Whats wrong with public MP?

[Giggles]

As a new person here, i think i can say a few things without getting anyone under pants all twisted up.. 

 

the multi player aspect seems reserved for weekend warriors who just want to fly, the "over dedicated" few who gripe and moan and come up with any excuses possible and demand to change the game in order to increase their kill rate.  And everyone else falling into the "newby/cannon fodder" bracket. 

 

 

[Charlo-VR]

3 hours ago, Giggles said:

And everyone else falling into the "newby/cannon fodder" bracket. 

This is historically accurate ?

[SAG]

20 hours ago, =420=Syphen said:

 

I don't know anyone who really uses SRS. Everyone I fly with uses private (or Public but not Server oriented) Discords. It's sad to say, but flying with randoms can be more of a headache then flying with a couple guys you fly well with.

Absolutely agree that flying with a couple of friends is better than a bunch of randoms, But most times is find it better to fly with a random than alone. Even if it's just to use them as bait 

[Drum]

53 minutes ago, SAG said:

Absolutely agree that flying with a couple of friends is better than a bunch of randoms, But most times is find it better to fly with a random than alone. Even if it's just to use them as bait 

 

So you're saying friends make better bait, what a pal...

[BraveSirRobin]

1 hour ago, Drum said:

 

So you're saying friends make better bait, what a pal...

No, he said that randoms make good bait.  And he’s not wrong.  We used to use steaming Alby’s  as bait all the time in RoF.

[CAFulcrum]

16 hours ago, ACG_Pike said:

 

Stalingrad has a huge city and river on it. If you can't find either, you quite honestly not ready for MP.

 

 

 

Which is exactly what I said.  The map covers more than just Stalingrad.

 

Not really digging the 'go home, this isn't for you' vibe though.  I'm not complaining personally, nor am I asking for realism to be relaxed, I'm just trying to offer suggestions as to why MP feels dead and only operates about 3 populated severs at any time.  In fact I'm not even asking for changes here, I'm just explaining why flying on MP is so confusing without any sort of command and control structure or mission planning layout.  Hopefully the air marshall mode will address all of this.

 

Also this is a game.  Specifically a combat flight simulator.  If you want full textbook sim play DCS.  IL2 fits somewhere between, and it does not strictly cater to hard core enthusiasts.  It caters to WWII air combat enthusiasts.  I don't see how making a product which relies on multiple purchases to expand it would want to be turning people away after the first purchase; not that il2 does, but at least in MP it is severely underdeveloped.

[Drum]

5 hours ago, BraveSirRobin said:

No, he said that randoms make good bait.  And he’s not wrong.  We used to use steaming Alby’s  as bait all the time in RoF.

I stand corrected, thanks and sorry for the snappy response.  You can't fly with bait so I miss read that comment, he implied cannon fodder which is true as bare minimum there's protection in numbers.  ?

[Giggles]

Most of the people thinking of going with great battles have had limited experience to world war two. 

 

At best they have watched Hogans Heroes.. 

 

If lucky they got to watch Black Sheep Squadron

 

Most likely watched the fallacy called Red Tails,   and the propoganda air plane films of the last decade. 

 

 

 

I guess flying with my AI wing men can sum it up...   they abandon me at teh first moment, swoop in to shoot my oponent just because they crash and steal the kill,  and never help out if i got a bogy on me.

[BraveSirRobin]

33 minutes ago, Drum said:

I stand corrected, thanks and sorry for the snappy response.  You can't fly with bait so I miss read that comment, he implied cannon fodder which is true as bare minimum there's protection in numbers.  ?

 

There is protection in numbers when you meet a bear in the woods.  You don't have to run faster than the bear, just faster than the people you're with.  

23 minutes ago, Giggles said:

Most of the people thinking of going with great battles have had limited experience to world war two. 

 

 

I'm pretty sure that is not true.  Most of the people here appear to have played an earlier version of IL-2.

[Pikestance]

7 hours ago, CAFulcrum said:

 

Which is exactly what I said.  The map covers more than just Stalingrad.

 

Not really digging the 'go home, this isn't for you' vibe though.  I'm not complaining personally, nor am I asking for realism to be relaxed, I'm just trying to offer suggestions as to why MP feels dead and only operates about 3 populated severs at any time.  In fact I'm not even asking for changes here, I'm just explaining why flying on MP is so confusing without any sort of command and control structure or mission planning layout.  Hopefully the air marshall mode will address all of this.

 

Also this is a game.  Specifically a combat flight simulator.  If you want full textbook sim play DCS.  IL2 fits somewhere between, and it does not strictly cater to hard core enthusiasts.  It caters to WWII air combat enthusiasts.  I don't see how making a product which relies on multiple purchases to expand it would want to be turning people away after the first purchase; not that il2 does, but at least in MP it is severely underdeveloped.

 

I can always find a server to fly on even when I lived in Asia. Normal mode do exist. It is just not popular. You can't expect to jump on a MP on expert setting when you are not an expert and do well. 

The game is not developed with MP in mind. It is developed with SP in mind. In SP you can make the game very easy...unlimited fuel and ammo, icons, easy physics, help with shooting, etc... 

 

 

1 hour ago, Giggles said:

Most of the people thinking of going with great battles have had limited experience to world war two. 

At best they have watched Hogans Heroes.. 

If lucky they got to watch Black Sheep Squadron

Most likely watched the fallacy called Red Tails,   and the propoganda air plane films of the last decade. 

 

I guess flying with my AI wing men can sum it up...   they abandon me at teh first moment, swoop in to shoot my oponent just because they crash and steal the kill,  and never help out if i got a bogy on me.

 

I find people to be quite knowledgeable of WW2. You have your gamers. MP'ers in squadrons usually know their stuff. 

My guess the gamers are young and they wouldn't know those shows you listed, except for Red Tails. You forgot Flyboys, a lovely film. LOL

 

 

Edited March 3, 2022 by ACG_Pike

[Gambit21]

1 hour ago, Giggles said:

Most of the people thinking of going with great battles have had limited experience to world war two. 

 

At best they have watched Hogans Heroes.. 

 

If lucky they got to watch Black Sheep Squadron

 

Most likely watched the fallacy called Red Tails,   and the propoganda air plane films of the last decade. 

 

 

 

I guess flying with my AI wing men can sum it up...   they abandon me at teh first moment, swoop in to shoot my oponent just because they crash and steal the kill,  and never help out if i got a bogy on me.

 

What a load of crap.

[Raptorattacker]

 

3 hours ago, Giggles said:

Most of the people thinking of going with great battles have had limited experience to world war two. 

 

At best they have watched Hogans Heroes.. 

 

If lucky they got to watch Black Sheep Squadron

 

Most likely watched the fallacy called Red Tails,   and the propoganda air plane films of the last decade. 

Do yourself a service (and others) and check out THIS post. You might find it interesting.

 

Edited March 3, 2022 by Raptorattacker

[-250H-Ursus_]

For me MP doesn't have anything problematic, but, true is that MP enviroment, is not friendly for starters. At least not the starters without a some kind of, "mentor" or "teacher", on his back helping him to learn.

Most startes which receives propper MP training, and listens, learns quick, and difficulty in MP is not an issue anymore.

 

Problem is the next in my personal and venemous opinion, because is could be a bit offensive to not prepared hears, because off course is targeting something.

Start to beign a "Singleplayer lord", avoiding PVP situations of any kind, going full PVE, mixing with the wrong ppl which hates MP and PVP situations only makes thing worst, using poor statements to justify like. "Is to hard they kill me always - In MP you are not simulating anything - Realism is to low in MP, everyone does everything they want"

First of all, in PVP true is harder than PVE. Difference is really noticeable, and that difference also is a problem in PVE, one doesn't learn to much, AI is predicteable and their only feat is that they can saturate a lonely player or pursuit them to, well, forever, but an experienced PVP player can flex the AI, and 2 experienced or 3, can wreck and entire enviroment effortesly, if they are not saturated and outperfomed by way far superior machines.

Getting stuck in there, in the end results in a player stucked in the same level of skill, won't go to further if he doesn't face MP and improves his skill, resulting in the very same frustration of always when gets in PVP and gets wasted.

 

Get mixed with ppl which hates MP doesn't help anything as well, that is problem of the community which never reach an agreement in what its wanted because persons are to different. IMHO this type of close minded players hurts the GAME ITSELF even harder than flaws on FM DM and everything complained in this years, because a rich and alive Public MP in the end, is what makes a game shine. Even in this niche of WW2, remember that the 2 games which literally absorved the market are MP Based games, like it, or not, truth is that.

And with the other excuses like "Is not to realistic" Or "Everyone does whatever they want" 

Go, join the army, problem solved. Its a game. Is not even a milsim. Even worst, lacks of argument, since i explained how a PVE situation can be easy target show to experienced players.

And not everyone does whatever they want, those are mostly lonewolfs, ppl in squads have clear objectives most of the time.

Multiplayer is a great part of the game, there is a lot of persons with a lot of knowledge and experience all over the place. Would be good if everyone is there instead of some large scales of persons hiding in PVE situations.

 

IMHO Combat Box is the best example of what this kind of ideal could lead to.

 

Squadrons flying each friday with their objectives, in a predesigned historical mission, is just awesome. 

Edited March 3, 2022 by -332FG-Ursus_

[Rache-der-Boote]

On 12/30/2021 at 3:39 PM, SharpeXB said:

Ok but see SRS is too complicated.

Really, SRS is too complicated? I'm surprised you found this forum and figured out how to use it. Good job, buddy!

[Giggles]

some people also dont really have the band width to run the extra VOIP  stuff.

[SharpeXB]

1 hour ago, perm said:

Really, SRS is too complicated? I'm surprised you found this forum and figured out how to use it. Good job, buddy!

It’s got a whole post of instructions, so yeah it’s more complex than Discord for example. Also it’s GUI is very poor. Also I didn’t see many people using it, again since it has too many channels and settings. Clearly people prefer something more simple. 

[Pikestance]

 

 

SRS looks more complex than it actually is. It's lot less complicated than keybinding. If you can do that, you can figure out SRS. 

[Robli]

SRS is not very complex, but as it is not automatically part of the game, then many people won't bother going through a separate installation of it.

Many people might even not know it exists or from where to get it. 

[Giggles]

7 minutes ago, Robli said:

SRS is not very complex, but as it is not automatically part of the game, then many people won't bother going through a separate installation of it.

Many people might even not know it exists or from where to get it. 

i cant even get discord to work... im special.... 

 

But seriously, its more of an issue of a hunt for glory then anything else. 

 

Doesnt matter if everyone uses the same radio system for communication....  well experience what the british did when they started training polish fellas to fly spitfires

[Drum]

Regarding the new Air Marshal (proper name?) addition still in the making; does anyone have information on what that's going to involve?

Edited March 4, 2022 by Drum

[Asgar]

38 minutes ago, Drum said:

Regarding the new Air Marshal (proper name?) addition still in the making; does anyone have information on what that's going to involve?

I do, but I‘d have to kill you if I told you ?

[Feathered_IV]

1 hour ago, Drum said:

Regarding the new Air Marshal (proper name?) addition still in the making; does anyone have information on what that's going to involve?

 

I suspect it was found to be very expensive to develop and not nearly as fun as it was first thought to be.

[Pikestance]

 

I imagine it would be a program that organizes roles on the server. I assume you will choose your a/c and it will assign you to a role on a map. I would also guess that it would also organize pilots to fly at least with a wingman. Personally, a human would be better suited for that, but while that sounds like fun, I can only imagine the pretentious jerks who would simply ignore it. 

[BlitzPig_EL]

Not to mention the pretentious jerks who would vie for the mission commander (Air Marshal) position so they could bark orders at everyone and then berate his team when they eventually lose because of his strategic ineptness.

 

On paper it's a good idea, but in practice it would make herding cats seem an easy proposition.

[PaladinX]

Ever played HLL? Works great with Commander, Squadleaders and Teammembers. Everybody does, whats ordered from "above".

People not following the game rules get kicked.

[Pikestance]

9 minutes ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

Not to mention the pretentious jerks who would vie for the mission commander (Air Marshal) position so they could bark orders at everyone and then berate his team when they eventually lose because of his strategic ineptness.

 

On paper it's a good idea, but in practice it would make herding cats seem an easy proposition.

I see what you mean

 

 

[Asgar]

39 minutes ago, BlitzPig_EL said:

Not to mention the pretentious jerks who would vie for the mission commander (Air Marshal) position so they could bark orders at everyone and then berate his team when they eventually lose because of his strategic ineptness.

 

On paper it's a good idea, but in practice it would make herding cats seem an easy proposition.

i don't think that's a concern, as was mentioned before it works great in HLL and i think our community is much closer in mind set to the HLL community than it is to Battlefield

[BlitzPig_EL]

Even though I'm not on the big servers much, I do agree, we have a cadre of quality players here.  Even us crazy BlitzPigs can work effectively together to deliver the pain to the enemies' ground assets.

 

We live to blow stuff up.  ?

[Pikestance]

38 minutes ago, Asgar said:

i don't think that's a concern, as was mentioned before it works great in HLL and i think our community is much closer in mind set to the HLL community than it is to Battlefield

 

I think you are comparing apples to orange. When you join a server on HLL and PS, you join within role. You would have to fundamentally change the way servers operate to have any sense of order. So instead of choosing an airfield, you will have choose a role. The choice on the role you choose will be limited to what is currently available. Personally, this would be far and away better than the current system. It would "virtually" put an end to lone wolfs since going off on your own will results in you being kicked from the server. I did a trial run on HLL but ended up buying PS because the system worked much better in PS. In ever every game I joined, I worked with a group. In HLL there were still rogue players (but less oversight). Anyway, I was not with a group (being in Asia at the time, there weren't many choices). However, I jumped in with some guys and had some fun. Players here who do not want to commit to a group can certainly be part of a group and will most likely enjoy the experience more. 

 

The server operators will have to rethink their missions. They will most likely have to be limited to ensure a fair distribution of a/c for each mission. 

[Drum]

Sounds fun!

[Giggles]

maybe at teh very least we need a new rating system for the servers. 

 

You now,  one marked "this way" will allow this this and that and always let you do this... 

 

 

instead of Edit  where you cant use external view until you are air born..    warn you that youll always spawn on the land run way with someone trying to land on it...   require manual radiator and trim control

or should i say,   give me a server where i dont air spawn MID STALL

 

Editted by Mr Smith

[Asgar]

On 3/4/2022 at 4:16 PM, ACG_Pike said:

 

I think you are comparing apples to orange. When you join a server on HLL and PS, you join within role. You would have to fundamentally change the way servers operate to have any sense of order. So instead of choosing an airfield, you will have choose a role. The choice on the role you choose will be limited to what is currently available. Personally, this would be far and away better than the current system. It would "virtually" put an end to lone wolfs since going off on your own will results in you being kicked from the server. I did a trial run on HLL but ended up buying PS because the system worked much better in PS. In ever every game I joined, I worked with a group. In HLL there were still rogue players (but less oversight). Anyway, I was not with a group (being in Asia at the time, there weren't many choices). However, I jumped in with some guys and had some fun. Players here who do not want to commit to a group can certainly be part of a group and will most likely enjoy the experience more. 

 

The server operators will have to rethink their missions. They will most likely have to be limited to ensure a fair distribution of a/c for each mission. 

i mean.... you always join in a role by design in IL-2. If you join in a bomber, you're gonna bomb stuff and in a fighter, you might drop a 250kg bomb, but generally you're most likely to go hunting for enemy planes. (dropping a bomb in that case would be the same as the squad medic dropping a guy) so yeah... we got roles in IL-2 if you will

In the end it's up to players to type in chat, use discord, teamspeak or SRS which are available for most popular servers. So it's not a game design problem.

[Pikestance]

5 minutes ago, Asgar said:

i mean.... you always join in a role by design in IL-2. If you join in a bomber, you're gonna bomb stuff and in a fighter, you might drop a 250kg bomb, but generally you're most likely to go hunting for enemy planes. (dropping a bomb in that case would be the same as the squad medic dropping a guy) so yeah... we got roles in IL-2 if you will

In the end it's up to players to type in chat, use discord, teamspeak or SRS which are available for most popular servers. So it's not a game design problem.

 

Yes, conceptually. In PS and HLL the roles are limited. To put it in IL2 terms. There will only be so many fighter available slots. You might have a total of 20 slots for BF 109s.

Two Staffels of 8 each with Staffel Captain, and a stab consisting of 4 a/c with a Gruppenkommander. The rest of the slots will be split between, Stukas, HE111, JU 88s which will be based on that particular maps needs. To be clear, you will still have a large livery, but you will always be limited to 20 BF 109s (and didn't include but you can include FW 190s). The 190s can be one Staffel or be considered a fighter bomber. Anyway, this is what I meant by define roles. 

 

This would work best with an internal communication system. In PS and HLL the "commanders" have their own channel and a channel to communicate with their group. The "air marshal" would be the overall commander and coordinate the efforts of everyone. 

[357th_KW]

Choosing an aircraft from a list isn’t even remotely the same as choosing a role in one of those other games.  In an IL-2 MP mission, there is no way for the mission designer to say “I want 35% level bombers, 35% dive bombers and 30% fighters”.  Likewise there isn’t any way to balance coalitions effectively, as the side balancing tool just sets a hard cap.  Ultimately the mission designer has to look at the size of the server, and guess at an adequate number of spawns for a particular plane, to last the duration of the mission, or come up with some resupply mechanic - X new airframes after a certain time etc.  What you get is people choosing the most fun/effective options (typically the highest performance fighters, and most time efficient attackers) almost exclusively and grinding through whatever is available.

 

Hopefully Air Marshall will include some more complex balancing tools, to enable workable asymmetric scenarios.  There’s no problem with one side having more players then the other (in fact, it’s far more realistic for most WW2 scenarios) IF a significant chunk of the more populated side is forced into bombers etc.  And likewise, being a bomber pilot is far more palatable when there aren’t ten times your number waiting in ambush over the target.

Edited March 8, 2022 by VBF-12_KW

[Pikestance]

Yeah, I was on a sever where the Germans outnumbered the allies 2-1, but they lost the map easily. While Germans took fighters, the allies took bombers and bombed all of the targets. 

[Charon]

1 hour ago, VBF-12_KW said:

What you get is people choosing the most fun/effective options (typically the highest performance fighters, and most time efficient attackers) almost exclusively and grinding through whatever is available.

 

I agree this gets very old. Unfortunately I don't think the time-efficient attacker problem is fixable in public servers as long as airfield spawn is the norm. People want to have fun, and flying slow planes to a target isn't much fun.

 

I'd love to see a server that tried to emulate a series of AQM fights. Imagine a 20 minute map with 1-3 objectives, limited plane selection, all air-spawn, SRS support, and players can only spawn in the first minute of the map. You'd get quick action, no matter what you were flying, and the synchronized spawns, SRS, and specific mission might encourage players to coordinate a bit.

[Pikestance]

For me Quick Missions are for practicing skills. The MP servers I want to be ore like career mode or scripted campaigns. 

There is already a "dogfight" server, but it is not very popular. 

 

I did enjoy the time I took JU 52. I took 45 mins because I wanted to avoid being spotted by fighters. I delivered my goods. I can't complain about it. It was a success. The downside is that it was an air start, so very little chance of getting escorts. 

[ZachariasX]

4 hours ago, Charon said:

and players can only spawn in the first minute of the map

Such mechanics do one thing, they further reduce player numbers on your server. But this may be less of a problem for players who want to stay among themselves.

 

In general: The more specialized the playing style you require, the smaller your audience.

[Charon]

17 hours ago, ACG_Pike said:

For me Quick Missions are for practicing skills. The MP servers I want to be ore like career mode or scripted campaigns. 

There is already a "dogfight" server, but it is not very popular.

 

This is how I view the simple quick missions, but the advanced quick missions have entirely replaced career mode for me (have you tried them?). I like having an objective, but I also like missions that are fast, and I like being able to ensure variety.

 

With career mode, I'd get streaks. I.e., on Monday, escort these slow bombers half an hour across the map, fend off some migs, then do it again on Tuesday. Realistic as that may be, I have more fun changing up the missions (and you can even pick missions that career mode won't generate, like strafing an airfield in Bf 109s). And air-spawning shortly before contact is great. It reminds me of playing Microsoft's CFS 1 & 2 as a kid, where you could just press 'e' to warp to the next waypoint.

 

Berloga exists, but it's more like the simple quick missions, as I understand it. It's just fighters dueling fighters with no mission other than dueling, right?

[Jaws2002]

On 3/4/2022 at 8:53 AM, PaladinX said:

Ever played HLL? Works great with Commander, Squadleaders and Teammembers. Everybody does, whats ordered from "above".

People not following the game rules get kicked.

Yeah....Still have the scars. I didn't  even have in the army so many idiot a$$holes playing "leaders and Commanders" . A lot of LARPERs who completely forget people do this for fun and not to ki$$ some internet commandos behind.

 Nobody plays a game to be an online slave, in his own time.

 HLL is for larpers.