Jump to content
LLv34_Untamo

Finnish VirtualPilots - Dynamic War

Recommended Posts

54 minutes ago, EAF_Ribbon said:

Now bombs can barely destroy those buildings, 250 and 500kg bombs destroy only one building when dropped on depot settlement.

To close depot it takes 30×250m or 20x500m bombs dropped directly on buildings (not getting destroyed if dropped in proximity), in short one bomb per building.

Factory will be nightmare to destroy!

Ok, need to do some testing as it seems the values suggested by Blacksix seem not to be feasible.

23 minutes ago, Porky said:

 

Short answer: Take out the depots first, always. You need to get it down to around 60 minutes or so, I believe.

Yes, that was the idea behind the shorter respawn times, to make depots matter more.

I did some more tweaking to the durability values. Effective next mission rotation. Comments welcome.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is this sort of behaviour acceptable on Finnish?

What a pussy.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Porky said:

 

Short answer: Take out the depots first, always. You need to get it down to around 60 minutes or so, I believe.

 

The way I see it, the respawn/resupply shouldn't be considered something that is only initiated once something is destroyed, but rather as something that is always ongoing; also, being closer to a depot may mean you have more supplies in store on the front. Thinking of it that way your feeling of immersion won't be broken...

 

 

 

Nice thought, but it have holes bigger than a truck.

I am unable to ignore my personal experience from my time in the military and my knowledge of military workings. I would be like ignoring gravity when I drop a glass.

If your idea was valid there would be no maximum on supplied aircraft. Players and the game mechanics would keep supplying the airfields indefinably disregarding the lack of loses. In the end the players should be able to have 1000+ aircraft in their personal hangar.

 

The 'pain' is twofold:

1) Realism of the speed of supply for tank bases

2) Lack of coherence with the rest of the supply system

 

Unfortunately I don't see an easy fix :o:

Tweaking one parameter in a complex system always seems to require fixes somewhere else :wacko:

 

3 minutes ago, Leifr said:

Is this sort of behaviour acceptable on Finnish?

What a pussy.

 

No!

But I am not an admin.

Share this post


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

Ok, need to do some testing as it seems the values suggested by Blacksix seem not to be feasible.

Yes, that was the idea behind the shorter respawn times, to make depots matter more.

I did some more tweaking to the durability values. Effective next mission rotation. Comments welcome.

It may be more realistic right now but it needs a lot more bombs to destroy depot since it is many small buildings and you need actually hit building to destroy it.

Maybe solution could be placing less but bigger buildings

6 minutes ago, Leifr said:

Is this sort of behaviour acceptable on Finnish?

What a pussy.

You scared him, just imagine panic he felt and savage hitting all those keys on keyboard to combat log :wacko:

Must be newbie, experienced pilot would never do that!

Share this post


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

Is this sort of behaviour acceptable on Finnish?

What a pussy.

 

Well, he isn't doing any favours to his side by disconnecting. So, aside from being a stats wh*re, no harm, no foul :) 

 

3 minutes ago, EAF_Starfire said:

 

Nice thought, but it have holes bigger than a truck.

I am unable to ignore my personal experience from my time in the military and my knowledge of military workings. I would be like ignoring gravity when I drop a glass.

If your idea was valid there would be no maximum on supplied aircraft. Players and the game mechanics would keep supplying the airfields indefinably disregarding the lack of loses. In the end the players should be able to have 1000+ aircraft in their personal hangar.

 

The 'pain' is twofold:

1) Realism of the speed of supply for tank bases

2) Lack of coherence with the rest of the supply system

 

Unfortunately I don't see an easy fix :o:

Tweaking one parameter in a complex system always seems to require fixes somewhere else :wacko:

 

 

You are overthinking things :) ..The respawn and supply times are gameplay decisions first, realism comes second here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, EAF_Ribbon said:

It may be more realistic right now but it needs a lot more bombs to destroy depot since it is many small buildings and you need actually hit building to destroy it.

Maybe solution could be placing less but bigger buildings

You scared him, just imagine panic he felt and savage hitting all those keys on keyboard to combat log :wacko:

Must be newbie, experienced pilot would never do that!

 

He's the current top live pilot and has been for a long time, mostly because he seems to disconnect when trouble rises up.

 

So how have the building values been adjusted? Is it possible to provide some form of percentage?

Share this post


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

 

He's the current top live pilot and has been for a long time, mostly because he seems to disconnect when trouble rises up.

 

So how have the building values been adjusted? Is it possible to provide some form of percentage?

Shouldn't it mark him as dead if he's been damaged and combat logged.

Few times i was kicked (wifi problem) when i was rtb and not seriously damaged and it counted me as dead.

Lol once it happen when i was on landing, i was pissed as hell!

Maybe it goes by damage percentage.

Anyway my vote is to ban him!

Share this post


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

Anyway my vote is to ban him!

 

Ehm... I don't see any damage logged in his other disconnects, so this case may actually be a coincidence rather than a premeditated decision to DC when under attack.

 

EDIT: Unless there's any other reason to suspect he may be doing that (in the other cases before getting hit). I wouldn't know.

Edited by Porky

Share this post


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

 

Ehm... I don't see any damage logged in his other disconnects, so this case may actually be a coincidence rather than a premeditated decision to DC when under attack.

 

EDIT: Unless there's any other reason to suspect he may be doing that (in the other cases before getting hit). I wouldn't know.

I didn't check his profile so i wouldn't know.

I jumped in conclusion, maybe he has bad internet connection and it isn't his fault.

My vote always goes for ban regarding combat logging but only if proved that he was engaged and defensive, and did it happen frequently. 

Those things surface eventually so if he is combat logger we'll hear about him again.

S!

Edited by EAF_Ribbon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

O..kay :) ... Clearly a "feature" ;) ... Temuri is investigating what the new correct hardness values are.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Porky said:

 

Ehm... I don't see any damage logged in his other disconnects, so this case may actually be a coincidence rather than a premeditated decision to DC when under attack.

 

EDIT: Unless there's any other reason to suspect he may be doing that (in the other cases before getting hit). I wouldn't know.

 

Actually those facts do not prove his innocence.  I have seen a few pilots whose tactics are to always combat log at the first sign of 'potential' trouble ie If you see an enemy who is higher or even co-alt heading towards you then log immediately.  They only want sorties where they find an enemy below them or, if in a bomber, see no enemies at all.      He was just unlucky in this case that Leifr managed to get some hits before he could log.  Maybe he got caught by surprise?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, 56RAF_Roblex said:

 

Actually those facts do not prove his innocence.  I have seen a few pilots whose tactics are to always combat log at the first sign of 'potential' trouble ie If you see an enemy who is higher or even co-alt heading towards you then log immediately.  They only want sorties where they find an enemy below them or, if in a bomber, see no enemies at all.      He was just unlucky in this case that Leifr managed to get some hits before he could log.  Maybe he got caught by surprise?

 

Just for clarification, I have not encountered this fellow - he flies in a different timezone I think.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would rather have that there would be no accusations / full on tribunals on this forum. This can lead to nasty fights that no one wants to see. If you encounter cheating / bad behavior, report it to us with evidence, so that we can decide what to do.

 

Just to comment on combat logging, I view it as a non-issue, at least on our server. In my eyes, you just gained a kill without firing a shot (or very few shots in that one case)... And you disabled him for quite some time by making him leave and then load the game again etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

True, true.

 

Looking forward to some building adjustments, just in time for another VVS victory. :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, LLv34_Untamo said:

O..kay :) ... Clearly a "feature" ;) ... Temuri is investigating what the new correct hardness values are.

And so far I’m not liking what I see.  If I give a plane a durability value of 7000, it’s destroyable by  machine guns and cannon. This is ok to me, but if I give a hangar or an industrial block a durability value of 25000, I can destroy buildings with one pass firing machine guns and cannon. I’m talking 20 mm cannon here. In addition, if I set durability value of 10000 to an industrial block, and drop a 250 kg bomb right between two buildings, it may be that neither building gets destroyed. Need to investigate and think some more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I know team Blue can be retarded but do you need to make it tedious for VVS to work the objectives? 

VVS Depots - close to frontlines, German Depots, nice and far behind frontlines.

VVS Factory, not to far and not parked on an airfield.

 

AI at depots seem good at wing sniping now too.  Ah stuff it, I might look in when there are more people online but when it is sparse, it's a chore.

 

AA small gunners seem to be very good too, you must have them off the Schnaps for a change. :cool:

 

Oh, are you saying we no longer need bombs to wipe out factories?  Why didn't I see this earlier :good::biggrin:

Edited by blitze
looking at building damage value discussion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, blitze said:

I know team Blue can be retarded but do you need to make it tedious for VVS to work the objectives? 

VVS Depots - close to frontlines, German Depots, nice and far behind frontlines.

VVS Factory, not to far and not parked on an airfield.

 

AI at depots seem good at wing sniping now too.  Ah stuff it, I might look in when there are more people online but when it is sparse, it's a chore.

 

AA small gunners seem to be very good too, you must have them off the Schnaps for a change. :cool:

 

Oh, are you saying we no longer need bombs to wipe out factories?  Why didn't I see this earlier :good::biggrin:

The logic goes so that depots closest to the tank battles are picked, so from time to time this situation occurs. We'd need to implement some more logic to move the factories closer to the front line, when either side advances.

Nothing has been changed with AI, it's only your feelings ;)

Currently the durability thing looks almost like a bug. Earlier there used to be a threshold value after which cannons and MGs couldn't destroy the object. Now it looks like there is no such threshold anymore. :(

Share this post


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

Currently the durability thing looks almost like a bug. Earlier there used to be a threshold value after which cannons and MGs couldn't destroy the object. Now it looks like there is no such threshold anymore. :(

 

Yeah, why the heck have they messed this up? So stupid!

 

Meanwhile Wellen and I just dropped 4000 kilos of explosives on a depot getting 2 objects each, which even though it was already partially destroyed and we didn't hit spot on with all our ordinance, is a bit weird.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If anything it's related in an unforseen way to 

Quote

34.  Damage to large objects from small explosions now calculated more accurately;

 

So I wouldn't be fully surprised if in the end this means that destroying large hangars with a single 50kg bomb to be history.

Which in combination with the faster respawn rates and the greater need to go for depots and factories ultimately could really bugger the red team, as their bombing loadouts are lacking the nice big bangs that many blue planes can bring.

Share this post


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

If anything it's related in an unforseen way to 

 

So I wouldn't be fully surprised if in the end this means that destroying large hangars with a single 50kg bomb to be history.

Which in combination with the faster respawn rates and the greater need to go for depots and factories ultimately could really bugger the red team, as their bombing loadouts are lacking the nice big bangs that many blue planes can bring.

 

Until VVS get their hands on the A20.  They also have Lagg's they can throw into buildings Japanese style.  :ph34r:

 

Until then, VVS have to co-ordinate on depots as the Pe2 single loadout is not enough.  Would be nice if the German Depots were:

A. Closer to front lines and

B. Not right next to Air Fields or Tank Bases

and

C. Factories were a little back from front lines.

 

This applies equally to both sides.

 

Pity teams can't intercept repair convoys or trains.  Delay the materials being sent out from depots/factories, that would be fun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, blitze said:

 

 

Pity teams can't intercept repair convoys or trains.  Delay the materials being sent out from depots/factories, that would be fun.

That would be nice, only route would be shown while you need to search for that train or convoy!

Share this post


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

 

Until VVS get their hands on the A20.  They also have Lagg's they can throw into buildings Japanese style.  :ph34r:

 

Until then, VVS have to co-ordinate on depots as the Pe2 single loadout is not enough.  Would be nice if the German Depots were:

A. Closer to front lines and

B. Not right next to Air Fields or Tank Bases

and

C. Factories were a little back from front lines.

 

This applies equally to both sides.

 

Pity teams can't intercept repair convoys or trains.  Delay the materials being sent out from depots/factories, that would be fun.

True, the Havoc is such a lovely beast. But its biggest load is a mix of 250s and 100s which require actual aiming to be properly effective, as opposed to just dive bombing with 2x1000kg in the Ju88.

Not that I dive-bomb in it, just saying that it's exceedingly easy to deliver ridiculous bomb loads with blue planes as opposed to the red ones.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Tested today an industrial block with 25000 as durability. I threw a 1000 kg bomb between the buildings and only three buildings were destroyed, leaving many more intact. Given that our system requires (IIRC, how was it @LLv34_Untamo?) 50% of the buildings in a block to be destroyed (not counting outhouses etc.) for the block to be registered as destroyed, I quite like how the 1000 kg bomb isn’t the be all end all loadout. You can achieve better results in a sortie by loading out more but smaller bombs, and bombing individual buildings accurately. Now if only 20 mm cannons wouldn’t be too effective.

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My point wasn't that the 1000kg bomb is the best choice but rather that it's very easy to bring something that large on target whereas to be effective with the typical red loadout you'll probably have to learn how to level bomb or get real lucky and good at dodging and weaving with a Il2 down low. :P

 

But that's good to hear anyway! I love using a ton of smaller bombs because I enjoy seeing my explosions "walk" over a target in a pretty line and before this it was just so much more effective and easier to obliterate the entire neighbourhood with one drop instead.

Edited by wellenbrecher

Share this post


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

Tested today an industrial block with 25000 as durability. I threw a 1000 kg bomb between the buildings and only three buildings were destroyed, leaving many more intact. Given that our system requires (IIRC, how was it @LLv34_Untamo?) 50% of the buildings in a block to be destroyed (not counting outhouses etc.) for the block to be registered as destroyed, I quite like how the 1000 kg bomb isn’t the be all end all loadout. You can achieve better results in a sortie by loading out more but smaller bombs, and bombing individual buildings accurately. Now if only 20 mm cannons wouldn’t be too effective.

 

Will a stick of smaller bombs, dropped from an altitude as a level-bomber, destroy the buildings though? I assumed that there was a problem with damage registration.

Share this post


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

I assumed that there was a problem with damage registration.

I think they changed the resistance to splash damage, so that may be what was perceived as "damage registration".

 

Now that I've looked at it a bit, to me it looks like the durability values suggested by Blacksix should be quite feasible. To me it just feels illogical and a bug that you can destroy factory buildings with 20 mm cannon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, blitze said:

Until then, VVS have to co-ordinate on depots as the Pe2 single loadout is not enough.  Would be nice if the German Depots were:

A. Closer to front lines and

B. Not right next to Air Fields or Tank Bases

and

C. Factories were a little back from front lines.

 

Selection process goes like this:
3 random tank bases are selected from the front line. Then 2 closest(!) depots are selected for both sides. Same goes for factories, with the exception that once factory is selected to be in a mission, it is kept selected through future missions, until it is either closed or captured.

 

So, they are the closest ones to the front. If the reds have just captured a blue depot, then most likely the next blue depot will be further away from the front line, as they are dotted around the map quite uniformly.

Edited by LLv34_Untamo
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


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

That would be nice, only route would be shown while you need to search for that train or convoy!

 

Long range strikes behind enemy lines AKA Interdiction :happy:

Something the Bf110 did a lot of on the Eastern front. Especially when they flew from bases in Norway :cool:

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Interdiction would indeed be nice to have. Maybe we will do new performance tests when we make the next map version...

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/26/2018 at 7:44 PM, Porky said:

 

Yeah, why the heck have they messed this up? So stupid!

 

Don't be so hard on them.

I have worked with software developers and they don't this on purpose becourse they know that they will have to clean it up themselves :(  and all of those I have known would rather make new stuff than do troubleshooting ;)

 

But I feel your pain. There are a lot of 'glitches' in this new release that have to be addressed.

Like the possibility of No-Drag on the A-20 which will make it turn better than a Bf109 :o:

I'm probably hurting my own side by bringing attention to it, but I am here for the simulation of realisme and the immersion.

2 minutes ago, LLv34_Untamo said:

Interdiction would indeed be nice to have. Maybe we will do new performance tests when we make the next map version...

 

 

It would be a nice feature, but don't break your neck by introducing new features.

From your presence on this forum and the changes we have seen, this must be your only hobby.
 

I have said it before, but it cannot be said enough. Thanks for hosting this server and the work your guys are doing. It is much appreciated :salute:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, and I am going to take a bit out of humble pie here. I have been flying again on Finnish despite the limited planeset - what have I been missing! :salute:

I hope that soon we will see a fresh start of the maps (with updates) and a clean wipe of the statistics. I recall being told that the new campaign would start in spring.

Edited by Leifr

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A quick observation on the whole bombs vs buildings thing.

I did two sorties that are relevant in this context.

 

On the 26th I missed horribly due to the cloud cover (with the 2x1000kg loadout) and was credited with 2 destroyed targets ingame. As you can see the stats gave me three instead and all were credited to me within two seconds.

Yesterday I actually hit the target and hit it well (with the 500kg/250kg mix loadout), even if I once again had a brain fart and did not set the spacing correctly. Ingame I was credited with 12 targets, the stats gave me 20. Again all credit was given for destruction within seconds.

 

So... it sorta looks to me here, that the stats record hits essentially like they used to before the update, even when ingame this does not seem to be true at all.

The only instances of this from before the update that I am aware of are the other way around, where the stats page gives you credit for less targets than the ingame display.

 

Dunno if this at all helpful, but I found it interesting and maybe it can help to find a good balance in setting up the buildings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, wellenbrecher said:

 

So... it sorta looks to me here, that the stats record hits essentially like they used to before the update, even when ingame this does not seem to be true at all.

The only instances of this from before the update that I am aware of are the other way around, where the stats page gives you credit for less targets than the ingame display.

 

Dunno if this at all helpful, but I found it interesting and maybe it can help to find a good balance in setting up the buildings.

We are more interested in individual buildings being destroyed in a block, as they are counted towards that block being ”closed”. For that we look at what the logs say, as does the stats parser. Thank you for the info :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, LLv34_Untamo said:

So, they are the closest ones to the front. If the reds have just captured a blue depot, then most likely the next blue depot will be further away from the front line, as they are dotted around the map quite uniformly.

 

Darn, I knew VVS success would turn around and bite them. :biggrin:

 

Thanks anyway for the work you put in to hosting this server. 

Share this post


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

We are more interested in individual buildings being destroyed in a block, as they are counted towards that block being ”closed”. For that we look at what the logs say, as does the stats parser. Thank you for the info :)

Switch small buildings with biggest ones so spacing will be tighter and problem solved.

Each block to contain 2 or 3 big buildings.

So still pilot shall need 2,3x250/500kg bombs to close individual block instead of 10bombs.

Edited by EAF_Ribbon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/25/2018 at 9:01 PM, LLv34_Untamo said:

The respawn and supply times are gameplay decisions first, realism comes second here.

 

The respawn time does seem to be a bit too short. For example currently tank battle 1208 is just 10 minute respawn away from a depot. This depot was destroyed and tank base was attacked and 40% destroyed when a message appeared that the depot is back in service. Now, before you get to even do another attack on the depot, the tank base next to it gets fully repaired. Maybe there could be some kind of capacity limit how many objects in a base could be repaired simultaneously?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, II./JG77_Kemp said:

 

The respawn time does seem to be a bit too short. For example currently tank battle 1208 is just 10 minute respawn away from a depot. This depot was destroyed and tank base was attacked and 40% destroyed when a message appeared that the depot is back in service. Now, before you get to even do another attack on the depot, the tank base next to it gets fully repaired. Maybe there could be some kind of capacity limit how many objects in a base could be repaired simultaneously?

Situation may have been that some block in the depot was destroyed way earlier than the remaining ones so when the block got repaired the depot opened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Really really enjoy this server. Reminds me of Blue Flag from another flight simulator. 

+1 on respawn times being a bit too short.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

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

Create an account

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

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...