Whats your favorite mission type?

[79_vRAF_Friendly_flyer]

If BoS can do COOPs like '46 did, I'll be happy indeed.

 

+1

[LAL_Wolf]

COOP

+1

+1 B)

Edited December 21, 2012 by LAL_Wolf

[nynek]

Voted online coop, but for me the best solution is start of permanent war at random  point the moment server is boot up. If U want "queekie" click fighter sweep and follow vector to furball if ground attack just wait a bit for assembly of 2, 3 planes and follow the mission or jump into AI plane already in the air. Here is THE question. When the hell we will be able to reach 1995 WarBirds 100, 200 plus aircrafts on the same server with some XXI Century FM, CEM, DM ?. IMHO ANY sim which doesn't have Massive in the name is waste of everybody time. Offline players are flying offline because it is very difficult to do anything else than

turn and burn in online universe. Picture this, one Stuka against flak, and 16 Mustangs of which 4 are on Teamspeak. You Guys developing this new game should do "something" to the game engine or maybe totally change Your approach to server side of the sim. Maybe flightsim developers were actually right 20 or so years ago by creating  global server first and then allow to players to connect to the universe.

Uneducated guesses from experience by

nynek

 

[AdlerAngriff]

The title of the poll was a bit misleading for me. I think it would be interesting to see what type of offline missions and multiplayer modes do players like.

 

For example, reacon, intercept, CAP, bomb run etc etc, ground attack, airfield attack.

[Pudfark]

I voted Coops.

Didn't realize I could vote for more than one thing.

Though I did vote for what was most important to me.

Thanx for the well "optioned" poll Furbs...

[Mac_Messer]

Sadly online is for the most part merely a glorified "2 Knights on the field of honor" thingy, almost comparable to some e-sports tournament.

I`m sorry to read that from you. It just shows how good or bad online play can be. A whole range of good and bad experiences. From my POV, things were exactly the opposite back in the days of WWII flying (2002-2007 look how time flies btw). I`d say that the moment the bomber guys got their toys and the fighter jocks could escort them instead of AI, LW side started winning whole online campaigns. That depended on numerous sacrifices made by both parties. The frontline was that what count, not a lonewulf hunting (teamplay had become pretty much the only way to survive at some point).

I guess you must have flown with the wrong people if you got such a bad impression. 

[csThor]

My opinion was formed over years ... it's not a spur of the moment thingy at all. It's also that I have a very "hardcore" attitude towards historical facts, I don't like making compromises because of gameplay or "fairness" (imbalances in numbers or technical advantages I'd balance out via tasks and mission layout). But there's one thing I've come to accept, something that tells me that my ideas aren't feasible online. Fact is most players don't have the interest and/or hardware to really dive into multi-engined aircraft. I'm in that camp, too. Actually I don't even understand all that navigation/radio navigation stuff. When the Desastersoft guys asked me to translate a short document on proper navigating in CloD to english as part of the Galland AddOn I had to surrender - I didn't even understand the basic german text.

This, in turn, leaves single-engined aircraft ... most of which are fighters. But there are also ground-attack aircraft or dive bombers but hardly anyone would fly these. Why? Because in the game environment they're just sitting ducks. There are simply far too many fighters around and any online war I participated in was tailored towards engagements between teams - there's no chance of survival for non-fighters in that environment.

 

If we take a look at OOBs of WW2 we'll spot that fighters, for the overwhelming part, were just a minority among the available types but in flight sims they're ubiquitous - because of their relative simplicity (when compared to medium bombers), because of their survivability (compared to a Stuka or single-seat Il-2) and their "glamorous reputation". Which is why I stay offline. There the AI will fly anything I put it into and it won't kick up a stink when it doesn't get the latest ????ber-plane.

[VBF-12_Stick-95]

Important post, thanks.

[BMA_FlyingShark]

Online dogfight server.

Online campaign.

 

~S~

[Volkoff]

I will almost exclusively play multiplayer. I will prefer any mission that favors the stalk and ambush style of play. I don't want to duel, not even dogfight, unless I make a mistake. I just want to make high speed diving hit and run surprise attacks, over and over, for as long as I play IL2 BOS.

 

Edited March 14, 2013 by MishaJames

[Trooper117]

Until I find out just how this game will offer the online content, (hope there is a hyperlobby type option) I'll probably stick to offline campaigns.

[ACG_Kraut]

All Online for me.

[Mirtma]

In IL2 and ROF I play quick battles almost all the time.

[LLv34_Untamo]

S!

 

It would be great if online campaigns like SEOW would be possible in BoS.

[ITAF_Rani]

I agree with Untamo...online campaigne is IMO the real soul of the airsim.....fight against other teams and obtain results makes all reallly

exting and lot of fun.....the off line phase is really necessary for new simmers and to have confidence with the game....but when you are in tournament and all your result are in statistic file and you fight with your mates and other teams ....all thing take different way..and the atmsphere is really realistic ....

[VoodooGT]

Although there are many good suggestions here in all likelyhood I would expect that the game play is very similar to the Rise of Flight model. I could be wrong but I believe that the 777 game engine is being used and therefore setting the parameters you can expect from the game.

[[RG]Flanker1985]

Best if we can play main story line campaign or Career campaign cooperatively with our friends.

Edited October 14, 2013 by HarbingerFlanker1985

[Klien]

S! Sirs;

 

"CO-OPs, CO-OPs, CO-OPs!!"

 

I wore out 1 PC flyin em in IL-2 1946 and I intend to wear this one out the same way with IL-2 BoS.

 

A mob of Mates flyin to achieve a good outcome is such fun (and to land after is the Bee's Knees)!!!

[Foobar]

24/7 online war

[dkoor]

For me a thoroughly historical perspective on combat flight sims doesn't work online. Why? Because, regardless how unpredictable players are inside the cockpit, they're utterly predictable they're out of it: 90% take fighters, 80% of which merely have it out among themselves without regard to mission goals or situations. Bombers are being flown by such a small minority that they're not even amounting to 1% of the whole and don't get me started on the fighter-bomber vs Stuka/ground-attack rate.

 

Sadly online is for the most part merely a glorified "2 Knights on the field of honor" thingy, almost comparable to some e-sports tournament.

Yeah this is completely true by my experience too.

I'm not saying that I didn't have some great time flying on mostly fighter servers (most of the servers during my IL-2 playtime were fighter orientated).

 

The one and only advantage of online over offline is that humans really have more brains (in most cases  ) than our average AI.

 

Will we have a situation in BoS where as standard, 8 players on server choose Ju-87, 4 Bf-109, 10 IL-2 & 3 LaGG-3 and try to win round?

I don't think so... there will be 1 or two at best with ground attacks rest will fly fighters.

Doing some kind of airquake.

[Matt]

That's interesting, in my rather short Warthunder time, i found ground-attack almost more exciting than dogfighting. And i usually stick to fighters.

 

So overall, i think this depends mostly on the mission itself. If there are lots of different ground-targets, which make the difference between winning and losing the mission for each side (that should be the case imho), i think ground-attack planes can be very popular and people who usually prefer fighters might take a ground-attack plane instead. And atleast with the currently revealed planeset, the fighter bombers are not a real alternative to the ground-attack/bomber planes.

 

They will not ncessarily be more popular than fighters (i see no reason why they have to be more numerous), but they should make up quite a bit of the planeset. Even in a simple 24/7 mission, as long as there is plenty of stuff to do for them.

[BMA_West]

Thought this poll might give the devs a idea of how we play our flight sims.

Quite a poll Furbs, thx

Puts lots of persective in participation.

Adding up votes quite some ppl did a multiple probably without going for the mix.

Surprisingly double for COOP compared to DF? While COOP always attracts much less in ROF over DF ...

I wonder however how many selcted and off line campaign and on line campaign? If not together with the quickies you get like 50%...

Makes you wonder.

Edited October 16, 2013 by West

[Karost]

DF and Coop

[keet]

My favourite mission type and the type that I am most able to play (due to time constraints) are probably quite different.  I enjoy playing offline campaigns, and this is what I usually play, but I would enjoy an online campaign, as well as cooperative missions, probably even more.

[Air_Warrior_Dos]

For me a thoroughly historical perspective on combat flight sims doesn't work online. Why? Because, regardless how unpredictable players are inside the cockpit, they're utterly predictable they're out of it: 90% take fighters, 80% of which merely have it out among themselves without regard to mission goals or situations. Bombers are being flown by such a small minority that they're not even amounting to 1% of the whole and don't get me started on the fighter-bomber vs Stuka/ground-attack rate.

 

Sadly online is for the most part merely a glorified "2 Knights on the field of honor" thingy, almost comparable to some e-sports tournament.

Exactly correct you are when it comes to the Online Experience.

In all my Online Multiplayer WW2 Flight-sim experience ( and I've had ALOT ) people will simply "Game the Game" if given the option. Therefor, with out direction ( solid online server controls ) -as on option- players will not be saved from themselves and will simply be robbed of what is possible.

 

The first MMO WW2 flight-sim had a strategic infrastructure that balanced this well, but not great. see Air Warrior

The second MMO WW2 FS did so in a different manner to some success. see Confirmed Kill / Warbirds / Aces High

The only other that succeeded these two and effectively surpassed them was IL-2 Ultra-Pack

 

Ultra-Pack's effective MMO WW2 FS server side controls is the brain child of the one who calls himself ZUTI.  

 

Sadly, to this date, no one to my knowledge has completely exploited the "what is possible" with Zuti's MDS tools.

Furthermore, a new version of Ultra-Pack is in perpetual limbo these days, and loosing players looking for improved graphics / physics that IL-2 BOS provides. 

 

If only someone like ZUTI or he himself could be contracted to bring this Glory to BOS, one can only imagine the possibilities. 

 

In the mid 1990's I was fortunate to beta test "Confirmed Kill 2". It got axed by Eidos for exceeding budget before completion. It did however contain something called a "Limited Resource Engagement" 

This LRE was vary similar to Zuti's MDS. 

 

Properly designed online servers utilizing MDS could provide ALL the answers to the problem with the MMO WW2 FS experience.

 

1. Medium attack aircraft, like the IL-2, and the Stuka would become viable AC.

2. Alt mongering / Air Quake and the long laundry list of bad behavior would cure itself.

3. Fighters would be used primarily for CAP and Escort as they historically were intended.

4. One's Virtual Life online would feel more Real and Sacred.

5. The limited resources that are present during the start of the online engagement, and those that may resupply periodically during the engagement, would be as valuable as Gold itself, if the participants wished to at all succeed with their virtual life.  

 

Remember always, this would be just an option to any current game play all ready established. I don't intend to offend anyone who desires other forms of game play, yet provide possibilities to those that do desire MORE.

[Nuni]

COOP'S = FMB