Jasta 5 Flying Circus Flugpark Server

[No.23_Gaylion]

Is there a way to make "targets of opportunity" to attack? As in, putting out ground attack objectives that aren't listed on the map which people could go search for? You could utilize the recon planes doing the recon objective to "activate" the ground targets on the map OR just go look for the targets yourself and strafe them when you find them. You could place the unknown ground attack targets in the spots where you have the "ambient" mg fire currently to draw people in.

 

Also, if an airfield gets destroyed it should be out of action, or planes reduced, or added "war stress" if possible.

Edited December 17, 2019 by US213_Talbot

[No.23_Gaylion]

Maybe you can hide the "object" to be destroyed inside one of the hangers that shuts down the field?

[BMA_Hellbender]

31 minutes ago, US213_Talbot said:

Is there a way to make "targets of opportunity" to attack? As in, putting out ground attack objectives that aren't listed on the map which people could go search for? You could utilize the recon planes doing the recon objective to "activate" the ground targets on the map OR just go look for the targets yourself and strafe them when you find them. You could place the unknown ground attack targets in the spots where you have the "ambient" mg fire currently to draw people in.

 

Sizzlor's missions has those, it's basically what we do on them all the time. They are respawning after a while, the problem is that there just aren't enough targets for 3+ CL.IIs (okay, this time you get to bomb the tank, then I get to have a go) and for each group of enemies there's typically only 1 AAA machinegunner who shoots back at us. They're easily put out of commission by firing at them, which causes the machinegunner to abandon his post, after which it can be taken out with impunity. As far as I know there's no way to change this behaviour, this is hard-coded in the game.

 

The fix is easy: more AAA machinegunners and adding in WWI AAA in those pillbox emplacements behind the trenches. Once the devs fix them, that is.

 

Quote

Also, if an airfield gets destroyed it should be out of action, or planes reduced, or added "war stress" if possible.

 

I discussed this with @J5_Baeumer the other day, and while it can certainly be fun to knock out an airfield, the moment the game starts becoming about vulching and denying people the ability to fly, we may lose some. It should really only be possible for the most forward airfield (say the one with Camels on it) and there should again be way more defensive AAA, meaning it could only be attempted by large formations. The rear fields should remain impervious to attack. It's tougher to protect an airfield against high altitude Bristol bombers than a pack of low-flying Halberstadts, but that makes sense, and that's why we should still have the Fokker D.VIIF on Central.

 

It's just a pity to hear many Central scout pilots saying: "Well, all the Fs are in use and they have unlimited SPADs and Camels, so I'm not flying".

 

It's understandable, but if the action was centered more around NML and protecting German lines from incursion, Central would do better with their slow Mercedes scouts.

[No.23_Gaylion]

Wow people actually say that? 

 

A SPAD on the same level vs anything is at an EXTREME disadvantage. Only in the hands of an experienced SPAD pilot is it in any way deadly. 

Edited December 17, 2019 by US213_Talbot

[SeaW0lf]

I think time will bring some specialized missions, like the ones with D7 vanillas, Spads and SE5as (no Camel / Dr1). Then the Dolphin could became a very rewarding ride for who likes to turnfight, but the D7, Albatros and Pfalz would still be deadly against it.

 

But right now there is always the Dr1 as an option to counter the Camel. I've been flying with 56/70% fuel and she is still very competitive, and she has a parachute. But I would not fly the D7 vanilla with Camels around, probably just defensively around Bapaume or Cappy, because she is a dog in comparison.

[J99_Sizzlorr]

24 minutes ago, J5_Hellbender-Sch27b said:

Sizzlor's missions has those, it's basically what we do on them all the time. They are respawning after a while, the problem is that there just aren't enough targets for 3+ CL.IIs (okay, this time you get to bomb the tank, then I get to have a go) and for each group of enemies there's typically only 1 AAA machinegunner who shoots back at us. They're easily put out of commission by firing at them, which causes the machinegunner to abandon his post, after which it can be taken out with impunity. As far as I know there's no way to change this behaviour, this is hard-coded in the game.

 

Well i admit the mission was not designed with newly formed Schlastas in mind. People were seldomly flying 2 seaters at all. At least there is something shooting back. But yeah once the ww1 AAA assets gets fixed I can make those ground targets better defended and a tougher nut to crack. But we also have to keep an eye on max. AI units per mission and on the balance,  some lone ground attacker should also be able to accomplish something. Enforcing teamplay isn't always well recieved. While you get bored to death doing ground attacks, why not try to accomplish those "impossible" recon tasks?

 

1 hour ago, US213_Talbot said:

Also, if an airfield gets destroyed it should be out of action, or planes reduced, or added "war stress" if possible.

 

About airfields, while i was creating the mission i talked to Matthias about it and he basically said leave them undestroyable because we don't want to enforce vulching and all that.

[No.23_Gaylion]

Ahh, yes. I guess that's the other side of that coin.

[BMA_Hellbender]

53 minutes ago, US213_Talbot said:

Wow people actually say that? 

 

A SPAD on the same level vs anything is at an EXTREME disadvantage. Only in the hands of an experienced SPAD pilot is it in any way deadly. 

 

They may have said Camels, SEs and also SPADs, but yes. All are fast enough to either disengage from or run down everything except the F. If you pair this with the effectiveness of long-range shooting, it's understandable while some feel frustration. On the other hand, the F, as we know, is clearly superior to everything Entente has to offer.

 

It's pretty tough to create a balanced experience, mostly because there was no "balance" around May/April 1918, which is most representative of what we have now, if you discount the D.VIIF, CL.II 200hp and the Bristol F.III, which are summer 1918 machines, contemporaries of the other 200hp Mercedes scouts and the 220/235hp SPAD and the Bentley Camel.

 

42 minutes ago, SeaW0lf said:

But right now there is always the Dr1 as an option to counter the Camel. I've been flying with 56/70% fuel and she is still very competitive, and she has a parachute. But I would not fly the D7 vanilla with Camels around, probably just defensively around Bapaume or Cappy, because she is a dog in comparison.

 

True. The problem is that the Dr.I is a real specialist plane, and because of its lack of speed, many of the former Dr.I aces also refuse to fly it.

 

33 minutes ago, J99_Sizzlorr said:

Well i admit the mission was not designed with newly formed Schlastas in mind. People were seldomly flying 2 seaters at all. At least there is something shooting back. But yeah once the ww1 AAA assets gets fixed I can make those ground targets better defended and a tougher nut to crack. But we also have to keep an eye on max. AI units per mission and on the balance,  some lone ground attacker should also be able to accomplish something. Enforcing teamplay isn't always well recieved. While you get bored to death doing ground attacks, why not try to accomplish those "impossible" recon tasks?

 

This isn't criticism aimed at your mission making, in fact your missions with the "hidden" NML targets are far more historical than those of Matthias and better suited for a lone two-seater, even if it is a little bit too easy for me to connect to the server while no one is on and knock everything out to pad my ground attack stats. You are both working within the constraints of the current (broken) objects and engine limitations, and both missions are fun in their own right.

 

As for doing recon tasks, I'd love to, but Central doesn't have a recon two-seater such as the DFW which can climb to altitude in a reasonable amount of time (ideally we'd need the Rumpler C.VII). So then the alternative is to make the climb with the CL.II 200hp, which still climbs worse than the DFW, perform the recon, and have nothing to show for it in terms of points. Yet another game engine limitation.

 

I think that until we have a recon plane available for Central, it may be best to focus the CL.IIs entirely around trench attack, which is what they were used for. You could even remove the 200hp from the available planes. The irony here is that the one Mercedes plane with a 200hp engine, is the one that needs it least... The Bristol is a more versatile machine, used for both recon and high altitude bombing behind enemy lines, although ironically not for trench attack. That's what Camel fighter/bombers did.

 

It's easy for me to speak as I'm a complete noob with the mission builder, in spite of multiple attempts, but we may simply need to embrace the imbalance rather than to try and force both sides to complete the same types of objectives.

Edited December 17, 2019 by J5_Hellbender-Sch27b

[No.23_Gaylion]

Can you not just airstart a recon cl2 at 2k and far back from the lines "simulating" a long climb up?

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

What about artillery guidance mission they were made from not that high as reconesan type jobs. This is also nice to watch where shell  do fall, especially if as it was for real they were guiding targets , pillboxes etc. located in the abandoned near mud viliges. Just imagine  - Ups  they miss again, church on the  fire

[No.23_Gaylion]

Yeah but they hit the orphanage which was the intended target.

[JGr2/J5_Klugermann]

1 hour ago, US213_Talbot said:

Wow people actually say that? 

 

A SPAD on the same level vs anything is at an EXTREME disadvantage. Only in the hands of an experienced SPAD pilot is it in any way deadly. 

 

As sweet as the 7F is the Spad is still the best plane in the game for survivability.  Beefed up Se5 is pretty good as well.

Edited December 17, 2019 by J5_Klugermann

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

10 minutes ago, J5_Klugermann said:

 

As sweet as the 7F is the Spad is still the best plane in the game for survivability.  Beefed up Se5 is pretty good as well.

Survivability is always on the side with parachutes.

[JGr2/J5_Klugermann]

Just now, 1PL-Husar-1Esk said:

Survivability is always on the side with parachutes.

 

Not if Talbot is around.

[SeaW0lf]

The other day I saw a player in flames cross almost to the other side of the mud and parachute. I think he made it (it was not my kill). Does anyone tested how long you can fly in flames and do not die / explode / get burned to the point of not being able the rejoin the war?

 

It could enter the bug section as well.

[No.23_Gaylion]

Well, he just wasted his time. you can parachute over Allied lines and finish before you hit the ground and it wont count as a death or capture...

Edited December 17, 2019 by US213_Talbot

[haltux]

1 hour ago, US213_Talbot said:

Wow people actually say that? 

 

A SPAD on the same level vs anything is at an EXTREME disadvantage. Only in the hands of an experienced SPAD pilot is it in any way deadly. 

 

Really? Is that a fact from multiplayer game stats? I only play single player and the Spad is my favorite aircraft. Fast and stable, perfect for zoom and boom attacks. View is terrible but you get used to it.

 

Camels are fun to fly but painfully slow and SE5a are pretty good but but it seems to me that when you have your enemy in your sight they are less efficient than Spads to get it down. Less stable, less firepower, I don't know. Or maybe it is just me, I don't know.

 

Plus historically its seems that Spads were considered by pilots as excellent so I am surprised.

[JGr2/J5_Klugermann]

3 minutes ago, SeaW0lf said:

The other day I saw a player in flames cross almost to the other side of the mud and parachute. I think he made it (it was not my kill). Does anyone tested how long you can fly in flames and do not die / explode / get burned to the point of not being able the rejoin the war?

 

It could enter the bug section as well.

 

It takes a while but the times it happened to me  I was unable to bail.

 

Just now, US213_Talbot said:

Well, he just waste his time. you can parachute over Allied lines and finish before you hit the ground and it wont count as a death or capture...

 

Not so sure about that. I've bailed over no mans land and was recorded as captured.  What happens if you bail as entente and are able to end mission before you splat ?

[No.23_Gaylion]

You should have pulled your risers harder towards the East.

[JGr2/J5_Klugermann]

10 minutes ago, US213_Talbot said:

You should have pulled your risers harder towards the East.

 

The only thing I get when I pull my risers is a wedgie.

 

Funny you say that, wind for that map was actually blowing east. Was wondering if I would carry that way but I was afraid of you.

[No.23_Gaylion]

You're ok. Its Christmas and Talbot needs a new desk chair and we all know Santa's a boche.

[BMA_Hellbender]

1 hour ago, US213_Talbot said:

Can you not just airstart a recon cl2 at 2k and far back from the lines "simulating" a long climb up?

 

It can be part of the solution.

 

To have them pose as Rumplers, I would have them spawn in at 5000m, a realistic recon altitude by 1918 standards. The theoretical ceiling of the CL.II 200hp is 6000m, the Rumpler C.VII could climb up to 7000m where it still maintained a TAS of around 160km/h. By comparison, the CL.II 200hp TAS at 5000m is not even 150km/h.

 

 

 

 

Yikes.

 

For the record: it would take a CL.II 200hp about an hour to get to the altitude.

 

And since recon isn't worth anything in terms of points, I'd have them be AI-only. Same for the Bristol F.III recons (ceiling 6000m).

 

 

1 hour ago, 1PL-Husar-1Esk said:

What about artillery guidance mission they were made from not that high as reconesan type jobs. This is also nice to watch where shell  do fall, especially if as it was for real they were guiding targets , pillboxes etc. located in the abandoned near mud viliges. Just imagine  - Ups  they miss again, church on the  fire

 

Same problem as recon: not worth any points.

 

It's all game engine limitation. Unless you're destroying things either flying or on the ground, you don't get stats.

[JG1_Butzzell]

3 hours ago, J5_Hellbender-Sch27b said:

It's just a pity to hear many Central scout pilots saying: "Well, all the Fs are in use and they have unlimited SPADs and Camels, so I'm not flying".

 

Agree, it is a pity. The Fs should be unlimited as well.

[1PL-Lucas-1Esk]

Maybe the stress level could have an impact on the plane set? Like:

 

- SL 3 - plane shortages (limited F's, CL.IIau, Falcon III, Camel)

- SL 4 - fuel shortages (fuel cut to 20-30%, of course, it should be locked on the server)

- SL 5 - Game over

A completed recon can make some types "unlimited" - just to encourage teams to fly this missions.

Just an opinion.

[BMA_Hellbender]

46 minutes ago, JG1_Butzzell said:

 

Agree, it is a pity. The Fs should be unlimited as well.

 

It's the "everything machine". Even I Iike to fly it, and I never fly scouts. There's almost no reason not to fly it, so if you don't limit it, that's all we will ever see. Plus, it only operated in small numbers by the end of the war

 

The Alb/Pfalz/Dr.I are still very potent machines, but just like in history, they have to use team tactics, outnumber the enemy and remain over their own lines. That's a pretty tall order for casual multiplayer. I still have faith in the Jastas, though.

 

Just now, 1PL-Lucas-1Esk said:

Maybe the stress level could have an impact on the plane set? Like:

 

- SL 3 - plane shortages (limited F's, CL.IIau, Falcon III, Camel)

- SL 4 - fuel shortages (fuel cut to 20-30%, of course, it should be locked on the server)

- SL 5 - Game over

A completed recon can make some types "unlimited" - just to encourage teams to fly this missions.

Just an opinion.

 

Camel pilots are going to love that SL 4. ?

 

I've always been against limiting the Camel: it was the main British scout in the Arras sector. The fact that it's a very good dogfighter and relatively fast to boot is not enough of an excuse to limit it. It's a very different machine now that it is affected by g forces and it goes down much easier than a SPAD. You could also lock its fuel load to over 50% and have it locked in with bombs, since ground attack was its main role from mid-1918 onwards. It won't stop people from just ditching their bombs and getting creative with fuel leaks, but at least you'll point them in the right direction.

 

If anything it's the Wolseley Viper S.E.5a that was a rarity until late in the war and the SPAD which barely operated at all in the Arras sector. Obviously we can't help the fact that we don't have a French/American sector, so limiting SPADs would be madness.

 

The Bristol F.III similarly wasn't available in large numbers till the summer of 1918, and having a CL.II 200hp and no Albatros D.Va / Fokker D.VII 200hp is a very interesting take on history indeed.

 

 

Oh, I forgot the Dolphin. We always forget the Dolphin.

[JGr2/J5_Baeumer]

The Flugpark is updated to 4.003 and available for your enjoyment.

[SeaW0lf]

1 hour ago, J5_Hellbender-Sch27b said:

Camel pilots are going to love that SL 4. 

 

That would be bad ??? I have been flying with 40%+ fuel.

 

Quote

I've always been against limiting the Camel: it was the main British scout in the Arras sector. The fact that it's a very good dogfighter and relatively fast to boot is not enough of an excuse to limit it. It's a very different machine now that it is affected by g forces and it goes down much easier than a SPAD. You could also lock its fuel load to over 50%.

 

That I think should be dome with care, because you can fly more than 2hs with 50% fuel, and I don't think the missions are that long or if people will fly a 2h sortie or that we would have ammo enough in this kind of missions. Some fuel locks could prevent people from flying on fumes, but I would not go far to load the Camel to turn it into a fat boy, because then everyone [the capable ones] will fly the Dr1. And then people nerf the already nerfed Dr1 with 100% fuel (already done in some servers) and it becomes this endless gripe about the aisle of the game who specialized in turnfighting (old gripe that led to some bad decisions).

 

I would agree with a 1400rpm Camel (the current is at 1460rpm if I'm not mistaken), but I would be careful with loadings to throw them off. In a way when I hear the talks about g-locks killing the UFOs, it makes me wanna fly the Camel even more as an insult ?

Edited December 17, 2019 by SeaW0lf

[J99_Sizzlorr]

4 hours ago, J5_Hellbender-Sch27b said:

This isn't criticism aimed at your mission making

 

After re reading my post i feel i sounded grumpier than I am. I just forgot the emojis... all good Bender keep the criticism coming it makes the missions better...

 

1 hour ago, J5_Baeumer said:

The Flugpark is updated to 4.003 and available for your enjoyment.

 

Thumbs up Baeumer!

[BMA_West]

On ‎12‎/‎16‎/‎2019 at 7:35 PM, emely said:

It is a pity that the chat does not write who you shot down, or who shot you down ...  And then I go to the statistics site, and I see data that there were real players.

 

I presume that must have been RAF NO.20 Emely and one one of their first sorties.

 

On ‎12‎/‎15‎/‎2019 at 9:24 PM, NO.20_W_M_Thomson said:

Please add the #20 RAF squad. Anyone interested in Bristol fighters come join us fly in our practice server the Mistfits slightly twisted practice server. we're on most nights @ pst in the western part of North America. If interested in going into the danger zone PM me until we have our website up. 

 

 

Edited December 17, 2019 by West

[1PL-Husar-1Esk]

9 hours ago, HagarTheHorrible said:

 

Yeh !  They can't reach the trigger !

High caliber AA is bugged/limited to 1500m but for small arms 1500 is quite enough height , don't you think ?

[HagarTheHorrible]

 Mg should be max 1500, but tracer of the period tended to only show up to 800 m which makes it rather ineffective above that level.  Which is where guns like the flaming onion should come in.

[emely]

3 hours ago, West said:

 

I presume that must have been RAF NO.20 Emely and one one of their first sorties.

 

 

 

Nothing is as happy as the new names in the game!  I hope the guys will be fine, the squadrons of bombers are very useful.  I thought newcomers fly only on camel and Dr1 ? (actually, my friends from this collision had the SYN tag, well, it's even better if there are several such squadrons)

[J5_Adam]

19 minutes ago, emely said:

Nothing is as happy as the new names in the game!  I hope the guys will be fine, the squadrons of bombers are very useful.  I thought newcomers fly only on camel and Dr1 ? (actually, my friends from this collision had the SYN tag, well, it's even better if there are several such squadrons)

 

Thompson is hardly a newcomer. Formerly Barker and GrahamshereGT.

Edited December 17, 2019 by Adam

[No.23_Triggers]

With the current line-up, the D.VII F presents a bit of a problem to me. It has a higher service ceiling than anything else by a huge margin, tighter turn than anything minus Camel, faster than (or at least equal to) anything at alt, very easy to handle, parachute, great dive speed, ridiculous energy retention and climb speed, etc etc etc. Hell, even an oxygen system! (Which I honestly don't know if that makes any difference or not). 

The SPAD and S.E are a nightmare for the other Central scouts, and the D.VII F renders the SPAD and S.E. redundant. It's a no-brainer for Centrals to fly the F, and frustrating as hell for the Ententes when they do so. 

The solution to me is one that's been mentioned to death. D.IIIau D.VII, and a later spec SPAD (Which should be limited) to combat the F. I've always found it weird that there were no D.IIIaus in the scouts, seeing as there's a Halberstadt CL.II with it modelled! 


 

Edited December 18, 2019 by US93_Larner

[emely]

It always has been, the 7F excelled at a high altitude spad.  Only in dive speed did he lag a little.  It would be nice to exclude this aircraft from the set (and also camel and dr1), replacing it with pfalz12 ? There is no point in dreaming about engine modifications, we don’t even have promises to release vol2!  What can we say about some kind of improvements to what is.

[NO.20_W_M_Thomson]

I haven't really flown the D7f much so I'm not sure if giving it a full tank would tame it a bit, at least until the entente gets something that would be some what equal to the D7f, like the spad the 103's are hoping for. Snipe would be nice but we know we won't get that. You can't deny everyone from using the D7f that's just un fair for the ones who bought this game and want to fly them. Especially the amount of jasta squads out there. they out number the entente squads probably 10 to one right now. Entente really only have 1 squad that has numbers and have flown together for a bit compared to Jastas , And some of the jastas have been together for 100's of years.?   

 

And the camel, It's only good down low, get that up too high and it becomes worthless. Gets bounced on like a bunch of seagulls attacking a little kid with French fries. 

So give the 7f a full tank and see what happens, everyone wants to hand the camel with an over load of fuel. 

[emely]

Pour a full tank 7f, just so that no one could kick ass spad? ? These villains, from the Entente that climbed under the clouds, also someone must shoot down.  What's wrong with the Se5a?  It is his job to fight 7f.

10 hours ago, Adam said:

 

Thompson is hardly a newcomer. Formerly Barker and GrahamshereGT.

I apologize, I'm talking about a fight with four Bristol planes.  Names of pilots: Mike77, Semispud, Jedders, Mugue.  Tag Squadron SYN.

[SeaW0lf]

2 hours ago, NO.20_W_M_Thomson said:

And the camel, It's only good down low, get that up too high and it becomes worthless. Gets bounced on like a bunch of seagulls attacking a little kid with French fries.

 

It is a bit challenging, but it is still the best option for me to face a D7F above 7000ft. If the Fokker decides to turnfight, even vertically, I rather be on the Camel. You have to be very experienced to get some separation. But that works for both sides, since a casual Camel will get smashed as well. Which then I think even things out. It will depend on the pilot and how the engagement started, who was higher and who manages to keep its strengths better than the other.

[JGr2/J46_Sturm]

1 hour ago, SeaW0lf said:

 

It is a bit challenging, but it is still the best option for me to face a D7F above 7000ft. If the Fokker decides to turnfight, even vertically, I rather be on the Camel. You have to be very experienced to get some separation. But that works for both sides, since a casual Camel will get smashed as well. Which then I think even things out. It will depend on the pilot and how the engagement started, who was higher and who manages to keep its strengths better than the other.

I can attest to that. I prefer the DVa but it is rather outclassed by other entente crafts unless you are teamed with other DVa's so I do go with the D7f in most cases and in many cases I still get shot down by camels.  My biggest problem is patience because I usually start out fine but end up pushing for a hit and thus lose any advantage I start with. Tisk tisk.

[JGr2/J5_Klugermann]

A Camel,  in good hands,  is the most worrisome opponent in this game. Fortunately or unfortunately, depending on your perspective, most of the elite RoF camel jocks have not returned.