Jump to content
Alonzo_

Combat Box by Red Flight

Recommended Posts

16 hours ago, Otto_bann said:

Regularly now, idiots clutter the chat to insult and endless trash talking. Is it possible to do something about it? It becomes ... painful. Thanks.

 

If the trash talk goes over the line, please let us know which pilots and we will investigate. A bit of smack talk is okay but we take sexist, racist, homophobic and religion-based slurs very seriously and we don't want that on our server. All chat is logged and archived and we can easily look at a player's past behavior.

 

11 hours ago, SCG_Riksen said:

@Alonzo

 

Thanks for the help setting up the Friday Night Flight. The map worked great and the server completely full. Awesome work!

 

Thank you @[TWB]Sketch for organizing it and all those who showed up!

 

Happy to! I'm glad it all worked out as I was out of the house for the evening. Sounds like the map picking script worked as it should have. Last night's event drew a full server, and when I checked the sides were evenly balanced! 146 pilots total, 132 air kills and nearly two thousand ground targets destroyed. http://combatbox.net/en/mission/3136/

 

If other groups would like to organize an event, Combat Box is happy to host. We are able to support an automated map roll at your event start time, as well as a choice of map. @SCG_Riksen also has "strategic recon" photographs available from the SCG website (section "mission documentation") for many of the objectives in a Combat Box mission.

  • Like 1

Share this post


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

 

If the trash talk goes over the line, please let us know which pilots and we will investigate. A bit of smack talk is okay but we take sexist, racist, homophobic and religion-based slurs very seriously and we don't want that on our server. All chat is logged and archived and we can easily look at a player's past behavior.


 I left the server a few minutes ago today for the same reason. The chat is cluttered with stupidities that don't concern the mission. This is I think (I hope) silly kids who talk about anything like today  money, real estate patrimony of their parents, their cars, etc... to finally ask to the best sayer if he is Jewish... The level is lamentable. Yesterday evening (Bruxelles  time) all pilots of german side have been called monkeys at so much time. I think a rule about this should also appear on the screen regulary and sometimes, to ban those pathetic guys. We can't use the chat anymore when thes guys are on it. I have been called a "sneaky bastard" because I have kill one of them in combat... It's sad.

 

On 11/30/2019 at 7:38 PM, Valkyrie77 said:

Shall I cry for you? Nobody can see other planes on expert mode.  Dry your eyes. 

 

Don't cry! But you can read the response of 2 other guys just below your answer about my post, wich prove you are wrong ;)

Edited by Otto_bann
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Otto_bann said:

I left the server a few minutes ago today for the same reason. The chat is cluttered with stupidities that don't concern the mission. This is I think (I hope) silly kids who talk about anything like today  money, real estate patrimony of their parents, their cars, their money, to finally ask to the best sayer if he is Jewish... The level is lamentable. Yesterday evening (Bruxelles  time) all pilots of german side have been called monkeys at so much time. I think a rule about this should also appear on the screen regulary and sometimes, to ban those pathetic guys. We can't use the chat anymore when thes guys are on it. It's sad.

 

I've reviewed the log from the mission just now and it's just people chatting. You'll get that on any server. Most people don't use the text chat for serious purposes -- if you're trying to coordinate with others consider jumping on Discord or another voice chat. Combat Box Discord has several channels and you can usually find wingmates there.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reminder you can completely hide the chat windows. 

The majority of the time where I see people chatting is when there's fairly few people on both sides so the chances of running into a hostile are very slim 

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

 

I've reviewed the log from the mission just now and it's just people chatting....

All other side pilots called monkeys or me sneaky bastard is just normal chatting...??? 😳 It's promote abuses IMO

 

@Dog : if I hide chat box, I can't use it.

 

Edited by Otto_bann

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Otto_bann said:

All other side pilots called monkeys or me sneaky bastard is just normal chatting...??? 😳 It's promote abuses IMO

 

awwww. :(((

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

December Combat Box Giveaway! Thanks to our generous Patreon supporters, we're able to give away another complete copy of BoX, to one lucky pilot. Now that Battle of Normandy has been announced, the winner can choose BoBP (premium) or BoN (premium, pre-order) as their prize. Just fly on Combat Box for at least 12 hours during December and you will be entered for the giveaway.

 

The fine print: All pilots who accrue at least 12 hours flight time during December will be eligible for the giveaway. Winner will be drawn at random and contacted via Discord and official IL2 forums. Best efforts will be made to contact the winner, but they must respond within 3 days or the prize will be given to first runner up instead. Winner may choose BoBP or BoN and may elect to gift the prize to a friend if they already own it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 71st_AH_Mastiff said:

Combat Box is stuck or down?

 

Discord is the best way to get ahold of us. Server had hung, control script noticed, restarted, and then the server didn't come up properly. I restarted it again and it's ok now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure if this the the right place to ask, but I have a lot of trouble getting into Combat Box server - often 4 or 5 attempts before I get in.  I can get as far as the tactical map often but then get thrown out.

 

Is there an IP to the server available so I can trace with PingPlotter?  I am in Colorado, and wonder if my packets are getting held up or lost at a Level 3 server - they are notorious for having oversold their service. 

Share this post


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

Not sure if this the the right place to ask, but I have a lot of trouble getting into Combat Box server - often 4 or 5 attempts before I get in.  I can get as far as the tactical map often but then get thrown out.

 

Is there an IP to the server available so I can trace with PingPlotter?  I am in Colorado, and wonder if my packets are getting held up or lost at a Level 3 server - they are notorious for having oversold their service. 

 

It is a bug. When it happens, restart your game and try again. Usually, the second attempt does it and allows you to join without an issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks Riksen, I'll try your suggestion.  :salute:

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If the axis players were even a little organized or had the least bit of commitment they would win more maps.  I hope your new BALANCE computations take into account the lack of effort on many of the maps they lose.  When they group up and try to hit targets they do well but most don't want to go low in enemy territory.  Yes, that would put them at a disadvantage and they just can't seem to handle that mentally.  For years they have to have a plane that climbs faster, goes faster, dives fast or they complain constantly about the program not being right.  I realize there are many things to keeping your server competitive but I want to choke every time I see you all making it easier for axis to win.  The bridge to far has Allied having to go 14 grids to the targets while the axis get to go only 5 grids.  Rhur pocket two of the Allied ground forces are in axis territory.  Well if our ground guys occupy it then it should be allied....we took it.  Yet that same map we have numerous columns deep in enemy territory and a supply depot deep in enemy territory.   Y29 has 3 of the big targets way deep.  Not one axis pilot has to go more than a grid into enemy.

 

Yes I only fly Allied.  Yes I am biased.  But I feel like you are giving them participation trophies like kids in soccer games these days.   And like the dozens of other servers over the years the Allied will keep winning maps because we want to.  We want to enough to fly under a bunch of 30mm packing axiz and put it on the line to win the freaking maps.  

 

SaluteSkis

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish that there was an in-game option to ignore chat from certain players. 

3 minutes ago, CIA_Elanski said:

If the axis players were even a little organized or had the least bit of commitment they would win more maps.  I hope your new BALANCE computations take into account the lack of effort on many of the maps they lose.  When they group up and try to hit targets they do well but most don't want to go low in enemy territory.  Yes, that would put them at a disadvantage and they just can't seem to handle that mentally.  For years they have to have a plane that climbs faster, goes faster, dives fast or they complain constantly about the program not being right.  I realize there are many things to keeping your server competitive but I want to choke every time I see you all making it easier for axis to win.  The bridge to far has Allied having to go 14 grids to the targets while the axis get to go only 5 grids.  Rhur pocket two of the Allied ground forces are in axis territory.  Well if our ground guys occupy it then it should be allied....we took it.  Yet that same map we have numerous columns deep in enemy territory and a supply depot deep in enemy territory.   Y29 has 3 of the big targets way deep.  Not one axis pilot has to go more than a grid into enemy.

 

Yes I only fly Allied.  Yes I am biased.  But I feel like you are giving them participation trophies like kids in soccer games these days.   And like the dozens of other servers over the years the Allied will keep winning maps because we want to.  We want to enough to fly under a bunch of 30mm packing axiz and put it on the line to win the freaking maps.  

 

SaluteSkis

 

@CIA_Elanski I too suggested not that long ago (here:

) that many of the balance concerns could be addressed by the Axis players themselves by making more of an effort to communicate and coordinate, however I think it is unfair to suggest that none of the Axis players are organized or committed to completing objectives. And particularly unfair to suggest that is the case in recent history. I have noticed far more people using the Axis comms in the CB DC server. Just last night we had a group of at least five of us that were working together to complete objectives on Frantic. And guess what - Axis won the map by completing ALL objectives in under 2 hours(http://combatbox.net/en/mission/3168/). And it wasn't just our group communicating and coordinating - there were others completing objectives as well and talking in team chat. I think it would be fair to say that Frantic is very even in terms of field placement relative to objectives and plane set options - curious whether or not you agree with that and what your take on the mission I am referencing is since you participated in it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, CIA_Elanski said:

I realize there are many things to keeping your server competitive but I want to choke every time I see you all making it easier for axis to win.  The bridge to far has Allied having to go 14 grids to the targets while the axis get to go only 5 grids.  Rhur pocket two of the Allied ground forces are in axis territory.  Well if our ground guys occupy it then it should be allied....we took it.  Yet that same map we have numerous columns deep in enemy territory and a supply depot deep in enemy territory.   Y29 has 3 of the big targets way deep.  Not one axis pilot has to go more than a grid into enemy.

 

A Bridge Too Far is based on historical location of the bridges. Airfields are fixed in IL2, we have to use the fields that the developers provide. Here's a picture of the closest spawn points.

 

abtf-distances.thumb.jpg.8da93aebc3c2a98694be0f55d0777dae.jpg

 

For Ruhr Pocket, the location of the front line is not the same as the influence zones which determine if someone gets captured or not. Here's the map around Dortmund:

 

ruhr-pocket-influence.thumb.jpg.68f37fdca5851923f30d3d4a01d02638.jpg

 

The dark blue is the influence zone where someone would actually be captured. The Allied Infantry Encampment (bottom, left) is inside the front-line, yes, but the actual German influence zone is pushed way back. Pilots bailing out over Dortmund (middle, top) or the Infantry Encampment, or even the German Airfield Werl (top, right) will not be captured.

 

Y-29, again, is based on historical events. Yes, Allied pilots need to go deeper into German territory to destroy targets. But to defend, they can simply patrol their airfields, some of which are less than 60 seconds apart given modern superprop air speeds. Germans trying ground strikes against Y-29 and Y-32 are 95% of the time on a one-way trip.

 

At the end of the day, you are 100% right: the side that has better coordination on ground strikes will win. But I've been on maps where I see that better organized side being red or blue, it doesn't seem to me like there is one side that can claim better organization. A lot is down to whether there is a dedicated coordinated squad flying, or an impromptu 'squad' flying on the CB discord for one side or the other.

 

The biggest problem would be if Combat Box got a reputation as a "favors side X" type of server or to have a "Z can never win this map" type of map. Pocket was unwinnable by blue until we changed it. Here's December so far:

 

image.png.4486fcdba38c132a4450a764499b2e31.png

 

That seems pretty reasonable to me. We also have a 683 red, 306 both, 781 blue pilot breakdown. That's a little bit blue biased but it's not so far off.

 

Game balance is really hard. We're trying to make fair, fun, interesting, asymmetric maps. And that's hard, and we won't get it right all the time. We do appreciate the feedback. If you have specific suggestions, we're all ears (remember that some items on the map, such as airfields, are fixed).

  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think Elanski's issue is so much the map geometry. It is the implicit advantage the map geometry imparts combined with the other concessions that are made to the team who gets the map advantage already; at least that is my reading of what he said. On the bridge too far mission, for example, the Allies have to fly deep into German territory to either attack or defend and that is how it should be as you have said. But, as you have also said, Allied rides aren't able to run 150 grade fuel to balance against the Germans only having G-14's and A-8's to counter with even though the fuel was widely available to the Allies in that part of the world at that point in the war. So when presented with a historical reality the Allied players are supposed to 'suck it up and deal with it' but the German players... Well the German players need a little helping hand to deal with this historical reality. It seems a little like having one's cake and eating it too for the Germans. I can see the other side of this argument, I really can. But I also know what it is to have a less powerful plane, by a considerable margin, and have that fight. I also know that it can be won. If a Yak 1 can fight and win against a G-4 then surely a G-14 can win the fight against a plane that is only a little faster or one that climbs better.

 

The bomb loads for the P-38 are a similar example. Allied teams were making good use of the 4x 1000 lb bomb load and winning maps. German players complained about it so it was taken away. But your screenshot there shows clearly that the German teams are killing about twice the targets of the Allied team despite flying about the same number of man-hours. Granted this is after that change but it wasn't the case that the Allied teams were destroying that many more ground targets when the 4x 1000 lb bomb load was available as I recall.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think the numbers mean much with how asymmetrical some of the maps are. Y29 basically has almost no hittable targets for the allies, aside from the two AA positions one of which could be destroyed by 2 P38s in a single run. Afterwards nobody is going to go hit ground targets that are several grids (!!!) behind the enemy bases. The only alternative is hovering over the airfields and murdering the occasional defenseless suicide jabos trying to actually do the mission, while there fighter cap is god knows where. This gets old real fast.

 

Bridge too far I 'kind of' like but there is almost no choice in what to strike for the allied side. You hit the closest panzers first, and then everything is very far away and a nightmare against a halfway decent defending team. The Germans can hit the north with mostly impunity due to proximity to their bases, and defend most their targets relatively easy.

 

I appreciate the novel idea behind the historical maps, and I'd probably enjoy them if they'd show up on special occasions. I certainly haven't been playing that much, but I feel these two are in the rotation every single time I play.

 

I also strongly feel the server is very very hard to fill with these 2 running. They just do not work well with low numbers due to how scattered everything is. That makes it both hard to get air combat and to do ground striking.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, /SF/Disarray said:

[...] Allied rides aren't able to run 150 grade fuel to balance against the Germans only having G-14's and A-8's to counter with even though the fuel was widely available to the Allies in that part of the world at that point in the war. So when presented with a historical reality the Allied players are supposed to 'suck it up and deal with it' but the German players... Well the German players need a little helping hand to deal with this historical reality. It seems a little like having one's cake and eating it too for the Germans.

@/SF/Disarray If historical accuracy is the goal, the number of Axis planes and pilots should be limited so that Allies have a 10:1 numerical advantage. There should be waves of Allied AI bombers dropping on Axis map objectives every 30 minutes. Each mission would last 30 minutes by attrition with an Allied victory.

 

I hope we can both agree that balance should be of a higher priority than historical accuracy when designing multiplayer missions. Right now, the December tour looks fairly balanced to me. 

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, /SF/Disarray said:

The bomb loads for the P-38 are a similar example. Allied teams were making good use of the 4x 1000 lb bomb load and winning maps. German players complained about it so it was taken away. But your screenshot there shows clearly that the German teams are killing about twice the targets of the Allied team despite flying about the same number of man-hours. Granted this is after that change but it wasn't the case that the Allied teams were destroying that many more ground targets when the 4x 1000 lb bomb load was available as I recall.

 

But given that we don't know the breakdown of those hours flown, all we can say is "given the maps, planes, and hours flown, blue destroyed more ground targets." But there are tons of variables there. What's a ground target? Does a tent with 500 durability count as a ground target? Has one side had only hardened dugouts and hangars to kill?

 

Unfortunately, because we have so few tools to analyze the map results, we need to stick a finger in the air and kind of try to use player feedback to figure out what to tweak, then tweak and see if the results are good. We're working on better tools, attached is a heat map of action on a map. As far as I know we're the only server building tools like this to help us balance maps.

 

30 minutes ago, =RvE=Windmills said:

I appreciate the novel idea behind the historical maps, and I'd probably enjoy them if they'd show up on special occasions. I certainly haven't been playing that much, but I feel these two are in the rotation every single time I play.

 

I also strongly feel the server is very very hard to fill with these 2 running. They just do not work well with low numbers due to how scattered everything is. That makes it both hard to get air combat and to do ground striking.

 

And we appreciate the feedback, but if you scroll back in the thread you can see we get the opposite feedback too -- some people love the nod to history and the feeling that  they are part of the imagined recreated scenario. Some folks have specifically asked for "strategic" targets deep in enemy territory that they can level bomb with heavies. We can please some of the people some of the time...

 

On map size, I am very sensitive to the feedback that the maps are too big, and I think A Bridge Too Far is on the outside edge of what is reasonable. I don't think we'll do one that big again. We're also adding "classic" non-Rhineland maps into the rotation each week, both to showcase our older maps and add variety, and because those maps tended to be smaller. We currently have about a 30 hour rotation to the map set, so hopefully you won't see the same maps too often even if you play at the same time each day. Of course if a map finishes early because one side wins outright, the rotation will be shorter overall.

 

Edit: Forgot heat map.

plot-1-merged-pocket.png

Edited by Alonzo
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Creep, I agree with you on that in so far as it goes. I'm not looking for 100% historical realism in outcome and am willing to see concessions made in setup given the limitations of the planes we have available to us and the nature of the game. What I take issue with is when that argument appears to only cut one way. Allies have to fly deep strike missions? Fine. The Germans are on the back foot, defending against one of the largest counter offensives in world history, targets deep in enemy territory make sense. The Allied ground effort is pushing the line back so naturally Allied ground targets that require defense will be closer to the line and I can see arguments for placing them on the other side of the line. This means Germans will have easier tasks in both attack and defense in so far as target placement goes. That makes sense to me. What doesn't make sense is why Allied planes should be limited to only match what the Germans are given when the historic realities that guide the map making paint a different picture. The Germans were pushing G-6's and 14's for the most part in these fights and were facing 51's and Spit 9's running 150 grade fuel for a lot of it and of the two the G-6 was the more common for most of the fight. So the Germans get their historic rides but the Allies get the plane but not the fuel? On top of that the Germans field more G-14's than history would suggest. I figure this is due to the G-6 being a collector plane that everyone might not have. People need planes they can use to play the game. Fair enough. I still don't see why that should necessitate weakening the Allied team in an ahistoric manner. I hope that this isn't misinterpreted or misunderstood. I appreciate both the need and the effort for balance in the mission set up. I just don't agree with some of the decisions.

 

As for 'nobody attacking targets deep behind enemy lines'... Well that is just incorrect. I attack those convoys and airfields and other stuff way in the back. I am not alone in that either. Granted those deep strikes tend to be done by organized groups but you will find that is the best way to do those kinds of things. I get that Windmills and other players might not like the prospect of flying deep strike missions. Fortunately there is good news on that front. Not everyone needs to attack the targets way in the back. Someone has to defend the front line stuff while others are off doing the ground attack. There is something for everyone to do. This may well result in times when those targets at the back don't get hit, true. But that is the nature of a game as opposed to a military operation. Nobody can tell you that you must do X in a game and sometimes that causes things to fall apart.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@/SF/Disarray I believe that Allied still holds the upper hand in terms of the fighters available to each side on Bridge; G-14s and A-8s vs Tempests and P-51s? I do not believe that the 150 octane fuel or the +11 boost make a tremendous difference when you consider the planes and options the Axis have available. Maybe this is my bias showing as I have been flying Axis almost exclusively since the release of BoBP in CB. Someone please correct me if I am wrong here.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The mission that is being run right now, Legend of Y-29, perfectly illustrates my feelings on this. The Germans have K-4's and D-9's but there is no 150 fuel to be had and no boosted saber engines on the Allied side. So the fuel is limited on a Bridge too Far because there aren't K-4's to counter it. But now there are K-4's and no fuel. It is this inconsistency that bothers me.

 

Another thing that has occurred to me is while the Allied 4x 1000 lb bomb load was stripped out for fairness the Germans retain their 4x 1000 lb bomb load. I just don't see how this advances an even playing field.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, /SF/Disarray said:

Another thing that has occurred to me is while the Allied 4x 1000 lb bomb load was stripped out for fairness the Germans retain their 4x 1000 lb bomb load. I just don't see how this advances an even playing field.

 

The P38 is an incredible plane, and can transition from the bomber to the fighter role with very little downside. We restricted it slightly because it was simply too good and way better and more versatile than anything the Germans have for ground attack. You need to look at a lot more than just the permissible bomb load to decide if something is fair. 6 x 500lb bombs on the P38 is still a hell of a punch and makes big dents in the types of objectives we have on Combat Box.

 

Our design goals are roughly:

  1. Make a fun server that pilots want to fly on
  2. Ensure maps are approximately balanced and fair (because 1)
  3. Ensure maps and plane sets are varied (because 1)
  4. Build maps that are inspired by historical events (because this is cool, and people like it, and because 1)
  5. Do something other than rebuild Wings or KOTA or TAW. Hence our late war emphasis and nods to history.

We try to balance close to a 50/50 winrate. We'll never be exactly there, because the planes and the maps are asymmetric. 60/40, that's probably fine. 80/20 or 100/0, well that's a map that needs to be adjusted.

 

We could just unlock all planes all mods and scatter identical targets down a north-south front line, but I think that would be pretty boring to everyone.

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 4

Share this post


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

Another thing that has occurred to me is while the Allied 4x 1000 lb bomb load was stripped out for fairness the Germans retain their 4x 1000 lb bomb load. I just don't see how this advances an even playing field.

 

Hmm, not to be rude but that strikes me as a little disingenuous. There is no Axis plane that can carry that kind of armament AND perform in a fighter role. If Allied had fewer A-20s or had their bomb loads restricted, then I could see Allied-only players having cause to be irritated.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

The mission that is being run right now, Legend of Y-29, perfectly illustrates my feelings on this. The Germans have K-4's and D-9's but there is no 150 fuel to be had and no boosted saber engines on the Allied side.

 

This is the historical situation - Allies didn't have 150 grade fuel at the time on the continent. It arrived approx. 3 weeks later. We thought including the historical fuel situation would be more fun for this one given that it's mostly a defense mission for allies and that the Germans are usually running pylons.

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to let you folks know, especially @/SF/Disarray and @CIA_Elanski who have been quite direct in their feedback:

  • We've made the German Panzer targets easier to destroy on A Bridge Too Far and have opened up aircraft options for both sides at the closest airfields to the bridges. My observation when flying that map, though, is that the Allies tend not to destroy those close Panzer targets as often as you would expect -- maybe they are going for the deep strike targets where they expect less fighter cover instead?
  • We've unlocked +11 boost for the Tempest on the Y-29 map.
  • We're very committed to achieving balanced, fun maps. We'll continue to use a nod to history, but we're also going to be inconsistent about our fuel and loadout choices, depending on the map. We think balance is more important than exact historical accuracy. Sorry for the inconsistency, but that's the way it is.
  • We have a bunch of tools we use for balancing the maps, and we look at them every week to see what might need to be changed. We don't mindlessly change stuff to achieve 50/50 win rates, but when something is very skewed, we're more likely to change it. 
  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really love flying.  That always makes me reflect on the people who spend countless hours running the server, making maps, constantly updating things and having to listen to us bare our souls in the forums.  I fly here because you have a great server set up and pilots to fly against.  So I should have started with what a great server you have instead of my rant :)

 

It is not the server I am at odds with but mostly the peeps who complain about the Allied and balance.  Cripes for years we had to fly P40s, Yaks, Lagg etc.  I love the new planes.  I realize you all have great brain pans or this all wouldn't be possible so I know you aint mindlessly changing stuff.  Truely, I believe when the Axis want or are motivated to win maps they can.  Allied have been for the past 20 years I have flown flight sims.  Back on WarClouds there were numerous maps won by p38s (p38L) by the way, hitting tanks all spread out.  we had 6 bombs and 10 rockets.  We made pass after pass on the deck turning loose rockets and bombs.  Took 5 minutes and yup, we got shot down with half our ord still on.  If you flew axis, you would fly in, drop one bomb and get 4 tanks because, for balance, they grouped the four tanks touching each other.  So the fw190 would get 4 tanks in 3 seconds and leave at high speed.  He had almost no risk.  

 

I feel the Allied are already limited by the devs and then the server admin make choices to limit us further.  We have the crappiest P47D the devs could give us.  No 150 fuel for it, no paddle prop, no P47M which was flown in WWII.  No P38L with boosted ailerons to improve roll or 150 octane.  We have no B24, B17, B25, B26, P61.  We are limited.  Probably some german crap that wasn't added yet either.  

 

This is an old topic.  I believe the axis would win as many as the Allied if they wanted to.  No matter the odds, no matter the ord or planes or maps but for two decades the mental mind set of the Allied is win maps.  That is who is attracted to the Allied side.  Those who want to be Hartmanns typically choose to fly axis.  So trying to get the axis to win maps is difficult because that is not what the typical axis player wants to do.   Every server over the years has tried to make it "Balanced" and when they try the axis will win a month or two here and there.  Then they go back to being Hartmanns and Allied will win the next 7 out of 9 months because of their dedication to winning.  

 

So you and your fine team that run this server and put all the effort to make a quality server can look back at the past 20 years and realize it is a really hard struggle to get the "balance" you are hoping for.  

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


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

Just to let you folks know, especially @/SF/Disarray and @CIA_Elanski who have been quite direct in their feedback:

  • We've made the German Panzer targets easier to destroy on A Bridge Too Far and have opened up aircraft options for both sides at the closest airfields to the bridges. My observation when flying that map, though, is that the Allies tend not to destroy those close Panzer targets as often as you would expect -- maybe they are going for the deep strike targets where they expect less fighter cover instead?
  • We've unlocked +11 boost for the Tempest on the Y-29 map.
  • We're very committed to achieving balanced, fun maps. We'll continue to use a nod to history, but we're also going to be inconsistent about our fuel and loadout choices, depending on the map. We think balance is more important than exact historical accuracy. Sorry for the inconsistency, but that's the way it is.
  • We have a bunch of tools we use for balancing the maps, and we look at them every week to see what might need to be changed. We don't mindlessly change stuff to achieve 50/50 win rates, but when something is very skewed, we're more likely to change it. 

I absolutely love flying on CB, and appreciate all the work on the server, and your responses, and understand it's impossible to make everyone happy.

 

That said, I have to agree with Elanski - maps are too favorable to Blue.  Now that the initial rush of allied aircraft release is over, more people are flying blue and they are winning more maps despite (at least at the times I fly) being far less committed and organized in attacking objectives. The times they are committed and organized, blue side easily overwhelms the map. My specific suggestions:

 

Bridge too far - Get rid of 2 of those extremely difficult strategic objectives (fuel, munitions, industrial) that are distant, stacked with too many buildings, ahistorical, and not logically related to 2TAF objectives in this operation. Add 2 more vehicles/guns/bunkers objectives near the frontlines, maybe 1 on either side of XXX Corps' salient.

 

If not that, then just give us P-38's with bombs so we have a reasonable chance of destroying these objectives.

 

Battle over Eindhoven - get rid of the jet fuel bridge being magically repaired in 30 minutes. Give German engineers all the credit you want, but this is absurd. 262's just dominate this map (even when it's just the initial 2).

 

Y-29 - Several allied objectives are behind the German airfields, while German objectives are nearly equi-distant between each side's bases. Move 2 of the German objectives (maybe Y32 and B78 back behind usable allied bases.

 

Closing the Ruhr - Also distance issues. Move the rally point target to be some kind of blocking force near the frontlines.

 

Crossing the Rhine -Don't know, never on this map at the times I fly. Please randomize the map rotation!

 

Again, appreciate the server and the goals with map creation. Thanks!

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

IMO part of the issue is that Allies for this theater lack any other "strategic" bomber than the A-20.  Yes, on maps where the P-38 can be kitted for ground attack it helps, but without it and the A-20 being to only heavy-mover option, said A-20 is a fish in the barrel at this point of the war. 

 

There is one caveat though, and that is, most of the bomber pilots I know go on deck runs straight to and from the target and strategy is lacking. Last night, I escorted an A-20 on a level-bombing run to an airfield.  Even though they didn't 'score' as high as dive-direct placed bombs, they got in, destroyed a few objects and got out.  They maintained their altitude and when an enemy did show up, those of us around could spot them easier and give the A-20 maneuvering instructions that wouldn't have been possible with that pesky ground blocking the way at 150m altitude.  The A-20 helped me drag and bag him while getting good human-controlled gunner hits on as well.  

 

Good escort and change of commonly accepted tactics could well be a helper of survivability given the lack of plane set options concerning Allied bombers.  Also, though it often times takes longer, infiltration and exfiltration planning can reach the targets "blocked" by enemy spawn airfields.  The real question is: "If longer flights are necessary to successfully reach the target and get home, is the amount of "result" from a successful attack worth it compared to the "results" the opponent gets when their targets are set up to basically be charged at by ground attackers that have more diverse options in plane selection and also have better performing planes?"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 69th_Bazzer said:

Bridge too far - Get rid of 2 of those extremely difficult strategic objectives (fuel, munitions, industrial) that are distant, stacked with too many buildings, ahistorical, and not logically related to 2TAF objectives in this operation. Add 2 more vehicles/guns/bunkers objectives near the frontlines, maybe 1 on either side of XXX Corps' salient.

 

If not that, then just give us P-38's with bombs so we have a reasonable chance of destroying these objectives.

 

Battle over Eindhoven - get rid of the jet fuel bridge being magically repaired in 30 minutes. Give German engineers all the credit you want, but this is absurd. 262's just dominate this map (even when it's just the initial 2).

 

Y-29 - Several allied objectives are behind the German airfields, while German objectives are nearly equi-distant between each side's bases. Move 2 of the German objectives (maybe Y32 and B78 back behind usable allied bases.

 

Closing the Ruhr - Also distance issues. Move the rally point target to be some kind of blocking force near the frontlines.

 

I appreciate the kind words and the specific suggestions. Here are some responses, and my thinking on this. At the end of the day I don't think there's always an easy 'right' answer to map design and balance.

 

Bridge: There are 3 German targets right at the "hot spot" of the line of bridges. I rarely see these destroyed. Are people reading the target description and understanding that at a "panzers" target they should probably be destroying tanks? Map was adjusted this morning to make it about 10-20% easier to kill these Panzer objectives.

 

"Give us a P-38 with bombs": The way IL2 building destruction works, you're actually in pretty good shape with 6 x 500lb bombs, especially if you have time to loiter or want to carpet bomb a specific section of the target. I'd argue P38 with 6 x 500lb is roughly equivalent to the Bf-110 with a 2 x 500kg + 6 x 50kg load, and the P-38 transforms into a potent dogfighter afterwards.

 

Y-29: The Allies are supposed to be on the back foot for this mission. The airfields attacked by the Germans are a subset of the actual airfields attacked during Bodenplatte.

 

Pocket: Blue has 3 targets pretty close to the front to defend: two airfields and the fortified troops. There are also moving convoys that are closer to the Allies the sooner they get to them in the map. This is interesting surely!

 

Remember, you don't have to destroy all enemy objectives to win. Once an objective is destroyed, it helps concentrate the remaining effort of the team (a big reason that organized squads win maps -- once they wipe out one target, random non-squad members naturally concentrate their efforts too). I would have tons more sympathy if I saw red clearing "close" targets and then getting stuck on longer range ones, but I just haven't experienced that. Red does it pretty well on the Crossing the Rhine map, but then there are 3 very obvious targets that are super hard for blue to defend. And for each of these comments about moving stuff closer to the front, I have tactical bomber squadrons who want options to take off further from the front line and fly higher and longer and level-bomb enemy targets.

 

Again, this is great input, and the admin team (there are 4 of us) will discuss and take it on board. I'm not saying "no changes" but I'm also trying to make this a team effort, so I need to discuss with the team. We also have a specific "community liaison" channel on the Discord where we pull in representatives of the bigger squadrons and ask for their thoughts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you Alonso.  To make my point.  There are 20 axis on.  not one ground object hit or destroyed.  5 allied hitting targets.  Oh, and if you have seen the flight model of 110?  it is second only to a spit in turn and climb.  That or some are hacking the thing.  it is far superior to the p38 flight model for dog fighting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, CIA_Elanski said:

Oh, and if you have seen the flight model of 110?  it is second only to a spit in turn and climb.  That or some are hacking the thing.  it is far superior to the p38 flight model for dog fighting.

 

I think it's always been like that.  Try to avoid head-on jousting matches vs. 110's in 1v1 QMB Ace level....     

I was on the CB 'classic' map with the Russians to the East, Americans and British to the west and Germans in the middle (I forget the name).  Was flying the La5FN and got into it with a 110.  The only thing I could do was go full-boosted vertical and try to make him stall out climbing up after me.  I couldn't out turn him or out accelerate him in hopes of dodging his shots and running away.  Luckily, at the same time as his 109 buddy showed up, 2 or 3 friends showed up too and saved me.  I was able to RTB heavily beat up by the 110.  I don't recall a single shot of it coming from the tail gunner.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Question: So what's with the removal of the DB605DC?

The main reason I liked this server was because there was no trying to limit/balance anything unlike WoL Wings of Lastresort. Looks like the whining and complaining about uber german engineering and micro management to please a few has made it over here too. Shame.

Share this post


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

 

I think it's always been like that.  Try to avoid head-on jousting matches vs. 110's in 1v1 QMB Ace level....     

I was on the CB 'classic' map with the Russians to the East, Americans and British to the west and Germans in the middle (I forget the name).  Was flying the La5FN and got into it with a 110.  The only thing I could do was go full-boosted vertical and try to make him stall out climbing up after me.  I couldn't out turn him or out accelerate him in hopes of dodging his shots and running away.  Luckily, at the same time as his 109 buddy showed up, 2 or 3 friends showed up too and saved me.  I was able to RTB heavily beat up by the 110.  I don't recall a single shot of it coming from the tail gunner.  

It was Operation Frantic and that 110 was me. I will admit I was shocked; playing on WoL before 4.002 the 110 g was very heavy and anytime anyone got on my 6 I'd just pray a friend/my gunner was professional. 

 

But after dropping flaps and staying with you in turns I was thinking "what the **** happened to the flight model?!"

 

On a side note...on one of your verticals I had you lined up but when I pulled the trigger the cannons didn't fire. Realized the key binding for cannon and mg wasnt working so just tickled you with 7.62s.

 

Regardless....fun little dogfight but after that realized I might try and just turn fight with the 110 now next time I take it out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was a fun little dogfight when we had the dancefloor to ourselves.  I'm just glad help arrived at the same time the 109's did.  

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Canuck52 said:

It was Operation Frantic and that 110 was me. I will admit I was shocked; playing on WoL before 4.002 the 110 g was very heavy and anytime anyone got on my 6 I'd just pray a friend/my gunner was professional. 

 

But after dropping flaps and staying with you in turns I was thinking "what the **** happened to the flight model?!"

 

On a side note...on one of your verticals I had you lined up but when I pulled the trigger the cannons didn't fire. Realized the key binding for cannon and mg wasnt working so just tickled you with 7.62s.

 

Regardless....fun little dogfight but after that realized I might try and just turn fight with the 110 now next time I take it out.

Flaps in general seem a  borked in this game when used in combat. It's a global issue...see also, the P-47s flaps. They're more effective in the 110 because you can actually accelerate and climb. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, 69th_Bazzer said:

Battle over Eindhoven - get rid of the jet fuel bridge being magically repaired in 30 minutes. Give German engineers all the credit you want, but this is absurd. 262's just dominate this map (even when it's just the initial 2).

 

So a single bomb drop at the beginning of the map should prevent any additional 262s from spawning? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, 69th_Bazzer said:

Bridge too far - Get rid of 2 of those extremely difficult strategic objectives (fuel, munitions, industrial) that are distant, stacked with too many buildings, ahistorical, and not logically related to 2TAF objectives in this operation. Add 2 more vehicles/guns/bunkers objectives near the frontlines, maybe 1 on either side of XXX Corps' salient.

 

If not that, then just give us P-38's with bombs so we have a reasonable chance of destroying these objectives.

 

At least 3 targets give axis 3 more to defend. Yes they are difficult but it then requires co-ordinated effort to take one down - which was the original comment. Most can be pretty well decimated by a group of 4 P47s making a co-ordinated run through. You just have to be willing to take long route to avoid enemies and transit out high. They are not extremely difficult though. But then the same can be said for all red targets on bridge to far.  The blue targets are not really any easier - but get an organised blue squad in and they will tear them up cos they concentrate on one target at a time and move on rather than odd ones being randomly hit piecemeal. As Elanski said, luckily there are not many of them. Same would go for red.

 

Personally enjoy taking an a20 to 22k and level bomb these, of course a mission then takes 80minutes plus and its never levelled with a singleton. But at least it usually gives you good chance of survival if alone.  Then again, last night suddenly seems to have 90% cloud cover at 10k so that was a bust. Dont know whether they have several weather versions or have changed it cos never had a real problem before. Whilst the weather over Europe would have often been low cloud and poor visibility, we cannot scrub the mission for better conditions. So I hope it is just different weather variations of the same map rotating. As someone else said,  a20 low level is just a duck in a fairground.

The factories in north are hard to do purely because there are 4 different factories and without dismantling the mission I dont know whether completely destroying one is needed or a percentage of some/all will do it. Or do they count as 4 individual targets.

But a p38 would just about level them in one run from experience in other maps, so removing them (P38) does not bother me - makes people try different. And gives a different feel to the missions. Could give us P38s without the additional bombs for those unable to face taking a P47 to 12k and dive in. But then it does not really hold any more than a P51 anyway. But I assume we do not need to kill all those to win map (I forget winning conditions).

 

 

20 hours ago, 69th_Bazzer said:

Closing the Ruhr - Also distance issues. Move the rally point target to be some kind of blocking force near the frontlines.

Nah 2 P38s and one p51 levelled this last night.  If very accurate and lucky just the 2 p38 would do it, or make a second pass (nope). Just requires a longer mission time, 40minutes its done.

There are planty of us happy with bigger maps and longer flight times instead of being stuffed together, 5minutes to front line, where you know the same old people are gonna be sitting over the target another 5minutes away, doing nothing except watch someone bomb and then attempt to shoot them down.

Most people are not flying for the full 3.5hours of a map, so unless its been won whilst online, I will never know who did, unlike old il2 where dedicated squad could kill most maps in 30minutes.  Now I settle for getting 2 successfull missions in (hit target and everyone rtb).

 

 

 

Share this post


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

Thank you Alonso.  To make my point.  There are 20 axis on.  not one ground object hit or destroyed.  5 allied hitting targets. 

 

Anecdotal evidence is just that. Look at the tour stats for this month; they tell a far different story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, JG7_X-Man said:

Question: So what's with the removal of the DB605DC?

The main reason I liked this server was because there was no trying to limit/balance anything unlike WoL Wings of Lastresort. Looks like the whining and complaining about uber german engineering and micro management to please a few has made it over here too. Shame.

 

Isn't the DC pretty much pure fantasy. Like almost zero confirmed reports of these being in frontline use.

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...