Jump to content

Combat Box by Red Flight


Alonzo
 Share

Recommended Posts

Five_By_Five

Any chance at ever seeing new skins on the server?  Honestly, the only time I really ever see what another plane is wearing is while I'm on the airfield . . . and I generally choose something drab so as not to be a neon target (I die enough as it is) . . . but it would still be interesting to have a few different choices from time to time.  Or, are the available skins something determined by the stock game?  Not sure how that works.  Been a long time since I played with the stock skins.  I"m not even sure what they are/were.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

=TU=flynvrtd

EDIT: for those wondering about this post.

Sketch just permabanned me for no good reason and he posted in here. Then he removed his post after Talon posted.

 

Hey kid. I have a track file that will prove you are a childish twit

I did NOTHING to provoke this ban. Except tweak your tender little nose.

As you can see, I was well OUTSIDE the 8KM safe zone, I had just come from north of Roosendahl. Will the Combat Box ADULT admins please look at the logs and undo this bullshit?

 

 

 

Sketchneedstoberemovedfromadmins.JPG

Edited by flynvrtd
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, flynvrtd said:

Hey kid. I have a track file that will prove you are a childish twit

I did NOTHING to provoke this ban. Except tweak your tender little nose.

As you can see, I was well OUTSIDE the 8KM safe zone, I had just come from north of Roosendahl. Will the Combat Box ADULT admins please look at the logs and undo this bullshit?

 

Once a few more of the EU admins are up we'll figure out what went on here and get this sorted out. I'm not really one for parsing server logs and chat history I'm afraid but will get this looked into today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

=TU=flynvrtd

 

Issue was resolved . I made this video private at my channel.

The above screen caps from tacview are from the video.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by flynvrtd
explain video is private
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will say that thanks to your toxicity of communication since April you've been on very thin ice for weeks now, so don't necessarily expect a good outcome. While I'm not sure this action specifically was bannable it has triggered a broader look into your behaviour in our community.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

=TU=flynvrtd

Thats a load of horse crap. Having an opinion is "toxic" only if it differs with yours?

It's a sad thing that speaking clearly and to the point is something that is found to be "toxic" these days.

 

Also, check the chat logs in the game for this instance and see how your admin conducted himself. As well as in his exchange with another CB discord member in the general chat. You all will allow member/players to cheat by listening in on opposing channels...but ban me for playing by the rules

 

 

This whole thing is tied to your safe zones which I have NOT and DID NOT violate

 

Edited by flynvrtd
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, flynvrtd said:

Thats a load of horse crap. Having an opinion is "toxic" only if it differs with yours?

 

This whole thing is tied to your safe zones which I have NOT and DID NOT violate

 

 

Plenty of users have different ideas to us, but they at least reach a basic level of polite discourse when it comes to expressing them. You have made your opinion of our decisions in map design and aircraft balance clear on many occasions, and these are just a few of those. Let's just say you have a certain writing style.

 

I'm investigating the "safe zone" incident but also independently reviewing your communication on the discord and in the server logs.

 

 

 

unknown~2.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

=TU=flynvrtd

Oh dear me? I guess we need to be more genteel in this delicate day and age...

Like you NEVER see anything like that or WORSE from other CB member??? Please ??!?!

 

Do you realize how you are failing to make your case?

 

Edited by flynvrtd
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, flynvrtd said:

Do you realize how you are failing to make your case?

 

Unfortunately for you this is not a court of law, it's a box in a datacenter in New York that six guys pour literally hundreds of man hours a week into administrating so that 4,000 players a month can have a fun environment in which to enjoy their favourite videogame. A little understanding would be appreciated, that's all!

 

Take a breather, let the team get this figured out. Sketch has logged off so I don't have anything from him to go by yet. Jump on WoL for a sortie or get some sleep and I expect you'll be able to log back on to CB next time you planned to play. 👍

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There are people who cannot admit to lose against better than themselves. Bad faith is sometimes, unfortunately, their last resort to refuse the obvious.

 

But there are also a lot of people who don't know exactly where they are on the map. They may falsely accuse if they are not careful to don't speak too quickly.

 

I have also been falsely accused 2 times recently in the chat by guys who were wrong. It's not so bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

=TU=flynvrtd

You see, I have friends that I communicate and play with in CB. I know you may find that hard to believe.

Also, my views are NOT my own. I'm just willing to speak up.

If I wanted to play in another server, I'd be there.

Sad day when you all will seemingly build a case as those screen shots seem to indicate, without advising a member that he is being a problem.

Sad day when a different opinion is "toxic"

 

I know the admin team is a group of volunteers and I really do appreciate the time and effort put into the server.

But if you open up discussion for opinions and ideas....well, they're not ALL going to be what you might want to hear.

And with respect to your lovely collection of my prose. Look at the last time I piped up....Had I not calmed it down for quite some time now?

Seriously, Sketch should NOT be an admin.

Edited by flynvrtd
  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, flynvrtd said:

You all will allow member/players to cheat by listening in on opposing channels...but ban me for playing by the rules

 

Fly, a few days ago I spent the better part of my evening investigating claims that you were being targeted by a few players for doing exactly what you mentioned above, and ended up banning two. The next day I had a voice chat with one of them to make it clear that we will not tolerate this behaviour and unbanned him, with the understanding that  if he was caught spying on opposing voice comms again he would be perma-banned. So to say that we allow players to cheat is really not fair.

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

=TU=flynvrtd

haluter....rhe Vann user seems to be at it again.

I was unaware of the current situation. I had put in a ticket thru the discord complaint system and ironically enough, to summarize the results from Sketch....what do I expect you all to do?

He was quite dismissive. So I moved on.

Well aparrently you were able to do a bit more than him. And again it IS appreciated.

Please review the event that provoked Sketch to take this ridiculous step. I know you'll find he is totally out of line. 

Also, should I be unbanned, if you all have a problem with me,  freaking man up and tell me.

Edited by flynvrtd
Link to comment
Share on other sites

We will review last night's events as soon as the rest of the admins are available. For now I would recommend taking a break and not unnecessarily escalating it further.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, flynvrtd said:

Escalating??

How so? 

Simply by calling out a wrong?

 

 

This is escalating ^^

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@flynvrtd you're welcome back on the server as of 5 minutes ago. We had a word in the team regarding unilateral actions with the toolset so that this doesn't happen again. I've also reopened the discord server to you - perhaps against my better judgement, but please prove me wrong on this.

 

Provisionally from here on I have suggested that admin team will codify the permaban system using a vote that requires minimum 5 of the 6 admins to cast and a subsequent majority to enact a ban. This should prevent any future incidents of this nature.

 

Edited by Talon_
  • Thanks 2
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

=TU=flynvrtd

Thanks Sir,

Please,  in the future talk to me if you all have a problem with me.

And with regards to your discord access comment I again ask,  had I not backed off on that??

So how long is that on the record for?

Again, opinions and perspective differ amongst individuals and groups.

I'll try to find kinder gentler words. But sometimes blunt and direct has a benefit.

 

Edited by flynvrtd
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, flynvrtd said:

And with regards to your discord access comment I again ask,  had I not backed off on that??

So how long is that on the record for?

 

I wish we were organised like a credit record or something but it's more a case of "X person seems generally Y" I'm afraid. 😅

 

But I can tell you we will notice over time if somebody chills out. Only in human terms though, not a spreadsheet I'm afraid!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LUZITANO said:

The 8km perimeter rule is what i call "baby rule”

Call it whatever you like but it’s a good rule. I actually indulged in an illicit pleasure recently; I flew a solo He111 mission to bomb some ships.  The perimeter rule allowed me to climb safely over my airfield until I could cloud hop to the target.   After my drop I was engaged over the target but friendlies managed to drive him off  and I actually managed to return to base.  What a change from hedge-hopping suicide runs.👍

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DD_Arthur said:

Call it whatever you like but it’s a good rule. I actually indulged in an illicit pleasure recently; I flew a solo He111 mission to bomb some ships.  The perimeter rule allowed me to climb safely over my airfield until I could cloud hop to the target.   After my drop I was engaged over the target but friendlies managed to drive him off  and I actually managed to return to base.  What a change from hedge-hopping suicide runs.👍

ok baby, good for u. Have a "safe game". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, LUZITANO said:

ok baby, good for u. Have a "safe game". 

 

All our maps now have both protected and unprotected airbases. Players can choose to operate from unprotected airbases if they enjoy the feeling of danger, and can also choose to attack unprotected enemy airbases, including enemy players on the ground. Previously this option was not available on our maps as all airbases were considered protected, and you would be banned for vulching enemy airbases. Do you want us to return to the old rules, or would you agree that by offering players the option to play the game the way they want is a good compromise?

 

Edited by haluter
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some guys have not understood the interest of this server, probably in this simulator nor. What they want is absolute ease (shoot guys on takeoff or landing, on parachutes or something...).

It's not always the fact of some minds slower to understand. It can be also a demonstration of cowardice and the sustainability of the server and even the game is not their problem.


It's a wish (and it's understandable) of guys among the poorly classified in stats. Far away of circuit of opponents, they are easy targets.

  • Haha 1
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, LUZITANO said:

ok baby, good for u. Have a "safe game". 

It’s not a matter of having a safe game. It’s a matter of enjoying fully  what we’ve got. The vast majority of my flying time is spent in online squad coops. I fly Combat BoX solo late at night. It’s an exercise in  stealth and guile using the sun and the weather to increase your chances of success.  I’m an old enough hand at this to know that solo flying on an expert server is a recipe for crash and burn. I don’t mind, I expect to get hit but this way you get a chance to gain altitude safely and then set out on a mission. It makes it worth taking off as a bomber or a jabo and obtaining a realistic altitude before heading for the ground targets instead of a mindless cruise around as a solo fighter looking for a punch up in the weeds.  Wanna shoot me down? No problem but you’re going to have to work for it instead of cruising around enemy bases looking for easy kills of guys flying low and slow.

Edited by DD_Arthur
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really don't understand the aversion to these rules. I can only think that you want ether to be shot on the ground or shoot people on the ground.

If you want to shoot stuff on the ground there's plenty of other ground targets, or single player.

If you want to be shot on the ground just land at an enemy base.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, 71st_AH_Barnacles said:

I really don't understand the aversion to these rules. I can only think that you want ether to be shot on the ground or shoot people on the ground.

If you want to shoot stuff on the ground there's plenty of other ground targets, or single player.

If you want to be shot on the ground just land at an enemy base.

The problem is that you imagine that I destroy planes on their runways when I do the opposite, I destroy the vulchers ;)

 

You can see that many of these kills that I made have flak shooting at the enemy, usually flak from my base.

 

Now ... imagine the situation ... If someone flees the combat towards the base and the escape happens for more than 10 km through the map. And the person who is fleeing dies in the 8th km of the base's perimeter, will the stalker be banned?


This rule is not bad, it is arcade. It is complicated to apply, people will make undue complaints for feeling victimized even dying 20 km from their base.

 

I would like to see bases with more anti-aircraft defense and they could also spread flak cannons around the bases in the 10km perimeter that these cannons can shoot at the invaders and spot them.

That's my opinion. The 8km rule is complicated, better to make more powerful anti-aircraft defenses and spread them around the base.

 

Edited by LUZITANO
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, LUZITANO said:

Now ... imagine the situation ... If someone flees the combat towards the base and the escape happens for more than 10 km through the map. And the person who is fleeing dies in the 8th km of the base's perimeter, will the stalker be banned?

 

Kicked. They can immediately reconnect. So far our data shows this happens on less than 1% of kills.

 

17 minutes ago, LUZITANO said:

I would like to see bases with more anti-aircraft defense and they could also spread flak cannons around the bases in the 10km perimeter that these cannons can shoot at the invaders and spot them.

 

 

We've addressed this many times in the thread and on Discord. We cannot add enough AAA to achieve this unless we delete all the objectives from the middle of the map due to server overhead caused by AAA, and the server is an overclocked 5ghz processor. It's just about as optimised for dserver.exe as PC hardware can be.

 

19 minutes ago, LUZITANO said:

 It is complicated to apply

 

No it isn't - it's actually simpler than our old rule. With the new rule you are either kicked for being too close and attacking a player, or you are not kicked because you were not too close (or you were not attacking a player). The bot does it all for us so we no longer have to be the judge, jury and executioner for every player's sortie when they were killed within 10 seconds of takeoff or whatever. Players would even go "admin shopping" trying to find one via PM that gave them a more favourable outcome. The new rule prevents all of this.

  • Upvote 10
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I for one enjoy the challenge of bombing from 10,000 + feet. Now with the safe zones I can. These safe zones act to simulate a rear area bomber field where air superiority was usually total for the bomber force. I said "usually" understanding the circumstances the Germans faced near the war's end, but this is a game so we also have 262's protected from the number 1 tactic used against them, catching them on or near the ground.

 I'm playing a game, and now I am more the hunted than the fish in a barrel, and I like it.

 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, TWC_Target said:

but this is a game so we also have 262's protected from the number 1 tactic used against them, catching them on or near the ground.

 

No 262 bases are protected by exclusion zones.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, LUZITANO said:

ok baby, good for u. Have a "safe game". 

Some might say you are playing a "safe game" if you're upset about not being able to attack players who are in a place where you know where they will be and where they are at their most vulnerable state (taking off or landing). Some might also say that you're a baby... but I wouldn't say that.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, TWC_Target said:

I stand corrected.

 

Now you can perform the ultimate power move: level bombing a 262 base.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't think of that, good to know, thanks.

 ALTHOUGH, if I hit a plane on the deck with a bomb is that considered vulching?

Edited by TWC_Target
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, TWC_Target said:

Didn't think of that, good to know, thanks.

 ALTHOUGH, if I hit a plane on the deck with a bomb is that considered vulching?

Nope! Anything is fair game at an unprotected field.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, QB.Creep said:

Some might say you are playing a "safe game" if you're upset about not being able to attack players who are in a place where you know where they will be and where they are at their most vulnerable state (taking off or landing). Some might also say that you're a baby... but I wouldn't say that.

Those people thinking that "I" want to attack unprotected bases did not understand nothing. The 8 km perimeter is not historical, it only creates areas of aerial exclusion.. The only rule for aerial combat that exists is "check your 6".

Link to comment
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...