Jump to content
Alonzo

Combat Box by Red Flight

Recommended Posts

44 minutes ago, [Pb]Cybermat47 said:

@Alonzo

 

@9./JG54_GERMANWOLF has recently stated that he’ll happily teamkill anyone who happens to be between him and and enemy aircraft. Would it be possible to ban him from the server for this?

364E2342-9387-4C01-A9C0-425304B59EA6.thumb.jpeg.a9fa27190e5fd27a531917b1904b0d66.jpeg

 

To be fair, GW did get jumped on right away for the mistakes that can be seen in the video.  I take it that he was a bit pissed and decided to push buttons back.  Perhaps a critiques that are a bit more constructive will inspire a bit more of "I *actually DO* G.A.F." style of flying from him and other players that have a similar flying style.  

It's no fun when to make a video and instantly get (figuratively) bent over with a broken coke bottle in the comments.  I did that myself a few times and then realized I was a dick so, I stopped.   

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

 

I ran the data and you don't have any 262 kills on CB?

I didn't get the kills as far as I'm aware, just damaged them. My buddy is the one who got the kill.

 

EDIT: Just checked, apparently I did get the kill. My buddy got some too though.

Edited by Legioneod

Share this post


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

One of the people I flew Tempests with last night lost a vertical stabilizer on the ground during the mission "closing_of_the_ruhr_pocket_apr_1945". This is not the same issue as described in this post.

 

I believe the problem is with the orientation of the Koln airfield object (en:9000). The spawn pattern extends for 135m to the right of the object. So planes that spawn on the extreme right of the pattern may have part of the vertical stabilizer inside Block (en:8895). I think if you rotate the airfield object slightly to the left that will bring the 135m spot away from the block object enough to clear the vertical stabilizer.

 

Thanks Jim, I've fixed this (moved the spawn point forward slightly, and angled it around).

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


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

 

Thanks Jim, I've fixed this (moved the spawn point forward slightly, and angled it around).

That was my tail thank you both ;)

 

o7

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/9/2019 at 1:20 AM, Talon_ said:

 

Eindhoven has jets, though instead of bombing with them as they were used historically players are mostly using them to attack other players during takeoff and landing. It's also the map with the least historical basis so it's kinda bottom of the list for a balance pass in case we replace it with something a little more "real".

 

 

 

unit KG 51 was using the 262 for bombing, but Kommando Nowotny was operating them as fighters out of Achmer.

 

As for 262 vuItures, I certainly don't condone it, but really on the Eindhoven map there might be 3 or 4 max 262s up in the air at any given time, and they aren't even available till 15-20 minutes into a match. I can't see this really having more then a minor annoyance for the small minute amount of 262s that are doing this, and I can't see how that is really much different then the amount of tempests and mustangs that hang around 5-6 Km above German airfields, being vultures, while the AAA fire impotently at them.

 

It's unfortunately just part of how people play, and I don't think that is going to make any difference, removing them and limiting them, as you said they do not have an effect on match outcome.

 

the main problem for match balance is the fact that there are just more allied players, and when they have access to the P-38 (which is the best ground attack aircraft available in Bodenplatte) they are able to sweep maps. The P-38 is a much more appealing plane to fly then the Ju-88 as it's newer and can defend itself better, and it can carry a much better payload then the FW 190 A8, with 6 250kg bombs, or 4 500kg bombs. That combined with the fact that both the mustang and the tempests can carry decent bomb loads compared to the 109s (D9 can at least carry a comparable load), and the allies just have a better time destroying targets.

 

Perhaps a mild solution is to increase the ability level of the AAA to maximum, to where they are as accurate as in the TAW campaign, unless this has already occurred. this I think would solve some of the vultching problems, and prevent low flying p-38s from being able to clear targets so well, as the are able to come in low and do multiple passes without much worry of getting shot down making the most of there multiple bomb loads

Edited by CrazyGman

Share this post


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

Perhaps a mild solution is to increase the ability level of the AAA to maximum, to where they are as accurate in the TAW campaign, unless this has already occurred. this I think would solve some of the vultching problems, and prevent low flying p-38s from being able to clear targets so well, as the are able to come in low and do multiple passes without much worry of getting shot down making the most of there multiple bomb loads

 

AAA is already at Maximum at all player airfields.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For all the talk of unbalanced sides I don’t see a lot of truly absurd Imbalancing. Considering I used to regularly have to play with 3 or 4 to 1 odds against in every other server the occasional side imbalance of 2 to 1 doesn’t seem that egregious. Yesterday when I was playing sides were pretty well even plus or minus 5 players or so. Maybe it’s my time zone or playing time.

Edited by RedKestrel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing i think they could do is limit the number of Tempests or P-51s able to carry bombs

(or remove the ability from the Tempest all together as i think there was only 1 mission during ww2 where the Tempest carried bombs)

and maybe limit the P-38 numbers slightly also  to encourage (Force) people to instead use the P-47 as the standard fighterbomber as it was historically

 

(as an example in June 1944 the 9th airforce which was the Airforce in charge of Tactical operations/ supporting the ground forces in in northern europe

Operated 3 P-38 fighter groups, 2 P-51 Fighter groups and 13 P-47 fighter groups, and by Febuary 1945 only 1 remained with the other 2 having converted to the P-47 and P-51 in January and Febuary so the P-38 was pretty rare in comparison to the P-47).

 

And due to its slower cruising speed its more vulnerable to interception then P-38 (and even more so then the Tempest)

Edited by mattebubben

Share this post


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

Perhaps a mild solution is to increase the ability level of the AAA to maximum, to where they are as accurate as in the TAW campaign, unless this has already occurred. this I think would solve some of the vultching problems, and prevent low flying p-38s from being able to clear targets so well, as the are able to come in low and do multiple passes without much worry of getting shot down making the most of there multiple bomb loads

 

1 hour ago, Talon_ said:

AAA is already at Maximum at all player airfields.

 

From looking in the mission editor subforum, there may be a bug with AAA that causes it to track slower than it should. So whilst AAA at player airfields is already at max, there may be a problem preventing it from being as deadly as it should be. There are a number of these kinds of bugs (invisible AA is still a problem) but I think now the push to get 4.0 out the door has finished, maybe the developers will have time to catch their breath and fix a few outstanding issues. Fingers crossed, anyhow.

 

14 minutes ago, mattebubben said:

One thing i think they could do is limit the number of Tempests or P-51s able to carry bombs

 

We're slowly phasing out the bombs mod for Tempests as it seems quite ahistorical, especially for the missions we're building. We've also limited the P-38 further, the 4 x 1000lb bomb load is just too good so we're phasing that out (the 2,000lb bombs had already been disallowed on the P38).

 

These late war scenarios really are the golden age of the fighter-bomber, and the P38 is just head and shoulders above anything Germany can field. We do have one mission with no P38s, which is nice because it makes the P47 relevant again on that map.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Alonzo said:

 

We're slowly phasing out the bombs mod for Tempests as it seems quite ahistorical, especially for the missions we're building. We've also limited the P-38 further, the 4 x 1000lb bomb load is just too good so we're phasing that out (the 2,000lb bombs had already been disallowed on the P38).

 

These late war scenarios really are the golden age of the fighter-bomber, and the P38 is just head and shoulders above anything Germany can field. We do have one mission with no P38s, which is nice because it makes the P47 relevant again on that map.

Yeah I wish It were otherwise. I don't like the idea of limiting the P-38 bomb load as it's a awesome fighter bomber, but unfortunately the blue side just can't compare with it. the A8 is a great fighter bomber but it's loadout just pales in comparison to the P-38

 

At first I wanted more 262s availible, but over time I do now think the amount that are available on the Eindhoven map are probably ideal, as having 8 or 9 up in the air at any one time would be a bit much, even if they didn't change the overall outcome of the match.

 

As a bomber the 262 is mediocre as it is poor at dive bombing and has to fly at max speed to be survivible which limits what targets it can hit with it's modest single 500kg bomb (or if you want to be even slower 2 x 250 bombs). Which were a lot of the problems that KG 51 had with it.

Edited by CrazyGman

Share this post


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

Yeah I wish It were otherwise. I don't like the idea of limiting the P-38 bomb load as it's a awesome fighter bomber, but unfortunately the blue side just can't compare with it. the A8 is a great fighter bomber but it's loadout just pales in comparison to the P-38

 

At first I wanted more 262s availible, but over time I do now think the amount that are available on the Eindhoven map are probably ideal, as having 8 or 9 up in the air at any one time would be a bit much, even if they didn't change the overall outcome of the match.

 

As a bomber the 262 is mediocre as it is poor at dive bombing and has to fly at max speed to be survivible which limits what targets it can hit with it's modest single 500kg bomb (or if you want to be even slower 2 x 250 bombs). Which were a lot of the problems that KG 51 had with it.

 

If there's nothing that compares to the P-38's bomb load, then why are some Axis pilots getting 300+ ground targets recorded per sortie?  The last mission I flew had the top Axis bomber rolling with over 1600 points before the match ended.    

2 hours ago, Talon_ said:

 

AAA is already at Maximum at all player airfields.

 

http://combatbox.net/en/pilot/6554/ga603151/?tour=15

 

That's interesting because this pilot was strafing static targets on the ground and even took out 1 player lined up to take of right in front of me and not a AAA shot was fired.  I don't know why the link doesn't work but, the pilot's name is ga603151.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Mobile_BBQ said:

If there's nothing that compares to the P-38's bomb load, then why are some Axis pilots getting 300+ ground targets recorded per sortie?  The last mission I flew had the top Axis bomber rolling with over 1600 points before the match ended.

And then you look at the stats page, realize that other than the flight time, the axis have done more of all categories. More air kills, more ground targets destroyed, etc etc. And yet, the reds have won 90% of all missions. I do not think that allied bombers were more coordinated. More like the germans have to destroy a lot more stuff to finish an objective on the map. Add to that that some bombs are locked for whatever good or bad reason and yet tempests are still flying around with bombs. And p38 carries more than an a20, so why bother taking a „slower“ bomber as allied anyway.

 

it‘s fine for an axis fighter pilot that only goes for kills such as me, but nowhere near a balanced setting if you actually want to win the map as axis.
basically free food for air kills. Some guys don‘t even bother dropping the bombs to evade once attacked, cuz being killed gets you another load of bombs for your plane faster. And the german now has less ammo to try and stop the never ending one way trips of some dudes. Reminds me of someone on wings. No names mentioned.

 

and i‘ve not even said anything about team balance. At this point i also don‘t want to say it is even a reason, but it‘s just the opposite as before BoBP release, so i guess the other 50% that care to win a map are now „unhappy“.

Edited by IV./JG51-H_Stiglitz
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/10/2019 at 9:59 AM, Alonzo said:

From looking in the mission editor subforum, there may be a bug with AAA that causes it to track slower than it should. So whilst AAA at player airfields is already at max, there may be a problem preventing it from being as deadly as it should be. There are a number of these kinds of bugs (invisible AA is still a problem) but I think now the push to get 4.0 out the door has finished, maybe the developers will have time to catch their breath and fix a few outstanding issues. Fingers crossed, anyhow.

...

 

As per this post, try testing with a force complete command set to low or the attack area command set to medium and see if it makes a difference.

 

Update: I posted some test missions here.

Edited by JimTM

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, IV./JG51-H_Stiglitz said:

1.) And then you look at the stats page, realize that other than the flight time, the axis have done more of all categories. More air kills, more ground targets destroyed, etc etc. And yet, the reds have won 90% of all missions. I do not think that allied bombers were more coordinated. More like the germans have to destroy a lot more stuff to finish an objective on the map. Add to that that some bombs are locked for whatever good or bad reason and yet tempests are still flying around with bombs. And p38 carries more than an a20, so why bother taking a „slower“ bomber as allied anyway.

 

2.) Some guys don‘t even bother dropping the bombs to evade once attacked, cuz being killed gets you another load of bombs for your plane faster. 

 

3) and i‘ve not even said anything about team balance. At this point i also don‘t want to say it is even a reason, but it‘s just the opposite as before BoBP release, so i guess the other 50% that care to win a map are now „unhappy“.

 

1.) The player with 1600 points I mentioned had (IIRC) over 250 buildings + ground planes and vehicles.  The only target the Axis closed on that map was tanks.  I doubt it's because the expected work load for axis is unfair.  I was pointing at something else.  Perhaps there's a bug in the map?   

 

2.)  I guess maybe do like other Axis players do and wait for them to drop bombs before attacking them or vulch them while on final for landing?

 

3.) Get some of the Never-Red pilots who've permanently defected to Muricasturbation to come back to Axis if it's that bad.

 

I'm personally torn about it.  I don't mind balancing teams but, I don't want to have to leave the comms channel with my friends have been more Allied-leaning ever since I've met them. It seems that most Axis think that TeamSpeak is too "boomer" vs. Discord and I honestly don't care for Discord. 

So what do I do?  Fly Allied which has been heavy lately and get to socialize with my online buddies or fly Axis outnumbered and alone?  I mean I do take solo flights online and I don't always get on comms when people I know are on but, most of the time I do.

Edited by Mobile_BBQ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 11/9/2019 at 5:11 AM, Haza said:

however if you were to limit the guns and add armour as default you would very quickly limit the 262 as a fighter!


Perhaps vulching could be universally addressed by establishing a “vulch-free” airspace of a specific radius, up to a certain altitude, around bases, and auto-banning players who attack within said radius for say, 1 month? Similar to airspace restrictions over commercial airports.

 

Or, an alternative would be to set up low-level flak that ensures destruction below a certain altitude and within a certain radius. I recall some servers seemed to have such a setup several years ago.

 

The airspace restriction would be a non-resource-heavy stand-in for such flak.

Edited by kurtj

Share this post


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

 

If there's nothing that compares to the P-38's bomb load, then why are some Axis pilots getting 300+ ground targets recorded per sortie?  The last mission I flew had the top Axis bomber rolling with over 1600 points before the match 

 

Those players are using the Ju-88 as it can compare in regards to bomb load to the P-38 but it's slower, climbs worse, has mediocre defensive guns, terrible rear pilot visibility,  no forward pilot controled guns and much more difficult to take off in.

 

P-38s can simply take off and get there faster and easier, and can then effectively strafe targets as well. 

 

Ju 88 can take out a lot of stuff dropping 2 1000kg bombs on a virgin target, but it's not great at mopping up the rest after 

3 minutes ago, kurtj said:


Vulching could be universally addressed by establishing a “vulch-free” airspace of a specific radius, up to a certain altitude, around bases, and auto-banning players who attack within said radius for say, 1 month? Similar to airspace restrictions over commercial airports.

1. I don't know if you can actually implement that.

2. On a server with no icons on the map activated that is going to result in a lot of people banned. Espessially since in the heat of a long drawn out fights I have definitely pursued aircraft within proximity of their base without intending to. Heck just attacking the munitions depot on a Bridge to Far would likely result in 10+ players getting banned in one round 

Edited by CrazyGman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, CrazyGman said:

2. On a server with no icons on the map activated that is going to result in a lot of people banned. Espessially since in the heat of a long drawn out fights I have definitely pursued aircraft within proximity of their base without intending to. Heck just attacking the munitions depot on a Bridge to Far would likely result in 10+ players getting banned in one round 

This is a good point; if a technocrat warning could be incorporated, similar to when one reaches the edge of the map, this could be addressed in a simple manner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have said this before but I think it stands repeating: Why is it that things that were a problem for Red teams in the past were just fine, 'historic', all in my head, or just plane not a problem. But now that the Blue team is encountering some of the same problems they are things that must be addressed? I will grant, up front, that this isn't particular to this server but more a general trend but this seems to be one of the places this is playing out. When the Red team was outnumbered in frankly stupid proportions it wasn't an issue for the Blue team and even bringing it up as something that could be looked at could result in hostile responses. But now that the Blue team is seeing some small imbalance it is a super important issue that someone should really do something about. When 109's and 190's could blitz targets with half the bomb load of a PE 2 or more and still be capable fighters after the fact that was just a historical fact that shouldn't be changed for balance in any way. And do keep in mind that 109's and 190's can still do this bombing, they are just a little more vulnerable to intercept now that they are facing planes that aren't markedly slower than them. It seems to me this is a little of the shoe being on the other foot and people not liking the fit. If it wasn't an issue before why is it now?

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, CrazyGman said:

Those players are using the Ju-88 as it can compare in regards to bomb load to the P-38 but it's slower, climbs worse, has mediocre defensive guns, terrible rear pilot visibility,  no forward pilot controled guns and much more difficult to take off in.

 

P-38s can simply take off and get there faster and easier, and can then effectively strafe targets as well. 

 

 

I guess it comes down to the point of do we want things to be historical or balanced?  Even if we had every last model of plane and loadout that really existed, it still wouldn't work out to have both.  It actually seems that working with the full plane set we have now - even if historical restrictions were put on loadouts and whether the plane was present at the battle - wouldn't really give more balance and arbitrary restrictions in the name of balance would still give us neither balance or history.  

 

Share this post


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

1.) The player with 1600 points I mentioned had (IIRC) over 250 buildings + ground planes and vehicles.  The only target the Axis closed on that map was tanks.  I doubt it's because the expected work load for axis is unfair.  I was pointing at something else.  Perhaps there's a bug in the map?   

 

2 hours ago, Mobile_BBQ said:

If there's nothing that compares to the P-38's bomb load, then why are some Axis pilots getting 300+ ground targets recorded per sortie?  The last mission I flew had the top Axis bomber rolling with over 1600 points before the match ended.    

 

Tents. We used a lot of them for decoration but they die so easily in bomb blasts that they're skewing the stats when a single bomb nails 50.

 

2 hours ago, IV./JG51-H_Stiglitz said:

And then you look at the stats page, realize that other than the flight time, the axis have done more of all categories. More air kills, more ground targets destroyed, etc etc. And yet, the reds have won 90% of all missions. I do not think that allied bombers were more coordinated. More like the germans have to destroy a lot more stuff to finish an objective on the map.

 

Germans actually have to destroy fewer targets than Allies on Ruhr Pocket to win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Talon_ said:

 

Tents. We used a lot of them for decoration but they die so easily in bomb blasts that they're skewing the stats when a single bomb nails 50.

 

That is a reasonable explanation.  It certainly did look strange though. I guess it would only be an issue if CB looked at overall points to determine match winners.  But, it appears CB doesn't do that, so..... very good, carry on.  

Share this post


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

 

That is a reasonable explanation.  It certainly did look strange though. I guess it would only be an issue if CB looked at overall points to determine match winners.  But, it appears CB doesn't do that, so..... very good, carry on.  

 

Yeah I asked Alonzo if we could zero out the point value for tents and I think that's worked 😅

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, /SF/Disarray said:

I have said this before but I think it stands repeating: Why is it that things that were a problem for Red teams in the past were just fine, 'historic', all in my head, or just plane not a problem. But now that the Blue team is encountering some of the same problems they are things that must be addressed? I will grant, up front, that this isn't particular to this server but more a general trend but this seems to be one of the places this is playing out. When the Red team was outnumbered in frankly stupid proportions it wasn't an issue for the Blue team and even bringing it up as something that could be looked at could result in hostile responses. But now that the Blue team is seeing some small imbalance it is a super important issue that someone should really do something about. When 109's and 190's could blitz targets with half the bomb load of a PE 2 or more and still be capable fighters after the fact that was just a historical fact that shouldn't be changed for balance in any way. And do keep in mind that 109's and 190's can still do this bombing, they are just a little more vulnerable to intercept now that they are facing planes that aren't markedly slower than them. It seems to me this is a little of the shoe being on the other foot and people not liking the fit. If it wasn't an issue before why is it now?

 

Disarray,

Up until the release of the new aircraft the ratio of winning for either side appeared to be fairly even in this server. However, when one side is now winning at a ratio of 6:1 then I no longer consider that a " small imbalance".

That said, this is a gaming server and players are free to choose which side they want to play. However, if a server becomes stale then players will go elsewhere and numbers will start to fall, or players will just move to another game. 

Perhaps preventing this should be the goal!?

 

Regards

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do i get extra XP by winning a map, or what do I get by winning a map?

 

 

Bildergebnis für thinking meme emoji

 

Bildergebnis für thinking meme emoji

 

Bildergebnis für thinking meme emoji

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, MeoW.Scharfi said:

Do i get extra XP by winning a map, or what do I get by winning a map?

 

 

Bildergebnis für thinking meme emoji

 

Bildergebnis für thinking meme emoji

 

Bildergebnis für thinking meme emoji

.....Humility? 

 

jk

 

;)

Edited by CrazyGman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, IV./JG51-H_Stiglitz said:

cool, what's that? 1 map?

 

Yes which is a third of all the maps currently in rotation. The other two are much better balanced according to results posted earlier in the thread.

 

Edit: Germans also can destroy the tank columns without using bombs on Pocket as merely taking out all the trucks and AA is enough to complete the objective.

Edited by Talon_

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MeoW.Scharfi said:

Do i get extra XP by winning a map, or what do I get by winning a map?

 

 

Bildergebnis für thinking meme emoji

 

Bildergebnis für thinking meme emoji

 

Bildergebnis für thinking meme emoji

 

I thought to win a map, would require ground objectives to be attacked, so you are hardly up there unless we expect to see ace tank killer in a sortie videos now from you?

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, /SF/Disarray said:

I have said this before but I think it stands repeating: Why is it that things that were a problem for Red teams in the past were just fine, 'historic', all in my head, or just plane not a problem. But now that the Blue team is encountering some of the same problems they are things that must be addressed? I will grant, up front, that this isn't particular to this server but more a general trend but this seems to be one of the places this is playing out. When the Red team was outnumbered in frankly stupid proportions it wasn't an issue for the Blue team and even bringing it up as something that could be looked at could result in hostile responses. But now that the Blue team is seeing some small imbalance it is a super important issue that someone should really do something about. When 109's and 190's could blitz targets with half the bomb load of a PE 2 or more and still be capable fighters after the fact that was just a historical fact that shouldn't be changed for balance in any way. And do keep in mind that 109's and 190's can still do this bombing, they are just a little more vulnerable to intercept now that they are facing planes that aren't markedly slower than them. It seems to me this is a little of the shoe being on the other foot and people not liking the fit. If it wasn't an issue before why is it now?

I'm sorry but that's absolutely not an excuse...

I don't play much and when I do I go solo on the side low on players (not that it will change anything seeing my performances...), just to clear things up. I have absolutely zero side preference.

That something was wrong before, and nothing was done, cannot be a justification, in any way, for things being wrong now in the opposite direction.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Haza said:

I thought to win a map, would require ground objectives to be attacked, so you are hardly up there unless we expect to see ace tank killer in a sortie videos now from you?

 

Kamikaziing into the targets like Drinkins would do is a better way to win a map. So if everyone grabs a bomber and kamikazes into the target after running out of ammo just to take off again and repeat it, you would get a lot of WINNING THE MAP moves. Congratz. I rather value flying no matter ground attack or air to air than winning a map... 

  • Upvote 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MeoW.Scharfi said:

 

Kamikaziing into the targets like Drinkins would do is a better way to win a map. So if everyone grabs a bomber and kamikazes into the target after running out of ammo just to take off again and repeat it, you would get a lot of WINNING THE MAP moves. Congratz. I rather value flying no matter ground attack or air to air than winning a map... 

 

Oh I see, it's not about the winning, it's all about the participation, while not caring about winning! 

Well that perhaps is where lies the problem of imbalance if that attitude is shared. 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, MeoW.Scharfi said:

if everyone grabs a bomber and kamikazes into the target after running out of ammo just to take off again and repeat it, you would get a lot of WINNING THE MAP moves. Congratz.

I guess that‘s how the Japanese looked at it. Priorities...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

First and most importantly, I have to say that I've been really enjoying flying Combat Box (CB) since the new American aircraft (P-38, P-51, and Tempest) have come out despite  stutter issues due to the high volume of players. 

 

Having said that, I have noticed that the Allied side has never lost a map when I've played...so I did a quick check of the last 3 pages of the CB map results: 42 allied wins versus 4 Axis wins.  I don't think there's an easy solution here but it might be nice to drop down the size of the bomb load of the p-38 for starts to help with parity.

 

 

 

 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

First and most importantly, I have to say that I've been really enjoying flying Combat Box (CB) since the new American aircraft (P-38, P-51, and Tempest) have come out despite  stutter issues due to the high volume of players. 

 

Having said that, I have noticed that the Allied side has never lost a map when I've played...so I did a quick check of the last 3 pages of the CB map results: 42 allied wins versus 4 Axis wins.  I don't think there's an easy solution here but it might be nice to drop down the size of the bomb load of the p-38 for starts to help with parity.

 

 

 

 

 

This is an exact quote from one of the discussions being had on the discord last night. My personal perspective: I can't find evidence that bombloads larger than 2x1600lbs were carried by the 9th Air Force.

 

That being said my personal opinion is not the only thing that impacts loadout availability on CB.

p-38-tactical-chart.jpg

 

Edit: on the topic of balance, we normally look at missions with over 100 total players to rule out the influence of large squads going unopposed. A slightly out of date results table shows that A Bridge Too Far is pretty well balanced overall but Ruhr Pocket is all out of whack:

 

 

 

 

image.png.c1bd360de802542d6203dd117b5ea315.png

Edited by Talon_
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

 

Oh I see, it's not about the winning, it's all about the participation, while not caring about winning! 

Well that perhaps is where lies the problem of imbalance if that attitude is shared. 

Well, she makes a great point, actually. Survival is not accounted in winning conditions, and that should be the first and foremost goal. Flying includes landing back and people landing back get ZERO benefit of it in current system. Even though winning is lovely, doing it while chaining on way trips to death while bombing as fast as you can is hardly satisfying, imho.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, kalbuth said:

Well, she makes a great point, actually. Survival is not accounted in winning conditions, and that should be the first and foremost goal. Flying includes landing back and people landing back get ZERO benefit of it in current system. Even though winning is lovely, doing it while chaining on way trips to death while bombing as fast as you can is hardly satisfying, imho.

 

One thing I will say is that most players are not down for the suicide runs - this is reflected in the way Axis prefer not to fly their bigger bombers despite the fact that they have huge bomb loads - vulnerability.

 

Those that do like to Drinkins it will pretty much do it regardless of what we do with the mission design, though as you get no points for death there's very little personal gain in taking this approach.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, it's a tough position you are in, balance is a b*** :)

One could allow "advanced" planes only to thoses having shown their ability to do things while returning home, but I bet CB popularity would be tanking under such kind of strict rules... There's no win solution. I was just pointing that Scharfi's position is perfectly understandable, in my eyes moreso than the "win in any way or form", but that's my old eyes...

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...