Jump to content
StG77_Roo5ter

A Reasonable Plan to Expand the Player Base

Recommended Posts

Most players in MP are in Veteran or Ace cathegory = nothing to do with reenactment of history some people call for so loudly.You will never reenact history in MP.

AI predictible? Yes,it is.As was green-to-average pilot in those days.Most of them got killed without even trying to perform any kind of maneuver.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most players in MP are in Veteran or Ace cathegory 

 

That's what I used to think.  But it's not true.  There are plenty of noobs.  And even real noobs during WW1 got some training.  Most of our noobs don't even know how to start the plane.  And there are plenty of people like me who have some experience but still get pwned by the top pilots.  It's more of a mixed group than I used to believe that it was.

 

I also suspect that alcohol helps to level the playing field somewhat.

Edited by BraveSirRobin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Most players in MP are in Veteran or Ace cathegory = nothing to do with reenactment of history some people call for so loudly.You will never reenact history in MP.

Agreed 100%

 

Up till now, the only way to simulate (reenactment of a historic battle) was the COOP..

 

Because the COOP 'synchronizes' the players by having them all start at the same time.. Which is nearly impossible to do with a server that is up and running 24/7 and people can join at different times..

 

Back in the day, Falcon 4.0 'talked' about having a on going online war.. The idea/premise was there would be battles going on where the AI would be flying the planes.. Much like an offline campaign, but the difference was, you could show up (logg in) at any random time and 'take control' of one of the AI planes and fly the mission that was already in progress.. Sadly, as far as I know, that never happened, but I still think it was a good idea.. Because it is sort of the middle ground between the COOP and 24/7 servers and the kicker is it does not require a bunch of people to log in all at the same time, like a COOP does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So what does it come down too?

 

Why kids and adults fly less sims.

 

Warthunder and World of tanks is popular hell it just cost me 50$

 total since mid 2011 and with a good mouse  I have loads of fun playing it

with well over 20 000 matches played.!0's of thousands of players in there.

 

Why did we not get all the hundreds and hundreds of players that still fly

in the Hyperlobby today?

 

I am sitting in front of a 2000$ machine with a 200$ CH quadrant and Tracker IR 5pro 300$

a MSFF2 that is not supported by windows 7 any more so I bought a Logitech 3d pro for 40 $

headset a Senhiesser PC 350 Pro 250$ you can get a cheaper headset though.

 

To fly in these servers right now I NEED these toys to fly reasonably in a server because the

good ones are full real.

 

50$ a month for the internet.

 

60$ for the game plus an other 80$ for the add-on.

 

I went into ARMA 3 30 mins ago and it is quiet with 3500 servers of all types.

1079 of them were Co-oP based.

 

When I go in tonight to play those co-oP servers will more than double.

 

Co-oPs are the back bone of the flyers in hyper lobby now.

 

The Dservers in the HL are plentiful but for the most part empty.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I'm aware of your opinion.  It has no basis in reality.

 

And neither has your unnecessarily supremacist attitude towards SP. Both aspects have their justification and people have different interests. Your posts come across as attempts to diss SPers just for the heck of it.

Edited by csThor
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh and I did not mention a lot of the servers in BOS that i join and can't even play in for god knows what reason.

Edited by WTornado

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1.  It appears that you have never flown on a server like The Eagle's Nest.  

2.  Humans are a lot less predictable than AI.

It is a rarity but I agree with you 100%.  The well organized servers with specific aims are the ones which are fun and tend to attract the most online BOS customers. Even the DED (now official) Normal server is well populated with at least a few mud movers engaged. Even though that server is a DF server there are ground objects and some simple objectives.

 

The human element, both for it's unpredictability as well as the challenge of direct competition, is what really makes this endeavor worthwhile for me. I've never met an AI that made me go, wow, how'd he do that reversal? I say that once or twice a day online. I'm all for the SP getting better. I think it will but that will take an enthusiast to complete it.

 

Teamspeak makes it even more so and seriously enhances actual teamwork.

Edited by HerrMurf

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Warthunder and World of tanks is popular hell it just cost me 50$ total since mid 2011 and with a good mouse I have loads of fun playing it

with well over 20000 matches played.!0's of thousands of players in there.

As noted, realistic flight sims have been becoming less and less popular..

 

The first shot across the bow was Jane's cancelling the A-10 sim back in 1999..

 

In a nut shell, realistic anything require more effort than the dumbed down versions of it..

 

Which explains why games like ARMA, a more 'realistic' FPS is less popular than the x-box types of FPS..

 

There was a time, when realistic flight sims didn't have alot of options to dumb down the simulation.. Who needed unlimited ammo in a realistic flight sim? But, as time went by, the realistic flight sims started including such options.. In the hope of attacking the kid-os and hoping they would eventually turn off the noob options and start flying it more realistically..

 

Well.. that never happened

 

Now, games like War Thunder this or that have realized that the realistic simming is not a viable market.. And they cater too the dumbed down eye candy flight simming crowd.

 

Thus the table have turned, instead of a realistic flight sim including dumbed down options, all we can hope for is the dumb down flight sims include some realistic options.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And neither has your unnecessarily supremacist attitude towards SP. Both aspects have their justification and people have different interests. Your posts come across as attempts to diss SPers just for the heck of it.

 

I'm not doing anything of the sort.  I've played plenty of SP.  It gets boring because you start to know what the AI is going to do before it happens.  The only way that happens with humans is if you fly against the same people all the time, and even then they'll surprise you sometimes.  AI also has quirks that eventually just destroy immersion.  It does stupid things that you know that no human would do.  After a while it just gets old and boring.  That's why SP people tend to care more about having lots of other stuff in the mission.  It helps to distract from the crappy experience of fighting against AI.  Keep in mind that I'm not actually being critical of BoS's AI.  The AI programmer has an impossible job.  People want AI that will put up a good fight, but not too good a fight because then people will complain that the AI is impossible to beat.  So the AI has to put up a good fight, but eventually die, and it has to do this no matter what the skill level of the human player.  That is impossible.

 

Flying against the AI also results in people developing bad habits.  People get to know the AI's weaknesses, so they do dumb things that they know they can get away with against the AI.  That is why they get pwned when they try MP. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're only interested in flying bombers and don't care about fighting against AI, try organizing an attack on an airfield with 3 friends in MP, then try it with 3 of your closest AI buddies in SP.  If you're having more fun bombing the airfield with the AI, you might have issues.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As noted, realistic flight sims have been becoming less and less popular..

 

The first shot across the bow was Jane's cancelling the A-10 sim back in 1999..

 

In a nut shell, realistic anything require more effort than the dumbed down versions of it..

 

Which explains why games like ARMA, a more 'realistic' FPS is less popular than the x-box types of FPS..

 

There was a time, when realistic flight sims didn't have alot of options to dumb down the simulation.. Who needed unlimited ammo in a realistic flight sim? But, as time went by, the realistic flight sims started including such options.. In the hope of attacking the kid-os and hoping they would eventually turn off the noob options and start flying it more realistically..

 

Well.. that never happened

 

Now, games like War Thunder this or that have realized that the realistic simming is not a viable market.. And they cater too the dumbed down eye candy flight simming crowd.

 

Thus the table have turned, instead of a realistic flight sim including dumbed down options, all we can hope for is the dumb down flight sims include some realistic options.

It costs you 500$ to 600$ just to play a flight sim in accessories to run full real.

 

To what end to join a server with 4 to 25 pilots flying in it?

 

You take a Stuka or an IL-2 and the guys will leave you're side to take a fighter to come and shoot you down.

 

They won't be dumbed down for very long they will disappear all together.

 

My brother and law bought a 40 dollar ship in Star Citizen and it is still in its Alpha stage.

 

Game is going to be insane you can shoot it out on a base with personal weapons as a FPS

or travel and fight in space with 1000's of planets to visit as a marauder or merchant or Military

 

That has a future for me anyways when it is fully done..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you're only interested in flying bombers and don't care about fighting against AI, try organizing an attack on an airfield with 3 friends in MP, then try it with 3 of your closest AI buddies in SP.  If you're having more fun bombing the airfield with the AI, you might have issues.

I only have 1 friend flying now everyone else quit so that is out.

 

He fly's the bomber I fly fighter escort.

 

Do we have a choice? hehehe

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I use SP for gunnery practice fundamentals... air and ground targets.  You get a hell of a lot more trigger-time than MP, that's just a fact.  I'm not gonna stir the SP horse guts any more.

I will say this:  Without trying to once again hurt any dedicated-SP enthusiast feelings, if you aren't giving MP a shot, you're not getting the most of your investment.

 

Yes, I am once again shamelessly plugging the Eagle's Nest... but with good reason... please, come give it a try.  Everyone wins when you say screw it and try MP.

 

I have my moments, but overall I am NOT competitive amongst the real IL-2 fighter pilots.  I still have a blast.  And you know what I have NOT seen, in all of my MP hours?  Anyone giving anyone else a hard time.  Anything disparaging is so rare that it doesn't even warrant being mentioned.

 

Come fly with us.  

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And...

 

The topic has been moved to another part of the forum, and into obscurity.

 

Like the entire genre.

 

:mellow:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I only have 1 friend flying now everyone else quit so that is out.

 

He fly's the bomber I fly fighter escort.

 

Do we have a choice? hehehe

Ts3.thewetbandits.org

 

Now you only have yourself to blame if you don't follow through.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And...

 

The topic has been moved to another part of the forum, and into obscurity.

 

Like the entire genre.

 

:mellow:

 

Yeah, this is a common problem... I get what they are doing, we just don't have the momentum on General right now to warrant it... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just added a channel to our teamspeak, for those less than comfortable reaching out in an existing full channel.

 

DmnsOeK.jpg

 

This way intentions are clear... This channel is open for anyone to enter and link up with others.  Once matched up, please move to the appropriate coalition channel and start kickin butt. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would use your TS but I can't do push to talk.  Too often I am talking and not pushing and as a result wingman is dying, so I use voice activation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1.  It appears that you have never flown on a server like The Eagle's Nest.  

2.  Humans are a lot less predictable than AI.

 

Be it Eagle's Nest or ATAG, yes, there are plenty of instances where organized efforts are done in multiplayer. 

 

However, multiplayer servers are as good as their playerbase. You can't organize anything if you have a bunch of airquakers flying around (which is the majority of the current MP base servers). Syndicate and EN, on the other hand, have pilots that are more inclined to make proper "mission". Bombing runs with escorts are among my favourites..

 

Still I'll be the first to admit that sometimes people just don't care about the objective and stick to "air quake" mode, even in these kind of servers.

Edited by 71st_AH_Chuck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would use your TS but I can't do push to talk. Too often I am talking and not pushing and as a result wingman is dying, so I use voice activation.

Pro tip: I use voice activation on the TWB server, but I'm extra cautious to mute my mic when I'm making noise that isn't pleasant for people to hear. No one can even tell that I'm not using PTT. If you aren't an inconsiderate or inattentive person you can get away with it too.

 

Also, this logic befuddles me..."I sometimes can't press the PTT, so I won't join the server so I can even just listen. I'll be damned if I have to practice pressing another one of these button things!"

Edited by AbortedMan

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also, this logic befuddles me..."I sometimes can't press the PTT, so I won't join the server so I can even just listen. I'll be damned if I have to practice pressing another one of these button things!"

 

I've tried using PTT.  It only pisses me off, so I don't even attempt it any more.

Be it Eagle's Nest or ATAG, yes, there are plenty of instances where organized efforts are done in multiplayer. 

 

However, multiplayer servers are as good as their playerbase. You can't organize anything if you have a bunch of airquakers flying around (which is the majority of the current MP base servers). Syndicate and EN, on the other hand, have pilots that are more inclined to make proper "mission". Bombing runs with escorts are among my favourites..

 

Still I'll be the first to admit that sometimes people just don't care about the objective and stick to "air quake" mode, even in these kind of servers.

 

It's tough to build up a group of non airquakers if the non airquakers refuse to play MP.  It's a self defeating attitude.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That has a future for me anyways when it is fully done..

Sadly, dumb down games is everyone future

And...

 

The topic has been moved to another part of the forum, and into obscurity.

 

Like the entire genre.

 

:mellow:

Sad, but telling

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I've tried using PTT.  It only pisses me off, so I don't even attempt it any more.
 

 

The PTT requirement is so you don't annoy everyone else in the channel by being selfish.   As AbortedMan mentioned, many people have found workarounds like "push to mute."

 

At the end of the day, If you're not constantly keying up for no reason, and forcing others to listen to your dog/wife/children bark in the background... it's highly likely you'll be just fine. 

 

 

 

 

The topic has been moved to another part of the forum, and into obscurity.

At least now the devs will see the suggestions and respond!  This is exciting!!!

Edited by [TWB]Pand

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And?  I never said he had to change his opinion.  But he hasn't flown in any of the BoS MP servers, so he has absolutely no idea what he is talking about.  Of course, he has every right to be an expert about something he knows nothing about.  It wouldn't be a flight sim forum without those posters.

 

He may not be totally familiar with the current servers on BoS.. but he has been simming online longer than me.. and I have been doing it for the past 14 years.. I get where you are coming from and I get where he is coming from.. all I am saying is he is entitled to his opinion..

 

Based off other moderated posts throughout this forum, I'm not sure this statement is entirely accurate.

 

Well that is largely because a lot of edited posts step upon other lines than just stating one's opinion.

 

And...

 

The topic has been moved to another part of the forum, and into obscurity.

 

Like the entire genre.

 

:mellow:

 

There is a link to here still in the GD..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It's tough to build up a group of non airquakers if the non airquakers refuse to play MP.  It's a self defeating attitude.

 

I'm pretty much a MP-only guy... never saw the point of SP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SP typically has more 'realistic/historic' missions to fly.

MP typically has more 'unrealistic/gang bang' missions to fly.

 

Note the use of the word, typically, which should not be confused with the word 'always'

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

SP typically has more 'realistic/historic' missions to fly.

 

 

Right up until the point when it becomes painfully obvious that you're fighting with and against robots.  Then the "realistic/historic" facade crashes and burns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right up until the point when it becomes painfully obvious that you're fighting with and against robots.  Then the "realistic/historic" facade crashes and burns.

 

How contrarian of you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Right up until the point when it becomes painfully obvious that you're fighting with and against robots. Then the "realistic/historic" facade crashes and burns.
 

 

I think it's pretty obvious that you don't like SP, but a great many do. I would like to think that most people that play WWII flight sims are interested in the historical aspect of the game be that a career mode or an interesting and involving campaign?

 

MP can be a crash and burn affair too, particularly when the "Vulch" squad are in town. Oh what fun it is to spawn and die over and over because you have a swarm of people waiting for some poor sap to enter the game. 

Having a decent campaign certainly wouldn't hurt the game would it and I genuinely can't understand why anyone wouldn't want that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's silly to think nothing would/could/should change in 12 years. These are different games, different engines...times change, man! I agree they should have released the mission editor much, much, MUCH earlier than they did (I got it early due to being a tester and look at the stuff I'm creating...and I'm an imbecile). Feeling right at home should be relative to the function you're performing in regards to any game editor...you figure out the logic and employ what you learn. It's the same cycle no matter what the UI looks like. Perhaps in 6 months the people that actually know what they're doing will have made some amazing stuff for this game.

 Show where I said nothing should change....I said the old should exist with the new as the game evolves for the sake of familiarity  into the new iteration, much like you find in Arma...if you could use the Arma2 editor the Arma3 was not that foreign.

"These are different games, different engines" this is a very important statement that i will address at the end, beyond that you mange to agree with me in a more verbose manner.

 

 

I giggle a little bit when people reference CloD in terms of "what it should have been"...look at CloD right now. It's dead. It's nothing and never going to be anything but a hopeful memory. It'll have the same dwindling ~100 guys playing on weekends hoping for the one or two guys script hacking in their basement and changing gun sounds to "revolutionize and resurrect" the game to "keep the dream alive". If CloD is your standard for success, we're all doomed.

 

A. "what should have been" was a fully completed and well documented product...however it turned into a mismanaged nightmare suffering from premature birth that ended in abandonment , it was however the next step in the evolution of the IL2 franchise and not just an expansion much like what BOS is.

 

B. Team fusion is a collection of volunteers who maintain a website and populate it with any info,tool or reference to help the established and new players alike  along with  patches to help improve the games function overall  along with a dedicated server. They  are also now making 3D cockpits for existing planes that don't have them as well as an entirely new plane.....but some how you have manged to reduce them to a couple of delusional dweebs siting in a basement "hacking script"...Bravo! not only was that naive but insulting as well....care to recant?....

 

 

Wasn't HyperLobby community created in the first place? Why would a company spend time/money/resources on creating something that is easily created by someone that can do it as their hobby? "Should already exist" is subjective...I don't need it, nor do I think 777/1C should use their resources to build one. It's really not that hard to create/find a mission you want to run, host a server, and use the myriad of social outlets to find a group of people to play a co-op with. Hell, you could run your mission, start a server and title it "Co-Op server, come join!" and I bet you'd get traffic. I can tell you right now to join a TeamSpeak server that has a handful of people in it regularly and start making friends, but I imagine you won't listen...the official BoS/777 teamspeak or ts3.thewetbandits.org is a good start, if I'm wrong.

 

The onus is on you.

 

the fact that you have to ask if HL was community driven and you don't even know the makers name leads me to believe you never used it or khow how it came to be....

Hyperlobby was made by a game named Jiri-Fojtasek  and was touted as the savior of the MP community because the UBI game browser was trash and the official servers were lagtasticl... HL created a one stop shopping experience for the MP user, you could login check your friends list see where they are , see how many players were logged in (listed)  there was also a list of all DED servers what maps they were running what setting s and who was in them.

There were also multiple rooms such as CO-OP rooms DF rooms campaign rooms ...etc there was also the chat area where all 5,6,7...1000 people who were logged in could see what was going on such as someone announcing a CO-OP, style,plane set and difficulty setting's.

a lot of it was very impromptu and informal ...such as a hosting a CO-OP , you simple clicked on the CO-OP room set the number of players and difficulty,  everyone in the lobby could see it and the slots would fill up the mission would launch and when it was over most of the time you were thanked for the mission and hosting and then well...wash,rinse,repeat.

Jiri created a program hosted a master server and kept a SQL data base  up and running and maintained 24/7.....I would classify that as a little more than a "hobby"...

 

You know who else uses a similar type of game browser?....EA, it's called battlelog..again one stop shopping, friends list, server hosts,chat function...etc you see we don't need a myriad of social outlets when there is a tried and true method that has been around for more than a decade and works!

 

"These are different games, different engines." this is what is at the heart of the problem...this is not a continuation of the il2 franchise...it is a continuation of ROF...and if Jason had simple announced that he was a doing a WW2 expansion expectations would have been on par with a 777 product. Slapping on the IL2 tag created unrealistic expectations because the bar had been set so high....you cannot claim to be moving forward when you are engaging in key feature set regression (no CO-OP, cant host local, max 48 player...etc).

 

If you really want to increase the player base it might be a good idea to get a lot of the players who have been alienated by successive il advised dev decisions...and I think a true bare minimum would be CO-OP,local host followed by a game browser that has the basic or improved functions of hyperlobby. 

 

 

 

S!

Edited by T-oddball

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having a decent campaign certainly wouldn't hurt the game would it and I genuinely can't understand why anyone wouldn't want that.

 

 

I never said that I didn't want that.  I said that it won't help to get more people to play the game, because hardly anyone plays the campaign in a flight sim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I never said that I didn't want that.  I said that it won't help to get more people to play the game, because hardly anyone plays the campaign in a flight sim.

I don't class the current SP as a campaign IMHO. Maybe if it was persistent, dynamic and involving people would? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish it was this simple but I feel like my Stuka would never have a tail because of jerks- on the other hand I think we might have some middle ground on this idea.

 

What if every three months an account would accrue an invite for a gunner only copy of the game for free? Max accrual of two at a any one time unsent.

 

This would allow the community to do some self control of the floodgates and provide a way for me to enslave my wife. I know a lot of people who would gun for me who don't necessarily play flight Sims. This could really help add new people to the flight Sim community and if someone just likes gunning well the rest of us can have a better experience too.

 

One addition that would be nice is 6DOF gunners seats.

If it's a problem you can always lock the seat. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right up until the point when it becomes painfully obvious that you're fighting with and against robots.  Then the "realistic/historic" facade crashes and burns.

 

Depends IMHO..

 

I have seen 'real' online pilots do things that no 'real' WWII pilots would have done..

 

So, real pilots is no guarantee that you wont have your realistic immersion bubble popped! ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great points here throughout, just a couple of things: 

 

I'll be brief, out of the country on business ATM. 

 

First off, the assertion that humans are more predictable than AI is absurd.  Is an AI going to chop throttle and force an overshoot in a rolling scissors with eachother's canopies practically scraping together? Nope. 

 

The argument between MP and SP is futile.... if people don't want to get with the times that their prerogative.  Just don't come into the online forums and try and dump on the online players for playing online with each other.  You will lose. 

 

On a different note:

 

While I know we all like to think of ourselves as 'above' War Thunder, I think it is is time that we rethink our stance on this.  We are a dying breed here (online CFS players) and it is pretty evident.  Why are we going to actively sh*t on the absolute best conduit we have for drawing more people in to this genre?  Instead of shunning WT, we should embrace it for what it is: a stepping stone.  A 3 leveled stepping stone at that.  WT brought me into the fold, I started at arcade and ended up in FRB/SB, and I constantly see more and more people going that same route.  I try to still have an active presence in WT specifically to guide people from FRB/SB over to here, and I think more people should do the same.  

 

From what I see, and yes this has been stated in this thread before but allow me to reiterate, there are 2 primary barriers of entry for this game:

 

Cost - This game is $60, $100 if you want to bypass the horribly implemented unlock system that have been shoved down our throats.  While that may not be a lot for the older and more financially established crowd, it carries a lot of weight when you're a high school or college aged individual.  And lets face it, we need new blood to keep this genre alive.  1CGS should absolutely port the Russian $10 deal over here.  Why they haven't yet boggles the mind.  

 

Equipment - This is an interesting one.  Some say you need a whole bunch of rockin flight gear to do well.  I've got ~$1500 invested into my setup but Rambo over here pushes my sh*t in with his 3d pro.  So we should be actively informing people that it doesn't take a full blown cockpit to enjoy or excel in this game.  

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends IMHO..

 

I have seen 'real' online pilots do things that no 'real' WWII pilots would have done..

 

So, real pilots is no guarantee that you wont have your realistic immersion bubble popped! ;)

 

Even if they flew completely like humans, they're still robots, and they're not going to be angry with me for the next hour if I hang them out to dry when I need to save my own ass.  And giving them names doesn't change any of that.  I don't care if they survive, I'm just going to use them as bait to help my own survival.  The immersion factor is 0.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...