forums I see very little comments from them regarding online stuff. IL2 BOS is the best game I struggle to find the enthusiasm to play....it's brilliant in so many ways in that the core is almost perfect...graphics, AI, FM & DM are all more than good enough but for online there is almost no incentive to fly. They're obviously well aware of what made IL2 so fantastic for the onliners (hyperlobby and online wars + co-ops) yet these these things barely get a mention. The only way to get a good fight would be a co-op type mission which I'm working on building at the moment, but then you have to find opponents which means arranging it a day or two (or even a week) in advance with the obvious problems like people not turning up or forgetting etc. It's nigh on impossible to get something going on the fly or at a moments notice and if your opposing team pull out at last minute you might as well go watch TV. Surely the onliners deserve a bone being thrown their way occasionally? Edited March 30, 2015 by 6./JG5_Emil 1
System87 Posted March 30, 2015 Posted March 30, 2015 Honestly i have me doubts if the game can handle more then 48 players and a few ground units, the game keeps dissapointing me more and more...
ACG_pezman Posted March 30, 2015 Posted March 30, 2015 Rooster: Feel free to start a topic I think it's a good idea. Also they should give the ME-109F2 for the German side imo. JG77_Con: I agree. However I think the best way to fix these problems is to increase the player base. If you make the base game (like DCS or Warthunder) free you will have more players. Hands down this sim is better than War Thunder and DCS. DCS has the disadvantage of expensive aircraft and lacking graphics to say nothing about spotting. War Thunder just has a lot of aircraft from all sides, most of which they can't figure out how to match up equally, plus shit physics and no immersion. BOS has a great FM and DM, devoted dev team, great graphics and immersion, plus more to come in the future. Once all the people from other sims try the FREE BOS, you think they are going to have a hard time deciding which to choose? $50 per aircraft on a game that might get a WW2 map and vehicles (try taking an M1A2 Abrahms out with a 190D9) or $20 per plane in a sim that can compete on every level with DCS in an actual theatre of war. And War Thunder... well I rofl thinking about it. As a person who flew the game (and I mean game) religiously for almost two years, more changes happened in that game after BOS' release than in all the time the "simulator battle" crowd bitched and moaned for the changes. Free market competition made WT nervous as their die hards left causing them to finally listen. Game still sucks unless you fly by the seat of your mouse. I believe this sim is solid and would make waves if marketed properly. I understand the devs want to make money, and they should. I think they could make more by relying on sales from the store by getting people hooked first. DCS gave me a SU-25T... I know have everything except the korean war jets and a couple of helos. They made at least $150-$200 from me alone... with a free game. That 50-100% more than what I spent on this sim. Just saying, we can debate economics and business plans all day, but I'd rather fly. \\//
Vaxxtx Posted March 30, 2015 Posted March 30, 2015 Surely the onliners deserve a bone being thrown their way occasionally? Are you serious? The offliners are just as "bone-less". In fact, aside from semi pretty graphics, this game is about as fun as watching grass grow for online and offline.
6./ZG26_Emil Posted March 30, 2015 Posted March 30, 2015 Are you serious? The offliners are just as "bone-less". In fact, aside from semi pretty graphics, this game is about as fun as watching grass grow for online and offline. I support the offliners as well. You guys will most likely get a dynamic campaign a la PWCG, you've got the tools to build missions and the AI is pretty decent as well. In time I think it will be pretty good for offliners. The gameplay for both groups is as important as the graphics etc....arguably even more so but so far we never hear about any improvements to online and I don't believe a few extra pilots will add anything in to what we already have. Il2 online was great even when 16 players online was the most we could host.
JG5_Schuck Posted March 30, 2015 Posted March 30, 2015 More slots are always nice....... New planes are always nice...... Regular updates and patches are always nice...... But with out a COOP mode and a lobby to wait in and view who's online, this game will crash before its even had a chance to take off. Which is such a shame.
AbortedMan Posted March 30, 2015 Posted March 30, 2015 More slots are always nice....... New planes are always nice...... Regular updates and patches are always nice...... But with out a COOP mode and a lobby to wait in and view who's online, this game will crash before its even had a chance to take off. Which is such a shame. http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/12832-bos-launcher/ There is already a hyperlobby type app for BoS that has a chat client and player lists that even shows if they're flying or waiting to spawn. COOP missions are already extremely possible with the current editor, it just takes someone that's more interested in creating them than they are bitching on the forums for solutions that are right in front of their faces. <---not directed at you personally, but I see a lot of gripes about this game (and others) from a lot of people that could be easily solved with an extremely small amount of initiative. If you want to blame anyone for stuff like this failing or no one knowing about it, blame the mods here. They bury extremely important threads in subforums that no one visits in the name of organization. These kinds of apps and announcements of community effort are what keep games alive. I'm currently working on an online mission that has infantry actually disembarking trucks and entering player flown transport aircraft, but the real challenge is how am I going to announce it so people see it and know it exists when any thread I'd make to let them have it gets shuffled away to the darkest regions of the forum? 3
Roo5ter Posted March 30, 2015 Posted March 30, 2015 http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/12832-bos-launcher/ There is already a hyperlobby type app for BoS that has a chat client and player lists that even shows if they're flying or waiting to spawn. COOP missions are already extremely possible with the current editor, it just takes someone that's more interested in creating them than they are bitching on the forums for solutions that are right in front of their faces. <---not directed at you personally, but I see a lot of gripes about this game (and others) from a lot of people that could be easily solved with an extremely small amount of initiative. If you want to blame anyone for stuff like this failing or no one knowing about it, blame the mods here. They bury extremely important threads in subforums that no one visits in the name of organization. These kinds of apps and announcements of community effort are what keep games alive. I'm currently working on an online mission that has infantry actually disembarking trucks and entering player flown transport aircraft, but the real challenge is how am I going to announce it so people see it and know it exists when any thread I'd make to let them have it gets shuffled away to the darkest regions of the forum? As long as we get the opportunity to strafe said dismounted infantry.
Vaxxtx Posted March 30, 2015 Posted March 30, 2015 http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/12832-bos-launcher/ There is already a hyperlobby type app for BoS that has a chat client and player lists that even shows if they're flying or waiting to spawn. COOP missions are already extremely possible with the current editor, it just takes someone that's more interested in creating them than they are bitching on the forums for solutions that are right in front of their faces. <---not directed at you personally, but I see a lot of gripes about this game (and others) from a lot of people that could be easily solved with an extremely small amount of initiative. If you want to blame anyone for stuff like this failing or no one knowing about it, blame the mods here. They bury extremely important threads in subforums that no one visits in the name of organization. These kinds of apps and announcements of community effort are what keep games alive. I'm currently working on an online mission that has infantry actually disembarking trucks and entering player flown transport aircraft, but the real challenge is how am I going to announce it so people see it and know it exists when any thread I'd make to let them have it gets shuffled away to the darkest regions of the forum? If it was so quick and easy why is there only a small handful of missions (not campaigns) that are made so far? Hey, I am guilty of not doing anything about it, as I have lost most hope and interest that this game is going to do anything fun and innovative. I am talking about the die-hards here that still have hope. Add to the fact mods are not an option and you have a very select amount of people willing to make SP or Online decent.....which in turn makes people stop playing and not buy. The point is the devs should have made the meat and potatoes (SP and MP) better, and not tossed out so many restrictions. When you toss out generic content in both areas and hope that players will make the rest of the game for you, you are gambling. Judging by the player made stuff so far, Id say it was a risky gamble. On your second point, I agree. Why the user made "missions" are hidden under an obscure title does not make any sense.
Quax Posted March 30, 2015 Posted March 30, 2015 Are you serious? The offliners are just as "bone-less". In fact, aside from semi pretty graphics, this game is about as fun as watching grass grow for online and offline. It depends on what you are looking for. If you want immersion, the feeling of flying a WW2 plane in a WW2 environment , there is only BoS. But you are right, there are better games. Looking for 64 players as well.
6./ZG26_5tuka Posted March 30, 2015 Posted March 30, 2015 Tbh I could even live with a higher player limit and more stable servers currently. It's not like current MP missions are not fun if you're not flying solo for 30min or have play tower defense against waves of vulchers. What bugs me most is that we actually all had this stuff already, so it's no new demand whatsoever. It's truely disappointing to see absolutely no indication of improving restoring MP in this direction. And while I agree SP needs a lot of improvements they kind of set things in stone for it while MP offers at least some way of improvement without crossing several boarders of game mechanics. In a nutshell I think we can rather hope for MP changes than SP in future, though personally I need some indication of good will from devs first to do so. It's certain that without those things being solved BoM will have much tougher times o face than BoS in it's Early Acccess phase.
AbortedMan Posted March 30, 2015 Posted March 30, 2015 If it was so quick and easy why is there only a small handful of missions (not campaigns) that are made so far? Hey, I am guilty of not doing anything about it, as I have lost most hope and interest that this game is going to do anything fun and innovative. I am talking about the die-hards here that still have hope. Add to the fact mods are not an option and you have a very select amount of people willing to make SP or Online decent.....which in turn makes people stop playing and not buy. The point is the devs should have made the meat and potatoes (SP and MP) better, and not tossed out so many restrictions. When you toss out generic content in both areas and hope that players will make the rest of the game for you, you are gambling. Judging by the player made stuff so far, Id say it was a risky gamble. On your second point, I agree. Why the user made "missions" are hidden under an obscure title does not make any sense. It really is quick and easy. I could make a bomber intercept mission with a "waiting for more players" COOP mission style that only triggered when a certain amount of players joined, or dynamically changed difficulty and objectives as more/less players joined. I could create a "lockout" so joining players could only spawn a new flight when the previous players came back...could make a GIANT persistent campaign within a single mission instance that would activate/deactivate new objectives upon completion in different areas/different airfields/different aircraft/different teams/ and/or display an in-game briefing/picture/sound/movie/in-game movie as things happened/planes landed...This stuff is a far cry from complex and only requires a couple tick boxes, a couple zone triggers, and placing what you want where you want. The limitations on COOP have much less restrictions since I imagine you're only dealing with 10-12 people that are actually going to participate, though a full server COOP is possible as well (just have to limit AI aircraft). I don't fly COOPs so I don't have much interest in doing this kind of stuff, nor do I know what COOP players really want in that regard, but to imply that they are impossible to achieve with BoS is incorrect. It just takes someone that wants to do it. I know this community lost a lot of those people when the whole dev/community fiasco went down as well as when they added the arbitrary player limit to servers. The moral of the story is that if people keep blaming any devs for what they believe is their shortcomings without doing some remedial investigating on what resources and tools are available to them, then this entire industry is doomed (more so than it already is), and they have nothing to blame but themselves...look at the guys screaming for an update to DX12. They don't even know what they're asking aside from what gaming articles they've read, yet they fault the devs for not seeing their near-sighted views on implementing something with a higher number than "9" just because it gives them warm fuzzies inside to know they have a higher level of DirectX. Next version of DirectX could be called "DirectXBreakYourGameIfYouImplementThis" and people would still want it simply because it's new, and will shit all over devs for not using it, and not using it for the right reasons. ...anyway, I got off topic in that ramble...TL;DR: Cooperative missions are doable in BoS. 1
Vaxxtx Posted March 30, 2015 Posted March 30, 2015 It really is quick and easy. I could make a bomber intercept mission with a "waiting for more players" COOP mission style that only triggered when a certain amount of players joined, or dynamically changed difficulty and objectives as more/less players joined. I could create a "lockout" so joining players could only spawn a new flight when the previous players came back...could make a GIANT persistent campaign within a single mission instance that would activate/deactivate new objectives upon completion in different areas/different airfields/different aircraft/different teams/ and/or display an in-game briefing/picture/sound/movie/in-game movie as things happened/planes landed...This stuff is a far cry from complex and only requires a couple tick boxes, a couple zone triggers, and placing what you want where you want. The limitations on COOP have much less restrictions since I imagine you're only dealing with 10-12 people that are actually going to participate, though a full server COOP is possible as well (just have to limit AI aircraft). But the question is....can you make a 50 missions "campaign" strung together with stats, and 70+ aircraft +100 ground units? That's what offliners are looking for.
Pharoah Posted March 30, 2015 Posted March 30, 2015 Living in Aust is even more difficult I think - when I jumped online last night, most servers had zero players...and the most was 2!! add to that the fact that most servers have a ping of 300+, it stops me from wanting to join anything. So I turn to the SP campaign....but we know how good that is. So? I just close BOS, and go watch TV. I used to enjoy the eagle server that was US based. Had a lot of immersion ie. a/c flying left/right/centre, targets to attack (tanks attacking, etc), transport missions for H-111s, etc. Then the server got closed and nothing took its place. Sad really.
KoN_ Posted March 31, 2015 Posted March 31, 2015 (edited) What gets me is that they ran after the War-Thunder crowd which is an online flight game . So where is the war-thunder crowd ...??? http://steamcharts.com/app/236390 http://steamcharts.com/app/307960 Edited March 31, 2015 by II./JG77_Con
216th_Xenos Posted March 31, 2015 Posted March 31, 2015 Living in Aust is even more difficult I think - when I jumped online last night, most servers had zero players...and the most was 2!! add to that the fact that most servers have a ping of 300+, it stops me from wanting to join anything. So I turn to the SP campaign....but we know how good that is. So? I just close BOS, and go watch TV. I used to enjoy the eagle server that was US based. Had a lot of immersion ie. a/c flying left/right/centre, targets to attack (tanks attacking, etc), transport missions for H-111s, etc. Then the server got closed and nothing took its place. Sad really. Eagles nest recently reopened: http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/14872-twb-eagles-nest-dynamic-mp-campaign/
71st_AH_Mastiff Posted March 31, 2015 Posted March 31, 2015 What gets me is that they ran after the War-Thunder crowd which is an online flight game . So where is the war-thunder crowd ...??? http://steamcharts.com/app/236390 after their update Friday I crash to desktop so no war tanks for me... they have no ideas what their doing over there.
Vaxxtx Posted March 31, 2015 Posted March 31, 2015 after their update Friday I crash to desktop so no war tanks for me... they have no ideas what their doing over there. Really? So all the players are a fluke? Look I played the WT beta for a while and although it did not then, and does not now, appeal to me, its obvious they DO know what they are doing.
Pharoah Posted March 31, 2015 Posted March 31, 2015 Eagles nest recently reopened: http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/14872-twb-eagles-nest-dynamic-mp-campaign/ Really? I must've missed it from the list. Awesome...I will definitely check it out.
beepee Posted March 31, 2015 Posted March 31, 2015 (edited) Really? I must've missed it from the list. Awesome...I will definitely check it out. You should mate. There are not always many people in there during our evening hours, but the map I played on was entertaining enough if you are into mud-moving. Plenty of ground targets, moving front lines, the odd A.I bomber to kill. If you are into mindless air quake, there are other servers that cater for that kind of play. I am in NZ and usually ping hovers around 200-230 (with a fairly average connection on my end). Look for TWB - The Eagles Nest in the server list. Oh, and +1 for 64 player limit. Edited March 31, 2015 by beepee
Pharoah Posted March 31, 2015 Posted March 31, 2015 All good mate. Thats why I mentioned it earlier - I used to frequent this server quite a lot during the beta stage. Given I fly mudmovers (IL2/Stuka/He-111) 100% of the time, it was good to see a server with an actual 'war' going on ie. tanks, trucks, trains, convoys, air battles, etc etc. But yeah, when it closed down I kinda lost interest in IL2 and have only just picked it up again (and have been playing the SP campaign). Will definitely check it out.
AbortedMan Posted March 31, 2015 Posted March 31, 2015 But the question is.... can you make a 50 missions "campaign" strung together with statsYes. The mission editor has the ability to run missions based on the events that happened in the previous mission. Stats can be recorded and rewarded/parsed/saved/output/gawked over/e-peen enlarging with the event log feature. 70+ aircraft +100 ground units?No. This game cannot handle 70+ aircraft in the air at once...but I don't think any scenario with 70+ aircraft in the air at once applies to any plausibly historical themed missions in the BoS era. Personally, I don't think a 70+ aircraft dogfight would provide much of an experience. As for +100 ground units, yes...and then some. The mission we run on The Eagle's Nest right now has over 600 active ground units. That's what offliners are looking for.Not sure what else to say. The tools to get this done are available. Really? I must've missed it from the list. Awesome...I will definitely check it out.Come join us! http://www.thewetbandits.org/twb/ for info and ts3.thewetbandits.org on TeamSpeak.
6./ZG26_Emil Posted March 31, 2015 Posted March 31, 2015 It really is quick and easy. I could make a bomber intercept mission with a "waiting for more players" COOP mission style that only triggered when a certain amount of players joined, or dynamically changed difficulty and objectives as more/less players joined. I could create a "lockout" so joining players could only spawn a new flight when the previous players came back...could make a GIANT persistent campaign within a single mission instance that would activate/deactivate new objectives upon completion in different areas/different airfields/different aircraft/different teams/ and/or display an in-game briefing/picture/sound/movie/in-game movie as things happened/planes landed...This stuff is a far cry from complex and only requires a couple tick boxes, a couple zone triggers, and placing what you want where you want. The limitations on COOP have much less restrictions since I imagine you're only dealing with 10-12 people that are actually going to participate, though a full server COOP is possible as well (just have to limit AI aircraft). I don't fly COOPs so I don't have much interest in doing this kind of stuff, nor do I know what COOP players really want in that regard, but to imply that they are impossible to achieve with BoS is incorrect. It just takes someone that wants to do it. I know this community lost a lot of those people when the whole dev/community fiasco went down as well as when they added the arbitrary player limit to servers. The moral of the story is that if people keep blaming any devs for what they believe is their shortcomings without doing some remedial investigating on what resources and tools are available to them, then this entire industry is doomed (more so than it already is), and they have nothing to blame but themselves...look at the guys screaming for an update to DX12. They don't even know what they're asking aside from what gaming articles they've read, yet they fault the devs for not seeing their near-sighted views on implementing something with a higher number than "9" just because it gives them warm fuzzies inside to know they have a higher level of DirectX. Next version of DirectX could be called "DirectXBreakYourGameIfYouImplementThis" and people would still want it simply because it's new, and will shit all over devs for not using it, and not using it for the right reasons. ...anyway, I got off topic in that ramble...TL;DR: Cooperative missions are doable in BoS. Yes co-ops are absolutely possible. I've made my first one already. I think there is some confusion (even among the people calling for 'co-ops') about this subject which goes way back to when people were asking for it in ROF and CLOD (ex-IL2ers who moved on after the hacking of the sim). It's not so much the mission type it's about being able to easily find opponents and that is something we could really do with some help on from the devs. A player list and pager/chat system would fix this in my opinion. They got 'co-op' mode in ROF but it changed very little and the same would apply to BOS. The point is it might sound like bitching to some people but the fact is that the software could be changed to suit the user more and if it's not possible then make it work with hyperlobby and be done with it. The bos launcher is cool but it's not showing all servers including my test one. Only one person joined it in the last 12 hours I ran the software.
AbortedMan Posted March 31, 2015 Posted March 31, 2015 The bos launcher is cool but it's not showing all servers including my test one. Only one person joined it in the last 12 hours I ran the software. Because no one knows it exists. It's been hidden away from the forum that everyone goes to. If it were stickied on the general discussion page like it should be it'd be packed with people. You can get your server added to the list by messaging Vaal. 1
Pharoah Posted April 1, 2015 Posted April 1, 2015 Tried out the TWB server tonight...looks well laid out with ongoing battles, etc. My only question is - why have you disabled the map? if you have, how are you supposed to navigate?
ZaknafeinTV Posted April 1, 2015 Author Posted April 1, 2015 No. This game cannot handle 70+ aircraft in the air at once...but I don't think any scenario with 70+ aircraft in the air at once applies to any plausibly historical themed missions in the BoS era. Personally, I don't think a 70+ aircraft dogfight would provide much of an experience. As for +100 ground units, yes...and then some. The mission we run on The Eagle's Nest right now has over 600 active ground units. Not sure what else to say. The tools to get this done are available. Ok that shows the game is not properly optimized or designed, even in RoF it was also something like this (70 planes and 20 ground objects). After this numbers master server was inefficient. So what can we expect after a year of working on the BoS and now the BoM. Issuance of games every year not bode well for us, but people are happy to see the "new" aircraft and map. Sad. 1
SR-F_Winger Posted April 1, 2015 Posted April 1, 2015 (edited) IMO 75 is the very least we need on the servers. And this is LOOONG overdue! Big part of my Squad even doesnt preorder anything before we dont get a statement on what is planned in regards to playercount. 48 is just too few. Edited April 1, 2015 by VSG1_Winger
Phant0m Posted April 1, 2015 Posted April 1, 2015 Tried out the TWB server tonight...looks well laid out with ongoing battles, etc. My only question is - why have you disabled the map? if you have, how are you supposed to navigate? Expert mode doesn't allow the mini map - you need to use the full map. By default I think it is set to "o" Be sure to head on to the TS as well
Livai Posted April 1, 2015 Posted April 1, 2015 Ok that shows the game is not properly optimized or designed, even in RoF it was also something like this (70 planes and 20 ground objects). After this numbers master server was inefficient. So what can we expect after a year of working on the BoS and now the BoM. Issuance of games every year not bode well for us, but people are happy to see the "new" aircraft and map. Sad. "The devs are promising dedicated servers with 100-player capability, optional global stat tracking, and bomber sharing" Very sad how easy others forget the whole drama from the BoS Pre-Order. Pre-order again but expect a change or hope that with money change something? New Planes and maps are nice but new Planes and maps alone are not the whole game. We had a player count 64 it was dropped to 32 then increased to 48. But that are still not the promised 100! With BoM we get a another big empty space map like all other maps before. Maybe more annoying multiplayer for those that not pre-order or bought BoM. And again we are back to that what the Devs said that BoS is mainly online mode orientated and now BoM, too. But if the game is online mode orientated were are the improvements to improve the online experience with a 100 player count or a solid Online Campaign were I can decide to play against or together with human or AI player for example?
Recommended Posts