News from the Russian Front (Dev Answers 54)

[SimFreak]

We are not planning an MP lobby where you can chat.

 

Jason

Easiness of organizing MP session kept original IL2 going for a while with large(st?) following in flight sim world....it would be nice if lessons learned from others would be implemented.  If not within game GUI, how about extended part of this forum with support of chat / lobbies and ability to see server list to join?

[FuriousMeow]

I never hung around in hyperlobby. I looked at servers and joined the ones I wanted. The only time I would chat was when stuck waiting those agonizingly long wait times for coops or wars to kick off.

 

Hyperlobby was needed because there wasn't a sufficient in-game MP server browsing capability. RoF, and subsequently BoS, do have a very capable in-game MP browser. The success related to the old Il-2's MP was not due to Hyperlobby's chat feature, it was due to the fact that a 3rd party server browser was required since the Il-2 software did not have a sufficiently capable in-game one.

[BraveSirRobin]

I never hung around in hyperlobby. I looked at servers and joined the ones I wanted. The only time I would chat was when stuck waiting those agonizingly long wait times for coops or wars to kick off.

 

Hyperlobby was needed because there wasn't a sufficient in-game MP server browsing capability. RoF, and subsequently BoS, do have a very capable in-game MP browser. The success related to the old Il-2's MP was not due to Hyperlobby's chat feature, it was due to the fact that a 3rd party server browser was required since the Il-2 software did not have a sufficiently capable in-game one.

 

This is almost certainly why they don't plan for in-game chat.

[LastRightsXIII]

  If not within game GUI, how about extended part of this forum with support of chat / lobbies and ability to see server list to join?

+1

[III/JG11_Tiger]

I never hung around in hyperlobby. I looked at servers and joined the ones I wanted. The only time I would chat was when stuck waiting those agonizingly long wait times for coops or wars to kick off.

 

Hyperlobby was needed because there wasn't a sufficient in-game MP server browsing capability. RoF, and subsequently BoS, do have a very capable in-game MP browser. The success related to the old Il-2's MP was not due to Hyperlobby's chat feature, it was due to the fact that a 3rd party server browser was required since the Il-2 software did not have a sufficiently capable in-game one.

I would have to disagree, when in a squad it was a great way to get co ops etc organised and running, you knew who was in the game before jumping in and as you said yourself it kept people online while waiting for games to start, in ROF I take a look if not many online I go and play something else, if there were people to chat with I would stick around until the numbers were there to play, only my opinion but I feel it was a very important feature in the success of the original IL2.

[Charlo-VRde]

If not within game GUI, how about extended part of this forum with support of chat / lobbies and ability to see server list to join?

 

I suspect the devs will make available for BOS what they made available for ROF at http://online.riseofflight.net/en/ .

 

That's what I check when I realize I have time for a virtual flight and want to know if I can have some MP fun.

 

Charlo 

[=RvE=Windmills]

I suspect the devs will make available for BOS what they made available for ROF at http://online.riseofflight.net/en/ .

 

That's what I check when I realize I have time for a virtual flight and want to know if I can have some MP fun.

 

Charlo 

 

Sure hope BoS will get a little more populated then that though.

 

Grand total of 2 people playing online as of now.

[ST_ami7b5]

Sure hope BoS will get a little more populated then that though.

 

Grand total of 2 people playing online as of now.

It's better in the evening.

[FuriousMeow]

I would have to disagree, when in a squad it was a great way to get co ops etc organised and running, you knew who was in the game before jumping in and as you said yourself it kept people online while waiting for games to start, in ROF I take a look if not many online I go and play something else, if there were people to chat with I would stick around until the numbers were there to play, only my opinion but I feel it was a very important feature in the success of the original IL2.

 

As I said, the success of Il2 was due to hyperlobby's requirement not because it was nice to have and chat. Entirely too much of Il2's MP success is placed on HL's chat function when in fact if it weren't for HL, there would have been no MP because in-game it lacked any form of capable MP game browser. It wasn't the chat that made it, it was simply HL because HL fulfilled a very real need (MP game browsing) that the game itself lacked in any useful manner.

 

MP chat lobbies made sense back in the day of IPX based games, or direct host/client connections of 16 or less players that required them to get organized. Things like HL and Kali aren't needed when the in-game MP browser functionality exists and it's clear what server has people, who is on there, what map it is, etc. Just join the server, it's up and running. Chat lobbies were necessary to organize the old style of MP, dedicated servers removed that need to organize and get everyone lined up and ready to join at the same time since it's persistent. MP chat lobbies are not the way of the future, they were the way of the past.

Edited February 26, 2014 by FuriousMeow

[FuriousMeow]

Sure hope BoS will get a little more populated then that though.

 

Grand total of 2 people playing online as of now.

 

Well, I don't know why it has to be repeatedly explained but the servers are populated I find 40+ on Wargrounds when I go there and secondly it's WWI which has a much smaller following than WWII. The majority of people that play WWI flying games do so single player for some reason.

Edited February 26, 2014 by FuriousMeow

[6./ZG26_Emil]

As I said, the success of Il2 was due to hyperlobby's requirement not because it was nice to have and chat. Entirely too much of Il2's MP success is placed on HL's chat function when in fact if it weren't for HL, there would have been no MP because in-game it lacked any form of capable MP game browser. It wasn't the chat that made it, it was simply HL because HL fulfilled a very real need (MP game browsing) that the game itself lacked in any useful manner.

 

MP chat lobbies made sense back in the day of IPX based games, or direct host/client connections of 16 or less players that required them to get organized. Things like HL and Kali aren't needed when the in-game MP browser functionality exists and it's clear what server has people, who is on there, what map it is, etc. Just join the server, it's up and running. Chat lobbies were necessary to organize the old style of MP, dedicated servers removed that need to organize and get everyone lined up and ready to join at the same time since it's persistent. MP chat lobbies are not the way of the future, they were the way of the past.

 

This is now academic as we've heard from the horses mouth but I don't really understand your view on this.

 

The success of IL2 was the fact that it was easy to provide every type of game play DF, Co-Op and online wars and because there was a chat function it was easy to advertise you missions/servers and get people to join. This is not really possible (or simple) the way things are with ROF and CLOD. If I want to do a 3 v 3 how do I find opponents and short notice, post on a forum? Not really workable doing this several times a night and several times per week. I could set up a server and wait for people to join or join the TS and spam it all night but it just seems like more of a hassle.

Well, I don't know why it has to be repeatedly explained but the servers are populated I find 40+ on Wargrounds when I go there and secondly it's WWI which has a much smaller following than WWII. The majority of people that play WWI flying games do so single player for some reason.

 

Maybe it's not the fact that it's WW1 but the fact that the play style in confined in MP so people either do airquake or offline.

 

I consider myself MP orientated but have almost never played ROF online...speaks volumes

[FuriousMeow]

Wars are predetermined, you don't chat those up on the fly and get them organized. Coops like they were with Il-2 won't exist with this. The servers are persistent 24/7. You can setup a quick host for a 3 vs 3 but then at the same time you say online is airquake. You do realise those small duels are the exact same thing?

 

So you never tried RoF online, and it's airquake - what speaks volumes is a pre-determined prejudice. Chat won't fix that. Online is not airquake, at all. There are targets other than just fighters. There are missions for bombers and recon.

 

Something speaks volume, but it isn't the lack of a lobby.

[6./ZG26_Emil]

Wars are predetermined, you don't chat those up on the fly and get them organized. Coops like they were with Il-2 won't exist with this. The servers are persistent 24/7. You can setup a quick host for a 3 vs 3 but then at the same time you say online is airquake. You do realise those small duels are the exact same thing?

 

So you never tried RoF online, and it's airquake - what speaks volumes is a pre-determined prejudice. Chat won't fix that. Online is not airquake, at all. There are targets other than just fighters. There are missions for bombers and recon.

 

Something speaks volume, but it isn't the lack of a lobby.

 

At least read what I wrote if you are going to disagree please.

 

DF doesn't interest anyone I know, the dynamic DF type missions are a compromise between DF and CO-OP aren't terrible but they still encourage a certain style of play which doesn't interest the co-opers. Personally I think this is why the numbers online for ROF and CLOD are low (in fact lower than you see for IL2 on HL) in my opinion it's a lack of chat even more than a lack of co-op, the latter can be worked around.

 

I'm not attacking ROF and by the way I have flown online (if you read what I said) but it's not how I want to play the game online so I just played around with it in QMB every now and then, it's a great game but I'm not a big fan of offline and neither I am a fan of DF servers, I felt the same way about CLOD, there's a lot I can put up with but not being able to find people to fly against isn't one of them.

 

Your attempt to 'educate' me on this matter is a little condescending if you don't mind me saying. I've played flight sims for years I know the difference between DF and an organised fight and it is a big one.

[FuriousMeow]

There's several reasons why CloD's numbers are low, chat isn't it.

 

There are dozens of MP only games out there which are highly successful that do not utilize a chat lobby. Why is this one different? There's even a WWII flying game that is highly successful, no chat lobby.

 

If you are going to disagree with me, then read what I wrote - there is a significant less following for WWI than WWII. Your response? That you own RoF and don't fly it online. Good for you, it's snowing outside right now here but that also doesn't have any bearing on the number of individuals that are interested in WWI. It's a fact, there are significantly less individuals interested in WWI and even less of them interested in going online. RBII/3D required Kali to run, that had a chat lobby. That game didn't last very long online, so that actually refutes the "chat lobby is needed" argument.

 

And see you can't even call the MP server MP for RoF, it's DF to you. It's not just dogfighting, it's a full on war that has mission objectives and is more coop depending on who is on. I've been escorted by scouts, I've escorted recon, I've encountered a squadron and I've encountered single patrols. In fact, that is exactly what WWI was. It wasn't large scaled coordinated missions like WWII, and the online environment for RoF better reflects WWI than any "coop" ever would. There are also wars frequently run, so apparently they are getting by quite fine sans lobby chat.

 

Again, this is the only genre where a chat lobby is "required for MP longevity." Which is simply false, it's simply what most of you all first got into with Il-2 and so know nothing else. Dedicated servers with in-game browsing capability remove the need for a lobby to find games, they are all right there in an easy to read list.

 

Il-2's online longevity was it's ability to be constantly evolved. It went from limited MP to dedicated servers capable of hosting over a hundred players. If it had stayed the same as when it was first released, chat wouldn't be able to save it - it would have died after a year. Everyone ignores that, Il-2 evolved over 10 years - THAT is what led to it's longevity. Not anything else.

Edited February 26, 2014 by FuriousMeow

[Rama]

To all: please stop the personnal stuff. You can argue and be clear and undertstandable without it.

 

To Emil: I'm not sure you know the RoF online mode well, at least about what's behind the words "dogfight mode" and "coop mode". Actually, MP mission designers (including for online wars) prefer to use the dogfight mode to create well scenarized missions, because this mode has much more possibilities (and easier to use) than the co-op mode (who also exists in RoF). And the non-existant features can be easilly replaced by dogfight features (combination of timers and triggers).

The RoF dogfight mode is offer much more possibilities than the RoF coop mode, and even more than the IL2 coop mode. So if the online mode isn't as popular as in other games, maybe it's because it's WWI, maybe it's because the editor is very complex to use (but not so much after the initial time investment)... but certainly not because it's a "dogfight mode".

[BeastyBaiter]

From the Russian forums, I just have to know what this thing says.

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.ru/topic/1225-obsuzhdenie-54-j-chasti-dnevnikov-razrabotchika/?p=139317

 

Stumbled onto it while looking for more yak pics.

Edited February 26, 2014 by =LD=King_Hrothgar

[6./ZG26_Emil]

To all: please stop the personnal stuff. You can argue and be clear and undertstandable without it.

 

To Emil: I'm not sure you know the RoF online mode well, at least about what's behind the words "dogfight mode" and "coop mode". Actually, MP mission designers (including for online wars) prefer to use the dogfight mode to create well scenarized missions, because this mode has much more possibilities (and easier to use) than the co-op mode (who also exists in RoF). And the non-existant features can be easilly replaced by dogfight features (combination of timers and triggers).

The RoF dogfight mode is offer much more possibilities than the RoF coop mode, and even more than the IL2 coop mode. So if the online mode isn't as popular as in other games, maybe it's because it's WWI, maybe it's because the editor is very complex to use (but not so much after the initial time investment)... but certainly not because it's a "dogfight mode".

 

Yes I am well aware of what can be done in ROF which is why I am not talking about co-op, I have played on Warclouds and the Syn server, I see them as a hybrid between what people used to describe as DF and CO-OP I don't think there's anything wrong with that style of game play for those that want it, very much the same as the ATAG server for CLOD.

 

Those that want something like the old IL2 co-op or the team versus team fights can still get that from the way ROF and BOS will work but it's trying to find opponents that is the hard part because there is no lobby. It is possible to email squads and organise something ahead of time but it's not really possible to find opponents on a whim. If I want to have a 1v1, 3v3 or 5v5 whatever how are we supposed to find the opponents? The same question applies to if I make a mission and want people to play it.

 

For some reason the mere mention of Co-Op has always caused such responses like FMs (we were verbally attacked on the yellow forum in the early days of CLOD as well when it was brought up) which is why my original post didn't mention it whatsoever, I was simply asking that we had some way to communicate with people before joining the game. I find it hard to understand why fellow players should feel so empowered to tell others how they should play the sim.

 

I think my posts were written politely and I've put my case across. I know there's many people out there who agree with me on this.

[=LD=dhyran]

We're not limiting online with 64 players, there must be something lost in translation. It's just a well know number among players that we use to describe a balanced player+AI mission. But there's no 64 players limit if you create your own misson and make it light for the CPU (i.e. add less bots).

 

Good news Zak,

 

i just put together a new super fast Server, 12 Cores 3.4 Ghz Xeons, 1TB all SSD as Raid, backup center two stages, disk -> tape.

I am pretty sure with that I-backbone of 100GB into the net it will perform good enough to get 100 players online  All i need are more Testers

[6./ZG26_Emil]

From the Russian forums, I just have to know what this thing says.

 

http://forum.il2sturmovik.ru/topic/1225-obsuzhdenie-54-j-chasti-dnevnikov-razrabotchika/?p=139317

 

Stumbled onto it while looking for more yak pics.

 

Those are screenshots from a documentary about people flying IL2 online. No clue what the captions say though

[Emgy]

Lobby chat would be nice, if it's not in-game, the community can always setup a semi-official IRC channel. IIRC, trillian has an always-on-top feature that lets you use IRC in-game without alt-tabbing, haven't tried it with Bos. I think some twitch streamers use that.

Edited February 26, 2014 by Calvamos

[[JG2]Phen0m]

All i need are more Testers

Anytime bro, let us know.

[Zak]

Those are screenshots from a documentary about people flying IL2 online. No clue what the captions say though

Some guy said that he finds shooting "unevident" and that he doesn't like "were we are going", and that guns should sound like a "firy-bloody orgy". We all thought it sounded funny so Weeper made this meme:)

 

Stumbled onto it while looking for more yak pics.

I got 4 screens and posted the same ammount to all platforms.

[Charlo-VRde]

Lobby chat would be nice, if it's not in-game, the community can always setup a semi-official IRC channel. IIRC, trillian has an always-on-top feature that lets you use IRC in-game without alt-tabbing, haven't tried it with Bos. I think some twitch streamers use that.

Another option would be a Twitter hashtag like #bos whenever someone is looking for coop. That could draw pilots who are offline and who read their Twitter feeds on their phones to hustle over to their gaming machines to hop into a mission.

 

Few simmers I know use Twitter, and it wouldn't surprise me if a bunch of folk derail this thread to rage against Twitter (social media are like troll bait on sim forums, must be our average older age )... But I'm just pointing out, like Calvamos, that there are 3rd party options that will likely rise up to fill a need, much like the devs plan on us using Teamspeak instead of them coding voice radio into BOS.

 

IMHO, the devs have their priorities in the right place.

 

Charlo

Edited February 26, 2014 by Charlo

[BraveSirRobin]

For some reason the mere mention of Co-Op has always caused such responses like FMs (we were verbally attacked on the yellow forum in the early days of CLOD as well when it was brought up) which is why my original post didn't mention it whatsoever, I was simply asking that we had some way to communicate with people before joining the game. I find it hard to understand why fellow players should feel so empowered to tell others how they should play the sim.

 

No one is telling you how you should play the game, they're telling you that coop style missions can be created using the RoF/BoS mission builder.  If you want a lobby where people can meet to join coops they can add one to the semi-official 777 teamspeak server.  That should solve all your problems.

[Emgy]

I forgot, TS3 also has OK text chat features

 

http://ts3.riseofflight.net/en/

Edited February 26, 2014 by Calvamos

[=RvE=Windmills]

Well, I don't know why it has to be repeatedly explained but the servers are populated I find 40+ on Wargrounds when I go there and secondly it's WWI which has a much smaller following than WWII. The majority of people that play WWI flying games do so single player for some reason.

 

 

I don't know why you feel the need to jump at the defence of the developers at every single post that is even slightly infavorable to them or the products they make with that condescending tone.

 

I asked to stop all personal attack there.

Last warning.

Edited February 26, 2014 by Rama

[BlackDevil]

So this is 64 human players plus AI? I regularly fly campaign missions with 60-70 humans and 40 plus AI bombers in CoD, please tell me that will be possible or am I missing something in translation?

 

BoS AI planes need much more CPU than CloDs, as in BoS the AI flies the real plane (same FM as players), and CloD AI planes are just "drones" without FM. This is a huge difference and should explain, that 40 AI planes will not be seen in BoS online missions. Important is, that ground units don´t eat too much CPU, as they are needed in MP -  AI planes are not ! AI planes are for SP, and there the "real FM" is a big advantage. Who wants to fly against "drones" in SP ?

[SimFreak]

Break Break

 

 

There is a post that we will get 5 days access....no eta yet.

[Georgio]

No, those are scary people, especially the guy with the third eye, I mean what's going on there... :D

 

Those are screenshots from a documentary about people flying IL2 online. No clue what the captions say though

Edited February 26, 2014 by Georgio

[Picchio]

Break Break

 

 

There is a post that we will get 5 days access....no eta yet.

 

WHERE WHERE

[6./ZG26_Emil]

No, those are scary people, especially the guy with the third eye, I mean what's going on there... :D

 

 

Ha ha did you watch the documentary it's nuts!

 

There was a guy who rigged the game up to give him electric shocks when he was shot down

Edited February 26, 2014 by JG5_Emil

[Sandhill]

Once again, Ian, thanks for the update of what's on the "home" boards!