Combat Box by Red Flight

[Bremspropeller]

No, but there's a good chance that's me in the Mustang.

I did have some similar fun in the Tempest, before figuring out that there's that little funny lever to pull...

 

Combat Box currently is the most fun server to fly on IMHO. Good job guys!

Edited December 15, 2019 by Bremspropeller

[CIA_Luth]

3 hours ago, Bremspropeller said:

No, but there's a good chance that's me in the Mustang.

I did have some similar fun in the Tempest, before figuring out that there's that little funny lever to pull...

 

Combat Box currently is the most fun server to fly on IMHO. Good job guys!

I agree. Most fun. Great job.

[=RvE=Windmills]

Easiest way to give bombers more viability would be to give them airstarts across the board. This allows them to level bomb from a somewhat safe altitude, gives them a chance to get out and encourages people to play bombers more. Place their spawn points a grid or 2 back from the main airfields, and kick them into the air at 3000/4000m, depending on their capability.

 

 

[69th_Mobile_BBQ]

3 hours ago, =RvE=Windmills said:

Easiest way to give bombers more viability would be to give them airstarts across the board. This allows them to level bomb from a somewhat safe altitude, gives them a chance to get out and encourages people to play bombers more. Place their spawn points a grid or 2 back from the main airfields, and kick them into the air at 3000/4000m, depending on their capability.

 

 

 

There's quite enough distance from the target to sneak away from any AF under threat, unless the planes are being attacked the moment they lift off, and enough distance to climb to whatever altitude the pilot wants to go to the target.  Air spawns won't stop pilots from going to the deck and trying to hit targets by crashing straight through the front door.  There's a great deal of bomber pilots who only have that 1 play in their playbook.  The reason they can attack so often is that they are being shot down AFTER they attack.  I suggest trying to find them BEFORE they attack and leave the ones alone that are going home.  Attacking and dying right after cuts the flight time needed to sustain repeated attacks by nearly half.    

[Bilbo_Baggins]

3 hours ago, =RvE=Windmills said:

Easiest way to give bombers more viability would be to give them airstarts across the board. This allows them to level bomb from a somewhat safe altitude, gives them a chance to get out and encourages people to play bombers more. Place their spawn points a grid or 2 back from the main airfields, and kick them into the air at 3000/4000m, depending on their capability.

 

 

 

@Alonzo this would be a total game changer. Would you please consider this? 

 

It would not only bring the fighting up higher but encourage teamwork to protect bombers whilst also providing an incentive to level bomb and fly the bomber machines how they were supposed to be used. This is a great idea that could set the server apart from others. 

Edited December 15, 2019 by Bilbo_Baggins

[Otto_bann]

Just my 2 cents :  whatever the future developments, do not add constraints. Servers die of being subject to restrictions, limitations and obligations. CB is popular and appreciated because there are relatively few on this server: please don't add others.

[Talon_]

On 12/14/2019 at 9:14 AM, Haza said:

Interestingly the Tempest with bombs were allowed, while the Me262 was limited even during the period that the Tempest historically didn't drop bombs, yet during the period where Me262s operated in numbers, most maps are locked to single figures!  However, I guess you have to keep things balanced to keep players happy!

 

Tempests don't get bombs on our server and the Me262 over the Bodenplatte map was used exclusively as a tactical bomber after Kommando Nowotny left the area in Autumn 1944.

[9./JG52_Hackl]

Easily the best server period.

 I like the Alonzo team methodology from what I've read in these forums.

THB I avoided it here because I did not think I was good enough to survive all the late war stuff during Luftwaffe's decline.

As mentioned in an earlier post fixes to visibility has made it survivable for me.

 I also enjoyed KOTA as well, but it seems lacking attendance wise since BP's released.

WOL when these 2 are low attendance for stick time but defo not first pick.

I know it is primarily late war scenarios on CB, but what are chances of occasional earlier or mid war just to for a breather change of pace.

I realized I can go to other servers mentioned as someone will most likely say.

But again I think Alonzo's team has "it" going on and would be interest to see what they come up with.

Not trying to change nothing, just thinking out loud.

Keep up the Great work guys.?

Salute!

[=EXPEND=CG_Justin]

I am all for adding AI bomber formations. I hope the devs get it fixed soon.

[adler_1]

i just went through an update and now there is no server  , whats going on ? i see almost 80 % of the servers are not listed as well .

Edited December 17, 2019 by dog1

[RedKestrel]

6 minutes ago, dog1 said:

i just went through an update and now there is no server  , whats going on ? i see almost 80 % of the servers are not listed as well .

Easy answer: The servers haven't updated yet. 

if the problem persists for you make sure you have Mods OFF, as if you have Mods ON you won't be able to see any servers that don't allow mods.

[adler_1]

i'm a novice in the field , really enjoying flying here , all the plotting and stuff  , very immersive  thanks headsup .

[Alonzo]

Combat Box is back up. Thanks to the rest of the admin team for dealing with it -- I am away on a work trip and was unable to do the update myself. 

[adler_1]

great news , 

[adler_1]

a couple of questions about game play . 

when joining right at the begining of a new session i fly to the rally point where an evacuation is to begin  i find the warehouses already bombed out with  smoke etc yet there is still no enemy in the session or armies trucks lorries tanks etc getting ready to move   , further in an evacuation are we supposed to see  lorries etc driving to the final destination and do we see them arrive when its declared that they made it to destination ?  

Edited December 21, 2019 by dog1

[Alonzo]

40 minutes ago, dog1 said:

when joining right at the begining of a new session i fly to the rally point where an evacuation is to begin  i find the warehouses already bombed out with  smoke etc yet there is still no enemy in the session or armies trucks lorries tanks etc getting ready to move   , further in an evacuation are we supposed to see  lorries etc driving to the final destination and do we see them arrive when its declared that they made it to destination ?  

 

Many of the cities on the map are already bombed, and sometimes smoking. This is both for atmosphere (it's a war zone) and to help with navigation (if you get lost, you might spot a smoking city and be able to use that as a landmark).

 

On Combat Box maps, targets that move are indicated by an arrow. Unfortunately due to server stability problems, we cannot move the icon safely to show where they are. So you just kind of have to guess. They move along main roads usually.

[adler_1]

ok so the smoke is eye candy only and the convoy does move to destination , just follow the road to destination and read the update messages . thanks  

[Talisman]

Quick question if I may.  Is it possible to have enemy aircraft activity and location reports delivered via audial means, as by radio from ground control, rather than on-screen?

 

Perhaps IL-2 GB mechanics don't allow this?

 

I like to fly with a clear screen (no text, chat, or compass, etc) for as much immersion as possible and I use VR.

 

It strikes me that receiving information by radio would be more realistic and immersive, but is it possible?

 

Thank you for creating and running such a good MP server.

 

Happy landings,

 

56RAF_Talisman

[FTC_Riksen]

1 hour ago, 56RAF_Talisman said:

Quick question if I may.  Is it possible to have enemy aircraft activity and location reports delivered via audial means, as by radio from ground control, rather than on-screen?

 

Perhaps IL-2 GB mechanics don't allow this?

 

I like to fly with a clear screen (no text, chat, or compass, etc) for as much immersion as possible and I use VR.

 

It strikes me that receiving information by radio would be more realistic and immersive, but is it possible?

 

Thank you for creating and running such a good MP server.

 

Happy landings,

 

56RAF_Talisman

 

IL-2 mechanics do not allow this as any type of media (image or audio), as of now,  are played for both sides unlike messages-only. It would definitely be a great immersive feature but the system is very rudimentary in terms of media and briefings (it does not allow separate briefings either).

[Alonzo]

7 hours ago, Riksen said:

IL-2 mechanics do not allow this as any type of media (image or audio), as of now,  are played for both sides unlike messages-only. It would definitely be a great immersive feature but the system is very rudimentary in terms of media and briefings (it does not allow separate briefings either).

 

Yeah, we looked into this when we were first developing the server concept. You could use audio cues as a general "everyone hears it" message, maybe to narrate the course of the battle or for messages where both sides should hear it (for example, if a target is destroyed, or one side is near to winning or has won). If we were offered the option of single-coalition audio I would totally request some voice acting volunteers and go record a ton of audio!

[DoWAlpha]

I enjoy the server but these restrictions are driving me up a wall. Why does every server seem to find some way to be one sided. When CB first came out you could use everything the plane came with. Now you even have mission that take place the same day as operation Bodenplatte (or even after) yet the allied fighters that were made for guess what "Battle of Bodenplatte" are locked out of crucial things like Gyro gun sites and 150 octane fuel. People talk about specific supply dates and things like gallons of fuel shipped, yet supply issues are ignored on the other side. The K4 came out one month before in very limited numbers and every german Airfield has 30 K4s and 30 D9s. The most supplied air-force in history can't provide gunsites and good fuel to their pilots but a German airforce that was being held together by chewing gum at this point has unlimited everything. Every mission that has a G-14 has everything unlocked so they can still get their one hit kills. I even seen German fighters on here that are available and have everything unlocked on maps that take place before that variant even debuted! Why can't we just simply get what the planes came with? For F sakes you have a 1942 Spitfire up against a almost 1945 109 and it can't even have 150 octane fuel? For all the fan boys that want to argue against it, I once saw a sever on here that actually put together a mission that put planes against each other based on the date they came out in real life.  There were G6s and G4s to go up against a Spit IX instead of K4s and D9s. Guess what .....that mission died so fast because literally no one would fly on the German side! Why not, no MW50s, no MK108s? I thought it didn't matter

[Barnacles]

47 minutes ago, AlphaZulu said:

I enjoy the server but these restrictions are driving me up a wall. Why does every server seem to find some way to be one sided. When CB first came out you could use everything the plane came with. Now you even have mission that take place the same day as operation Bodenplatte (or even after) yet the allied fighters that were made for guess what "Battle of Bodenplatte" are locked out of crucial things like Gyro gun sites and 150 octane fuel. People talk about specific supply dates and things like gallons of fuel shipped, yet supply issues are ignored on the other side. The K4 came out one month before in very limited numbers and every german Airfield has 30 K4s and 30 D9s. The most supplied air-force in history can't provide gunsites and good fuel to their pilots but a German airforce that was being held together by chewing gum at this point has unlimited everything. Every mission that has a G-14 has everything unlocked so they can still get their one hit kills. I even seen German fighters on here that are available and have everything unlocked on maps that take place before that variant even debuted! Why can't we just simply get what the planes came with? For F sakes you have a 1942 Spitfire up against a almost 1945 109 and it can't even have 150 octane fuel? For all the fan boys that want to argue against it, I once saw a sever on here that actually put together a mission that put planes against each other based on the date they came out in real life.  There were G6s and G4s to go up against a Spit IX instead of K4s and D9s. Guess what .....that mission died so fast because literally no one would fly on the German side! Why not, no MW50s, no MK108s? I thought it didn't matter

Fly a g14 then if you think there's too many k4s

[-SF-Disarray]

His point, that you seem to have tried your very hardest to miss, is 'historical availability' seems to only apply to one side a lot of the time. If a mission is set just outside of the time frame when 150 fuel was available it isn't allowed. But at the same time K4's are available in abundance one week after the first few came off the factory lines. And at other times a mission will be set when 150 fuel was historically available but is locked because it wouldn't be fair to the German team to have to fly against 150 fueled planes when they only have G14's because that is what was historically available to the Germans. So it seems historical availability is only a factor when it either helps the German team or hurts the Allied team. I guess Allied teams aren't allowed to have nice things or any advantages in tech.

[Barnacles]

14 minutes ago, /SF/Disarray said:

His point, that you seem to have tried your very hardest to miss, is 'historical availability' seems to only apply to one side a lot of the time. If a mission is set just outside of the time frame when 150 fuel was available it isn't allowed. But at the same time K4's are available in abundance one week after the first few came off the factory lines. And at other times a mission will be set when 150 fuel was historically available but is locked because it wouldn't be fair to the German team to have to fly against 150 fueled planes when they only have G14's because that is what was historically available to the Germans. So it seems historical availability is only a factor when it either helps the German team or hurts the Allied team. I guess Allied teams aren't allowed to have nice things or any advantages in tech

It's not paranoia if everyone really is out to get you.

[-SF-Disarray]

So, if I'm just paranoid, educate me. Why is it that on the bridge too far mission that no Allied plane can use 150 fuel even though it was widely available on the front at that time? Because the guy that made the mission already answered that one for me. The answer, in case you are curious, is because they felt the German planes available, the G-14 and A-8, would not be a match for Allied planes with 150 octane fuel. But on the mission Legend of Y-29 set just after the K-4 was rolling out in the first runs from the factory, there are as many K-4's as there are G-14's despite that being an impossibility of manufacturing rates, but there is no 150 octane fuel because it is too early for that kind of stuff. So Germans can have things that, historically, they shouldn't have in those numbers, but the Allied teams are constrained by historical reality. But by all means, make another pithy comment without engaging with the facts. It seems to be what you are good at.

[Barnacles]

21 minutes ago, /SF/Disarray said:

Allied teams aren't allowed to have nice things or any advantages in tech.

Let's have a sense of perspective here. It's not as if it's restricting anyone from flying a whole plane, like 262s and a fair few maps without d9s and k4s. It's an engine mod with provides a marginal performance increase. It always used to be the lw only crowd who were beyond parody making sure they had everything within their power to increase their already significant superiority in equipment.  I know it's a sim but if there's an opportunity to mix it up a bit for the sake of variety, where it's not taking massive historically liberties, then why not? The allied planes are plenty good enough and arguably superior even with 100 Oct.

13 minutes ago, /SF/Disarray said:

So, if I'm just paranoid, educate me. Why is it that on the bridge too far mission that no Allied plane can use 150 fuel even though it was widely available on the front at that time? Because the guy that made the mission already answered that one for me. The answer, in case you are curious, is because they felt the German planes available, the G-14 and A-8, would not be a match for Allied planes with 150 octane fuel. But on the mission Legend of Y-29 set just after the K-4 was rolling out in the first runs from the factory, there are as many K-4's as there are G-14's despite that being an impossibility of manufacturing rates, but there is no 150 octane fuel because it is too early for that kind of stuff. So Germans can have things that, historically, they shouldn't have in those numbers, but the Allied teams are constrained by historical reality. But by all means, make another pithy comment without engaging with the facts. It seems to be what you are good at.

I was already aware of the admins' reasoning. Basically they're trying to balance history again balance in a scenario which was very one sided. I personally agree with them that their mission design has provided a good challenge for both sides, with a bit of variety map to map. The historical accuracy point you make is fair enough, but at some point you have to make compromises for an interesting server. It seems that some people want 150 Oct and unlimited allied planes Vs g14s and a8s an a handful of k4s, which I acknowledge is historically accurate but if every map was like that it'd be dull, which is very subjective of me but this is supposed to help the admins guage opinion.

 

 

All that said I'd like to see a mechanism to try to make sure that there are a decent amount of people flying the 'worse' planes like a8s and g14s rather than k4s

[Hawk-2a]

8 hours ago, 71st_AH_Barnacles said:

All that said I'd like to see a mechanism to try to make sure that there are a decent amount of people flying the 'worse' planes like a8s and g14s rather than k4s

You‘d be surprised by how many decent Lw pilots prefer the g14 to the k4 simply due to it‘s maneuverability.

the complaint about too many k4s is ridiculous, as its dogfighting ability is probably worse than the g14 except for the speed and acceleration.
allies are too predictable in their path to an objective, making it essentially easy to shoot them down, even with a g2.

90% of kills i get is by simply shooting unaware tourists flying in a straight line looking at the sunset or whatever.

and yes, i mainly fly g14...

Edited December 22, 2019 by IV./JG51-H_Stiglitz

[Bremspropeller]

If the server was historically correct, there would be 3 german planes to take and 60 allied.

 

I can't understand why loadouts are restricted, though. Give both soides all the bang they have and see what they can do with it.

[Otto_bann]

13 hours ago, AlphaZulu said:

... I even seen German fighters on here that are available and have everything unlocked on maps that take place before that variant even debuted! Why can't we just simply get what the planes came with?...

Try to make a misson, to survive and get kills with an A8 or G14 and you will have the response.

You don't want and historic flight, you want the most aerial superiority as possible and easier opponents, be honest...;)

Edited December 22, 2019 by Otto_bann

[Ribbon]

I'm 90% of time allied pilot but when there is big difference in playes ratio i jump on other side.

Last night i went on axis side and while starting engine plane spawns next to me and shoot flares at me damaging my plane (K-4) so seems some players make sure K-4's are limited enough.

http://combatbox.net/en/sortie/log/263967/?tour=16

 

I think some kind of balance should go over historical accuracy, otherwise server should be limited to 6:1 player ratio in allies favor.

I find current plane availability just fine.

 

Problem with why allies win more maps is cos they are more focused on objectives while mindset of majority axis pilots is; go fighter role and camp around allied airfields.

Always was on every server!

[Barnacles]

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

You‘d be surprised by how many decent Lw pilots prefer the g14 to the k4 simply due to it‘s manoeuvrability.

the complaint about too many k4s is ridiculous, as its dogfighting ability is probably worse than the g14 except for the speed and acceleration.
allies are too predictable in their path to an objective, making it essentially easy to shoot them down, even with a g2.

90% of kills i get is by simply shooting unaware tourists flying in a straight line looking at the sunset or whatever.

and yes, i mainly fly g14...

 

Me too, I think the G14 is great, that's why worse was in inverted commas. I fly in preference to the k4 sometimes too. Last thing anyone wants is just p51s v k4s all the time.

My point is that..

As far as I am aware, Allies (and I fly Allies nearly 90% of the time) restrictions amount to a couple of maps without 150 oct and one map which at one stage didn't have a p38.

 

That doesn't sound like "Allied teams aren't allowed nice things", especially when there's a map with 60% of the LW BoBp planes missing. (Not that I'm complaining about not having the LW late planes on an early map, or saying it's ahistorical, that is nice too occasionally for variety and historical accuracy).

 

I'm being pessimistic about people's motivations here, but I think the calls for 150 oct are because of a desire to make life a bit easier for people who generally fly p51s, which is already (subjective opinion I know) the best fighter in the game. I don't see how using a bit of historical licence to reduce the performance gap between one side and the other on a handful of maps is the end of the world

 

 

Edited December 22, 2019 by 71st_AH_Barnacles

[Barnacles]

Further to my last, this is coming...

 

It will probably have 150 octane fuel as an option. (as it historically did) giving it a speed close to 640 km/h at 2000ft. It historical counterparts in this configuration could have been 109 G6s or 190 A6/7s.

Now don't get me wrong, I love this plane, and would like to fly it with 150 octane occasionally if that's what it took into combat, but having it with 150 octane on every map especially if some of those maps have nothing faster than a 190A6 on just sounds a bit much. It just, as with the p51, seems pragmatic to narrow the performance gap with minor modifications to the historical configuration to make things a bit more interesting.

[Bremspropeller]

The problem I see with DF servers is that it incentivizes just that: Dogfighting and shooting down airplanes.

That is hardly what the 9th AF or 2nd TAF focussed on. They'd usually fly road-recces and shoot up stuff they'd see or bomb/ strafe specific targets.

They'd hardly see any Luftwaffe airplanes.

 

Some Ideas I have on the top of my mind:

 

1) It would be interesting to see, if there could be a way of designing DF servers that recreate that:

Flying a road-recce in a sector or shooting up a train-route. The first one would work by sectors and is simply a search&destroy mission, while the latter would be built around an arbitrary train-schedule. They could work on one map, too. It would be interesting for the defenders (Luftwaffe) to figure out what the Allies are actually attacking.

You could specify several train-lines (eg. line 1 runs from Cologne through Düsseldorf to Hannover, Line 2 from Frankfurt to Siegen, etc...) and refer to "Train leaving Düsseldorf on Line 1" in the Allied chat, while the Luftwaffe chat only mentions "air activity in the Düsseldorf area" when allied airplanes go there. They LW would till have to figure out whether the Allies are going for the train, or if there's some targets strafed at Lohausen airport, or some road in the general area.

 

2) Another interesting mission could be the Ardennes (with bad weather) and providing CAS under low clouds, shooting up convois or cutting-off supplies.

Why not have the Luftwaffe drop Fallschirmjäger into a hot area and try to set up an escort/ fighter-umbrella on top, while the Allies have to try to kill off those and try to help their friends on the ground break out of an encirclement? You could have the Ju 52s fly between two layers of clouds, just skimming the lower clouds.

[Hawk-2a]

The problem with such asymmetric missions is this: what is a win condition for the Lw? Or allies? How do you measure that? How does this guarantee replayability for the next time that mission is on?

how do you balance something like that to make it equally fun no matter the side you play?

[Bremspropeller]

#2 is basicly "Operation Stößer":

 

 

[-SF-Disarray]

I feel, perhaps, I have not made myself clear enough. What bothers me isn't that plane sets are being balanced or that there is some semblance of parity. What bothers me is the uneven hand that seems to be applied when it comes to this fairness. The mission Legend of Y-29 is a prime example of this: Allied planes aren't afforded 150 octane fuel because it wasn't in use. Fine. But on that same mission, on the German side we find equal numbers of K4's as G14's, a situation that is frankly a historical fantasy. That early in year there simply weren't that many K4's built, let alone deployed to that part of the front. So the situation we have is one where one side can't have something because that is how it was while at the same time the other side can have something that was impossible. We could argue the merits of the K4 vs the G14 all day but that doesn't change the fact that there is a double standard at play. And before Otto comes in telling me that I should fight the good fight with the under powered machines and then talk, I've been there and done that for years. Learn to win against G4's in a Yak 1 or a LaGG 3 and we can talk.

[Otto_bann]

An when the map is on 44 like the most part of time, G6 and G14 have to fight the same reds : 51, Tempy, 38, all are faster... Is it a disadvantage or not?

And most part of time in past, Yak and Lagg fight on servers against F2 and F4, most rarely G4, be honest you too because I fly since long time as well...

But if the big disadvantage does not scare you, I recommend the A8: you will be ... amazed

Edited December 22, 2019 by Otto_bann

[Talisman]

If it was possible, I would like to see a lot more ground targets to attack than needed to win the map. 

 

Knowing which targets are to be attacked every time leads to somewhat gamey outcomes on the map.  However, if there were lets say, approximately 25%, or more, ground targets to attack than needed to win the map, then perhaps we could shift the maps towards feeling a little more realistic than gamey.  Also, it might encourage more pilots to engage in ground attack missions more often.

 

Happy landings and merry Christmas,

 

56RAF_Talisman

[Creep]

18 hours ago, /SF/Disarray said:

But by all means, make another pithy comment without engaging with the facts. It seems to be what you are good at.

Not a good look, that. 
 

Bottom line is that the current map rotation (notice I did not say every map) is balanced pretty well. That is a fact - simply look at the stats page or the reporting that Alonzo and the team has shared in this thread. 
 

I would encourage you to fly Blue once in awhile; your perspective might be different afterwards.

Edited December 22, 2019 by QB.Creep

[Barnacles]

53 minutes ago, 56RAF_Talisman said:

If it was possible, I would like to see a lot more ground targets to attack than needed to win the map. 

 

Knowing which targets are to be attacked every time leads to somewhat gamey outcomes on the map.  However, if there were lets say, approximately 25%, or more, ground targets to attack than needed to win the map, then perhaps we could shift the maps towards feeling a little more realistic than gamey.  Also, it might encourage more pilots to engage in ground attack missions more often.

 

Happy landings and merry Christmas,

 

56RAF_Talisman

I particularly like the Bonn airlift one which has an area target. Personally I'd like to see a map where the targets are spread out, randomly placed and soft (attackable by strafing), so both sides are not just bum rushing discreet targets with as many bombs as possible.