Jump to content

Combat Box by Red Flight


Alonzo
 Share

Recommended Posts

On 11/23/2020 at 10:35 AM, CIA_Elanski said:

If you can put an outclassed Hurricane on 42/43 maps

We need a map for the "underdogs". In the periferic sectors of the Soviet front obsolete aircraft had a larger participation and the Hurricane facede planes such as the 109E or Fiat G.50 beyond 1941. I would love to play on a map for underdogs. 109F-2 with 15 mm cannon, Mig only with machine guns, Hurricane only with "a / b / sov.mod" options. And ... If a new map (there are rumors) is introduced in the north, in Leningrad or some near region, it would be the perfect scenario for the "underdogs".

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

NO.20_Krispy_Duck

I fly the Hurricane and P-40 just because I like flying them. I know a couple other guys who enjoy the early planes and seek them out just for fun. Stats are not a priority for me. I'll fly them in pretty much any server because they're just planes that appeal to me. I'm not saying you have to dump the P-51 or Tempest and make it all Hurricanes and P-40s if you are doing a late war setting. I like seeing them as a secondary option where you have maybe 6 or 8 as secondaries as each of the bases.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, NO.20_Krispy_Duck said:

I fly the Hurricane and P-40 just because I like flying them. I know a couple other guys who enjoy the early planes and seek them out just for fun. Stats are not a priority for me. I'll fly them in pretty much any server because they're just planes that appeal to me. I'm not saying you have to dump the P-51 or Tempest and make it all Hurricanes and P-40s if you are doing a late war setting. I like seeing them as a secondary option where you have maybe 6 or 8 as secondaries as each of the bases.

What makes it a "late war setting" if you have those anachronistic planes then? Surely it's just a fantasy 'what if' map? I'm not saying that's not a valid things to desire or have, but if you're going to use the argument 'player X likes Y plane, and it's not better than Z, so put it in' you might just as well have just everything.

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem with mixing in Hurricanes (particularly the IIC) with a 1945 setup is exactly the same as allowing 190A3s and 109Es.  They don’t belong there historically, and they also “break” historical tactics.  If you’re in a G14 trying to out maneuver a Tempest for instance and a Hurricane shows up, you’re totally screwed.  
 

I’d much rather see a couple 1941/1942 maps setup specifically for these earlier aircraft.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

HURRICANE

The Hurricane post BOB in its various configurations appeared in North Africa , Med and the Far east including India Burma all the way to the end of the war .  In North Africa Marseille of JG27 shot down an average of 3 a day in 1942 over Lybia  . Europe it was only present in force up at Murmansk , Karelia , Shonguy , Vaenga and to a lesser extent around Leningrad to the best of my knowledge  , So in reality if that's what we are looking for it should not be in any of the missions of Red flight . The best would be to develop a map which covers the Barentz sea mouth to include the railway line from Murmansk down to Leningrad and lakes  including to the south Siverskaya , Krasnowerdiesk home of JG54 .

refs:

Aircraft of the Aces Osprey 107 Soviet Hurricane aces of WW2

Black Cross Red Star volume 4 part 6 the northern skies .

below is a Hurrricane IIB from 609 IAP over Karelia

1.jpg

Edited by adler_1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

NO.20_Krispy_Duck
9 hours ago, Barnacles said:

What makes it a "late war setting" if you have those anachronistic planes then? Surely it's just a fantasy 'what if' map? I'm not saying that's not a valid things to desire or have, but if you're going to use the argument 'player X likes Y plane, and it's not better than Z, so put it in' you might just as well have just everything.

 

I got a laugh out of this. Because, as has been said several times in this thread, it's a compromise as to planes available and historical setting. Several missions in the server are "what if" scenarios while others simulate months of battles compressed into a single mission. It's a balance between gameplay options and realism. One could certainly remove them, but don't kid yourself that the plane set, even with reductions, is realism.

Edited by NO.20_Krispy_Duck
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, NO.20_Krispy_Duck said:

 

 Several missions in the server are "what if" scenarios 

So have the Hurricanes, Sopwith camels or x wings in those missions then.  

 

There's your compromise. 

40 minutes ago, NO.20_Krispy_Duck said:

 

 but don't kid yourself that the plane set, even with reductions, is realism.

I don't, but relatively it's personally a better experience for some without a 'zoo'. I'm just debating where the balance lies. I'm sure the server can cater for all tastes by varying its strictness wrt. plane availability on various maps. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, adler_1 said:

HURRICANE

The Hurricane post BOB in its various configurations appeared in North Africa , Med and the Far east including India Burma all the way to the end of the war .  In North Africa Marseille of JG27 shot down an average of 3 a day in 1942 over Lybia  . Europe it was only present in force up at Murmansk , Karelia , Shonguy , Vaenga and to a lesser extent around Leningrad to the best of my knowledge  , So in reality if that's what we are looking for it should not be in any of the missions of Red flight . The best would be to develop a map which covers the Barentz sea mouth to include the railway line from Murmansk down to Leningrad and lakes  including to the south Siverskaya , Krasnowerdiesk home of JG54 .

refs:

Aircraft of the Aces Osprey 107 Soviet Hurricane aces of WW2

Black Cross Red Star volume 4 part 6 the northern skies .

below is a Hurrricane IIB from 609 IAP over Karelia

1.jpg

 

Hurribombers units on the Channel front still operated in mid-late 1942, dunno exactly when they last operated, before being completely replaced by Typhoons or other types.

Edited by SYN_Ricky
Link to comment
Share on other sites

to be or not to be friendly with friendlies

I feel embarrassed when i am approached by a friendly who offers to escort me to target because if i dont reply i feel its rude and if i do it can be more trouble than useful , same goes for gunner which i always keep blocked . Recently one followed me to target even though i did'nt reply to offer and i cannot tell him to buzz off cause its free to fly even close . this means he might deviate into target alert area limits and give me up  not to mention his presence which is an extra object that can be spotted . To make matters much worse is the next day he was flying with the opposing force which means he now knows your habits and routs which could well have been his intention . Please share your experiences on this subject    

 

Edited by adler_1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

[_FLAPS_]Grim

If I feel sneaky I refuse the offer.

 

Most of time I prefere CAP at the target, escort to the target isnt needed 90% of the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lol @adler_1,

 

I too always lock my gunner station (too many bad memories in the early days of people shooting my tail wing off).
 

I always appreciate it if people cover me and stay with me on my way to the target. I agree that close formations do more harm than good (people looking at me instead of looking for enemy fighters).

 

I will never ever refuse to tell friendlies where I am going. When I startup in a bomber, I will always notify the team along the lines of “110 NEED COVER, Red Tanks, 0821. ETA 10mins”. I will usually keep repeating this until I get to the target and I always appreciate any cover I get.

 

I think purposely not saying anything to your team mates is counter intuitive, goes against teamwork, and is a lone wolf strategy that I don’t agree with.

 

If someone is covering me and decides to go close formation with me, I’ll politely ask them to go away and stop sniffing my ass and keep a lookout for fighters instead. 9/10 comply and are happy to do what you say. 
 

I think if you don’t say anything, and don’t explain, you will always have a problem you will never fix.

 

Regards,

 

Tipsi

 

Edited by Tipsi
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Friendly or not 

i dont fly with a team or friend so i dont feel obliged to reply though like i said i feel bad about it  . I will try next time to request he does not follow me to my  target though again i repeat that i cannot force this on to a player , he is free to even alert the enemy .

Hurricanes on the The Crimea map

I just discovered 4 hurricanes were part of 182 IAP  based at Rostov during spring 1943 . Page 301 4'th edition Black cross Red star . 

 

Edited by adler_1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yesterday I was bombing enemy bridge, it was destroyed 100%, but target was not done. There were also some enemy troops there, aa guns and similar, about 10-15 targets around. Should all of them be destroyed? Why? Without bridge they can not cross river, and further bombing makes no sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason for the targets around the bridge needing to be destroyed as well is for gameplay reasons. If al lit took was to nock the bridge down the mission could be rolled in a few minutes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Brzi_Joe said:

Yesterday I was bombing enemy bridge, it was destroyed 100%, but target was not done. There were also some enemy troops there, aa guns and similar, about 10-15 targets around. Should all of them be destroyed? Why? Without bridge they can not cross river, and further bombing makes no sense.

 

Well it depends. If all those ground troops are engineers, they will surely repair the bridge!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

48 minutes ago, Alonzo said:

 

Well it depends. If all those ground troops are engineers, they will surely repair the bridge!

Bomb a bridge, keep a man stalled for an hour. Bomb a man's engineering corps, and stall his whole operation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, -SF-Disarray said:

The reason for the targets around the bridge needing to be destroyed as well is for gameplay reasons. If al lit took was to nock the bridge down the mission could be rolled in a few minutes.

It would be better to put in target description: "Bridge and defences."

I asked my side for what to do, they didn´t know, just one pilot quessed that probbably defences must be destroyed too. Alonzo was on other side, but I couldn´t ask and present my plans to enemy :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It might be helpful to post a recon photo of the target somewhere on combatbox.net or on the forum. Only experienced pilots know where to target to close and leave unexperienced one to bomb already destroyed target. Dugouts do not seem to remain destroyed when I visit the same target multiple times. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, CIA_DrJet said:

It might be helpful to post a recon photo of the target somewhere on combatbox.net or on the forum. Only experienced pilots know where to target to close and leave unexperienced one to bomb already destroyed target. Dugouts do not seem to remain destroyed when I visit the same target multiple times. 

The problem with the dugouts is not that they don't remain destroyed, at least I think so. It seems like the LODs are a bit bugged on them so they sometimes look intact when they are really destroyed.  This happens with all buildings to some extent at a distance, but the dugouts still show the undamaged model sometimes until you are quite close to them. I don't think this is something they can change server side. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

NO.20_Krispy_Duck
27 minutes ago, RedKestrel said:

The problem with the dugouts is not that they don't remain destroyed, at least I think so. It seems like the LODs are a bit bugged on them so they sometimes look intact when they are really destroyed.  This happens with all buildings to some extent at a distance, but the dugouts still show the undamaged model sometimes until you are quite close to them. I don't think this is something they can change server side. 

 

And even when I'm close, there's not a huge difference in a destroyed building versus an intact one. On my screen at least, the difference is only that the "destroyed" building is kind of a brown-ish color. It's not like old IL2 1946 where the buildings were visibly destroyed from distance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry to whoever was taking off last night from B-58 as number 2 in a pair of P-38s....I was in that P-51 behind that ended up colliding with your tail while lining up on the runway....🙈

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bremspropeller

On what grounds does the game decide on banning a player that disrespects the protective bubbles around the airfields?

I chased a Fw 190 (in a non 150 Spit IX) yesterday, managed to catch up with him, fired a couple of rounds and didn't see any hits.

As I broke off, I was banned.

Does the game register firing within the bubble, hitting or what's the underlying metric?

 

 

Some dude contacted me via SRS yesterday over Turnhout. Seems like he knew me, because he wasn't swallowing his own tounge calling out my name.

Sorry I wasn't more talkative - dummy me had forgotten to activate the SRS overlay.

 

WRT Hurricanes:

I love the friggin Hurricanes in 1944. The airplane is not a collossal threat or clowncar, so let it in.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Bremspropeller said:

 

 

WRT Hurricanes:

I love the friggin Hurricanes in 1944. The airplane is not a collossal threat or clowncar, so let it in.

 

I love the Sopwith camel, why not put that in?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bremspropeller
13 minutes ago, Barnacles said:

I love the Sopwith camel, why not put that in?

 

It's for your own safety.

Trust me, I know an engineer!

  • Haha 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Bremspropeller said:

 

It's for your own safety.

Trust me, I know an engineer!

That's unfair, the Camel had an impeccable flight safety record on all the flights it didn't crash.

  • Haha 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/2/2020 at 4:35 AM, Brzi_Joe said:

It would be better to put in target description: "Bridge and defences."

I asked my side for what to do, they didn´t know, just one pilot quessed that probbably defences must be destroyed too. Alonzo was on other side, but I couldn´t ask and present my plans to enemy :)

 

If you mouse over the target, you can see a pop-up description (assuming they exist on all CB maps).

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

Just had a VERY interesting flight on ComBox!

 

We were wondering just "how it works", so Black-Moose and I took the "A-20 Hawkeye AWACS" plane up to find out.

 

Hopefully the other pilots on our side found it useful, using SRS for the AWACS info would speed up getting "the message" out, I think we only had 1 other plane using SRS.

 

So, log onto SRS radio if your side's only AWACS is airborne.

 

What a fun and refreshing option for mission choice.

 

Well done implementing this, one suggestion though, could the radar range be increased with altitude? currently the range is well within visual range rather than radar range.

 

Cheers

 

Witch

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And at the same time, all this cloud cover, and often 2 layers of cloud, means no-one on either side can level bomb in A-20's, Pe-2's, Ju88's and He 111's..... sigh.

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

NO.20_Krispy_Duck
On 12/12/2020 at 10:49 AM, Barnacles said:

I love the Sopwith camel, why not put that in?

 

The version with or without functioning control cables?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

SCG_FeuerFliegen
3 hours ago, Black-Witch said:

And at the same time, all this cloud cover, and often 2 layers of cloud, means no-one on either side can level bomb in A-20's, Pe-2's, Ju88's and He 111's..... sigh.

 

 

I do wish more high altitude level bombing would be encouraged.  I do really appreciate one CB mission (can't remember the name) where there is a German bomber airstart, which is exactly what I think more missions/servers need.  It would be nice to actually utilize the P-47's high altitude performance.

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

LR.CrimsonLion
53 minutes ago, SCG_FeuerFliegen said:

 

 

I do wish more high altitude level bombing would be encouraged.  I do really appreciate one CB mission (can't remember the name) where there is a German bomber airstart, which is exactly what I think more missions/servers need.  It would be nice to actually utilize the P-47's high altitude performance.

There are multiple maps, I think. I like to level bomb once in a while as well and dodging fighters is part of the fun, but having regular air starts at some altitude for bombers, I think, would encourage more to jump into it as those can be very long flights to get to alt, then nav to target, then (hopefully) get home.

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

I think it’s Standoff in the Lowlands.  It would be nice to see a similar feature for A-20s on most maps.  The Allies had tons of light, medium, and heavy bombers in use during the period and we hardly ever see them in game because the time factors and risk vs reward favor fighter-bombers so much.

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

On 12/12/2020 at 8:11 AM, Bremspropeller said:

On what grounds does the game decide on banning a player that disrespects the protective bubbles around the airfields?

I chased a Fw 190 (in a non 150 Spit IX) yesterday, managed to catch up with him, fired a couple of rounds and didn't see any hits.

As I broke off, I was banned.

Does the game register firing within the bubble, hitting or what's the underlying metric?

 

The vulch-detector looks for damage done to player aircraft within 8km of a protected airfield. If the cause of the damage is an enemy player, they are kicked. So you probably did score a hit on the 190 for the vulch-bot to kick in and take action. Also very important: it's a kick, not a ban, so you can immediately rejoin the server if you want. It's intended as a gentle slap on the wrist rather than anything more heavy-handed.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, CrimsonLion said:

There are multiple maps, I think. I like to level bomb once in a while as well and dodging fighters is part of the fun, but having regular air starts at some altitude for bombers, I think, would encourage more to jump into it as those can be very long flights to get to alt, then nav to target, then (hopefully) get home.

 

+1 on that. Finnish Virtual Pilots encourages folk to fly replenishment flights with air starts, and it can be a nice break from flying fighters to ease into a bomber for a change without having to do the whole takeoff and complete travel to a distant target. I enjoy popping in to an air start bomber to replenish an airfield there - takes all of about 10 minutes to enjoy some success and a landing or provide a satisfying target for someone else to shoot down.

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

15 hours ago, -332FG-KW_1979 said:

I think it’s Standoff in the Lowlands.  It would be nice to see a similar feature for A-20s on most maps.  The Allies had tons of light, medium, and heavy bombers in use during the period and we hardly ever see them in game because the time factors and risk vs reward favor fighter-bombers so much.

 

And because, all too often, there's too much cloud to level bomb from realistic heights of 13,000' to 16,000'.

 

While some bomber pilots will prefer the "whole sortie", engine start taxi out etc it does take a lot of time to complete such a mission, I think giving buff drivers an air start option could mean more buffs about, especially with "shorter" mission time remaining.

 

ComBox does already have some Bomber air starts, Out over the Eismeer IIRC. :)

 

Witch

Edited by Black-Witch
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

SCG_FeuerFliegen

What do you guys think of having a map/mission with just one or two main targets, so that the battle revolves around one particular objective?  

 

Yes, it might be similar to berloga in the sense that all the planes would gather in one area, but with ground attack being a top priority, and fighters would have incentive to provide cover for those ground attackers.  Also it wouldn't have to be in one exact area, as there could be both high altitude bombers(encouraged by a 5-6km air spawn) attacking at the same time as low level ground attack.

 

I also have a similar idea but instead of one ground target objective, the objective could be a large flight of high altitude bombers.  While I hear that large formations of bombers can drain performance, if there were no other objectives, it could allow the number of bombers to be much larger than if it was just one of several objectives.  The winning team would be based on weather or not the bomber's ground target was destroyed or not.

 

I think it would be especially fun around certain places on the northwest side of the map, like in Amsterdam or Rotterdam.  I understand this might not be a historical battle, but I don't think we should sacrifice a potentially enormously fun battle/map simply because it's not historically accurate

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[_FLAPS_]Grim

No, thats a slaughterhouse for attackers. It turns to Beloga on some targets anyway. While its hard to get cover as attacker, nobody cares to cover even there. 

  • Upvote 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, [_FLAPS_]Grim said:

No, thats a slaughterhouse for attackers. It turns to Beloga on some targets anyway. While its hard to get cover as attacker, nobody cares to cover even there. 


I think the end result would be two large groups of fighters circling their own objectives, with a few brave souls crossing the dance floor and getting shot down.

 

I call it Il-2 Great Battles: Middle School Dance
 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A couple of announcements from the server team today:

 

Quick announcement on the direction of Combat Box:

 

We've had some feedback from players about the focus and direction of the server. We built Combat Box to be the premier late-war server, with historically inspired, high-quality missions and innovative mechanics. We set a high bar for ourselves and we've seen a lot of success with this recipe.

 

Recently during TAW, we saw quite a drop in player numbers and were concerned our formula had gotten stale. We branched out a bit and added some mid-war missions to our rotation. Feedback on these has been mixed, and in particular, those missions moved us away from being the "go-to" place for late-war aircraft. Pilots logging on were no longer guaranteed to find their favorite late war planes and instead needed to check which mission CB was actually running.

 

The admin team has decided to refocus on late war, and as of today, we're removing the mid-war missions from our rotation. Those missions aren't dead—we have plans to use them occasionally for special events and as a special project on our secondary server. However, our main focus will be late war, historically inspired missions.

 

I want to thank everyone for their feedback and continued engagement with the Combat Box team. We have a wide variety of players, all of whom have different preferences. If we make decisions you disagree with your polite feedback is always welcome, and we encourage you to consider others' viewpoints too.

 

Mission Design Contest

 

As part of our refocus on late-war missions, we are running a mission design contest! Figuring out a good design for a mission can be extremely daunting. Our community wants historically inspired missions that are fun for both sides, include a balanced map layout for attackers and bombers, and the mission needs to have meaning behind it. As you can see, it is pretty hard to please everyone. Having said that, we have an awesome community here, and we would like to collaborate with you to create some new missions!

 

If you're interested, first make a copy of our mission design template from this Google document. Mission designs will not be accepted without using the template first.

 

We really want to use your submission, so think hard about your mission design and map layout. Does it meet the standards of the community? Would it be fun? Is it balanced and historically inspired? Use il2missionplanner.com to help design your mission. Fill in your template document, which includes a bunch of instructions and hints about good mission design, and feel free to collaborate with others or ask questions here.

 

The best mission design will win some very exclusive prizes, and your mission will be brought to life by the team. You'll also receive a headline mention in the mission credits that roll when the mission ends. Second and third place entries may also be turned into missions, time permitting.

 

You can work alone or with a group, as we are happy to receive individual submissions or a mission designed by a group. The closing date is January 3rd, so you have a little over two weeks to work on your submissions over the holidays. Please use our Discord #mission-design-contest to ask questions or to get feedback on your works-in-progress. Good luck!

  • Like 6
  • Thanks 1
  • Upvote 2
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...