72AG-DED- Random Expert +

[Matthias_PDX]

I do get what your saying, I just don't see a problem with it to be honest. Perhaps the teams were heavily lopsided? At any rate, they are already changing the scoring for the next campaign so airfields might have less action.

[Otto_bann]

To be honest, the problem seems to me evident, even screaming : if you fly blue at those moments (not rare), where do you TO or landing...?

 

And no, the balance was pretty good.

 

Yes, we hope a cure soon

[Aap]

I also don't see a problem here. Do you think in real war the pilots messages to enemies: "Please go away, I have nowhere to land"? Airfield attacks are (were) very valid tactics.

Now that they are changing airfield capture point value from 2 to 1, it will make airfield targets less important and other targets more important, so that will take some of the attention away from airfields already. Another thing that they could do, would be adding more AA and AAA to airfields and set up AA respawn, like -IRRE-Centx suggested. 

[Otto_bann]

Come on... You think in real all airfiels in 1 side was out or attacked at same time, when the other side was a smiling nature, calm and safe. Look at the picture!

It's just a dishonest imagination

[IRRE_Centx]

If a vulture is getting a lot spawning targets to shoot, the guys who get shot down are to blame: Never spawn on an airfield that is under attack.

Spawn from a different field, gain altitude and then shoot down the vulture. 

 

You obviously lack of experience on this server to say this... (1h flight time...)

Why do you think we don't do this, if the solution was that simple?

 

Here are few reasons (among other like "damaged airplane" etc...):

- an airfield can be deleted in less than 5 minutes by an organized group of people (I have a recorded track of an attack of 72AGs on a German airfield... airfield was destroyed exactly 3min46 after the first bomb impact!)

- when airfields are attacked by lonely guys, they often don't stay above the airfield for 30 minutes, no. They rush, dive, drop some bombs/straff a few things and they run away. 

 

So how can you take off from another airfield and join this? Teleportation isn't available...

If you want to defend your airfield (and with the current situation where airfields reward 2 points, it's MANDATORY to defend them...), you have to take off from attacked airfields.

The only other solution is to do a "defensive camping" where you circle above your own airfield.

But then it's a gamble, you can circle only above ONE airfield (maybe two if you're lucky enough to have two close airfields...). If enemies attack another airfield, you're screwed!

[[_FLAPS_]Grim]

"defensive camping"   ...like...defending?   

More AA is a good way to go imo.

[Aap]

 

 

Come on... You think in real all airfiels in 1 side was out or attacked at same time, when the other side was a smiling nature, calm and safe. Look at the picture!

 

 

Absolutely. Have  you ever read about the beginning of Operation Barbarossa for example? Or later on in the western front, when allies had air superiority, and shot down many German pilots during takeoff or landing. Even some really experienced aces lost their lives there. On the server there is no need for one side to be smiling and stay calm - there is an air war going on on the server, so both sides try to defend their own targets and attack enemy targets. If the sides are reasonably balanced in numbers, then it is just a matter of which side is executing better or have better tactics to reach these goals.

The only thing that I would change about the airfields, after the already announced change of capture points from 2 to 1, is adding more flak to airfields + having the flak respawn after some time, if destroyed.

[Otto_bann]

Absolutly not! Never in history, Barbarossa or other battle, 100% bases at 1 side was ko or attacked when the other side not only one, that's what my picture say clearly. So at Barbarossa, no Luftwaffe plane couldn't take of and landing? Come on... : it's 100% unrealistic.

The balance was good like often, so if I follow your point, the pilots at 1 side are more... ''intelligent''? Of course not. It's just the fact of few ones (sometimes large part of a squad), specialised at base attacks and easy kills, that's all.

Increase flak = increase lag on servers generally (alas).

Edited December 13, 2016 by Kleinen

[Aap]

Absolutly not! Never in history, Barbarossa or other battle,

I guess you should do some more reading about WWII aerial warfare and attacks on airbases. There is no point of really continuing this discussion for now.

 

100% bases at 1 side was ko or attacked when the other side not only one, that's what my picture say clearly

What does that picture say clearly in your opinion? That not even one of the red airbases are under attack? Care to explain, how you are able to see that from this picture? You believe that all these captured red key points during this campaign were achieved without destroying any of the red airbases?

Edited December 13, 2016 by II./JG77_Kemp

[Otto_bann]

I guess you should do some more reading about WWII aerial warfare and attacks on airbases. There is no point of really continuing this discussion for now.

 

What does that picture say clearly in your opinion? That not even one of the red airbases are under attack? Care to explain, how you are able to see that from this picture? You believe that all these captured red key points during this campaign were achieved without destroying any of the red airbases?

 

Maybe I read more as you think What is your source saying 100% of 1 side was out or attacked when nowhere at other side? I'm curious to read it

 

The picture is clear : Each red colored base was attacked. I tryed to take of at each, it was a dogfight, vulch at all and at same time.

 

It happens one base colored is not attacked, I know it. But an ennemy plane is around so and I can't choose one place for landing and take off safety, even far away like in real it was possible. That's what is no realistic and more, so less fun for gameplay.

 

Try to repeat history in simulator is not possible. The number of planes, bases, and others things can't be implemanted. So focus on 4 bases by side and say Barbarrossa was this, it's not true. At this time, dozens squads and dozens bases, thousands of planes at each side.. 100% attacked at same time and 0% at other side? impossible. On our simulator it's each day...

Edited December 13, 2016 by Kleinen

[[_FLAPS_]Grim]

But our simulator doesnt simulate the whole eastern front. And parts of the eastern front have been shut down for shure.

[150GCT_Veltro]

I also don't see a problem here. Do you think in real war the pilots messages to enemies: "Please go away, I have nowhere to land"? Airfield attacks are (were) very valid tactics.

Now that they are changing airfield capture point value from 2 to 1, it will make airfield targets less important and other targets more important, so that will take some of the attention away from airfields already. Another thing that they could do, would be adding more AA and AAA to airfields and set up AA respawn, like -IRRE-Centx suggested. 

 

+1

[=38=Tatarenko]

Frequently the Russians would attack multiple airbases at once for exactly the same reason as in the game - to stop supporting fighters getting airborne. I got vulched twice in a row last night, no complaints here. Made it better when I did get my IL-2 off and between the trees.

Speaking of trees - they are the biggest IL-2 killer in the game!

[Trinkof]

A rear base near HQ with double AAA ... Not destroyable would solve partly the problem.

 

I have also been once 2 or 3 days ago in a situation where all base were destroyed exept one which was under attack.

 

Being damaged I landed on a desactivated base .... And plane was reported lost.

 

Maybe allow landing on destroyed base as regular landing could help

[IRRE_Centx]

Guys, chill!

 

 

We all agree on one thing: airfield attack are part of the war and should be simulated in game.

 

Problem is that in real life no airfield would be permanently camped as it is the case now.

With the announced diminution of the reward for destroying an airfield (2 -> 1 point), this should releave pressure on airfields = less lonely suicide bombers, less lonely fighters camping airfields and so on...

 

 

 

Perfect solution can't be found on a forum, only by testing in game.

So just wait next campaign with the adjusted objectives and chill!

[Otto_bann]

A rear base near HQ ... Not destroyable would solve partly the problem. / Maybe allow landing on destroyed base as regular landing could help

 

Example of 2 simple good ideas Others exist.

 

 

 

... With the announced diminution of the reward for destroying an airfield (2 -> 1 point), this should releave pressure on airfields...

My bookmaker don't belive on that, maybe he is wrong Easy killers laugh about point for win the mission. Wait and see...

Edited December 13, 2016 by Kleinen

[Aap]

 

 

Maybe I read more as you think What is your source saying 100% of 1 side was out or attacked when nowhere at other side? I'm curious to read it

 

Probably there is a language barrier and then there is your fixation of something related to 100%, but attacking enemy airfields was one of the main points in achieving air supremacy in pretty much every front. Read about Battle of Britain, read about Operation Barbarossa, read about Pearl Harbor + Wake Island, read about preparation for D-Day in Normandy. On the contrary, I am curious to read about air supremacy doctrines that forbade airfield attacks. Have any sources to that?

 

 

 

The picture is clear : Each red colored base was attacked.

To be specific, there were enemy planes in the proximity of every blue base. Let's say that it means that they were all attacked. But what was not clear, what you meant by " the other side not only one"?

 

 

 

But an ennemy plane is around so and I can't choose one place for landing and take off safety, even far away like in real it was possible.

What was possible in real life? To take off 100 km from where you were stationed physically? In real life you could be ordered to scramble and you had no choice but to obey. In this game you can pick the most secure airfield for takeoff or wait until enemies are gone - there were not that kind of luxuries in real life. Also when landing, you get a good indication that there is higher danger when you look at the map. In real life there was no map with highlighted red circles to alert you. You could maybe see red flares or get commands from radio and many times pilots were just shot down during landing approach with no warning or idea at all that there any enemies around. 

 

 

 

100% attacked at same time and 0% at other side?

Again, what is the 100% - 0% thing that you are talking about here? And again, in real life it did not really matter for a single pilot, if another airbase 50 km from you were under attack or not, if the airfield where you were stationed was under attack, then you were under attack and just had to cope with that. 

[TP_Silk]

Even if you could get credit for landing on an unmarked airfield only when all your faction's airfields are knocked out or under heavy attack, that would be an improvement IMO. I admit that being able to land anywhere any time is a bit much, but a little latitude when options are reduced would be good. Maybe if an airfield is reduced to less than 50% operating capacity by attacks it can get marked by the game somehow and then if more than three airfields are either destroyed or marked as less than 50% capacity that would enable players to land at an alternative field with no loss of points provided, of course, that the alternative airfield was within that faction's area of influence?

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

A rear base near HQ with double AAA ... Not destroyable would solve partly the problem.

 

I have also been once 2 or 3 days ago in a situation where all base were destroyed exept one which was under attack.

 

Being damaged I landed on a desactivated base .... And plane was reported lost.

 

Maybe allow landing on destroyed base as regular landing could help

That is what I am saying all the time. A Rear Airfield with Forward AAA Batteries Me-262 style 2-5km outside the Airfield. 

 

That would also be the safest solution for Bombers, since they suffer the most from Campers. (I lost my "not dying" streak to one). 

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

Furthering my Case for Disallowing 2 Engine Bombers from Front Line Airfields.

Checking the Top Scoring Ground Attack Pilots well I found a Pattern. Despite the Points System they still don't value their lives. 

 

Take the Current Top Scoring Ground Attack Pilots:

 

=K= Rechelieu: (Favourite: Ju-88)

-has 3033 Ground Kills in 76 Sorties.

-In 76 Sorties he lost 24 Aircraft. That is one Aircraft lost every 3 Sorties.

-He has died 12 Times, once every 6 Sorties.

-He has flown 30 hours, which gives us an average Sortie Length of 23 Minutes.

-The Average Life Expectancy of his Pilots is 2.5 hours. 

-His Favourite Loadouts are: 1800+1000; 4x500+2x250; 4x500+18x50

-These are either the cheapest or Heaviest Possible Loadouts. 

                         

SDV_SMJ1963: (Favourite: Ju-88)

-has 2382 Ground Kills in 59 Sorties

-In 59 Sorties he lost 20 Aircraft. One lost every 2.95 Sorties. 

-He has Died 8 Times, once every 7.3 Sorties

-He has flown 17.3 Hours. That gives us an average Sortie of 17.5 Minutes. 

-His Average Pilot's Life is 2.1 Hours. 

-His Favourite Loadout is: 2xSC1000

 

GennON: (Favourite: Pe-2 s.35)

-has 2164 Ground Kills in 92 Sorties

-In 92 Sorties he lost 23 Aircraft, One Aircraft every 4 Sorties. 

-He has died 13 times, once every 7 Sorties

-He has flown 24 Hours, Average Sortie Length of 15 Minutes

-His Average Pilot Life is 1.85 Hours. 

-Favourite Loadouts: 2x500 or 4x250. 

 

 

They were all captured roughly Half the Times they Died, cutting their Virtual Lives even shorter. 

However, the Average Sortie Lengths are just about enough to get to the Target at Low Alt, Drop and get Killed. They exploit the System, flying exceedingly short, suicidal Sorties and only sometimes return home, often enough with fuel for less than 45 Minutes. 

 

Disallowing the use of Bombers from Front Line Airfields would disincentivise this kind of Behaviour and Force Pilots to play more efficiently since they can't just hop into the next on every 15 Minutes, since just getting to the Target would already take 30 Minutes. They would be forced to take more realistic Bombloads, since the Big ones slow you down a Lot and generally would be forced to play more historically accurate. 

 

 

The System is against Proper Flying, it's 

 

 

In favour of Exploiters. 

Edited December 13, 2016 by 6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann

[IRRE_Centx]

Furthering my Case for Disallowing 2 Engine Bombers from Front Line Airfields.

Checking the Top Scoring Ground Attack Pilots well I found a Pattern. Despite the Points System they still don't value their lives. 

 

Personnally I found another pattern, which really bothers me more than suicide bombers...

 

I don't give it's name but you can guess easily whom I'm talking about... and if you ever played during the (European) mornings, you met him...

 

Let's check what this ace destroyed:

146 Aircrafts

5 Large-caliber AA guns

87 Medium-caliber AA guns

40 Small-caliber AA guns

88 Static aircrafts

739 Airfield objects

 

 

Knowing that on almost of his "fighter" sortie where he scored "aerial" kills you can see that he destroyed some AAs before getting his kills... or when there are no AAs destruction, strangely he shot down the same pilot 2-3 times in a row, with 5-10 minutes between the kills...

I really wonder what he focused... 

 

 

Now let's check some of missions results when he was online early mornings, with almost nobody on the server:

 

(and this are just a few ones, seriously this guy won a dozen of maps for Germans almost by himself...)

 

How many times I arrived on server at those hours to see that Soviets had 1-2 airfields disabled... and guess who was online... 

 

THANK YOU for putting airfields at 1 point instead of 2 for the next campaign, THANK YOU 

[Otto_bann]

Probably there is a language barrier and then there is your fixation of something related to 100%, ... I am curious to read about air supremacy doctrines that forbade airfield attacks. Have any sources to that?

 

Maybe, sorry for my bad english.

 

I never said to forbade air attack for on ALL fields, but let half or part of them free because it's never happens in reality. 100% / 0% are not a fixation for me, just an obvious fact of what happens on the server each day, that all : it's not historical, not fun, even a little bit stupid IMO...

 

 

To be specific, there were enemy planes in the proximity of every blue base. Let's say that it means that they were all attacked

 

No, already said in my prévious response : Their were not at proximity but above runways of 3 actives bases left (4th was already out), fighting and vulching on all at same time. I know it because I passed one by one  tryed to find one free in hope to take off safely

 

 

 

But what was not clear, what you meant by " the other side not only one"?

 

I mean It so much twisted at middle of the battle to see one side at hell on all of his bases and the other side with his bases at heaven on each

 

 

What was possible in real life?

 

You will never reproduct the reality in this sim and servers... We are obviousely obligated to deal with reality.

 

So now, few good questions :

 

- the number of planes and bases on the server is like reality? No (so much).

 

- is it possible to increase those number like in reality? No

 

- in reality all bases one side has attacked all ennemies bases at same time (their was dozens)? No for sure

 

- in reality, one or few bases far away of front (or less far) was flyable at time of the battle? Yes

 

- what's happens actualy on the server is it a problem? Yes (otherwise it seems this point is understood now, an give a cure at next campaign - hope).

 

You can argue like you want, the real life you will never have here (it's happy).

100% (all blue bases attacked) - 0% (all red bases free and safe) on my picture... I'm not sure to understood your question?

 

 

 

In real life there was no map with highlighted red circles to alert you

 

The radio on board was existing already you know (german side anyway)...

 

 

And again, in real life it did not really matter for a single pilot, if another airbase 50 km from you were under attack or not, if the airfield where you were stationed was under attack, then you were under attack and just had to cope with that.

 

Sorry but no again... Alone pilot front of an ennemy attack at 10 vs 1 has to keep his plane and life safe first, so he runs aways for lands elsewhere : It was not the pacific war with kamikazes... This is often impossible to do it actually online, like the picture prove it.

Edited December 13, 2016 by Kleinen

[IRRE_Centx]

100% (all blue bases attacked) - 0% (all red bases free and safe) on my picture... I'm not sure to understood your question?

 

I interrupt your passionate conversation with Kemp just to give you an information:

You can only see airfields OF YOUR SIDE marked as under attack.

 

So the fact that red bases are not shown under attack on your screenshot is 100% normal... you can't know it just by watching the map!

Maybe they were attacked and you don't know it

Edited December 13, 2016 by -IRRE-Centx

[Otto_bann]

Thanks for information Centx ; ) the 0% was just for fun comparision but the 1st problem stay the same.

I think we have enough  spoke about this anyway, and may be boring for some guys...

The server will move soon on more logical anyway, so let's go and fly.

[=38=Tatarenko]

 

I think I've finally got the hang of this ... that heavy rain and low visibility mission tonight was a godsend for the IL-2 and this time the squirrels didn't get me ...

 

[6./ZG26_Klaus_Mann]

Sorties.jpg

 

I think I've finally got the hang of this ... that heavy rain and low visibility mission tonight was a godsend for the IL-2 and this time the squirrels didn't get me ...

 

 

I actually had one of my coolest Missions in a He-111 in Very Low Visibility, Very Low Cloud, basically Fog 500m and above, flying at 4500m, barely able to see the Ground and managed to accurately Level Bomb a Warehouse and destroy it. Enemy had destroyed all Radio Beacons so I had to find back home barely being able to make out the Ground, got home on the very last drop of fuel. I literally ran out as I flared for touchdown. 

One of my biggest Level Bombing achievments so far. 

[=38=Tatarenko]

I see this morning that the server has completely reset ...

[jaydee]

HI all ! First off, thanks 72AG for the work to create this server. ~S~. I just have a few hours flying on the Server. All of that time has been spent Navigating and getting familiar with the Airbases. I don't Know the "Moscow" Map. So taking off and finding my Home Base again in a Map I don't know is keeping me Busy. (Especially in Winter). I am too busy for Combat.(Not much Point if I cant find my Home base  after.)(If I survive).

BUT, I am really enjoying it ! Every night I take off from a Different Base and the Front has moved. Great Dynamic Campaign !

When I fly (Australia Time) the "Farmers" are out and about. The Server is quiet and the they are just "Farming" the ground targets to get Massive Scores and Credits. That's ok, each to their own ! BUT they can influence the Dynamic Campaign so much. KP's can be taken easily with 3 or 4 "Farmers" with no Opposition !...

I don't understand the Economics of the Server yet. I have read all the Preceding Posts about Vulching etc  and how to keep the Server Real AND Enjoyable !

This is MHO ! ...... When a Pilot Dies, His Score/Credits are Reset to 0/1000 !...That is about as Full-Real as it gets.

The Farmers with 30000 Credits will have to Worry about Me being around. I could get a Lucky Shot and Ruin Their Score.  The Vulchers have a lot to lose too. Maybe KP's wont be so easy but more Risky ?

Enjoying the Server,just my 2 cents worth !

j

[=38=Tatarenko]

What are the new rules please? How to we take KP now? Are Airfields worth only 1 now? Do we still need 5 to win?

[HR_Tumu]

All objectives need real flak on this server i think.

[IRRE_Centx]

All objectives need real flak on this server i think.

 

They have real flak... (Well at least the German AA is efficient, since I fly only VVS on this server I don't know how it is on the other side)

 

Last time I tested the new warehouses with a Pe-2, I took a 88mm shell right in my cockpit when I was 2km away from the objective xD

And artillery positions with light AAs... gosh those guys are snipers, how many times I did get one shoted in a il-2/Pe-2 on an artillery position even before dropping my bombs...

[=38=Tatarenko]

Yes the Germans definitely have real flak already! (Except at the HQ).

And last night as I was taking off two Ju-88 attacked Solidilovo in a suicide run and both were taken down (after dropping bombs) so that seemed to work as well.

[IRRE_Alleluia]

I found an interesting bug this morning.

Armoured colum from blue side ( on mainly fly VVS ) have collided on the road.

The problem, is that some tanks exploded when they were head on.

[=38=Tatarenko]

Once I was flying as the only Red and a blue truck column wiped itself out while turning around - I didn't touch it at all. I've seen it since a couple of times with trucks but never with tanks yet. I can imagine the flakwagons burning after hitting tanks.

[IRRE_Centx]

Once I was flying as the only Red and a blue truck column wiped itself out while turning around - I didn't touch it at all. I've seen it since a couple of times with trucks but never with tanks yet. I can imagine the flakwagons burning after hitting tanks.

 

Trucks (and also a bit tanks) columns have problems when they try to take a bridge

 

Sometimes they do it successfully... sometimes the entire column ends in the river   (= destroyed)

Edited December 14, 2016 by -IRRE-Centx

[TP_Silk]

Trucks (and also a bit tanks) columns have problems when they try to take a bridge

 

Sometimes they do it successfully... sometimes the entire column ends in the river   (= destroyed)

 

Maybe this is the answer - an Engineer module that can enter enemy territory and build bridges for them to try and navigate.... and hopefully fail   

 

Maybe an airborne engineer module dropped by those nice new transport game mechanics 

[LLv34_Temuri]

Once I was flying as the only Red and a blue truck column wiped itself out while turning around - I didn't touch it at all. I've seen it since a couple of times with trucks but never with tanks yet. I can imagine the flakwagons burning after hitting tanks.

Yeah, the collision detection is poor. I was just recently observing old Il-2 ground vehicle behavior, and it looks like the collision detection in old Il-2 is made something like this:

1. Vehice drives towards an obstacle (e.g. a destoyed vehicle)

2. When the vehicle hits that obstacle, instead of blowing up, it detects that "oh I hit something, I should not do that".

3. The vehicle then jumps a bit back and goes around the obstacle.

Despite the silly "jump back", I would be happy if it worked like this in BoS too.

[IRRE_Centx]

Yeah, the collision detection is poor. I was just recently observing old Il-2 ground vehicle behavior, and it looks like the collision detection in old Il-2 is made something like this:

1. Vehice drives towards an obstacle (e.g. a destoyed vehicle)

2. When the vehicle hits that obstacle, instead of blowing up, it detects that "oh I hit something, I should not do that".

3. The vehicle then jumps a bit back and goes around the obstacle.

Despite the silly "jump back", I would be happy if it worked like this in BoS too.

 

Actually the vehicles in BoS detect well the destroyed vehicles and avoid them efficiently (without hitting it, they avoid them "naturally")

 

Problem is when two vehicles are moving, sometimes they fail to avoid each other x)

... or when they meet a bridge x)

Edited December 14, 2016 by -IRRE-Centx

[=38=Tatarenko]

Recently I was strafing a soft column on this server and a car got away. I chased it into a village and it went off the road (as they do) and crashed into a tree and started burning. No kill for me but I thought it was nice.

[LLv34_Temuri]

Actually the vehicles in BoS detect well the destroyed vehicles and avoid them efficiently (without hitting it, they avoid them "naturally")

 

Problem is when two vehicles are moving, sometimes they fail to avoid each other x)

... or when they meet a bridge x)

If I recall correctly, they avoid destroyed vehicles if the destroyed vehicle was target linked to the same "lead" vehicle. Without target linking they won't.

And yeah, they have a hard time avoiding running into any blocks.