How Popular is Multiplayer?

[BraveSirRobin]

Only in theory.

No, not just in theory. People have actually done it.The fact that it's not popular isn't a problem with the game, it's a problem with the community.

[RockRidge]

A good start would be to fix the a.i. in mp. That would go a long way from my perspective.

 

I can work with the m.e.although it certainly is not without its faults.

 

but its frustrating when the engine doesnt work as intended, especially as we have 10 guys playing online and we want aggressive AI.

[216th_Lucas_From_Hell]

Side note: they did a in-browser HyperLobby early on for this simulator, with the chat functions and all that the old HL had. It was used a little bit early on, then it faded into oblivion to the point that they stopped updating the server list.

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

This is where the socalled limitation of IL21946 coops was the advantage. You could fly with anyone randomly and still most people after reading the briefing and being put in formation with others went on and flew alongside focusing on objectives. Now tell me why it is a requirement, for BoS mp to work, to gather up on forums, make a pilot list, join TS, define objectives and fly at the same time? This was not required in 1946.

1. Detailed briefings and target information is already implemented. Doesn't help much if people don't read it though.

2. The sad fact is that the general audience doesn't care for cooperative flying. Just look at the server stats and you'll see those with the most quick action and less tactical gameplay are the most popular ones.

3. Forum signups are nessecary because we have too few players to count on. With signups you have the ensurance at least some will attend and can plan ahead accordingly.

 

It seems to be that the problem with the current coops compared to "good ol' 1946" isn't the missions or platform itself. It's the players that don't want to make the effort joining a campaign and flying coordinated with other people and squads on a big server for different reasons. Combine that with an overall low ammount of active players (probably way lower than 1946) and you get why we don't see much cooperative flying atm.

[Mac_Messer]

Have I read correctly that hyperlobby was designed by a third party?  If so, how is it the devs responsibility to make a new hyperlobby for this game.  Looking at that screenshot of hyperlobby posted by Lucas (above) it shows multiple games by multiple companies.  I can see the utility of something like that and I can see where Mac is coming from in wanting something similar.  I just don't see it as a failure of this game or these devs.  Why doesn't someone whip up a new hyperlobby?

I don`t think I`ve said anywhere that it is to blame on the devs alone. The devs probably did all that they could do given the resources they have. Now since the mp numbers are still small, some people try to think why is this and what to do in order to make the numbers grow. Now those people are faced with the same public which says the experience is all here and it`s all good. I`m arguing that is not the answer to those who hope for a better multiplayer experience.

 

One thing I`m able to admit is that it may be possible that all the hubub about 2000 ppl waiting just to jump into BoS mp is not true and current numbers is all BoS can hope for. If that is the case then the whole point is mute as no matter what incentive is created, no additional players will come.

[Brano]

Ingame voicecom is IMO a good idea to think about. I flew a lot online in old Sturm and I hardly ever used Hyperlobby. For some time I used X-Fire soft to quickly check who's online and where they fly. We were a bunch of Czechoslovak virtual pilots meeting Wednesdays and Sundays on dedicated server. And there were sessions called "Specials" flown in co-op mode organized weeks ahead,like Attack on Bismarck in Swordfish. That was a real S&M

[beepee]

 

 

In real life IL2 1946 still has numbers

 

Where? Last time I checked Hyperlobby it had about the same amount of people online as BOS.

 

And if you really miss IL21946 that much, piss off and play it with all those 'numbers'.

 

I flew IL21946 with a mate yesterday and yes, it was great fun. And you know what...we CO-OPerated against the enemy and had a blast.

 

It sounds like people are too lazy to join a teamspeak channel and get organised...or maybe you are all just shy (and mildly brain damaged)?

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

For me great coop would be like this - i would invite my friends and we together would play campaign against AI. If one could join letter or respawn when dead - it's better. Saveing progres and generating missions on my own box or devs protected account.

[Mac_Messer]

No, not just in theory. People have actually done it.The fact that it's not popular isn't a problem with the game, it's a problem with the community.

I`m not saying it can`t be done. I`m saying it is a lot harder to do than before.

 

Blaming the community looks like blaming the reality. Someone here already mentioned earlier : you give people what they want or you don`t get customers.

[BraveSirRobin]

I`m not saying it can`t be done. I`m saying it is a lot harder to do than before.

 

Except, it's not harder. It's just different. You can use Teamspeak instead of Hyperlobby. Problem solved.

[beepee]

 

 

I`m saying it is a lot harder to do than before.

 

[RockRidge]

For me great coop would be like this - i would invite my friends and we together would play campaign against AI. If one could join letter or respawn when dead - it's better. Saveing progres and generating missions on my own box or devs protected account.

Thats what we do, but with the poor behaviour of MP AI its lacking sadly.

 

Hopefully they will address this. Hopefully.

[BraveSirRobin]

And, yes, I blame the community for refusing to acknowledge reality.

[Brano]

For me great coop would be like this - i would invite my friends and we together would play campaign against AI. If one could join letter or respawn when dead - it's better. Saveing progres and generating missions on my own box or devs protected account.

Yep, online campaign PvE mode is what I'm looking for the most. Even actual ingame campaign would be so much more enjoyable if there was possibility to replace AI wingmen with my friends

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

Yes, PvE would be nice but as mention Ai is buggy and causes performence issues in MP, so this is not feasible right now.

 

Still, there's no gain by going to the forums complaining about lack of coops while refusing to participate in any of the ones availabel right now. Seems like some people expect things to shape the way they (and only they) want it to be without doing anything for it, which is not the way it works with a small MP comunity as we have.

 

This vicious circle of arguments is leading nowwhere...

Edited May 30, 2016 by 6./ZG26_5tuka

[Mac_Messer]

Except, it's not harder. It's just different. You can use Teamspeak instead of Hyperlobby. Problem solved.

History is full of people saying stuff along the lines of your. They failed.

And, yes, I blame the community for refusing to acknowledge reality.

Yes! That is great way to make the mp numbers grow. Problem solved.

Yes, PvE would be nice but as mention Ai is buggy and causes performence issues in MP, so this is not feasible right now.

 

Still, there's no gain by going to the forums complaining about lack of coops while refusing to participate in of the ones availabel right now. Seems like some people expect things to shape the way they (and only they) want it to be without doing anything for it, which is not the way it works with a small MP comunity as we have.

I search for coop servers few times a week, GMT zone. It is desert mostly.

 

And yes, given how much flying people we have now, it may just be because there are better mp experiences elswhere.

[Brano]

Yep, AI is buggy here and there and I don't expect such co-op campaign to be available tomorrow. Everything has its time and I am in no hurry. No time for flying at all in last week's. Refurbishing apartment:D

[BraveSirRobin]

History is full of people saying stuff along the lines of your. They failed.

.

Yes, people will fail if they make absolutely no effort to try to change. That appears to be the direction you want to go. Good luck with that.

[SC_Manu653]

For myself when I wasn't in a squad I never played multiplayer. I like to fly with an objective, a mission so dogfight server is not my cup of tea. The way we play with the community in co-op is a way of planning by using the official forum. Sometime we used some mini-campaign from Coconut to get AI (very aggressive sometime) for each side, someday we are split between 16-22 players and with the AI it's very busy...

 

From now to get a good co-op is to work for it...a little coordination and some publicity on forum.

I'm not able to make mission so I work inside the community to get the occasion for coop event. And it's working well from the community and the cooperation of squads. We are working now with the Russian community for co-op too.

And I'm not the only one....  ZG26, TX_Tip, Italian community, etc

Edited May 30, 2016 by 4./JG52_Manu653_

[BraveSirRobin]

For myself when I wasn't in a squad I never played multiplayer. I like to fly with an objective, a mission so dogfight server is not my cup of tea.

Wings of Liberty, and other "dogfight" servers have lots of objectives.

[coconut]

Maybe I'm a glass half full kind of guy, but the MP scene is quite fun and busy on the EU site. I actually have a hard time keeping up with all the evening organized events. And from what I see when I'm online, those are the servers available "without booking":

 

Expert settings (with GPS): Wings of Liberty, always populated

Expert settings (without GPS): DED random, fewer than on WOL, but also well populated during prime time. TAW: picking up players, not always populated, but people tend to join when they see there's someone online. There's also the duel server Berloga. Never been there myself other than for a quick look, but there's usually a fair number of players there. Flying Legends also has people on rather often.

Normal settings: Official server, about 20 people with compact missions. I'm not there too often, but it feels well populated (too much for my taste when I'm there).

 

I'm probably forgetting a few. I've also noticed an increase in the number of youtubers joining the game recently. Apparently WT did something that annoyed many people and they are currently trying out IL-2. All in all, from the player's perspective there should always be some place to play during EU prime time. I think it's important to point that out, in order to avoid scaring potential new players away.

[Brano]

Well said coconut. No need for creating doomsday atmosphere. Numbers are what they are and its up to each of us to make the best of it. With further Battles of X the numbers will increase. More unique planes and maps to fly on,more satisfied customers. We are only beginning

[Sokol1]

Have I read correctly that hyperlobby was designed by a third party?  If so, how is it the devs responsibility to make a new hyperlobby for this game.  Looking at that screenshot of hyperlobby posted by Lucas (above) it shows multiple games by multiple companies.  

 

 

Yes, Hyperlobby is a one man job software - is not a Maddox product or done for il-2'46 - that happen to exist  in right time, in il-2'2001 release with they poor Ubi Mp support  - work for some other old games (even CloD) but was most used for IL-2, even in their best times.

 

Besides Hyperlobby are other game lobby - that no longer exist, too well used for il-2'46.

 

IL-2 Cliffs of Dover 0

Dangerous Waters 0

Pacific Fighters 0

Wings Over Vietnam 0

Lock On 0

IL-2 Sturmovik 1946 52

Strike Fighters: P1 0

Fighter Squadron 0

Flanker 2.5 0 Falcon 4.0 

Allied Force 0

Medal Of Honor... 0

JAS 0

Operation Flashpoint 0

IL-2 Sturmovik 1

L-2 Sturmovik DEMO 0

European Air War 0

CFS 2 0 CFS 0

Free Chat 0

Fleet Comander 0

I.A.F. 0

Fighters Anthology 0

F-15 0 F/A-18 0

USAF 0

WWII Fighters

 

This 52 on il-2 46 in Hyperlobby don't mean that are 52 people playing, but that are several empty hosts - each count one player, even if in dedicated machine - and some players, that now is 20.

 

 

In real life IL2 1946 still has numbers

 

When looking at HL numbers, don't forget to subtract the host slots.

 

So first and foremost someone need ask to Jry if they have interest in add BoS in Hyperlobby, if dev's add that START button for COOP...

 

Reinventing hyperlobby and coop aren't going to get people to quit WT.  

 

Agree, now HL/COOP dont will add more than a dozen of old 1946 players - maybe a hundred - to BoS/BoM scene.

Edited May 30, 2016 by Sokol1

[SYN_Mike77]

I'm not sure I would count DED as a dogfight server.  It is very mission oriented and they have even built in disinsentives to throwing your life away in suicide attacks.  As a result, the best way to fly is as a group and most of the people in that server seem  to know this.  My advice is to log into it, pick a side and start organizing a flight.  Even if you don't encounter an enemy airplane you will find achieving objectives very tough and rewarding.

I'm not sure I would count DED as a dogfight server.  It is very mission oriented and they have even built in disinsentives to throwing your life away in suicide attacks.  As a result, the best way to fly is as a group and most of the people in that server seem  to know this.  My advice is to log into it, pick a side and start organizing a flight.  Even if you don't encounter an enemy airplane you will find achieving objectives very tough and rewarding.

 

If you haven't tried that a couple of times then you are as guilty as those who didn't fly IL2 coop's sounding off about it!

[6./ZG26_5tuka]

I search for coop servers few times a week, GMT zone. It is desert mostly.

Sry but that's a bad excuse. Each coop server has it's own thread with all information you need (except server password in some cases) to know. FNBF, Friday 19 UTC, Official IL-2 TS. ZG26 Squad-Coop, Wednesday 19 UTC, ZG26 TS. You can easily gather the rest on your own.

 

Apart from that some people like Lucas make the effort of posting in the general section when players are desperately needed to fill one side up (usually VVS) for an upcoming event. Thats a good example of how people can improve cooperative gameplay with their own participation.

Edited May 30, 2016 by 6./ZG26_5tuka

[Sokol1]

Ingame voicecom is IMO a good idea to think about. I flew a lot online in old Sturm and I hardly ever used Hyperlobby. For some time I used X-Fire soft to quickly check who's online and where they fly. We were a bunch of Czechoslovak virtual pilots meeting Wednesdays and Sundays on dedicated server. And there were sessions called "Specials" flown in co-op mode organized weeks ahead,like Attack on Bismarck in Swordfish. That was a real S&M

 

 

Today you can use STEAM Friends to check - even the non-STEAM version of BOS can use STEAM features. Is not X-Fire or HL but will works.

[Gambit21]

Except, it's not harder. It's just different. You can use Teamspeak instead of Hyperlobby. Problem solved.

No, Teamspeak is not a replacement for Hyperlobby.

If it was, this conversations wouldn't exist, and we wouldn't have needed Hyperlobby back in the day when we also had Teamspeak.

I know in your mind "we just don't get it"...well the feeling is mutual.

 

Who were you flying CoOps with back in the day? Who was designing those missions?

I'd like to know a little bit more about your point of reference.

Edited May 30, 2016 by Gambit21

[BraveSirRobin]

and we wouldn't have needed Hyperlobby back in the day when we also had Teamspeak.

Good call, you didn't need Hyperlobby to organize co-ops. You could've done it through teamspeak. However you did need HL to get to the mission server. That is no longer the case.

 

 

Who were you flying CoOps with back in the day? Who was designing those missions?

I'd like to know a little bit more about your point of reference.

I'm kind of curious why you think that's even relevant. It's certainly not related to what you can do with the current mission designer. And your lack of understanding of the current mission designer is the real problem here.

[Gambit21]

With respect Robin, It's very relevant, because it would show me that you experienced what was possible before, that you have a proper point of reference, which is the only way that one could claim that all is well now and we don't need Hyperlobby or similar.

I was there, I was designing those missions and hosting them, and flying them. I know what could be done... I know what I see when I log on now.

 

Now I'm not a close minded fool...I would happy to learn that you're completely correct in all that you say, for the moment I have good reason to

have my doubts, including but not limited to what I see actually going on, and not going on currently online.

 

That said don't take anything I say as disrespect to you personally.

Edited May 30, 2016 by Gambit21

[BraveSirRobin]

With respect Robin, It's very relevant, because it would show me that you experienced what was possible before,.

It does nothing of the sort. I played Rise of Flight co-op missions. I'm a computer programmer. I've programmed IL2 missions. I know what was possible before. The new mission builder is much more powerful. It can do everything you had with co-op missions. Multiple people who have used both builders have told you this. You just refuse to listen.

[Gambit21]

So were not there...that's all I wanted to know.

I'm not dismissing anything else you've said.

[BraveSirRobin]

So were not there...that's all I wanted to know.

 

I have no idea what you're talking about. This mission builder enables you to do things you could only dream about in IL2.

[Gambit21]

I have no idea what you're talking about. This mission builder enables you to do things you could only dream about in IL2.

I know.

 

I also look forward some day to launching a proper CoOP, from my computer, that I've used that builder to carefully script and choreograph.

[BraveSirRobin]

I know.

 

I also look forward some day to launching a proper CoOP, from my computer, that I've used that builder to carefully script and choreograph.

So you look forward to when BoS was released?

[SKG51_robtek]

So you look forward to when BoS was released?

While you are so ardently propose that BoS / BoM is everything every CFS-player ever could wish for and absolutely for sure know what Gambit21 would like to have, maybe you should show him how to do it, instead of telling him there is no problem.

[No601_Swallow]

While you are so ardently propose that BoS / BoM is everything every CFS-player ever could wish for and absolutely for sure know what Gambit21 would like to have, maybe you should show him how to do it, instead of telling him there is no problem.

 

At the risk of intruding: the thing is, more or less everything that Gambit wants to do can be done in BoS. But it can't be done in the same way as in '46 and (arguably) it can't be done as easily or as intuitively.

 

As I've written before, the Devs are a little at fault here for not explaining well enough to the community the tools we have available and not providing enough examples of how to do it. For example, the DServer is fine - it works and it's easy to set up and configure. But it ain't easy to do it the first time. Without considerable hand-holding from people cleverer than me, I'd have given up on the DServer. But once you know what you're doing, it's absolutely fine and routine to set up.

 

Another example: the ME is fantastic. It allows me to do everything that in CloD you'd need a PhD in rocket-science/computer coding to do. But it's radically different from other FMBs in the genre, and the Devs have done more or less nothing to help new users. So the best (only) resources to help newcomers are those made by the community (chiefly, for me, Bob Vanderstock's youtube RoF ME tutorials and Tangmere's own Prangster's ME guide).

 

But the thing is, it's all there, and it all really works - and works well. It's just a steep ol' learning curve when you start off, and the Devs have done nothing to make it easier. In fact, sometimes their lack of explanation for their design choices (most of which I actually agree with) seems positively bloody-minded!

 

As for coops: once again, the DF-type missions can accomodate coops just fine. In fact, in the mission editing forum, someone's just started a thread specifically for sharing coop missions. I'll try and put up a couple of the Tangmere coops I've done later on today. HOWEVER! I also think a coop interface (choosing slots, readying up, launching missions) is still useful, even if it's not necessary to running coop-style missions. I miss it, and I wish it was there. I think a coop interface helps with things like squadron cohesion, sense of teamwork, sense of anticipation, even. All good things, all things which contribute to my enjoyment of a good ol' teamplay-based MP session.

 

So, I really hope the devs add this resource, but at the same time, I just don't get the exasperation (and aggression) of people who state that the game can't do what they want, when clearly, obviously and truthfully, it can!

[216th_Jordan]

What we are tlaking about here for the last pages is about the ease of playability.

 

Sure you can do all that stuff like ts, created events etc. etc. but a player that is not into the simming community that much will not find those wonderful created events if he or she does not expilicitly search for it.

 

Having an ingame lobby and voicecom would make things a lot easier for many. every external program used in addition is another obstacle. sure it can be done, sure its not hard once you've figured it out. but if you are not familiar with it, it is another obstacle.

 

Playability is not optimized with this game. I love this game and I hope for bright future for it as I think many others here do as well

[Brano]

Today you can use STEAM Friends to check - even the non-STEAM version of BOS can use STEAM features. Is not X-Fire or HL but will works.

I know that,but I dont use steam much,just to launch ETS2 from time to time. There are so many possibilities these days. Imagine smart phones and mobile internet. Thats still smtg like a magic to me. I can access internet from almost any location,anytime! And with so many communication apps on the market you can get organised within seconds 

[SharpeXB]

 Icons off is by no means "more Expert", it just turns the fight into a "hit-and-run" affair. Lose tally, end of the fight and death of the player that loses sight first.

 Z

Just like real air combat. That's the goal of "Expert" mode. The mantra "Lose sight, lose the fight" has no meaning in a game where the players can't lose sight of each other due to icons. With icons On, all realism disappears. That why in this game and other flight sim games (RoF, DCS), the most popular servers are run this way.

[wtornado]

 

 

Another example: the ME is fantastic. It allows me to do everything that in CloD you'd need a PhD in rocket-science/computer coding to do. But it's radically different from other FMBs in the genre, and the Devs have done more or less nothing to help new users. So the best (only) resources to help newcomers are those made by the community (chiefly, for me, Bob Vanderstock's youtube RoF ME tutorials and Tangmere's own Prangster's ME guide)

 

I just watched Prangster's tutorials and fiddled around with ME.

 

Not nearly as complicated and more limited I would of thought.

 

I am surprised on the amount of templates used although it makes online missions generic

it does save time.

 

Mission start,triggers need timers and the MCU system and how one won't work without the other is surprising.

and doing zones timers and linkage is once again surprising..

 

Everything has to be linked it must be hard on computer resources. 

 

I have been using ARMA 3 mission builder for a good while now I thought it would of been more

user friendly like ARMA 3 in creating platoons,groups,Battalions and flights of weapons,planes.

timers triggers in the ME are more automatic with the ME linking everything itself.

 

You choose any and every trigger,timer scenario and the ME controls,links everything. 

 

I just had to look after all that has been said on the ME and had to spend 2-3 hours looking all over.

I did not see anything on choosing and having a max ping like lets say 100 allowed to connect to

the server in the Dserver part or the ME tutorials