Jump to content
LLv34_Untamo

Finnish VirtualPilots - Dynamic War

Recommended Posts

2 minutes ago, 2/JG26_Krak said:

Is it really ok and necessary to have Spit IX and G14 in last week of plane rotation? It is pain in the South for guys who don't own premium planes from Bodenpl.

 

And another one from ranking, cause we don't get it. 

Example: 

Nil_Ubist with 52 groung kills only has 1743K.

Or

72AG_Bzzzt with 1 air kill and 70 ground kills has 4004K. Compare to RamaWill with 2 Air kills and 761 ground kills with 3668K only. 

How is that?

Yes.

 

For stats things, you need to ask Vaal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everything will be available. In the somewhat correct historical periodic order of our RPS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, 2/JG26_Krak said:

And another one from ranking, cause we don't get it. 

Example: 

Nil_Ubist with 52 groung kills only has 1743K.

Or

72AG_Bzzzt with 1 air kill and 70 ground kills has 4004K. Compare to RamaWill with 2 Air kills and 761 ground kills with 3668K only. 

How is that?

 

Is it the points for airkills vs groundkills?

or

The total calculation?

 

I have a nasty suspicion that getting killed reduces the value of ones deeds.

Killing 12 enemy ground units during a sorties will still be counted even though you die. The points for those kills are just nullified when you die. This could explain the difference in points.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, EAF_Starfire said:

 

Is it the points for airkills vs groundkills?

or

The total calculation?

 

I have a nasty suspicion that getting killed reduces the value of ones deeds.

Killing 12 enemy ground units during a sorties will still be counted even though you die. The points for those kills are just nullified when you die. This could explain the difference in points.

 

 

 

 

I'm thinking about calculation in total. You see that difference? RamaWill's got 1 AK and 691 GKs more than Bzzzt and still is 336K points behind. He did not die everytime he went up to get his points nullified or reduced. That is confusing, how or what is countable. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It also depends on the type of GK. As in AAA guns and such are worth sooooooo much more than industrial/railway objects.

Also, dying reduces the overall score. Very easy to see with small squadrons where the overall score more than halfes when someones loses a good streak.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you able to adjust the points per object or is it tied to the game? It would be nice to see an adjustment of points values, perhaps, to encourage factory and depot runs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Leifr said:

Are you able to adjust the points per object or is it tied to the game? It would be nice to see an adjustment of points values, perhaps, to encourage factory and depot runs.

Yes, it's possible to adjust the points in the stats site. Suggestions are welcome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Kuban implementation: all airfields and tank bases are done. "German side" depots are done.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LLv34_Temuri said:

Kuban implementation: all airfields and tank bases are done. "German side" depots are done.

 

Perfect! Just in time for the internet to be hooked up in my new house. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Leifr said:

 

Perfect! Just in time for the internet to be hooked up in my new house. 

Don’t hold your breath. There’s still work to do :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This planeset is far from fair, 109f4 against lagg3 with limited loadout and mig.

It's like yak1b vs 109e7.

Is this only way axis can win the map?

VVS should have yak1 .69 vs f4.

For this kind of map and warfare going historical planeset isn't fair given that axis pilots outnumber VVS by 50% at least.

And i'm saying this as a pilot who fly both sides.

My options are now either flying only axis or not flying on this server at all.

Sorry but being outnumbered and in a crap planes against way superb planes is not fun!

Cheers!

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, LLv34_Temuri said:

Kuban implementation: all airfields and tank bases are done. "German side" depots are done.

 

Will we get twice the distance between airfields of we got now or will it just as arcadish?

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, EAF_Starfire said:

 

Will we get twice the distance between airfields of we got now or will it just as arcadish?

When you look at the Kuban map, you'll notice that the number of airfields is rather limited. So it's either somewhat cramped areas here and there or only a handful of airfields.

9 hours ago, EAF_Ribbon said:

This planeset is far from fair, 109f4 against lagg3 with limited loadout and mig.

It's like yak1b vs 109e7.

Is this only way axis can win the map?

VVS should have yak1 .69 vs f4.

For this kind of map and warfare going historical planeset isn't fair given that axis pilots outnumber VVS by 50% at least.

And i'm saying this as a pilot who fly both sides.

My options are now either flying only axis or not flying on this server at all.

Sorry but being outnumbered and in a crap planes against way superb planes is not fun!

Cheers!

Fair point. I'll adjust.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just remove the F4 for the first week, or allow the Russians to use the Ser.69.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Leifr said:

Just remove the F4 for the first week, or allow the Russians to use the Ser.69.

Adjusted already. Added the Yak.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, LLv34_Temuri said:

Adjusted already. Added the Yak.

Thanks Temuri!

I hope now we will see more Red pilots so EAF can go Axis once in a while.

We switched to axis few days ago but cos lack of opposition we switched back to allies. 

I miss flying 190 and 109!

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About rolling planesets and player hangars...

 

We are planning to improve (because to change is to improve, right?) the current system so that there are two tiers of planes: "Basic" and "Award". "Basic" planes are available to a player on an airfield, as long as the player has planes on the airfield.

 

A player needs to spend an award point to get an "Award" plane on an airfield. The player must have planes on the airfield in question, and using the "Award" plane will expend a plane from that field like currently. "Award" plane locations are tracked.

Award points are divided into fighter and bomber/ground attacker points. Fighter award points are used to get "Award" fighters, bomber/GA award points are used to get "Award" bombers/GA aircraft. Award points are not tied to any airfield.

A player gets these award points by obtaining airkills/groundkills and then landing on a friendly airfield on that sortie or by flying a supply plane and landing it on an airfield. Exact details on how many kills are needed to get an award point is yet to be decided, as is the maximum number of award points.

 

Confused? Let's have an example:

1. A player has five planes on field A. He also has one fighter award point. Bf 109 F-4 has been defined as an "award" plane on the current planeset. He can spawn in on airfield A in any of the "basic" planes in the planeset or in an "award" plane.

2. The player spawns in on field A in a Bf 109 F-4 (which is an "award" plane). The player now has four planes on field A and he is sitting inside his Bf 109 F-4 hell bent on punishing the VVS.

3. The player flies his sortie and lands back on field A. The player now has four planes on field A plus his Bf 109 F-4. If he didn't get any airkills, he doesn't have any fighter award points, and if no groundkills -> no bomber/ground attacker points.

 

"But I only have BoS, and in this planeset BoS planes are award planes, and I don't have fighter/bomber/GA award points! You're telling me I can't fly?"
No worries! Fly a supply plane to an airfield, it will give you one fighter award point and one bomber/GA award point.

 

Plan is to use the currently running planeset configuration as a basis for this. As a general guideline,  I've been thinking that when a new plane is introduced, it will be an "award" plane for in the planeset it is introduced in and in the following planeset.

 

Comments, questions, hopes in vain? :)

 

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

As the F-4 is the best performing 109 apart from the G-14, it shouldn't be on the first weeks planeset, no matter if the Yak-1 .69 is enabled or not. IMHO

Edited by Conyooo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Conyooo said:

As the F-4 is the best performing 109 apart from the G-14, it shouldn't be on the first weeks planeset, no matter if the Yak-1 .69 is enabled or not. IMHO

F-4 is there basically for the reason that people who only have BoS can fly an axis fighter. Personally, I’d be happy to switch it with the G-2 or G-6 if you really think F-4 is better than them :)

 

I was thinking about the award point system. Perhaps it would be appropriate to reset the award points to zero when the pilot dies or is captured (the background java app actually calculates the capture already, it’s just not used for anything) or at least deduct a point or two. The captured status would be in mismatch with Vaal’s stats system, though, but we could use the chat to let the player know if he was captured or not. Thoughts?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think f4 is suitable opponent for yak1 .69, keeping in mind Finnish warfare system where ground objectives are/should be priority (low alt battles).

It has decent agility, not as yak but it's climb rate makes it even.

 

What i would suggest is a bit greater distance between airfields, like in the old days on Finnish server so more calculation and tactics can be made.

S!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, EAF_Ribbon said:

What i would suggest is a bit greater distance between airfields, like in the old days on Finnish server so more calculation and tactics can be made. 

 

I'm not sure what do you mean by more calculation / tactics with greater distance? ... To me, greater distance is just more meaningless and tiresome transit. Starfire also mentioned the term "arcadish" with the same topic. I'm a bit baffled. How is distance related to being arcadish? (and what is wrong with arcadish? :)) .. If some pilots prefer to dogfight all day long between two very close airfields (if that is what you mean by the arcadish part), then that's fine by me. You don't have to.

 

http://il2missionplanner.com/#virtualpilotsfi
Looking at the map... Yes, there are some airfields close to each other, but then there are also airfields that are 30+km away from all others. What would you hope the distance to be?

 

The current logic in taking airfields into the mission is such:
- 2 (at current settings) tank battles are randomly selected from the frontline

- closest airfields to the tank battles from both sides are selected into the mission

This second point COULD be altered so, that the SECOND closest airfields are selected (if found, otherwise the closest). But I imagine the distances would get annoyingly long. Might do a test at some point though. Anyways, in the case of tank battle being next to an airfield, the airfield MUST be selected, because of how the capture mechanism works.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, LLv34_Untamo said:

 

I'm not sure what do you mean by more calculation / tactics with greater distance? ... To me, greater distance is just more meaningless and tiresome transit. Starfire also mentioned the term "arcadish" with the same topic. I'm a bit baffled. How is distance related to being arcadish? (and what is wrong with arcadish? :)) .. If some pilots prefer to dogfight all day long between two very close airfields (if that is what you mean by the arcadish part), then that's fine by me. You don't have to.

 

http://il2missionplanner.com/#virtualpilotsfi
Looking at the map... Yes, there are some airfields close to each other, but then there are also airfields that are 30+km away from all others. What would you hope the distance to be?

 

The current logic in taking airfields into the mission is such:
- 2 (at current settings) tank battles are randomly selected from the frontline

- closest airfields to the tank battles from both sides are selected into the mission

This second point COULD be altered so, that the SECOND closest airfields are selected (if found, otherwise the closest). But I imagine the distances would get annoyingly long. Might do a test at some point though. Anyways, in the case of tank battle being next to an airfield, the airfield MUST be selected, because of how the capture mechanism works.

 

I wouldn't call it arcadish, i think it's due to map being close to an end (few AF left for one side) so AF are close to each other.

Problem for VVS occured  when one AF being attacked so switching to another AF didn't help a lot since enemy fighters were covering both AF due to small distance meaning while startup proccedure and takeoff enemy fighters already came form another AF.

That's where problem occured.

Many factors pops in those situations and being outnumbered is one of them and another one was f4 vs lagg/mig which made situation hopeless.

But that's how it is!

Having yak as it is now i think situation wouldn't be so easy for axis.

But overall in my opinion and playstlye min distance should be 30+km.

I'm getting back into sim so i need to adapt to server changes, in short i suck!

For Starfire he loves immersive long distance bombing flights (yet not to long), and i get him, sometimes i love too sneaking behind enemy lines and make bomb run than run away.

Cheers!

Btw new planeset system looks very good!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, LLv34_Temuri said:

The basic/award planes would go something like this:

lowhightierrps.thumb.png.95a48a57ae94251319f2f498acf6b5db.png

 

Does it make sense to have the Bf 110 E-2 and JU-88 A-4 as award planes? I mean, weren't they available from 1940 already? (pretty much at the same time as the 109 E-7).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, EAF_Ribbon said:

I wouldn't call it arcadish, i think it's due to map being close to an end (few AF left for one side) so AF are close to each other.

Problem for VVS occured  when one AF being attacked so switching to another AF didn't help a lot since enemy fighters were covering both AF due to small distance meaning while startup proccedure and takeoff enemy fighters already came form another AF.

That's where problem occured.

Many factors pops in those situations and being outnumbered is one of them and another one was f4 vs lagg/mig which made situation hopeless.

But that's how it is!

Having yak as it is now i think situation wouldn't be so easy for axis.

But overall in my opinion and playstlye min distance should be 30+km.

I'm getting back into sim so i need to adapt to server changes, in short i suck!

For Starfire he loves immersive long distance bombing flights (yet not to long), and i get him, sometimes i love too sneaking behind enemy lines and make bomb run than run away.

Cheers!

Btw new planeset system looks very good!

 

The distance between airfield was not a great problem when the groundwar was acadish as well. All was in a kind of equilibrium. As the complexity of the game mechanics have grown the balance as well as realisme have switched back and forth. The heavy aaa at the tankbases, lack of aaa at the airfield combined with the short distance between airfield (4 minutes from  engine start) and radar have essentially made FPVAW a DF server. Which I find a shame. As a groundattack pilot I don't fly if I don't have at least a 75%chance of not running into an enemy fighter. Where as fighter jockeys usually get their kick from the fight, I usually get my kick from staying a live and outsmarting the opposition.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Porky said:

 

Does it make sense to have the Bf 110 E-2 and JU-88 A-4 as award planes? I mean, weren't they available from 1940 already? (pretty much at the same time as the 109 E-7).

 

Perhaps the award can be special payloads as well? For example access to SC 1000 or SC 1800 bombs. It seems the most effective way for Axis pilots to take on tank bases right now is to dive bomb with big bombs (looking at ITAF_Cymao's stats). Limiting those again may be a good idea...

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, EAF_Starfire said:

 

The distance between airfield was not a great problem when the groundwar was acadish as well. All was in a kind of equilibrium. As the complexity of the game mechanics have grown the balance as well as realisme have switched back and forth. The heavy aaa at the tankbases, lack of aaa at the airfield combined with the short distance between airfield (4 minutes from  engine start) and radar have essentially made FPVAW a DF server. Which I find a shame. As a groundattack pilot I don't fly if I don't have at least a 75%chance of not running into an enemy fighter. Where as fighter jockeys usually get their kick from the fight, I usually get my kick from staying a live and outsmarting the opposition.

 

Problem was factory and it's tied AF were close to other airfields so axis covered all of them making factory bombrun flights one way ticket.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
8 hours ago, Porky said:

 

Perhaps the award can be special payloads as well? For example access to SC 1000 or SC 1800 bombs. It seems the most effective way for Axis pilots to take on tank bases right now is to dive bomb with big bombs (looking at ITAF_Cymao's stats). Limiting those again may be a good idea...

Perhaps not the 110 E-2, but as Ju-88 is more effective than the He 111 H-6 (and 88 has the 1000 kg bombs), I'd keep it as award plane in the first planesets. I'd like to keep this simple, at least to begin with, so no award-tied payloads for now.

Edited by LLv34_Temuri

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
10 hours ago, EAF_Starfire said:

 

The distance between airfield was not a great problem when the groundwar was acadish as well. All was in a kind of equilibrium. As the complexity of the game mechanics have grown the balance as well as realisme have switched back and forth. The heavy aaa at the tankbases, lack of aaa at the airfield combined with the short distance between airfield (4 minutes from  engine start) and radar have essentially made FPVAW a DF server. Which I find a shame. As a groundattack pilot I don't fly if I don't have at least a 75%chance of not running into an enemy fighter. Where as fighter jockeys usually get their kick from the fight, I usually get my kick from staying a live and outsmarting the opposition.

 

 

The tank bases / battles are supposed to be hot areas. What you need is escort.

 

7 hours ago, EAF_Ribbon said:

Problem was factory and it's tied AF were close to other airfields so axis covered all of them making factory bombrun flights one way ticket.

 

 

Working as intended :) .. The factory airfield is there for two reasons:
1) So that the owning faction can defend it.

2) Source for supply planes.

 

Again, you need cover. Yesterday, we made several strikes on the Mozhaysk factory, and we were intercepted many times, but we also made it out alive (most of the time), as we had escort.

And to that end... I really should allocate time to test Discord or other alternatives to our current TS3 server (which is currently limited to our Finnish Virtual Pilots Association's members, because of the free license 32 client limit), so that we could bring all pilots to the same channels.

Edited by LLv34_Untamo
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The F-2 is a real issue. As long as the optional 20 mm cannon is available, there are no real difference between that and the F-4. 

I see no reason why I should take the F-2 without the 20 mm cannon.

 

(remember that I am one of those renegades that fly both sides ;-))

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Isn't the engine different in the F4?

 

Also, adexu, consider the context that the F2 is a reward plane. The standard competition in week 1 are the LaGG 3, the I-16 and the P-40. The F2 would put a player in a good position to fight these planes.

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

×