How Popular is Multiplayer?

[StG77_Kondor]

Just picked up this game, I have TrackIR5, x52 pro along with CH Pro Pedals.  

 

The multiplayer servers you have listed in this thread, are these vanilla versions of IL-2 or modded servers?  I've only installed the game overnight, have not fired it up yet.  Looking forward to it.

 

Vanilla. There are currently no 'mods' for this sim, and no plans to open it up to them...for now.

 

Just open the launcher and it will update automatically if a new patch/version is released.

[FS_Fenice_1965]

 

 

Fenice, it pains me to admit it, but the ME guide (and youtube tutorials) are written by my squadron mate and general genius-with-astonishing-patience, Prangster (available here), not by me. Personally, I got started with with Bob Vanderstock's great Rise of Flight tutorials here. (Prangster, by the way, built the De Havilland Mosquito for IL2. I feel cool just typing my name in the same sentence as his!)

 

Sorry Swallow, I apologize and please extend my apologies to Prangster. I answered quickly and got confused by the similar sign.

Back to the topic. I would point that I like a lot of BOS ME aspects. Nevertheless, if the developers will be able to improve the interface having in mind the fact that many may approach the mission editor as a game within the game, it is possible that multiplayer popularity would benefit a lot.

[BlitzPig_EL]

While I would really like an easier to access mission builder, as I have tried to use the current one and just cannot understand it at all (EL is not a programmer), what good will an easy to use one be?

 

Without the ability to host our own missions on the fly from our home machines, the ability to easily make missions has no purpose.

 

The small number of my friends that still fly simply cannot justify the expense of operating a dedicated server, even if one of us could figure out the uber complex Mission Editor.

 

Just another case where the wishes of the hard core simulation crowd has stripped the fun out of flying, because once again, the old mantra, "harder is m0ar real" wins out over fun and enjoyment.

[No601_Swallow]

 

Without the ability to host our own missions on the fly from our home machines, the ability to easily make missions has no purpose.

 

 

 

You can absolutely and easily* host missions on your home machine.

 

*When I say "easily", it's annoying and unnecessarily complex (in my humbles) compared with HL. There are some hoops to jump through. You do need a second free account (which I and anyone who's hosted an MP mission has)- a very quick message to the comrades in customer services gives you this special account (I needed to create a new gmail email address - not exactly difficult - to get it registered). Then you just launch the DServer .exe in your game folder, set the options, point it at your mission or missions folders (if you want a few in rotation, etc) and ta-da! Your own server pops up in the normal MP server list in the game launcher, password protected, if you wish, invisible to the "general public" if you wish (for practice, testing, etc). Once you've done it a few times, it's easy - if a bit of a chore!

 

Then it's just a case of launching your actual game and then sort-of joining your own server through the MP interface - servicing yourself, so to speak... erm...

Edited January 22, 2016 by No601_Swallow

[BlitzPig_EL]

Can the server and client run successfully on the same machine?

[coconut]

Yes, but you'd better have a strong CPU, 4 cores at least. For a light mission (few or no AIs) and a handful of players, CPU usage by DServer should remain low.

[DD_APHill]

 

 

But, when it comes to combat, the wobbly flight dynamics just kill it for me.

 

 

+1 

[ACG_daffy_]

I was a very dedicated online player in the original IL2 series.

 

I have tried to get up to speed with online play in this sim, and I'm just not feeling the love anymore.

 

I enjoy the sim for just flying around offline and sightseeing, operating the aircraft, doing touch and goes, etc...  But, when it comes to combat, the wobbly flight dynamics just kill it for me.  I am grateful to those that have offered suggestions to make flying better, but they are just treating the symptoms, not the disease.  Virtual air combat is hard enough, I should not have to fight my adversary and my own aircraft at the same time, it's just no fun, and it's sad, because I really miss flying.

 

I keep coming back here to the forums to check and see if thing are improving, looking for any hope that I can enjoy it again, was very hopeful about the introduction of the P 40, but, we know how that went.

 

Maybe the P 39 will be better, if we ever get it.

 

Maybe the global physics issues that cause the wobbles will be fixed.

 

I keep hoping I can do this again.

I seem to remember you from the Hyperlobby days of IL2....in its infancy.  That was back when there would be 400 players online all day long, and squads fighting and punching it out.  Huge fun.  If you are who I think...then I recall you being pretty well equipped to handle that P-39.  If so, I think that's going back to 2001-2-3...Nice!

 

I've never really gotten away from the original either.  I've tried BOS a little, and like the forums, but it seems like it's missing stuff.  Or, maybe I'm just old now and too nostalgic.  Hell, even hyperlobby barely boasts 20 players at a time anymore.  A long time ago, it was an awesome genre with a ton of 'new' stuff exploding on the scene, and a bunch of CFS junkies carrying over grudges into this new Russian Airplane 'thing'.  Jesus...that was still in dial-up days in some cases.  But it always seemed to work.  Or, maybe you're not at all lol.  Either way, I agree with what you say.  Love the idea of the game, have some fun once and a while, but mostly from a slow bomber or something.  For a couple of minutes, then I get frustrated or bored and go back to hyperlobby for 1946. 

 

I think they are going to have to revisit some things, but mostly, they're going to have to open up the theaters and the aircraft types if they want to draw the high crowds. 

S!

[ACG_KaiLae]

Speaking as one of those who have "left"

 

What I think BoS lacks in general (and some other sims have):

 

- I'm a sucker for realism. Kind of a "learning curve masochist". Flying BoS planes is too easy for me. The number of concessions to casual gamers that has made its way into the game is mind-boggling. Yes I know some of them can be turned off - but many can't.

 

As for multiplayer in particular:

 

- I'm a sucker for realism. Online engagements in BoS are quite far removed from any conceivable real-life situation. Plus they're repetitive - fly a Bf, climb, swoop down on Russians, climb again, rinse, repeat. Fly a Yak, wait for Germans to make a mistake, or spend hours hanging on your prop waiting for Germans to make a mistake. Yawn. Yes, you can try and fly using real life tactics etc. And get shot down time and again by respawn monkeys. 

 

- no coop missions. I know - a lot can be done even with the current setup, creative mission editing, etc. Yet nobody does that - it's all endless take-off/crash/respawn... gets boring. The server most online players default to is the most gamey of them all. We old farts have a word for that - "air quake".

 

- No teamplay and coordination needed. Gets real boring. 

 

So - I'll most likely just continue doing what I do (flying other, more realistic sims). I'll probably fire up BoS from time to time to check what has changed, and I have great hopes for PWCG as well to at least improve SP experience... 

 

Sounds like you dislike the available servers and the way players are using the airplanes, than the sim itself? I'd like to see someone start something like ACG for IL-2, because that's what I think is missing for IL-2 multiplayer.

[No601_Swallow]

Speaking as one of those who have "left"...

 

- no coop missions. I know - a lot can be done even with the current setup, creative mission editing, etc. Yet nobody does that - it's all endless take-off/crash/respawn... gets boring. The server most online players default to is the most gamey of them all. We old farts have a word for that - "air quake".

 

- No teamplay and coordination needed. Gets real boring...

 

 

People do do that. It's just - I suppose - squadron-style flying, typically with people joining groups, committing time to a greater or lesser extent, getting to know the people you're flying with. Some people like that, and some people don't.

 

Certainly my own squadron builds and runs coop-style historically-oriented "campaigns", with the mission builders pumping out bespoke coop-style missions weekly. Even when there's not enough people to put up our own server, we typically jump in a "big" (public) server, choose tasks or objectives and then fulfil them as best we can. We take no notice of "respawn monkeys" except to defend each other from them. As always, it's up to players how they use the game. But there are plenty of people making and flying objective-oriented historical coop missions, I think.

 

I look forward to a happy time when the skies are full of squadrons having tournaments and competitions, and so on. Many in my squadron lament days passed, but I think in five years we'll all have bankrupted ourselves getting V-R'd up and there'll be a new golden age! In the meantime, this sim is extraordinary in what it makes available to us, if we choose to use it. 

[Frequent_Flyer]

I was a very dedicated online player in the original IL2 series.

 

I have tried to get up to speed with online play in this sim, and I'm just not feeling the love anymore.

 

I enjoy the sim for just flying around offline and sightseeing, operating the aircraft, doing touch and goes, etc...  But, when it comes to combat, the wobbly flight dynamics just kill it for me.  I am grateful to those that have offered suggestions to make flying better, but they are just treating the symptoms, not the disease.  Virtual air combat is hard enough, I should not have to fight my adversary and my own aircraft at the same time, it's just no fun, and it's sad, because I really miss flying.

 

I keep coming back here to the forums to check and see if thing are improving, looking for any hope that I can enjoy it again, was very hopeful about the introduction of the P 40, but, we know how that went.

 

Maybe the P 39 will be better, if we ever get it.

 

Maybe the global physics issues that cause the wobbles will be fixed.

 

I keep hoping I can do this again.

You could not be more correct! Your sentiment is very wide spread.

[-TBC-AeroAce]

Seriously if you want a good MP experience regardless of player numbers just use Ts and fourm and chat and you will be amazed. Even if there is just two of you, you can jump on a duel server or do an air race. All it take is saying hi

[JG4_Nemesis]

Reading over all postings and looking at my long term gaming experience with Flight sims, it is basically three things that suck about playing BoS / BoM

 

1.) Coops do not work / are not there / are far too hard to setup ==> nonsense-dogfighting without any bigger purpose is all you will ever get

2.) No HL support ==> no live interaction of virtual pilots, no communiy experience inside the gaming experience (and forums are just not it...)

3.) Mission editor hardly accessible, i.e. no pool of great missions

 

And oh yes, single player always sucks!!

C'mon Is there ANY BoS based online war that is working and enjoyable?

 

I told the devs, but they seemed not that interested or realizing these crucial drawbacks that kill the fun in their product. Instead, they rather use their energy to create forever new maps, planes, scenarios....

But all of those are useless if the core shortcommings remain the same.

 

Edit: Forgot 4.)[Edited] the Fw190 Cockpit visibility without learning anything from Olegs mistakes

Edited May 12, 2016 by SYN_Haashashin
profanity

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

Nemesis, VikS himself said in reply to a thread of yours that they plan to implement coops and the likes when time allows, no need for doom and gloom.

I hated HL to be honest, it was an ugly, clumsy mess albeit a functional one. People could just suck it up and start using the official BoS TeamSpeak more often, it's not that hard. Pop in there, ask where are you guys flying and join!

PWCG takes care of single player for those who don't like the campaign as it is, and there are way too many online wars that are enjoyable and full to the brim. ZG26's Moscow on Wednesday (Europe time), 4./JG 52's campaign on Wednesday (US time), 4./JG 52 campaign on Thursday (Europe time), Friday Night Bomber Flights on Friday (Europe time), Interactive War night mission on Friday (Europe time), Saturday Night Bomber Flights on Saturday (Europe and NA time), Interactive War day mission on Saturday (European time), ZG26's Moscow on Sunday (Europe time) plus Tactical Air War 24/7.

What is wrong with these? They are loved by everyone who joins, try them out

Also, the reason developers prioritise new releases over secondary features is that a new theater brings much more revenue per man hour than HyperLobby compatibility. It basically funds the secondary features.

Edited May 12, 2016 by 55IAP_Lucas_From_Hell

[SYN_Haashashin]

ZG26's Moscow on Wednesday (Europe time)

 

This is also up on Sundays European time .

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

Fixed it - I was going to write that first then decided to go chronologically and then this happened. Blimey, I'm signed up for that campaign and I was talking about it today

[Gambit21]

Nemesis, VikS himself said in reply to a thread of yours that they plan to implement coops and the likes when time allows, no need for doom and gloom.

 

I hated HL to be honest, it was an ugly, clumsy mess albeit a functional one. People could just suck it up and start using the official BoS TeamSpeak more often, it's not that hard. Pop in there, ask where are you guys flying and join!

 

 

 

 

HL was perfectly functional and allowed proper CoOps - everyone taking off at the same time to accomplish an objective.

I never had the slightest complaint or problem with it, so with respect I have no idea what you're talking about.

 

I created and hosted many, many online missions.

I could orchestrate timing, engagements, surprises. If I wanted a flight of Mustangs escorting a flight of B17's to be jumped

by a flight of 190's 2000m above, I could make that happen for everyone.

I could boot it up, post a mission, wait for it to populate which normally only took a few minutes with the usual suspects,

and we were off.

The existence of TeamSpeak does not in any way, shape or form make up for our missing HL - it's meaningless

in the context of what I'm talking about.

 

in my humble opinion, we need CoOps back or the online future of this sim will suffer.

I know I have little interest in online flying without CoOps, and I'm hardly alone.

 

Again, anyone that says "we don't need CoOps" doesn't understand what CoOps makes possible, and certainly

wasn't flying my missions back in the day. I'd bet the farm that not a single person that was flying with us, not

a ONE would contend that the missing HL doesn't impact us hugely.

 

Not sure any of those people are on here. Seahawk? Porkchop? Billfish?

I think LukeFF used to fly with us.

[BlitzPig_EL]

None are left Gambit.

 

I miss Billfish's posts about the IJAAF a lot.  She had a lot to contribute.

[ACG_pezman]

Thanks for defending the game Lucas, a lot of people like to focus on the problems and ignore all the great things about this game.  It can only get better and when it does (and it's already damn good too) more people will join.

 

/Rant On

 

I know there are a lot of people out there who are pissed that there are so few (just one) of the Western allies' aircraft in the game.  Those same people also say that if the dev's will make a European, North African, or Mediterranean theater (with the corresponding American and British aircraft) that sales would skyrocket, but I can't help but think how egocentric that is.  The Russian's have a story to tell too and no one else has seemed to tell it.  I have learned more from this game about the Eastern front in WWII that I am ashamed of myself.  I don't blame the Dev's for wanting to illuminate this period of history and I quite enjoy learning the challenges that the Soviet's (Russian's) faced.  As a matter of fact I was shocked by the challenge they faced and have developed a deep respect for the Russian people because of it.

 

In the book To Command the Sky:  The Battle for Air Superiority Over Germany, 1942-1944 by Stephen L. McFarland and Wesley Phillips Newton, (in the introduction to the book) they explicitly leave the VVS out of their overall synopsis of the war because of the nature of the VVS, being a tactical air force and not a strategic air force (like Germany, Britain, Japan, and the United States).  Because they were tactical they focused more on using their air force to win battles (that's why the VVS aircraft are more orientated to ground attack) instead of pushing a large strategy (like industrial bombing) to attempt to win the war.  This left the VVS with high losses (due to their lacking aircraft in the beginning and the nature of their missions) because they flew low and often put themselves at a disadvantage against a superior foe.  Anyway the aircraft losses for Russia, according to this book, were about 30,000+ more aircraft than any other nation.   A quick check on Wikipedia shows that Russian losses were about 104,000 to Germany's 76,000.  The U.S. lost (on two fronts of fighting) 95,000 aircraft.  This game makes it clear why those loses were so high.  The price Russia paid to remain Russia. 

 

Anyway, this story needs to be told to the West because we know so little about it, and how can we be fair, balanced, and objective if we don't even know the facts?  In time we will get the aircraft we want as Westerners, but I am happy that the Dev's have chosen their route and I hope they stick with it (battle of Kursk, etc...), because... ya know... the western allies didn't win the war by themselves... and neither did Russia.  We owe it to each other to learn and celebrate the contributions of peoples around the world to our world order.  That the systems and countries we have today are a direct reflection of the war, and our lives still to this day, are affected by it.

 

/Rant Off

[No601_Swallow]

Reading over all postings and looking at my long term gaming experience with Flight sims, it is basically three things that suck about playing BoS / BoM

 

1.) Coops do not work / are not there / are far too hard to setup ==> nonsense-dogfighting without any bigger purpose is all you will ever get

2.) No HL support ==> no live interaction of virtual pilots, no communiy experience inside the gaming experience (and forums are just not it...)

3.) Mission editor hardly accessible, i.e. no pool of great missions

 

And oh yes, single player always sucks!!

C'mon Is there ANY BoS based online war that is working and enjoyable?

 

I told the devs, but they seemed not that interested or realizing these crucial drawbacks that kill the fun in their product. Instead, they rather use their energy to create forever new maps, planes, scenarios....

But all of those are useless if the core shortcommings remain the same.

 

Edit: Forgot 4.)[Edited] the Fw190 Cockpit visibility without learning anything from Olegs mistakes

 

Sigh.

 

Just learn the sodding mission editor. It's really not that hard, and it's a very powerful tool. As for coops, I'll quote my own wall of text ('Cause there's no way I'm typing that out again):

 

 

At the risk of sounding like a lone lunatic, I'll defend the possibilities that BoS allows for coop gameplay. I thought about this stuff a hell of a lot when my squadron was struggling to transition to CloD.

 

For those (during the CloD era) who argued that coop was obsolete, my answer was always that the difference between coop and DF was how missions start.In a DF, the host starts the mission first and then people join when they want. In coop, on the other hand, people join (ready-up) and then, after everyone's in their slots, the host starts the mission. It's always seemed to me that the mix between human and AI participants. Is irrelevant. It's how the mission starts that makes the difference.

 

Now, from a mission design point of view, this difference was absolutely crucial. After all, the mission designer is making a mission where interesting stuff happens so he needs the players to be in a particular place at a particular time. Therefore timing is very important, and so the host clicking that "Start Mission" button and starting everything off in a coordinated way is the single most important event in the entire game. At least in IL2 '46.

 

My sqadron's best mission designers were absolute artists because of the way they judged and manipulated timing in IL2 '46 missions.

 

Clod changed this a bit, with the introduction of a fairly limited array of triggers. However, to get anything more than the basic things to happen in CloD, you have to layer submission upon submission within the main mission, and trigger them all through scripts. To say the least, scripting is a challenge if you're not a computer programmer. But it is possible to get sophisticated results with a hell of a lot of work and dedication. However, even now in CloD there are - what? - five or six people worldwide (!) who can put together really great missions and use CloD to its best potential.

 

Even so, CloD started to blur the distinction between DFand coop because of the possibilities that triggers offer.

 

Fast forward to DCS and, in particular, BoS. DCS has some very powerful and flexible trigger mechanisms, such that on the few occasions we've tried it as a squadron, the coop/DF thing just wasn't an issue.

 

And BoS. Now the thing about BoS is ABSOLUTELY EVERTHING MUST BE TRIGGERED. Every single element that you want to do anything at all in a mission must be triggered. It's like the total extreme of what was started in CloD (except - and thank you oh great God of mission builders - you don't need to use any scripting or programming to do it!).

 

Most obviously in BoS, mission elements can be triggered by the start of the mission itself. But they don't have to be. They can be triggered by the first person spawning in, or the tenth person spawning in, or the first person taking off, or the tenth person taking off. They can be triggered by players arriving at a point, or attacking a target, or getting shot down, or arriving back at base. Anything, almost.

 

What that in turn means is that the great mechanism the mission builder has built into the mission, all those cogs and events,etc, don't depend any more on the host clicking "Start Mission". All that worry about timing and so in is gone. Players can join when they want, in whatever order they want, and none of that mission mechanism will start to do its thing until the mission builder wants it to. Having everybody ready before starting the mission isn't important. Having everyone take off and form up in a timely manner isn't important. None of that matters, because the mission builder can make all the stuff happen whenever he wants it to,

 

So honestly: We don't need coop mode in BoS.

 

Do I wish there was a coop mode? Of course. Do I wish there was a HyperLobby? Of course. Jus the fact that I've had to spend half an hour typing this shows there's something wrong.

 

But it's not with the game, or with the way missions are run within the game. It's to do with the devs not explaining things, not having a mission editor guide, not helping us, etc. And it's to do with us players not putting the time in to learn the mission editor, play cooperatively, or really explore the possibilities that the game gives us.

 

Here endeth the wall of text.

 

Edited May 12, 2016 by No601_Swallow

[BlitzPig_EL]

Just looked at the mutlplayer browser.

 

Prime time in North America.

 

There are under 70 people playing online.

 

Why are the numbers so low?

 

/rant on

 

Inability to host games easily on the fly without a dedicated server.

 

Largely inaccessible mission builder. (Remember, the devs didn't want us to have it in the first place)

 

No coop mode

 

Still unresolved for most players ground handling and FM issues.

 

Limited plane set.

 

Totally nerfed P40 (Had to say it)

 

/rant off

[6./ZG26_Emil]

Respectfully the US makes up 30% of the customers but don't seem to want (or can't) get organised to form an American community.

 

Look at the French (a country with 70 million) we've seen their community fill an entire server week after week last year. There is a sizable Italian community as well and I guess the same with Russia but the UK doesn't seems to have much of one, nor many other European countries.

 

At the end of the day someone just needs to take the reigns and be responsible for creating something....it isn't easy but it's doable.

[Pharoah]

here's my $0.02 (from Australia).

 

1. I'm a member of two rather largish online squads that play lots of games but also have focused sim divisions. A lot of guys purchased BOS when it first came out (we're all in the 30-40+ bracket and were big fans of IL2 1946) but got bored with the Russian a/c and particularly flying in snow, so they stopped playing and picked up something else. Even with the summer maps, the Russian front just doesn't interest them (and trust me, I've been trying to get guys to join). In addition, having to play a rather poor single player campaign in order to unlock upgrades was enough to put guys off as well.

2. If the devs move towards something other than the eastern front (med, Normandy, PTO, BOB, north Africa, etc), I'm sure a lot of these guys will come back.

3. to answer the OP's question: its mildly popular - and that's just based on the number of servers up and average # of players online when I'm online (which is usually prime time in Aust ie. 8pm - 1am AEST).

4. personally, I LOVE MP. To me, that's where the action is at. I fly bombers or attack aircraft (IL2/JU87/BF110) 100% of the time and love the feeling of the unknown when flying to/from the target. There's been times when I've been killed by well placed shots and saluted them for their shooting...and times when I've not seen another online player (friend/foe) and was able to complete my bomb run.

5. having said the above, there's nothing quite like flying on a server with 50 other players (like in the old '1946 days) when you were able to form a flight of 4-6 bombers for mutual protection, combined with supporting fighters (as everyone knows....put a bomber in the air and everyone heads straight for it!! lol). I long for those days but will persevere with what we have now.

6. how could it be better? Refer #2 above (imho). Rather than concentrate on providing maps/incremental a/c to an already small player base....try something new that could potentially bring in more new players (or old players). You could keep the whole battle concept with examples such as:

- Battle of Britain (lets just assume that CloD doesn't exist shall we?)

- Battle of Guadalcanal (PTO, Zeros, Bettys, Wildcats, Dauntless)

- Battle of Malta (MTO, Hurri, Spit, Gladiators, Beaufighters)

- Battle of North Africa (MTO, Hurri, Spit, P40s, B25s)

- Battle of France (early 1940s, Hurri, Spit, Blenheims)

- Battle of Italy (maybe...MTO, Spit, B25, Corsairs, Hellcats)

- Battle of the Pacific (PTO, carriers, Hellcats, Corsairs, Dauntless, Avengers, Zeros, Bettys, Vals, Kates, Jills)

- Battle of Normandy (ETO, can be 1941-1944, Spit IX, B17, B24, Typhoon, A20, Mosquito)

 

obviously there's so many time periods to choose from...but I'm sure, if you add a new theatre interest will grow.

[RockRidge]

Speaking as a programmer with nearly 30 years, i kinda have a love \ hate relationship with the mission editor.

 

I try the best i can, and i am extremely grateful for the community created resources that are available, but i wish there was more info and also better mp ai. The pigs are complaining, and my imagination is struggling :o)

 

Only writing AI vs player mp missions here.

 

Still im not complaining, just want more.....

[6./ZG26_Emil]

Speaking as a programmer with nearly 30 years, i kinda have a love \ hate relationship with the mission editor.

 

I try the best i can, and i am extremely grateful for the community created resources that are available, but i wish there was more info and also better mp ai. The pigs are complaining, and my imagination is struggling :o)

 

Only writing AI vs player mp missions here.

 

Still im not complaining, just want more.....

 

Have you taken a look at Coconuts missions, they're really amazing and are perfect for a small squad versus environment type mission. I flew on there quite a few times last year and it was really fun and felt very life like. 

[BlitzPig_EL]

Rock bases most of our missions on coconut's work.

 

They are very good, but the AI are numpties, and make the '46 AI look like geniuses.

 

Thankfully we have someone with RockRidge's talents to come to grips with the ME, otherwise we would not be flying at all.   But, still, that's part of the issue.  You need to be an IT professional to run the bloody editor.

I used to make lots of maps for the Pigs for '46, but after struggling with the editor in BoS for a couple weeks I just gave up.  I don't need a second job, and that's what this thing is to me.

 

If there was a truly accessible Mission Builder, and not the developer's map making tool that they reluctantly gave us, with no documentation, or really even wanting us to have it in the first place, there would be a flood of content for the sim.

 

Couple that with being able to host without running a dedicated server that you have to ask permission for in the first place (If you think this doesn't rub people the wrong way then you don't understand the US market very well...) then you would see a viable, and very populated mutlplayer, not the wasteland we have today.

Edited May 13, 2016 by BlitzPig_EL

[tailwheel]

Speaking as one of those who have "left"

 

What I think BoS lacks in general (and some other sims have):

 

- I'm a sucker for realism. Kind of a "learning curve masochist". Flying BoS planes is too easy for me. The number of concessions to casual gamers that has made its way into the game is mind-boggling. Yes I know some of them can be turned off - but many can't.

 

As for multiplayer in particular:

 

- I'm a sucker for realism. Online engagements in BoS are quite far removed from any conceivable real-life situation. Plus they're repetitive - fly a Bf, climb, swoop down on Russians, climb again, rinse, repeat. Fly a Yak, wait for Germans to make a mistake, or spend hours hanging on your prop waiting for Germans to make a mistake. Yawn. Yes, you can try and fly using real life tactics etc. And get shot down time and again by respawn monkeys. 

 

- no coop missions. I know - a lot can be done even with the current setup, creative mission editing, etc. Yet nobody does that - it's all endless take-off/crash/respawn... gets boring. The server most online players default to is the most gamey of them all. We old farts have a word for that - "air quake".

 

- No teamplay and coordination needed. Gets real boring. 

 

So - I'll most likely just continue doing what I do (flying other, more realistic sims). I'll probably fire up BoS from time to time to check what has changed, and I have great hopes for PWCG as well to at least improve SP experience... 

My response would be the same as that. things that would change it:

- if other players coordinated with you (esp with teamspeak) so that you flew missions instead of just spawn/kill/die

- if there were real missions to fly (Wings of liberty always crashes for me so I usually just do DED)

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

As others sayed there are comunity organized solutions for lacking coop in form of weekly events. By far the most popular is Friday Night Bomber flights which is more of a free for all coop compared to lets say the ZG26 missions which aim for coordinated squardrom flying.

 

True, other than that the MP situation is disappointing, but the more popular these missions get the more they'll benefit the game and eventually attract people from air quake servers to participate.

 

And if you think flying fighters on full public servers is frustrating you clearly havn't tried flying a Stuka or Heinkel yet

Edited May 13, 2016 by 6./ZG26_5tuka

[No601_Swallow]

...Only writing AI vs player mp missions here.

 

Yep. The AI vs MP players "bug" is a problem that the devs really need to address. I don't know when it occured - AI seemed fine in MP until - what? - two or three patches ago? See here for the start of a discussion. I did a little youtube demo of the problem last week:

 

https://youtu.be/W7dl1uoU_zY

Edited May 13, 2016 by No601_Swallow

[Venturi]

In reply to pezman's post.

 

You can tell a story about the Soviets' sacrifices, as this Sim is (and also so is the original Il-2) and in doing so also represent the help they got from their major partners in the war. They gave a lot of material to the Soviets, not unselfishly, but because they knew that the Soviets were taking the brunt of the attack and paying in blood for it.

 

That material help included many American-made aircraft that were as good as Soviet aircraft of the time, and in fact developed some of the best Soviet aces flying them. Also, it is a fact, the Mediterranean theatre including the invasion of Italy, was a direct response to the Soviet's repeated request for the Western Allies to open a new front to relieve the pressure on them. No-one, no allied general seriously thought they could get through the Italian alps to invade Germany. No one seriously thought Italy was a big threat in a mainland European war. In fact Italy was a liability to Germany, and it became and remained a side show after the real western invasion at Normandy occurred.

 

A lot of American and other western allied lives were lost in Italy and the Mediterranean primarily to divert German resources away from the Soviet front, to help the Soviets.

 

To my mind it is an example of cross-cooperativity that has been rarely equaled in the history of nations. You are right, it is important to learn the facts and be objective. I have written on the sacrifices of the Soviets before (let us remember they destroyed the Wehrmacht) but it was not without help.

 

Anyways, to the OP - multiplayer is good, but you have to find a crew. Flying alone in MP is suicide, especially on the Soviet side. In many ways this sim is a victim of its own realism. To me that just makes it a good product!

[Brano]

Anyways, to the OP - multiplayer is good, but you have to find a crew. Flying alone in MP is suicide, especially on the Soviet side. In many ways this sim is a victim of its own realism. To me that just makes it a good product!

+1 

[Feathered_IV]

Multiplayer is a modestly popular offshoot of the main singleplayer game, which is enjoyed occasionally by a few hundred people worldwide...

[wtornado]

Multiplayer is a modestly popular offshoot of the main singleplayer game, which is enjoyed occasionally by a few hundred people worldwide.

Few hundred not much to add to that.

[216th_Jordan]

Well going by the pure forum member numbers this game has at least sold 80000 single copies. my guess would be closer to at least 120000 counting bom into it. About 2 to 3 thousand different people get on multiplayer in a month (going for wol stats * guessed ratio). I think a server thats full in prime time with 84 players during weekdays is NOT a bad sign for multiplayer. peaks for players rise over 200 at times on weekends, with tendency growing.

[BlitzPig_EL]

Original IL2 would have at least 350 players at any one time, 24/7/365 and sometimes over 1000 on weekends.  Countless numbers of active squads, many online wars, a vibrant mission building and hosting community, and mission types for every taste.

 

Sorry, but that is my metric of success.

[=362nd_FS=Hiromachi]

But it was quite a few years ago. A lot has happened since then. 

[GrendelsDad]

Blitz I am not flaming...I am truly asking.  Did IL2 original have all of those things within 2 years of release?  Just asking because I was not a multiplayer back in the day.  Where at in Ohio, lets go have a beer

Edited May 13, 2016 by 6./ZG1_GrendelsDad

[Feathered_IV]

Well going by the pure forum member numbers this game has at least sold 80000 single copies. my guess would be closer to at least 120000 counting bom into it. About 2 to 3 thousand different people get on multiplayer in a month (going for wol stats * guessed ratio). I think a server thats full in prime time with 84 players during weekdays is NOT a bad sign for multiplayer. peaks for players rise over 200 at times on weekends, with tendency growing.

At best that is 2.5% of the customer base that are using multiplayer each month.

[unreasonable]

Multiplayer is a modestly popular offshoot of the main singleplayer game, which is enjoyed occasionally by a few hundred people worldwide...

 

Interesting ambiguity in that formulation.

[BlitzPig_EL]

Blitz I am not flaming...I am truly asking.  Did IL2 original have all of those things within 2 years of release?  Just asking because I was not a multiplayer back in the day.  Where at in Ohio, lets go have a beer

 

Once we got past the BlueByte days and Hyperlobby became the default way to fly online things exploded.  Even early on I don't remember seeing numbers as low as they are now.

 

PM on the way.

Edited May 13, 2016 by BlitzPig_EL