BoS ME Capability [Archive] - The Air Tactical Assault Group - Team Fusion

WavingWhiteFlag[AM]

Oct-17-2014, 18:42

Hi all, AbortedMan here...

I type this with a white flag waving overhead. I thought I'd chime in just to clear up some misinformation I've seen regarding BoS mission creation. I'm here solely to objectively show what I've seen from my experience in the BoS ME to help clarify any misconceptions that may have come from the usual rumor mill stuff. I know I'm not the most famous around here for whatever reasons, but feel free to take this information as purely neutral and for clarification purposes from someone that has experienced Digital Nature's most current mission creation revisions.

The ME interface is exactly like what I've seen from RoF ME, though I have not created any missions for RoF. From what I've been told by caryatid (http://riseofflight.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=347&t=44102), as we were working together as he was porting his RoF dynamic mission structure to the BoS mission I created and was hosting on the Eagle's Nest server, is that BoS could support a lot more mission objects (AI, buildings, etc) than RoF could by a longshot. I've never had any experience with RoF other than playing it so I can't comment on that, but the latest mission I had on a 60 player server supported the following:

200 German AI armor pieces advancing to four different VVS airfields (50 at each base with a two hour travel time from the west)
240 AAA pieces (24 at each German/Russian base)
2 locomotives with a route spanning halfway across the play space of the map (~Stalingrad to Kalach) with a supply/repair function
~11,500 destructible city/village/town buildings, bridges, railroad stations across the map
~200 destructible tents/bunkers/aircraft/fuel dump mission objective oriented objects at each airfield
~500 MCU/mission trigger type objects, timers, and check zones (that could be bigger, I haven't counted...other than the complex triggers, I'm not sure if they take significant resources)

Mission objectives included:

AI tank formations attacking airfields, rendering them neutralized if successful.
-Neutralized airfields had triggers that allowed specific player flown He-111's to land and capture the base for use by German players.
Destruction/disabling of airfields based on player flown missions for airfield attack/static aircraft destruction.
-Resupply system based on truck convoys and railroad routes to re-enable disabled airfields
Objective counters for both teams
Aircraft resupply system allowing He-111 players to act as a transport/supply role to front airfields

My last tests on the fully populated server of 60 players included all of this and 18 AI bombers and fighters running patrols and base-disabling carpet bombing missions without a hitch. Was going to expand on this but ran out of time.

This was achieved on a virtual private server provided by NFO, which was a ten core Nehalem CPU @2.26Ghz (dserver running on two cores) with 10GB of RAM and maintained CPU usage under 13% with dserver simulations per second (sps) at ~35sps (50sps is baseline/optimal, 20sps is when things start visually lagging), so it was very playable and had room to expand. This is not an ideal powerhouse of a machine (bit of a budget box), but it served our purposes just fine. A dedicated box with a better, higher frequency CPU (dserver was not made to run on multiple cores, apparently) would probably allow a lot more in the mission and allow for higher player numbers (70 players was our all time max, but I was too busy playing and didn't look at server metrics, so I'm not sure if the server was choking)...but that is a bit of conjecture.

Stating that more than 50 objects in one area is not possible in BoS is a misconception and false...also, the BoS engine is capable of placing and playing thousands of objects in a mission. "Objects" being a bit of a blanket statement, I'd clarify those to be buildings, AAA batteries, and static aircraft/airfield assets. Additionally, Bliss, you are under the impression that a specific type of aircraft could not be limited by how many are in the air/spawned at a time, which is very possible using "OnKilled"/"OnSpawn" triggers in conjunction with a variation of <this object group> (http://riseofflight.com/Forum/download/file.php?id=38380&mode=view) and naming the type of plane you want limited (just one way to do it). I didn't make that group, but was able to leverage the community to have it sent to me in template form so it was easily portable (click, click, done) from RoF to BoS.

It is a correct statement that the current DN engine cannot handle thousands or hundreds of aircraft in the air at once in SP and definitely not in MP. I don't think that is the goal of the game though, as I cannot find any historical evidence of such a formation/furball/simultaneous air operations in the Stalingrad theater.

I hope this shows a little insight on the topic. I'm not trying to offend, encroach, insult, convince, or deter anyone from anything or anyone by posting this. I play both BoS, DCS and CloD online and enjoy them equally for their respective merits.

ATAG_Bliss

Oct-17-2014, 18:52

I'm sorry, but I've heard many people make claims the same way you are, and every single time I've asked them to do something so simple as this video (flying next to all those objects), not a single person has been able to provide me a video like this that actually shows it is possible.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mg8fC3APmfA

You can place 1,000,000 objects in Cliffs of Dover, especially if they are out of pilot view. The problem with ROF was always the fact that mission builders had to deactivate all those objects in the 1st place as they all couldn't be active at once.

Again, I look forward to a video similar to the one above when you get the chance. If you can actually do that, then I will be quite happy about the game. Anxiously awaiting your video!!!

WavingWhiteFlag[AM]

Oct-17-2014, 19:01

I find it odd that this is the standard in which you judge video games, as this isn't what these games were designed to do...but to each his own. When I get to my computer I'll see about making a video.

ATAG_Bliss

Oct-17-2014, 19:06

No.. It's just the easiest way to prove or disprove your claims. If you say the game can handle thousands of objects, then place 1000's of static objects next to each other and make a video. I wouldn't think it would be too terribly difficult if what you are saying is correct. I'm just a "gotta see it to believe it type of a person". Especially when I tried to do the same with the ME time and time again with 100's of objects and it was unplayable.

I'm honestly excited if what you say is true. I'm being sincere. Because if that is the case, then there's actually some longevity in the game and a good chance this could really take off. So show me something similar above. Make a recording of flying through 3 minutes of just static placed object after static placed object like the video above.

But on the flip side I've seen many mission builders say the same thing in ROF, and when asked for proof they can never give it. So you can probably see, especially coupled with my own experience with the ME, why I would want that proof. If that's possible, I would probably grind through SP even. Not even kidding.

WavingWhiteFlag[AM]

Oct-17-2014, 19:09

Ok, I understand your request as a litmus test of the capabilities of the two engines, but that isn't a clear test of anything gameplay wise that people that are buying this game are going to buy it and play it for...or reviewing it for, specifically.

I hope you understand where I'm coming from.

EDIT: it seems you want to review the engine, not the game, correct?

ATAG_Bliss

Oct-17-2014, 19:16

;145928']Ok, I understand your request as a litmus test of the capabilities of the two engines, but that isn't a clear test of anything gameplay wise that people that are buying this game are going to buy it and play it for...or reviewing it for, specifically.

I hope you understand where I'm coming from.

Oh I seriously disagree. There are plenty of people (just like the video above) that only play flight sims to build stunt maps and race against their friends. They never even fire the weapons. That is their enjoyment etc. That's why I'm asking you to show such a map even being possible and flying through all those objects etc.

Obviously there are plenty that only want to play MP or play SP as well. The entire point is, the more capable it is, the better it can handle every type of flight simmer and that of course equals more popularity and success.

And then there's those few of us that just like to tinker around in the FMB etc.

Again, if it can achieve what you are saying, I'm going to be eating a lot of crow. And I won't care one iota about grinding to get my stuff in SP. But I think you're going to run into quite a few road blocks trying to do what I asked. I shall be waiting.

Tycoon

Oct-17-2014, 19:33

ATAG_Bliss

Oct-17-2014, 19:37

Is the stuff in the video possible in COD? (I've seen the video before but just realized it's old Il 2).

And White flag guy if you can please make a video, just get as many objects as you can in. If for no other reason it would be fun to see, no challenge here, I'll respect your flag.:D

Oh yeah.. Clod actually even handles more objects.. Here's an example from Clod:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SBa2Tl8NtT8&list=UUeR4h3wGW9XFa5S57kxThgA

TWC_Target

Oct-17-2014, 20:25

I forget which night was race night on Hyper Lobby or which sqn hosted it. But the race had a following and many I spoke with said they enjoyed it.

Dakpilot

Oct-17-2014, 20:55

Seriously has it really come to debating which game can have more objects in an air race.....I fear the plot has been lost a while back.....:stunned:

Cheers Dakpilot

Skoshi_Tiger

Oct-17-2014, 21:07

Ummm! DP the thread is titled "BoS ME Capability". Now I could be wrong but to me it would not be unreasonable to discuss the capabilities of the Mission Editor and what you can and can't do when creating a viable mission using the said tool.

Talk about loosing the plot!

TWC_Target

Oct-17-2014, 21:08

Seriously has it really come to debating which game can have more objects in an air race.....I fear the plot has been lost a while back.....:stunned:

Cheers Dakpilot
No the debate is about how many objects the game can handle in any given situation. The air race is just the medium for the stress test.

Tycoon

Oct-17-2014, 21:24

Seriously has it really come to debating which game can have more objects in an air race.....I fear the plot has been lost a while back.....:stunned:

Cheers Dakpilot

It's not about that, it's purely about engine capabilities, for those that want big expansive missions object count and amount of ai units is important. Clearly COD can support large amounts of objects and ai, Though what the OP posted for BOS is still not that bad.

P.S. thanks for the vid, man all those detailed hangers, it looks like the death star!:). by the way is that a dogfight map or something? I sure hope ATAG starts a dogfighting server on that map, just watch the droves leaving the channel map!:P sorry couldn't resist.

Vaxxtx

Oct-17-2014, 21:44

I am looking forward to some BoS videos. Seriously. It will do 1 of 2 things for me.

1. Make me shut up about the engine limitations and make me actually care more about BoS being a success. It would also get me excited and sad at the same time knowing the ME wont be out for a while. But I hope this is what happens.

2. Put the nail in the coffin on BoS for me. I know quite a few others will be disappointed as well.

Either way at least more people will have an idea of what to expect.

Chivas

Oct-17-2014, 21:54

The FMB was a major key to the success of the original IL-2, were thousands of missions, and hundreds of campaigns were created by the community. Its not unreasonable to ask for some examples like a video of the capabilities of the ME in BOS. The ROF ME has never produced anywhere near the amount of missions partly because of the smaller genre, and the complexity of its use. I've always said, that I see no reason why the ME code couldn't be improved for use in BOS, but I haven't seen much yet to suggest it has been accomplished. I'd also really like to see the video. If the BOS development has improved the code enough to allow alot more content, and ease of use, it will go along way in securing a decent future for BOS.

WavingWhiteFlag[AM]

Oct-17-2014, 22:15

Just FYI, my OP was originally to clear up some of the misconceptions of the things I've read here, not to create a video for air races...but I'm working on that now.

Tycoon

Oct-17-2014, 22:23

Thank you!

ATAG_Bliss

Oct-17-2014, 22:34

;145961']Just FYI, my OP was originally to clear up some of the misconceptions of the things I've read here, not to create a video for air races...but I'm working on that now.

Good deal.. Hopefully shouldn't take too long. I just copied/pasted a couple thousand light houses, then threw in some hangers for fun, then flew next to them. It only took around 3 minutes from start to finish. Just waiting on youtube to upload atm..

Edit: And the video..

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RjeRlyj5FNw

gavagai

Oct-17-2014, 23:16

Seriously has it really come to debating which game can have more objects in an air race.....I fear the plot has been lost a while back.....:stunned:

Cheers Dakpilot

How about the % of users who will actually succeed at creating their own missions with the ME. I was only able to create the most simple missions with Rise of Flight. The ME is similar to learning a programming language. There is no casual mucking around for fun. You can't even test a mission from the ME. You have to close the ME and then launch the application to test what you have done.

I've made missions with Il-2 1946, and I even learned the trigger system in DCS. I could probably learn the ME for ROF (or BOS), but it is tedious and not fun, so I never bothered to do it. The ME in Il-2 and DCS are actually fun to use, and that's an important difference.

ATAG_Bliss

Oct-18-2014, 00:16

Bummer - looks like he logged out without being able to provide a video. Should have only taken a couple minutes to do. Ah well.

WavingWhiteFlag[AM]

Oct-18-2014, 06:34

Here it is. Apologies for being late...I have higher priority things to do on my Friday nights

http://youtu.be/xwebS57OvLc

My rig is a Intel i5 2500k (stock clock), 8GB RAM, and a reference GTX 670. This was played at normal speed. There aren't many very tall buildings in Stalingrad, apparently, so I used what I could. There aren't any hangars that have their doors open wide enough for my aircraft to fit through so I couldn't make the uber dangerous indoor flying bits..though thinking about it now I could probably use a bunch of bridges for the same exact effect. I created the raceway itself in just a couple minutes by placing the track then copy/pasting huge chunks, but it was boring as hell so I added some action scenery, which took about 45 minutes to test and get everything not crashing into the track and still being close enough to see.

I'm fully confident that this could be doubled, tripled, and even quadrupled and beyond in length and numbers of AI, and then played with 60-70 players, though it would be a hilarious mess. The mission I spoke of in the OP has much more going on at once than this.

Headshot

Oct-18-2014, 07:09

Looks great. Good on you taking the time to test BOS ME and post your results. :salute:

nacy

Oct-18-2014, 07:26

ATAG_Bliss tu a jouer tu a perdu.

ATAG_Bliss you play you have lost.

Continu0

Oct-18-2014, 07:36

Looks like AM has a point here... do these buildings have a DM?

Arthursmedley

Oct-18-2014, 07:37

Wow! That looked really impressive - especially with the artillery landing around the plane too. Thanks for doing this. Interesting to see what the game is capable of.:thumbsup:

LuseKofte

Oct-18-2014, 07:40

Bliss got a point. People say I told he was wrong. I just said there are many versions and I cannot tell for sure who right.

In retrospective I should not care either.
I had and hopefully will continue to have many fun flights in cod, the same goes for bos.
Sorry for my intervention

WavingWhiteFlag[AM]

Oct-18-2014, 07:41

Looks like AM has a point here... do these buildings have a DM?

Yes, everything in the video has a DM enabled...except me...I kept getting damaged by the damn train in the beginning so I set myself invulnerable.

gavagai

Oct-18-2014, 07:43

"A winner is you" and all your base are belong to us.:)

I'm going to agree that BoS passed that test.

P.S. What's with the subtitle warning you about enemies on your 6?

Skoshi_Tiger

Oct-18-2014, 07:52

The ROF wiki states the following limits (I guess it's all we've got until the developers tell us the limits for BoS )

Recommended limits for a mission

no more than 8 types of aircraft
if more than 8 types of aircraft - in the server settings to disable skins
if the count of aircraft on the airfield indefinitely - restriction on the number of participants 16-20
if the count of aircraft on the airfield is limited - the restriction on the number of participants to 40
no more than 15 buildings with Entity - including the airfields, neighborhoods, bridges
no more than 12 flags
no more than 12 zones, no more than 10 points a break boundaries between zones
not more than 50 units at one time an active technics
no more than 12 balloons at once active
if you are using AI aircraft - no more than 16 active at a time, while the restriction on the number of players should not be more than 16

Ignoring these restrictions may cause instability as the game client and dedicated server.

Neoqb gave immense freedom of 3rd party content developers, including missions, but this freedom must be used carefully and with due understanding of the limits and the impact of your work on the face of the project.

AB, looks good but it does lead to a few questions,

Does the building you use have entity?
How stable would this mission be in multiplayer? What are the factors that you base your confidence about large numbers of players using such a map?

Cheers!

vranac

Oct-18-2014, 08:01

Hi AbortedMan, those numbers you posted aren't bad at all. However, I missed videos of those actions. Do you have any, just to see the how many pilots, tanks, AA... can be around.

Something like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOkM40zC9io

This is one SP mission made by one very talented guy, podvoxx. He also made an online war "Batlle of France" with similar scenario including moving frontline.
I had one of the coolest experiences flying in Blenhaim over the raging tank and artillery battle with multiple 109's attacking me and RAF pilots engaging them.

Unfortunately I forgot to record that :ind:

Tycoon

Oct-18-2014, 08:51

Haha I cant believe someone finally posted a vid, thanks whiteflag!:thumbsup:
So I guess what we saw in the video isnt possible in ROF?

Hood

Oct-18-2014, 09:03

Guys, don't forget this isn't a pissing contest (though Bliss's "Oh well" deserves a snigger).

AM has kindly addressed Bliss's "review" but neither video really addresses the crux of the matter which is being able to play a game and have a great experience. My take is you can do this in CLOD and BOS.

Hood

Archie

Oct-18-2014, 09:22

Looks very interesting! That's the first time I think that someone has actually bothered to make a video showing what the BoS engine can do, so thanks for that AM. :thumbsup:

Chuck_Owl

Oct-18-2014, 10:24

@AbortedMan:

Nice demo! It's good to see what the engine can do!

ATAG_Colander

Oct-18-2014, 10:28

Thanks for the video Aborted.

Tycoon

Oct-18-2014, 13:31

On a side note is DCS capable of a lot of objects like these videos?

LuseKofte

Oct-18-2014, 14:27

Well, to me it is not fair comparing COD and BOS, they are different in many ways. This test shows a engine not as limited as we all thought.
It did not surprise me at all, I find BOS running smoother than cod.
That said I prefer cod game wise.
It is too soon involving DCS as a WW2 sim , they are not finished with development, infrastructure map, well everything. I hope the development of DCS world will be treated for what it is, a wip, And not being treated like BOS was in its WIP period. And still are btw

1. Night missions were added to the Campaign;
2. Destroyed villages and bonfires were added to the front line areas in the Campaign;
3. Bonfires in Stalingrad were added to the Campaign;
4. The skill level of allied AAA was changed in the Campaign. It should be safe now on the home airfield;
5. Ammo counter for the turret armament was added in multiplayer;
6. The lag between hits and hit sounds was decreased in multiplayer;
7. Trucks and train cabs should be swinging on the road in multiplayer as they are in single player modes;
8. The bug with ground vehicles shooting after being destroyed and removed from the map was fixed;
9. The bug with flares and headlights random disappearing was fixed;
10. Sun glint on the airfields coming from the already set sun was removed;
11. The bug with turrets not shooting when the aircraft is damaged was fixed;
12. FW 190 A-3 climb rate was corrected according to the reference data;
13. Engine limits added not only to extreme revs but for extreme supercharge as well (with possible break down in case of prolong use);
14. Ju 87 D-3 and He 111 H-6 now have an automatic supercharger mode instead of switching to the 2 stage;
15. Time for takeoff and climb engine modes on He 111 H-6 and Ju 87 D-3 was increased, so after 1 minute of takeoff mode the engines should be able to run 30 minutes in climb mode;
16. After 1 minute of working in extreme engine mode Bf 109 F-4 should be able to run in combat mode for 30 minutes;
17. After 3 minutes of working in extreme engine mode FW 190 A-3 should be able to run in combat mode for 30 minutes;
18. Reheat time limiter on La-5 bug was fixed;
19. Animation for landing lights, nav lights and cockpit light switches on He 111 H-6 was added;
20. Flaps lever animation on He 111 H-6 was fixed;
21. Basic set of scenarios was added (standalone single missions).
22. Speed indication on FW 190 A-3 fixed;
23. Speed indication on Ju 87 D-3 fixed.
24. Parts which have fell off from plane now have damage on them
25. Temporary design of Plane Setup dialog was replaced by final one
26. Special marks were added to Premium customers HUD icons in Multiplayer game

heinkill

Oct-18-2014, 16:39

SorcererDave

Oct-18-2014, 17:44

Yes but...

So why in SP do the campaign missions feature so few vehicles... Five tanks in an attack, six trucks in a convoy, one train...

So why are the flights and dogfights so small... Friendly flights of 7-8, enemy flights same or less?

In MP the player is the AI, can BoS code not manage too many moving complex AI objects? Only static ones?

H

Lol. Dude, it's not a case of the engine not being able to handle AI objects, it's just the developers making a very lazily-designed campaign. Which is a shame by the way since as someone who DOES rather extensively play single player as well as multiplayer, the campaign is inexcusably shit. It boggles my mind that 777 could make a very enjoyable dynamic career mode in RoF and then just... not bother with BoS. Guess I'll have to wait for modders to fix that. On the bright side though the AI is definitely smarter than CloD's. Not quite on the ninja-bastard difficulty level of 1946's AI, but to be fair it took them years to get that right.

Dutch

Oct-18-2014, 17:59

Hello AbortedMan, would you care for a chocolate hob-nob? :D

Is it possible, that after all these years of certain people entrenching themselves in one camp, whilst others entrench themselves in another, that it might actually be possible for all WWII flight sim fans to unite against the real enemy? The bloody developers? :D

We turn our eyes to DCS and Eagle Dynamics in expectation....then we realise that there's some sort of panic sale this weekend. Will they fold? Are they selling up? Are they bankrupt? Have the Fighter Collection withdrawn support owing to the sanctions imposed by certain governments on others?

Who can say for sure?

How about a Jammy Dodger?

:)

Tvrdi

Oct-18-2014, 18:57

All I know is that my rig is struggling on syndicate server with al planes and objects in the mission. That is with AA set to 2, vsync ON and on 1920x1200. GTX 660Ti and i7920OC 3.7Ghz....In all other sims including CLOD and ARMA3 most of teh time is super smooth...btw latest uodate in BOS fecked MP performance...

Skoshi_Tiger

Oct-18-2014, 20:18

Lol. Dude, it's not a case of the engine not being able to handle AI objects, it's just the developers making a very lazily-designed campaign. Which is a shame by the way since as someone who DOES rather extensively play single player as well as multiplayer, the campaign is inexcusably shit. It boggles my mind that 777 could make a very enjoyable dynamic career mode in RoF and then just... not bother with BoS. Guess I'll have to wait for modders to fix that. On the bright side though the AI is definitely smarter than CloD's. Not quite on the ninja-bastard difficulty level of 1946's AI, but to be fair it took them years to get that right.

I guess this takes us back to the importance of the original topic of this thread to the community.

Single player campaigns were never the strong point of the original releases of IL2 and CoD's campaign (as released) was held in contempt. Oleg got away with this because the tools required to create immersive highly detailed missions and campaigns were freely available. Right from their release IL2 and COD success was in a large part due in a large part to community involvement in creating these missions.

IMHO the success of BoS in a large part will depend on the availability and capabilities of the tools created to create this content. Restricting peoples ability to create this content will stifle the creativity in the community and they will go else where. No matter how good a sim is, will people play "inexcusably shit" (your words mot mine - since it's release a week or so ago I haven't had time to play BoS ) campaigns or un-immersive multiplayer missions for six months while 1CGS restricts the use of the FMB to an elite few?

Cheers!

Just tried and am waiting for another 1.23GB download :doh:

ATAG_Colander

Oct-18-2014, 20:34

SorcererDave

Oct-18-2014, 20:51

Sounds like your mileage may vary. I've not played multiplayer since before the latest update, but I've always gotten consistently better framerates in BoS than in CloD. Hell even now with a Core i7, GTX 780 6GB and 16 gigs of RAM, CloD will quite often spazz out on me and drop to about 20 frames a second. I get why people feel the CloD engine is better (and I mostly agree), but you've got to admit that the fact that, only now, 3-4 years later does the average PC owner have the horsepower to run it on high settings, is a big black mark against it. I've had a number of friends I've tried to get into the game coming from War Thunder, and while they loved it in principle, they just couldn't play regularly because the game performed so horribly on their computers.

Arthursmedley

Oct-18-2014, 20:59

btw latest uodate in BOS fecked MP performance...

Strange...I get same performance tonight on the Syndicate server as before the latest update.

Jammy Dodger sounds nice Dutch.:thumbsup:

WavingWhiteFlag[AM]

Oct-18-2014, 21:06

The ROF wiki states the following limits (I guess it's all we've got until the developers tell us the limits for BoS )

AB, looks good but it does lead to a few questions,

Does the building you use have entity?
How stable would this mission be in multiplayer? What are the factors that you base your confidence about large numbers of players using such a map?

Cheers!

All the buildings in this video have entity links created. That is what makes them interactive to players/objects, ie, activating the DM, setting what country it belongs to, giving it orders/triggers, etc. I'm confident this mission would be extremely stable in large-scale MP because it's hardly a stretch for the DN engine to accomplish this scenario. The mission I describe in the OP has waaaay more things going on in it...I'm talking thousands upon thousands of buildings (plus Stalingrad and neighboring towns) vs this raceway's ~1100 buildings (plus Stalingrad and neighboring towns).

Hi AbortedMan, those numbers you posted aren't bad at all. However, I missed videos of those actions. Do you have any, just to see the how many pilots, tanks, AA... can be around.

Something like this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cOkM40zC9io

This is one SP mission made by one very talented guy, podvoxx. He also made an online war "Batlle of France" with similar scenario including moving frontline.
I had one of the coolest experiences flying in Blenhaim over the raging tank and artillery battle with multiple 109's attacking me and RAF pilots engaging them.

Unfortunately I forgot to record that :ind:

I'm sure this could be done...If a big base assault scenario is what you wanted to see, that can be arranged.

P.S. What's with the subtitle warning you about enemies on your 6?

That's something I wrote in using the subtitles function for flair...I was going to release the mission to everyone on the thread, but didn't feel like writing out the instructions on how to get custom missions working on people's early access BoS account.

@AbortedMan:

Nice demo! It's good to see what the engine can do!

Please don't take this particular video as a benchmark for the engine/game. It's really only a fraction of what is being done on Syndicate and the former Eagle's Nest server...which is why I was confused in the beginning of this thread as to why this would be wanted as a litmus test. this mission only has ~1100 extra buildings added, 51 ground units, and 12 AI aircraft. The online mission I described has exponentially more of everything all going on at once. The only thing that is deactivated in my online mission is the AAA at bases that don't have any players within 6km...if you're not doing that in any mission (or application, for that matter) then you're wasting resources that can be used for other things. That's just good basic programming principles. There was an all-out tank assault vs a wall of AT guns at each front VVS airfield on Eagle's Nest! I can add on-screen video/pics to the mission, create an in-game cutscene, and even create a tournament type racing circuit type thing (for racing, in this example...can also be used as a moving frontline/dynamic campaign in MP or SP) based on who wins by using the editor's ability to load a specific mission based on the current mission's outcome.

This is a good point.
The same test should be made online as I'm assuming both where done offline.

My test was done offline, but read the replies above to see why it's not that big of a task for the game to do.

WavingWhiteFlag[AM]

Oct-18-2014, 21:14

while 1CGS restricts the use of the FMB to an elite few?

I agree that it's extremely stupid and self-limiting to only give the FMB to a small group of the community. The devs shot themselves in the foot once again for that...but we are not elite, favored, or paid (well, I'm not). We took the initiative to make ourselves available by constantly messaging people and citing bugs and other reports in the early days. We took the initiative to show that we wanted to be a part of the development cycle...anyone could have done the same, but it's understandable that everyone couldn't. I had zero experience in creating missions for any game other than plinking around in ArmA 3 editor for a week. I am not elite.

I have a professional background in IT which obviously helps me understand computer/software related problems, so it comes a bit easier to me, but we are not favored in any way...obviously, I mean, look where I am now...I'm a dev-team pariah due to a slight comment I made ("Can't say I'm happy about the new changes...") which prompted a behind-the-scenes backlash of temper-tantrum proportions.

LBR=H.Ostermann

Oct-19-2014, 01:12

;146188']I agree that it's extremely stupid and self-limiting to only give the FMB to a small group of the community. The devs shot themselves in the foot once again for that...but we are not elite, favored, or paid (well, I'm not). We took the initiative to make ourselves available by constantly messaging people and citing bugs and other reports in the early days. We took the initiative to show that we wanted to be a part of the development cycle...anyone could have done the same, but it's understandable that everyone couldn't. I had zero experience in creating missions for any game other than plinking around in ArmA 3 editor for a week. I am not elite.

I have a professional background in IT which obviously helps me understand computer/software related problems, so it comes a bit easier to me, but we are not favored in any way...obviously, I mean, look where I am now...I'm a dev-team pariah due to a slight comment I made ("Can't say I'm happy about the new changes...") which prompted a behind-the-scenes backlash of temper-tantrum proportions.

S!

Aborted, you are the guy that created missions for the Eagles Nest server, you think that the unlocks can potentially "lock" some gameplay modes and missions? Like the BOSWAR, how STENKA will deal with this?

Tvrdi

Oct-19-2014, 03:12

Hoots

Oct-19-2014, 03:51

the thing is I can fine tune video settings in CLOD...its dx11 so even with reducing some parameters it still looks good. BOS have only presets so you can pick lower settinga and have uglier visuals and afwull clouds or you can pick higher presets and pickup ssao and all other ugly hsrdware heavy stuff...

Not really anything to do with the me if we were being honest.

WavingWhiteFlag[AM]

Oct-19-2014, 04:19

the thing is I can fine tune video settings in CLOD...its dx11 so even with reducing some parameters it still looks good. BOS have only presets so you can pick lower settinga and have uglier visuals and afwull clouds or you can pick higher presets and pickup ssao and all other ugly hsrdware heavy stuff...
Not anything to do with dx11 or dx9 either. Do some research on what directX actually is/does and the affect on the user-facing side. It will quell a lot of debates about that shouldn't be debates at all.

jaydee

Oct-19-2014, 04:25

WavingWhiteFlag[AM]

Oct-19-2014, 04:28

S!

Aborted, you are the guy that created missions for the Eagles Nest server, you think that the unlocks can potentially "lock" some gameplay modes and missions? Like the BOSWAR, how STENKA will deal with this?
Unlocks limit the impact of objectives that affect armament loadouts. If most of the server's players hasn't gone through the trouble to unlock all the new guns/bombs, then an objective like an airfield ammo supply being refilled by a train supply system that allows the use of cannons or big bombs really doesn't mean much.

It doesn't exactly limit game modes, it just guts certain aspects of gameplay that would otherwise be very meaningful.

In any case...I hate it and they're stupid.

WavingWhiteFlag[AM]

Oct-19-2014, 04:31

Revvin

Oct-19-2014, 05:07

I don't understand the point of this post here on ATAG, AM. I think this post belongs in BOS Forums to be honest.
One thing I have decided with my Limited Internet Posting is that I post my Negative Opinions about the Game/Mods in That Forum. I disagreed with Bliss's Posting here. I Didn't go to any other Forum and Whinge about Bliss. I posted my opinion here on ATAG.
I would suggest you post this topic on BOS forums. See how far you get.
I feel your post is Provocative.
One of the advantages of having a Free and Open Forum (here on ATAG) is that, everyone ,is allowed to post their Opinion. One of the disadvantages is that people that have an axe to grind ,or have some other agenda can abuse that Freedom of Speech.

AM was simply trying to clear up some of the confusion about what IL-2 BoS is capable of. Bliss has posted about the limitations of the ME based on his experience of the RoF ME and with CLoD and his his wealth of experience in both sims he puts forward a strong case but I found it interesting to see AM's post and later the video which makes things look not quite so bleak as perhaps Bliss has suggested up to this point. I didn't find AM's post at all provocative, it's about BoS and he's posted in the BoS forum here at ATAG. There is little point in having a BoS forum here if all you're allowed to do is criticise it.

Osprey

Oct-19-2014, 05:37

Oh yeah.. Clod actually even handles more objects.. Here's an example from Clod:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SBa2Tl8NtT8&list=UUeR4h3wGW9XFa5S57kxThgA

Classic. This is ACG's old circuit made by DavidRed, we had a lot of fun on this (especially when the loser started firing lol)

I recall Farber asking 777 about objects in the mission, stating that some of us needed 50+ formations and also 70 players, but it was ignored and trampled on. Sure, at Stalingrad maybe there were few big formations, but the BOB and other theatres there were not so for the sake of longevity these numbers are required. I spoke with Jason Williams myself and stated that ACG would have no interest in BOS as a group should this limitation be true (notwithstanding realism). We have BOS pilots, but we'll never run a campaign or server for BOS as long as it doesn't support our ridiculously sized needs.

So, what's the truth? Is it posible to have 100 AI bombers and 100 human pilots in the server? (COD cannot do this)

Skoshi_Tiger

Oct-19-2014, 06:26

So, what's the truth? Is it posible to have 100 AI bombers and 100 human pilots in the server? (COD cannot do this)

Not sure about AI, buy I have been online with 90+ planes in COD. What current sim is around what will meet your requirements?

vranac

Oct-19-2014, 07:08

;146187']I'm sure this could be done...If a big base assault scenario is what you wanted to see, that can be arranged.

Please don't take this particular video as a benchmark for the engine/game. It's really only a fraction of what is being done on Syndicate and the former Eagle's Nest server...which is why I was confused in the beginning of this thread as to why this would be wanted as a litmus test. this mission only has ~1100 extra buildings added, 51 ground units, and 12 AI aircraft. The online mission I described has exponentially more of everything all going on at once. The only thing that is deactivated in my online mission is the AAA at bases that don't have any players within 6km...

200 German AI armor pieces advancing to four different VVS airfields (50 at each base with a two hour travel time from the west)
240 AAA pieces (24 at each German/Russian base)

Mission objectives included:

AI tank formations attacking airfields, rendering them neutralized if successful.

My last tests on the fully populated server of 60 players included all of this and 18 AI bombers and fighters running patrols and base-disabling carpet bombing missions without a hitch. Was going to expand on this but ran out of time.

I was asking did anyone recorded this kind of an action. You said there were 60 pilots at the server, some of them surely went to stop those tanks.
Is there any video about that ?

Tvrdi

Oct-19-2014, 07:13

@Vander - your video was recorded in sp and my maon concern is mp. This is where dn engine limitation is.

LuseKofte

Oct-19-2014, 07:33

Hood

Oct-19-2014, 07:34

Is it posible to have 100 AI bombers and 100 human pilots in the server? (COD cannot do this)

This is a better real example test. Using ACG as an example Osprey, do you mean a 100 plane strong AI bomber raid with 100 human pilots in and around that raid?

Widely separated AI and human aircraft may not have the same impact on the server or player machines.

Hood

WavingWhiteFlag[AM]

Oct-19-2014, 08:14

Classic. This is ACG's old circuit made by DavidRed, we had a lot of fun on this (especially when the loser started firing lol)

I recall Farber asking 777 about objects in the mission, stating that some of us needed 50+ formations and also 70 players, but it was ignored and trampled on. Sure, at Stalingrad maybe there were few big formations, but the BOB and other theatres there were not so for the sake of longevity these numbers are required. I spoke with Jason Williams myself and stated that ACG would have no interest in BOS as a group should this limitation be true (notwithstanding realism). We have BOS pilots, but we'll never run a campaign or server for BOS as long as it doesn't support our ridiculously sized needs.

So, what's the truth? Is it posible to have 100 AI bombers and 100 human pilots in the server? (COD cannot do this)

I don't think 100 AI bombers and 100 players is possible in a practical online BoS mission...maybe if the 100 AI bombers and the 100 players are the only objects in the mission, but that wouldn't be very practical.

I was asking did anyone recorded this kind of an action. You said there were 60 pilots at the server, some of them surely went to stop those tanks.
Is there any video about that ?

I don't have any video of attacking or defending the tanks with a full server, but I'm sure you can ask around or search YouTube for some recordings. A quick look at the old Eagle's Nest server thread on the official BoS forums offered this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_pUCZFLvTbA but it's not attacking the tank formations, it's Stukas attacking one of the airfield's supply depots.

@Vander - your video was recorded in sp and my maon concern is mp. This is where dn engine limitation is.

Vander isn't on this thread, I don't think, so I'm thinking you meant vranac or myself...if you meant myself, yes, the limitations of MP are more strict than they are in SP, specifically with AI aircraft since they use the same flight models and aerodynamic calculations as player aircraft which apparently takes a lot of CPU resources per aircraft. The ground objects/AI are much less tasking, though, and with some clever mission creation the numbers can get pretty high, from what I've seen/tested.

I'm hoping the recently announced Ju-52 (which will be AI only) will be a bit "dumber" so they will effectively use less server resources since they won't need that much FM simulation cycles. Even then, though, I don't think there were huge wings of Ju-52's in operation doing giant transport raids in Stalingrad at the time the game is simulating.

gavagai

Oct-19-2014, 08:41

;146223']Not anything to do with dx11 or dx9 either. Do some research on what directX actually is/does and the affect on the user-facing side. It will quell a lot of debates about that shouldn't be debates at all.

As I understand it, the biggest difference is that Nvidia and AMD look at DX9 as a dinosaur and want to move on, even if it is sufficient for visuals in a flight sim.

Tvrdi

Oct-19-2014, 08:47

ahh I thought Vander is the only it expert in syndicate. The thing is, I dont think sp is main concern for most of us. The problem is mp and how badly the sim is optimized for mp. In ROF after yrs of fixing it is considerably better. Still, thers no way you can have so many players, ai planes and ground objects on the server in BOS like you can habe in Il2 46 and CLOD. My cpu util is at 80% and its choking sometimes when more planes are nearby. DN engine, as I learned when I was core tester in ROF, wasnt buićt for large mp battles. It was built for dogfighting servers. Also, how can BOS be Rof2 engine with uglier landscape, cockpits and clouds than those existing in ROF? Why its been advertised as best sim ln the market? And a true successor of original IL2. Its only the first two letters which are the same.

Hood

Oct-19-2014, 09:29

Where is AAA ? You said there were 24 units at every airfield. I didn't see any flak at all.

He was talking about the mission he was developing for EN server. He didn't say that video was one that had 24 AA units at that airfield etc.

I do like how some are trying to do down BOS rather than keeping it on topic. Let's talk about the ME.

Hood

WavingWhiteFlag[AM]

Oct-19-2014, 09:35

As I understand it, the biggest difference is that Nvidia and AMD look at DX9 as a dinosaur and want to move on, even if it is sufficient for visuals in a flight sim.

"Sufficient for visuals" being the key word here...the main differences between DirectX versions is the application programming interface (API), which is back-end development stuff. The advancements in rendering tech like tesselation (the main difference between dx9 and dx11) aren't even utilized in any flight sim today, to my knowledge. DX11 offers more efficient resource usage when rendering polygons versus DX9, but if a performance-to-display standard is set by a developer studio and reached using any version of DX within the satisfactory criteria, the difference is moot. I see a lot of gamers putting too much stock in whether or not a game is in their favorite version of DirectX without a lot of education on what DirectX actually is/does/is capable of. Essentially, if the tools being used to create a game get the job done to the standard that is required, it doesn't matter. In the context of the flight sims we play, DX9 or DX11 isn't going to make the difference between a playable experience and a non-playable experience when 100 aircraft are on the screen.

ahh I thought Vander is the only it expert in syndicate. The thing is, I dont think sp is main concern for most of us. The problem is mp and how badly the sim is optimized for mp. In ROF after yrs of fixing it is considerably better. Still, thers no way you can have so many players, ai planes and ground objects on the server in BOS like you can habe in Il2 46 and CLOD. My cpu util is at 80% and its choking sometimes when more planes are nearby. DN engine, as I learned when I was core tester in ROF, wasnt buićt for large mp battles. It was built for dogfighting servers. Also, how can BOS be Rof2 engine with uglier landscape, cockpits and clouds than those existing in ROF? Why its been advertised as best sim ln the market? And a true successor of original IL2. Its only the first two letters which are the same.

The only reason why the SP racetrack mission example was brought up is because Bliss requested it. The OP and main reason for this thread is to show that BoS has more capabilities than RoF and was previously believed. There's obviously some optimization to be done to the engine or some issues with your system if your rig is choking at the moments you describe. I have a similar setup and have not experienced any issues. I personally have not seen anything that BoS cannot do that the current version of CloD:TF can do, other than having 100 players...the max I've seen on a server is 70, but that was not a limitation of the server hardware/game/engine, just a lack of more people playing at the time. Which is why I asked a related question months ago on these forums. The mission I had on Eagle's Nest I would consider a large scale MP scenario. It spanned half of the playable map and had the aforementioned amount of buildings/objects/AI. Something being "uglier" is an opinion, and that's totally acceptable, not going to debate that...I think the ground texture and clouds in BoS look the best out of any sim that is available today, and definitely an improvement over RoF, but again just an opinion.

I can't agree that BoS was built for dogfighting servers, if by that you mean small scale play areas limited to air-to-air only type missions. This is what I wanted to inform people about with this thread. I've see more movement and interaction with ground units/buildings in BoS than I ever have in CloD, but that is because what BoS is trying to simulate incorporates a lot of ground war stuff...comparatively, not so much of that happened in the Battle of Britain, so it makes sense that the CloD engine can host a plethora of AI bombers (to simulate the various large-scale bomber raids) because that's what it was designed to do. Meanwhile, BoS obviously focuses on the Battle of Stalingrad, which wasn't solely an air war and they've apparently focused development on being able to provide lots of interaction on the ground...and thank god, because we all know they didn't focus development on a proper campaign or staying within normal flight-sim genre standards like not having unlocks.:td2:

Mysticpuma

Oct-19-2014, 09:45

I had a look at the RoF ME and then quickly closed it. Way beyond me to even play with which is a shame as I do like to create quick missions for testing :(

I checked out your video AM and I thought it looked pretty cool. Sort of reminded me.of the Death Star run in Star Wars. If you add some flak and about 30 Ai chasing you or buzzing around...I think someone could do a remake :)

I have no opinion either way on this but thanks for posting :)

Cheers, MP

ATAG_Snapper

Oct-19-2014, 10:44

Folks, let's please stay on topic. Specifically the Mission Editor for BoS. Discussion should be centred on its capabilities and limitations for this sim.

Please take any discussion on FM's and DM's to another thread.

Thanks,

Snapper :salute:

ATAG_Colander

Oct-19-2014, 10:49

Please take any discussion on FM's and DM's to another thread.

+1 That's how it starts and we don't want to have to lock yet another BoS thread.
:salute:

ATAG_Snapper

Oct-19-2014, 11:27

Everyone: off topic posts re FM & DM have been moved to a new thread I've created here:

http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/showthread.php?t=13390

Again, please post comments in the appropriate threads.

Thanks,

Snapper :salute:

Osprey

Oct-19-2014, 12:53

Like I said, 100 AI plus 100 human is not possible anywhere but that would be very nice. ACG missions regularly have 70 humans and 40-50 AI. Objects on the ground don't matter a jot, explosions, clouds and everyone in the one place hit things far more. Performance tends to get dodgy at 110 in combination in my experience, and that tends to be in the form of warping so there's a bottleneck somewhere in the packets getting shared about.

Where COD is wonderful is the flexibilty of missions so we will manage the larger numbers in the future by using shifts on the server and adapting the mission accordingly.

The Holy Grail is raids of 100+ AI and 150 humans in there too - WW2 airwar as an MMO, maybe tank platoons involved in ground battles - COD should follow that route, change the game name, change the intro screen and sell it further.

It will be interesting to see if DCS every manages that leap, they have a ground element already.

SorcererDave

Oct-19-2014, 13:07

I was asking did anyone recorded this kind of an action. You said there were 60 pilots at the server, some of them surely went to stop those tanks.
Is there any video about that ?

I dunno if there's any video about but for what it's worth I did play that mission when the server was relatively full. Flew top cover in my Yak for some Sturmoviks trying to knock out the tanks. Ran smooth as silk on my end.

LuseKofte

Oct-19-2014, 14:01

I might be a bad reader, but what exactly is so complicated with ROF ME, I did make myself a mission and I flew it, I did not really find it complicated at all to make.
Is it the part of making it a playable online mission with scripting that is complicated?
Because I find COD easy, but it need scripting to meet the standards. And that is kind of java language

dburne

Oct-19-2014, 15:43

I might be a bad reader, but what exactly is so complicated with ROF ME, I did make myself a mission and I flew it, I did not really find it complicated at all to make.

You might want to ask 777 that question, as they feel it is too complicated for the general public.
That is the whole reason they decided to only let a select few have access to it.

Edit: I have also hear comments from some mission designers, Heinkill was one I think if I am not mistaken that said he took a look at it and it was beyond his expertise. The heart of it must be pretty complex I would think.

Mysticpuma

Oct-19-2014, 16:28

Hi LuseKofte.

Seriously I'm not here to knock the Mission Editor, I don't make missions as such and have no idea about scripts.

When I got IL2:1946 I used to just run QMB and then one day ventured into the FMB. I chose an aircraft, hit insert on the map, chose it's waypoint, set it's altitude and speed and then changed the conditions. That was it. Hit "play mission" and it did just that :)

The interface was very intuitive and I had never tried it before.

About two-years (maybe more) I bought RoF and installed it. Had a nightmare setting up the controls which I found very non-intuitive , hated the fact you can switch the cockpit off (for movie-making not any other reason!) and when I loaded the Mission Editor I just got completely lost trying to find out what did what, how to insert flights and everything I found so simple about IL2:1946 (and then Cliffs).

BoS uses (I am under the impression) the same Mission Editor and so I would never venture in there and this must be the reason only a select few would. Even the developers said only a few would have access because it is so complicated (but easy if you are use to the ways of their software).

Again, I am not knocking it. I personally found it very difficult to understand and use, where I know how to do things in Clod's FMB (but not script!). As regards capibility, as I said, I have no opinion because I just don't know how to use it or what it is capable of. I said I liked the video AM posted, it reminded me a little of one of the first videos I ever made of Il2 (the original) before there were any mods called "Secret Weapon over Stalingrad" :recon: (check out from about 1m 32secs to see what I mean :) (no HD in those days!))

http://youtu.be/o4kr1gyLluY

http://youtu.be/o4kr1gyLluY

So I have no axe to grind in this discussion, I simply said I couldn't use it....obviously others know how to, as they do with CloD. I just do what I do when I can and have fun with my flight sims :)

Cheers, MP

Tvrdi

Oct-19-2014, 17:17

Strange...I get same performance tonight on the Syndicate server as before the latest update.

Lucky you. Look here:

LINK (http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/11887-multiplayer-has-become-slow-motion/)

ATAG_Bliss

Oct-19-2014, 17:20

;146007']Here it is. Apologies for being late...I have higher priority things to do on my Friday nights

http://youtu.be/xwebS57OvLc

My rig is a Intel i5 2500k (stock clock), 8GB RAM, and a reference GTX 670. This was played at normal speed. There aren't many very tall buildings in Stalingrad, apparently, so I used what I could. There aren't any hangars that have their doors open wide enough for my aircraft to fit through so I couldn't make the uber dangerous indoor flying bits..though thinking about it now I could probably use a bunch of bridges for the same exact effect. I created the raceway itself in just a couple minutes by placing the track then copy/pasting huge chunks, but it was boring as hell so I added some action scenery, which took about 45 minutes to test and get everything not crashing into the track and still being close enough to see.

I'm fully confident that this could be doubled, tripled, and even quadrupled and beyond in length and numbers of AI, and then played with 60-70 players, though it would be a hilarious mess. The mission I spoke of in the OP has much more going on at once than this.

That looks really good. I'm quite surprised in comparison to what happened with the same in ROF. But I also noticed you made this as a SP mission and not one that's connected to the master browser. In all my time with the ME and all the testing, since I never played SP, I never tested missions without the game's master browser (aka - online world). So we really need a test of the same mission in the master browser environment (IE - online), just like my example mission from IL2 was.

As a beta tester for ROF, the problem with large quantities of objects in missions had to do with the amount of data that was being phoned home. Once that limit was reached, the master browser would take a crap and then the server would crash. Sadly, because the game relies on this master browser for the online component you really need to post up an online test of the same mission to adhere to the online mission I set as an example.

Regardless, what you showed is definitely not possible in ROF in the online world. And judging by what PW was saying, the offline world either. Do you have a way to play the mission online and record it that way as well? Would be neat to get a couple players racing each other and see how well it performs. If it's good that way, then I'd say there have been some major changes to the master browser taken place. I hope you see what I'm getting at. SP vs Online (not being connected to the master browser vs being connected to it) has always been a huge difference in performance with ROF.

To give you an idea: http://riseofflight.com/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=353&t=24508

LuseKofte

Oct-19-2014, 17:41

Hi LuseKofte.

Seriously I'm not here to knock the Mission Editor, I don't make missions as such and have no idea about scripts.

When I got IL2:1946 I used to just run QMB and then one day ventured into the FMB. I chose an aircraft, hit insert on the map, chose it's waypoint, set it's altitude and speed and then changed the conditions. That was it. Hit "play mission" and it did just that :)

The interface was very intuitive and I had never tried it before.

About two-years (maybe more) I bought RoF and installed it. Had a nightmare setting up the controls which I found very non-intuitive , hated the fact you can switch the cockpit off (for movie-making not any other reason!) and when I loaded the Mission Editor I just got completely lost trying to find out what did what, how to insert flights and everything I found so simple about IL2:1946 (and then Cliffs).

BoS uses (I am under the impression) the same Mission Editor and so I would never venture in there and this must be the reason only a select few would. Even the developers said only a few would have access because it is so complicated (but easy if you are use to the ways of their software).

Again, I am not knocking it. I personally found it very difficult to understand and use, where I know how to do things in Clod's FMB (but not script!). As regards capibility, as I said, I have no opinion because I just don't know how to use it or what it is capable of. I said I liked the video AM posted, it reminded me a little of one of the first videos I ever made of Il2 (the original) before there were any mods called "Secret Weapon over Stalingrad" :recon: (check out from about 1m 32secs to see what I mean :) (no HD in those days!))

http://youtu.be/o4kr1gyLluY

So I have no axe to grind in this discussion, I simply said I couldn't use it....obviously others know how to, as they do with CloD. I just do what I do when I can and have fun with my flight sims :)

Cheers, MP

I agree totally, I made that mission before I knew it supposed to be difficult, I only understood that it was useless when I learned from BOS forum they did what they did. I was never active in ROF forums, so I had no idea. I find mission making very relaxing, it is the testing I find tedious.
I have spent years and still do make missions for IL2, I just in the middle of things and facing a reinstall. I am self educating myself in the scripting needed in cod.

But all these discussions are based on each and everyones subjective idea on how a sim should be. My engagement is only based on getting pissed when those opinion result in a general description as "fucked up" or "bad sim"
It is just lately, after the first unlock storm was rested, I see a wonderful debate that is actually useful. I am quite pleased and find myself agreeing on almost everything said

hnbdgr

Oct-20-2014, 11:42

Lucky you. Look here:

LINK (http://forum.il2sturmovik.com/topic/11887-multiplayer-has-become-slow-motion/)

This thread was taken down... what was the issue?

LBR=H.Ostermann

Oct-20-2014, 12:22

This thread was taken down... what was the issue?

S! Log in the forum to see the thread.

:salute:

Tvrdi

Oct-20-2014, 13:51

This thread was taken down... what was the issue?

It was about drastic performance drop in mp after the last patch plus heavy lag. Many ppl reported the same. There was a guess they are testing new AI and how it hits oue machines. This is basicaly one of the main issues and limitation of DN engine which was mentioned earlier. Put more ai and ground units IN MP and ROF/BOS engine/ server crashes.

Hood

Oct-20-2014, 14:17

It was about drastic performance drop in mp after the last patch plus heavy lag. Many ppl reported the same. There was a guess they are testing new AI and how it hits oue machines. This is basicaly one of the main issues and limitation of DN engine which was mentioned earlier. Put more ai and ground units IN MP and ROF/BOS engine/ server crashes.

Now this is a massive leap from one thing to a conclusion.

Care to back that up Tvrdi? What exactly was the change - was it player net code or AI net code? Was it air or ground AI processing if that was it? How many units were put in? Some servers were down for development testing, was it part of a test to stress test the server pre-release?

What exactly was it that caused the slow down - please share. No conjecture please.

Hood

Tvrdi

Oct-20-2014, 15:01

Now this is a massive leap from one thing to a conclusion.

Care to back that up Tvrdi? What exactly was the change - was it player net code or AI net code? Was it air or ground AI processing if that was it? How many units were put in? Some servers were down for development testing, was it part of a test to stress test the server pre-release?

What exactly was it that caused the slow down - please share. No conjecture please.

Hood

Dude ask on BOs forum and check that link I provided.

bye

II/JG3~Siggi

Oct-20-2014, 15:30

Dude ask on BOs forum and get banned.

bye

Fixed that for you.

:glaughter:

Hood

Oct-20-2014, 15:30

Dude ask on BOs forum and check that link I provided.

bye

I read it this afternoon but there were no answers and no Dev commentary on what was causing the slow down.

I hoped you had the answer rather than using something that is unexplained as evidence.

Hood

Tvrdi

Oct-20-2014, 16:02

I read it this afternoon but there were no answers and no Dev commentary on what was causing the slow down.

I hoped you had the answer rather than using something that is unexplained as evidence.

Hood

Read Requem's post in that thread.....

WavingWhiteFlag[AM]

Oct-20-2014, 16:16

Fixed that for you.

:glaughter:

Lol, I think you actually enjoy hating this game/company.

dburne

Oct-20-2014, 16:31

Zak just posted that a new update will be coming out in about an hour.
Excerpt from the change log:

<<< 15. The issue with severe performance drop in multiplayer (including slowing time, etc.) was fixed; >>>

II/JG3~Siggi

Oct-20-2014, 16:40

;146629']Lol, I think you actually enjoy hating this game/company.

I don't hate either. I do hold both companies in utter contempt though.

heinkill

Oct-20-2014, 16:41

dburne

Oct-20-2014, 16:46

Dakpilot

Oct-20-2014, 16:59

One of the big advantages of server side generated missions is that they can be constantly tested, tweaked and updated seamlessly, you don't know its been done until it loads a new generated mission, the whole point of early access is to test and find the limits..cant even remember how many updates there have been in the last two weeks, another 20 or so items in the changelog tonight..it is definitely a work in progress

Some people seem to be getting some fun out of the missions tho....

"Currently flying chapter 3 of the campaign, and I just had the most amazing experience flying IL-2 on close support. I really wish I'd remembered to take screenshots, but I was far too engrossed, so my describtion of the will have to do.

During the early chapters of the campaign, I honestly felt, that the world in which I flew missions seemed just a bit underpopulated, especially with regards to ground units, which seemed to pop up only around the target area and close to the front line. :blush: Well, in chapter 3 that has all changed.

I had selected a short mission for CAS in the IL-2. The mission called for the destruction of artillery and took place at dusk. I was a bit disappointed/worried to learn, that I only had one wingman on the mission and no escort. It was a beautiful evening with scattered low hanging clouds that we flew just beneath, just about the best the landscape in BoS can look is just after sunset with the darkening sky in the east and a blood red band in the west. :biggrin:

En route to our target we were repeatedly fired upon by small caliber cannon from the ground but with little effect, and within 4 minutes we were over the target area, and boy was it something to behold! The fighting we were supposed to be supporting happened right on the outskirts of an airfield, which was fully equipped with both planes standing at the ready and AAA firing like mad at us, streaks of yellow tracers coming in from several directions at once. Everywhere below vehicles darted back and forth both on roads and in the terrain. No less than 6 batteries of German artillery were dug in just outside the runway and grenade blasts erupted everywhere both on the ground and in the air. All over the place small human figures were seen running back and forth. Two nearby villages were burning and the air seemed full of whispy smoke. All together there cannot have been less than 100 ground objects (not counting humans) in action at once. :clapping:

The scene was so intense, that I didn't even notice the 2 Bf 109s swooping down on us, and just as I was pulling up after dropping my bombs on the nearest artillery position, I spotted the thick, black brush stroke of my wingman going down in a blaze :o: . I turned and met the 2 Messers head on and took a couple of hits but no serious damage. I said to myself "to hell with it" and instead dove on the damaged artillery position and managed to get the last gun to secure me a "task completed" :joy: and I thought "I gotta get out of here". The 109s made one more pass without hitting me and then apparently gave up and started climbing again (I don't know if that's just a fluke in the AI, but I liked it) I took another hit of 20mm from the ground on the way out despite my frantic maneuvering, but was left with nothing more than a few holes in my left wing.

On the way home darkness was settling into a beautiful night. I felt like getting the extra points for a landing and flew all the way home. On the way I saw several enemy convoys with their headlights now turned on. I was fired on repeatedly from the ground and even stalked briefly by 4 109s, but they ended up in combat with some patrolling Yaks. I was just circling the bonfire-lit home base, when suddenly the search lights came on and the heavy AAA started firing. I looked up and saw 6 He 111s escorted by Bf 109s, barely visible against the dark blue sky, passing overhead at some 4000m. I don't know if they were attacking the airfield, as I saw no bombs go off, but one Heinkel was shot down in flames and crashed in a nearby village, just as I was about to put the wheels down in the icy runway. Even the landing was perfect. :dance:

I didn't get that many points for the mission, as I had only just done the necessary damage to the artillery, but boy did I have a blast. I will never accuse the campaign world of being empty again :happy:"

Cheers Dakpilot

WavingWhiteFlag[AM]

Oct-20-2014, 18:19

Having never had a go on the Eagle servers before they were shut down I find your comments really encouraging AM, it is great to hear what the platform is techinically capable of.

Which makes me really sad then to realise what a boring campaign they made, with so few objects and life on the map and so little variety in the mission types etc. Because I have played about 20 missions in the campaign so far and am getting pretty bored. It's like playing 20 quick missions in a row, with no purpose or point. In fact, quick missions are probably more interesting because there can be more aircraft in them ie up to 16 vs 16. In campaign I have only ever seen 8 v 8 max.

Which makes me hopeful for the future that this will improve!

Which makes me frustrated that the game is so handicapped on release.

Which makes me feel ungrateful because compared to the wigged out mess that was CoD campaign on launch, BoS campaign is a rockstar.

Which makes me feel like unclean, like a fanboi saying that.

Which makes me wonder, if I talk like a fanboi sometimes, why am I on the 777 'hater list'

Which makes me shake my head and think, those guys, they are just some crazy ass Russian gangsters aren't they.

Which makes me realise why they put me on their hater list.

Which is about where I should stop.

H

Wholly agree on all points...except I refuse to subject myself to the agony that is anything over 3 SP missions. It's just so awful, especially after seeing the stuff that was done on the player created missions online. It's a completely different game. The fact that you put yourself through 20 missions should be awarded on its own...some kind of purple heart for boredom or something.

Well you have done about 20 more than I have ( excluding three training missions before I hung it up)...

I have no idea what goes into making a campaign, but it would seem to me what was thrown together for BOS was almost an afterthought or something. I don't know maybe they put in several months putting that thing together, who knows. I know it was to be the big focus of BOS, and I am amazed at what it is now.

After looking at one of the server-generated missions from the campaign (I loaded it up in the ME while it was generated) it looks erratic and machine made, because it is, obviously. I imagine the parameters they're tweaking which probably include aircraft and ground unit density/frequency/difficulty are based on benchmarks with their "minimum requirements" test machines and the average skill level of the demographic they're trying to bring in, so they're keeping things conservative. This definitely should be a variable that the user can choose, as it's not doing the game any favors at all.

This whole "server generated" missions thing is just a big shortcut they've made to side-step making and putting effort into an in-depth story driven campaign. Yes, right now a mission has the potential to be different every time, but not better or worse in terms of quality...they're all crap right now, IMO. That is to say, "it's the same shit, different toilet". I'm not sure what any of it has to do with Stalingrad, either. You can win the entire air war by doing one kind of mission over and over and over and over and over with little to no relevance to what's going on in the actual grand scheme of things...the game could be set on planet Mars and it would be the exact same game.

Hood

Oct-20-2014, 18:53

Read Requem's post in that thread.....

Requiem isn't a developer, nor did he provide the actual explanation, merely a possibility. The change log doesn't help explain it either:

An update will be deployed within ah hour. The change log for it is as follows:

1. Fires in villages improved in Campaign;
2. Smoke domes above cities and villages follow the wind now in Campaign;
3. Temperature and atmosphere pressure now vary depending on the date in Campaign;
4. New info in Campaign briefings: target altitude, altitude in the target zone for bombers, airfield altitude, temperature, atmosphere pressure;
5. Campaign mission "Escort attack planes" a player now has to convoy them to the very exit point;
6. Main game screen interface finalized;
7. Distance of reaction increased for AI cover planes;
8. AI won't turn on the lights on landing in day-time;
9. AI will use nav light in night missions;
10. Fixed a random issue that caused AI planes using nav light in day-time;
11. FW 190 A-3 climb rate fix that wasn't deployed with the previous update should be working now;
12. Temporary engine modes got more tuning;
13. Special engine modes are now shown in technochat;
14. Technochat now shows messages about the state of temporary engine modes;
15. The issue with severe performance drop in multiplayer (including slowing time, etc.) was fixed;
16. Performance improved for dserver;
17. Static planes destroyed with machine guns should now be correctly added to score;
18. Random crashes and freezes in campaign missions fixed.

Easy to jump into assumptions about the underlying DN engine isn't it?

Hood

Vaxxtx

Oct-20-2014, 21:09

requiem

Oct-20-2014, 22:23

Requiem isn't a developer, nor did he provide the actual explanation, merely a possibility. The change log doesn't help explain it either:

Easy to jump into assumptions about the underlying DN engine isn't it?

Hood

A pretty good possibility when you think about it, although I probably didn't explain in as much detail as I will now so it may have given off the impression of a bad assumption. Did you notice that the thread was titled "Multiplayer has become slow motion"? I don't see any single players complaining in that thread about slow time in their missions because MP missions push the limits of what the DN engine can handle AI wise.

I'm not a developer nor am I on their payroll, but I gave that explanation/possibility to prevent idle speculation since those incidents of time slowing down are very consistent with my experience from RoF. I'm not as good as someone like Vander with the ME but I definitely know my way around it and have actually used this effect to my advantage in order to determine when I have hit the limit for AI in a mission. I would do this by adding AI to a SP mission until it reached the point where enabling time acceleration had no effect upon the time in-game before converting it into a MP mission I would host myself.

You could see the effect in BoS before they removed x16 time compression, but you can still replicate it in RoF. The time would be moving at a high rate at x16, but once the AI spawns in the speed at which the clock in-game moves slows down even though the game is still at x16 time acceleration. This isn't a bad thing or indicative of bad programming at all, it is simply an observation that shows how your CPU load depending on the AI in a mission changes the maximum amount of time compression available.

This effect can be replicated in RoF, so it is the DN engine exhibiting the same behaviour under high AI loads. It's a good thing though that both the slow downs occurred and were reported because it shows the devs are testing the AI and hopefully figuring out ways to better optimise it better for the SP guys out there and the MP mission makers.

WavingWhiteFlag[AM]

Oct-20-2014, 22:24

As a beta tester for ROF, the problem with large quantities of objects in missions had to do with the amount of data that was being phoned home. Once that limit was reached, the master browser would take a crap and then the server would crash. Sadly, because the game relies on this master browser for the online component you really need to post up an online test of the same mission to adhere to the online mission I set as an example.

Regardless, what you showed is definitely not possible in ROF in the online world. And judging by what PW was saying, the offline world either. Do you have a way to play the mission online and record it that way as well? Would be neat to get a couple players racing each other and see how well it performs. If it's good that way, then I'd say there have been some major changes to the master browser taken place. I hope you see what I'm getting at. SP vs Online (not being connected to the master browser vs being connected to it) has always been a huge difference in performance with ROF.

To give you an idea: http://riseofflight.com/Forum/viewtopic.php?f=353&t=24508

What role does a master browser have in regard to the client/server communication in DN? I'm under the impression you're saying there is some sort of extraneous infrastructure involved in data transfer between client and server while playing. When I was running netmon on the our server and my home client while testing exactly what RoF and BoS was doing before we went live, I didn't see any other constant outside traffic outside of client<->server other than the initial log in of the client (I'm assuming it was to some sort of authentication/domain controller), which was minimal. This was in both RoF and BoS.

Can you explain what a master browser is doing in the pipeline and why it's there? Just for clarification, the "master browser" term I'm familiar with acts as a routing solution/DNS server for multiple subnets over a network, usually corporate in size. I'm not a genius or anything, but I can't see how a master browser fits in this scenario.

Hood

Oct-21-2014, 05:31

A pretty good possibility when you think about it, although I probably didn't explain in as much detail as I will now so it may have given off the impression of a bad assumption. Did you notice that the thread was titled "Multiplayer has become slow motion"? I don't see any single players complaining in that thread about slow time in their missions because MP missions push the limits of what the DN engine can handle AI wise.

I'm not a developer nor am I on their payroll, but I gave that explanation/possibility to prevent idle speculation since those incidents of time slowing down are very consistent with my experience from RoF. I'm not as good as someone like Vander with the ME but I definitely know my way around it and have actually used this effect to my advantage in order to determine when I have hit the limit for AI in a mission. I would do this by adding AI to a SP mission until it reached the point where enabling time acceleration had no effect upon the time in-game before converting it into a MP mission I would host myself.

You could see the effect in BoS before they removed x16 time compression, but you can still replicate it in RoF. The time would be moving at a high rate at x16, but once the AI spawns in the speed at which the clock in-game moves slows down even though the game is still at x16 time acceleration. This isn't a bad thing or indicative of bad programming at all, it is simply an observation that shows how your CPU load depending on the AI in a mission changes the maximum amount of time compression available.

This effect can be replicated in RoF, so it is the DN engine exhibiting the same behaviour under high AI loads. It's a good thing though that both the slow downs occurred and were reported because it shows the devs are testing the AI and hopefully figuring out ways to better optimise it better for the SP guys out there and the MP mission makers.

Requiem, please don't take my comments wrong. In no way am I criticising your assumption which may very well be absolutely correct. Your explanation makes it even more likely that this was what the problem was. What is objectionable is that any "problem" is immediately seized upon by a few as evidence that the DN engine is no good when so many parameters are not known.

Hood

heinkill

Oct-21-2014, 09:06

;146672']Wholly agree on all points...except I refuse to subject myself to the agony that is anything over 3 SP missions. It's just so awful, especially after seeing the stuff that was done on the player created missions online. It's a completely different game. The fact that you put yourself through 20 missions should be awarded on its own...some kind of purple heart for boredom or something.

This whole "server generated" missions thing is just a big shortcut they've made to side-step making and putting effort into an in-depth story driven campaign. Yes, right now a mission has the potential to be different every time, but not better or worse in terms of quality...they're all crap right now, IMO. That is to say, "it's the same shit, different toilet". I'm not sure what any of it has to do with Stalingrad, either. You can win the entire air war by doing one kind of mission over and over and over and over and over with little to no relevance to what's going on in the actual grand scheme of things...the game could be set on planet Mars and it would be the exact same game.

It is interesting to speculate on this situation as a business case, and then follow it to see how it turns out and see who was right - 1CGS management, or the early access user community and the devs inside who voiced concerns.

I just did a business course where there was a case study based on the NASA management decisions which resulted in the Columbia space shuttle disaster (may the crew RIP).

The conclusion was that because in the past the critical event which occurred (a piece of foam striking the shuttle wing as it took off) did not result in a fatal accident the last 12 times, then NASA management took the most preferred position, that it would not happen this time either, even though this specific event, and previous events, were not comparable. And that once this management perspective started to take hold, NASA started looking for evidence to support this opinion, and ignore or actively stop the search for evidence which would contradict it. Staff who raised an opposite opinion (such as a team of Boeing engineers) were sidelined and when one employee actually went around management to try to get DoD imagery of the shuttle in orbit to check for damage, he was actually disciplined for not following the right bureacuratic protocols for making requests to DoD.

The analogy here is that you apparently have a couple of strong management opinions in the 1CGS team saying, 'This is our strategy, and we need to stick to it because...' While in other parts of the team, there have been people pointing out its flaws, but not being heard. Then, the SP game gets released and the feedback from users is overwhelmingly negative, at least 70% of most users in several polls don't like it. (Without trying in any way to say it is as serious as a space shuttle disaster...this is like the Columbia shuttle disaster when it was confirmed that the foam had hit, and probably damaged, the wing.)

Right now, it feels like the user community active on forums is like the guys at Boeing saying, 'this sucker has a huge hole in it and is going to blow up'. Meanwhile management is saying "Yeah, people said that about Rise of Flight too but they were wrong, we have a clear vision, we are sorry 70% of you don't like it, but we are going ahead anyway and this will not be a disaster because we were right about Rise of Flight.'

Of course, it's just a game. Their decisions aren't life and death, except in an economic sense. But as I said, it will be interesting to watch, who was right - the management team with its unwavering 'vision', or the early access user community.

We are unlikely to get insight into sales figures, so I guess the best way of judging whether the title is a success or failure could be (timelines are arguable I know) how soon does the game go on sale at a significant discount eg 50-70% off (2 years, the vision was right / 12 months, the vision was wrong).

Of course the devs can adjust course after launch and may already be planning to. They could consider an option where the player can choose not to grind for the unlocks, and instead buy them as a mod pack, RoF style (http://riseofflight.com/en/store/weaponmods). Personally I don't know why they don't do that already, at launch.

And they have said they will release a two plane version where you can grind your way to unlock the other planes. They said this won't be free (you can bet it will be cheap though), so any bets you will also be able to buy the individual planes you want for it, instead of having to grind your way to earn them?

Perhaps all of this is part of the long term 'vision' already, which is what keeps most of the dev team from breaking out in open rebellion - because they are convinced it ultimately makes business sense.

Anyway, another bunch of useless idle speculation to wile away a coffee break.

H

H

Vaxxtx

Oct-21-2014, 10:07

Speculation is all we have to go off when looking at the business model of BoS. Its odd I agree.

At first I was thinking maybe its just a Russian thing? After the metacritic post it was pretty clear its not just a cultural thing, and more of an ego thing. How can someone NOT like what awesomness we have made?!?!?! I think the more fanatical folks have helped stroke this ego as well. This had led to the attitude of the developers know what YOU want....you dont.

There is a fine line between making a profit on a game, and making a profit by passionately making a game. As far as I can tell the passionate part has been more on getting this product out the door bare-bones and less on lets make something great and new for 2014.

dburne

Oct-21-2014, 10:13

Of course, it's just a game. Their decisions aren't life and death, except in an economic sense. But as I said, it will be interesting to watch, who was right - the management team with its unwavering 'vision', or the early access user community.

I sincerely hope BOS is a great success, for the sake of the genre.

It will indeed be interesting to see how it goes after the public release. I can't help , but think back to MS Flight.
MS put a new team together, to develop their next civil flight sim. There was so much hope by the civil flight sim community, that it would be even better than the previous release - FSX. A lot of excitement, as just a couple years earlier MS had disbanded it's flight sim team and stated they were done with it.

Then a few short months before the release, the team made known the direction they were going with it. Free download, unlock planes by going through training missions, XP Grinding, etc. Now it was different, in that it was a free download with the option to purchase additional content and planes. That is certainly not the case with BOS, it is far from a free download - for now.

The MS team stated the hard core community, was not what they were after - they were after a much larger target audience with Flight. They were not entertaining any 3rd party develops as the franchise had done in the past. The backlash from the community was huge - but they stayed the course. And the rest is now history.

Now it is not fair I am sure to even try to make a comparison, as they are very different sims and very different genres. It is just when I have seen all the backlash of the last couple of weeks, I am so reminded of those weeks prior to Flight's release.

heinkill

Oct-21-2014, 15:58

It will indeed be interesting to see how it goes after the public release. I can't help , but think back to MS Flight.

Interesting comparison, I never really bothered looking at MSFlight, so I looked up the IGN review. You are spot on. Look what happens if you swap MS Flight/Microsoft for BoS/1CGS in the review text - I think I know now where the devs got their inspiration!:

Flying is magical, but playing this game is not.
by Gord Goble

Unless you truly believe in the magic of potential future downloadable content – and are willing to pay the very real price for whatever enhancements may or may not be coming down the pike – BoS is, for the most part, a waste of your time. It matters not if you're a detail-oriented, accuracy-loving sim-head or a gunning-for-action "arcade" gamer. BoS is likely not the droid you're looking for.

In an attempt to reel in a wider general audience for its latest flight-based affair, 1CGS has, in many ways, sacrificed much of what made its prior flight games so compelling – realism and depth. In so doing, it will undoubtedly alienate a wide swath of its potential audience – the hardcore crowd that not only filled its simulation coffers for years but also stuck with 1CGS through a variety of rough patches.

You see, BoS is just about as far removed from a true flight sim as American Idol is from originality. Sure, it gives the illusion of a sim – comprehensive cockpits; pretty, believable renditions of real life planes; and an assortment of switchable options that seem as if they'd make the thing that much more difficult and wonderfully time-consuming. Yet that illusion is…illusionary.

As frustrating as it may be for seasoned sim veterans, it likewise isn't "fun" enough to hold the interest of the casual gaming crowd it's clearly after. Somewhere along the development trail, BoS morphed from the sim-based follow-up one would naturally expect into the highly accessible product the developer ultimately decided it should be. And yes, it is accessible.

When you first climb into the cockpit...numerous on-screen prompts hold the hand of the newbie like never before.

Considering you can't conduct a career or live out a story...can't fill the skies with AI aircraft ...there arguably isn't much to hold long-term interest other than to experience the joy of landing, taking off, sitting in the cockpit, and enjoying the scenery.

THE VERDICT

BoS is not a terrible game. The environment, for example, may be eerie in its sense of ... emptiness ... but the artistry is lush and convincing, the frame rate seems solid even if you're not running the latest and greatest equipment, and time of day and weather variables really add to the show. There is an initial wow factor, no doubt.

But look closer, spend some time with it, and all is not what it seems. The one big question here – and yes, it's really big – is where 1CGS plans to take BoS in the future. Only time will tell, but in the meantime, BoS is best sampled in its freebie guise.

That is kind of spooky, is it not?

H

Vaxxtx

Oct-21-2014, 16:40

That is kind of spooky, is it not?

That honestly sounds like a review for BoS. If someone posted that and did not know MS Flight was replaced by BoS, I dont think anyone would even know.

Continu0

Oct-21-2014, 16:42

That is kind of spooky, is it not?

H

Yes, it is.

But I believe that the first release (BoS) does not decide over the future of 777. The game is good enough to attract old 1946-people and they will be happy for some time. I believe it`s what comes afterwards that will decide over it: Will they be able to provide a FMB? How long does it take to come up with new maps/planes/theatres? How can the community get involved with the game (servers, skins, mods, etc..?).

BoS in it`s current state is probably good enough to convince enough people to wait for the next release. But expectations will not get lower and I wonder if they can keep up...

dburne

Oct-21-2014, 16:47

Interesting comparison, I never really bothered looking at MSFlight, so I looked up the IGN review. You are spot on. Look what happens if you swap MS Flight/Microsoft for BoS/1CGS in the review text - I think I know now where the devs got their inspiration!:
That is kind of spooky, is it not?

H

Indeed it is, I was ( past tense) a big fan of the MS Flight Sim franchise, and was heavily involved with it when all that went down, and there are so many parallels with what is going on now with BOS, and the path that MS took with Flight.

That is what really concerns me .

Stig1207

Oct-22-2014, 03:19

There is a fine line between making a profit on a game, and making a profit by passionately making a game. As far as I can tell the passionate part has been more on getting this product out the door bare-bones and less on lets make something great and new for 2014.

I would say that Oleg and Ilya were very passionate about making Il2 Cliffs of Dover. Not sure they made a profit.

LuseKofte

Oct-22-2014, 07:09

Cod was abandoned. I think it is one of the reasons for dcs, Rof and BOS are funded plane by plane. If something goes wrong like in cod, together with not enough players with powerful pc there just is not money to fix it. I know a lot of people still waiting to upgrade and then go cod.

1lokos

Oct-22-2014, 12:12

Info about Mission Editor posted today:

Q - ...where my editor and server?

A (Loft) - Work on additional software starts tomorrow.
Viewer for authors skins, Editor and Dedicated Server.
First you will likely get a server, and then the viewer and later the entire editor, will be updated and update the game for a long time.

http://forum.il2sturmovik.ru/topic/2045-obsuzhdenie-83-j-chasti-dnevnikov-razrabotchika/page-30#entry219145

Sokol1

dburne

Oct-22-2014, 12:24

I hope that means, with the work being done on the editor, maybe will be a little more user friendly.

jaydee

Oct-23-2014, 06:08

;146227']This thread isn't meant to challenge an opinion. It's to clear up the misconceptions that were in other threads here.
Fair enough AM . But why come HERE to clear up misconceptions? You could have posted about the ME on BOS Forums(or maybe your posts wouldn't be allowed).If they were allowed, you would have the full backing of the BOS Devs to clear up any Misconceptions and I am sure you would have the "Presses Running Hot" with replies.
To me,you posted this Topic here to stir the pot. ~S~

jaydee

Oct-23-2014, 06:12

As long ass they are pro clod it is free as hell, when it is pro bos you feel provoked?
You are the last guy Id want to give an Explanation to,but I will. Just look at some of my other Posts in ATAGs BOS forums.

WavingWhiteFlag[AM]

Oct-23-2014, 06:23

Fair enough AM . But why come HERE to clear up misconceptions? You could have posted about the ME on BOS Forums(or maybe your posts wouldn't be allowed).If they were allowed, you would have the full backing of the BOS Devs to clear up any Misconceptions and I am sure you would have the "Presses Running Hot" with replies.
To me,you posted this Topic here to stir the pot. ~S~

This was originally a reply on a thread that had gotten locked before I could submit the post. The thread had multiple misconceptions that were starting arguments and disagreements between the people involved...specifically about "<X statemeent>is just conjecture" so I provided information to clear up the claims of conjecture on both sides of the discussion. I posted facts based on what I've seen and done with BoS. They cannot be argued with as they aren't speculative or up for debate...they're just descriptions of what happened. I don't see how that stirs the pot, and if it stirs yours, I'm sorry.

JimmyBlonde

Oct-23-2014, 08:36

Dakpilot

Oct-23-2014, 09:48

Soon to be stress testing the missions mention in the first post with, 120-130 players , server is up

Cheers Dakpilot

WavingWhiteFlag[AM]

Oct-23-2014, 14:15

Soon to be stress testing the missions mention in the first post with, 120-130 players , server is up

Cheers Dakpilot

When did you get my mission? I haven't given it to anyone but dhyran awhile ago, and that version is very outdated.

heinkill

Oct-23-2014, 14:59

Heinkill, have you taken a gander at the campaign since the official release?

It seems to be a lot more populated now, I was wondering if 1C have dipped it's balls in kerosene or if I was just imagining things. When I flew it earlier today it seemed to be non-stop, planes going everywhere, ground fire coming up at me from all over the front. It was like old Il-2 with the added ambient effects and boosted object numbers. Absorbing while in the cockpit at least.

Being random, I think I have been unlucky - got 20 missions in, nearly finished chapter 2, saw none of that.

But another factor as I understand it is your pilot level. If you fly (or let autopilot fly) successful missions, the game adds more enemy flights and incidental activity from level 6 up. I am currently just on level 5. Perhaps you are on a higher level?

H

JimmyBlonde

Oct-23-2014, 18:16

Being random, I think I have been unlucky - got 20 missions in, nearly finished chapter 2, saw none of that.

But another factor as I understand it is your pilot level. If you fly (or let autopilot fly) successful missions, the game adds more enemy flights and incidental activity from level 6 up. I am currently just on level 5. Perhaps you are on a higher level?

H

Nope, I'm only level 3 or 4. It seemed different though, or maybe it was just because I flew a ground attack mission and was lower than usual.

Dutch

Oct-24-2014, 21:01

I know a lot of people still waiting to upgrade and then go cod.

My word. Honestly?

I bought my current pc in anticipation of the release of Cliffs of Dover in January 2011. In a couple of months it will be four years old. Sure, I upgraded the gfx card, twice. Plus the power supply, but are you talking about the old guard of IL2, who were so pleased that they could run widescreen IL2 '46 on top graphics settings at 120fps with their Pentium IVs, who then threw their toys out of the pram because their machine couldn't run 'Cliffs'?

And they are still waiting to upgrade? Good Grief. Maybe they should buy a nice board game, such as Cluedo, Monopoly or Scrabble. :devilish:

aus3620

Oct-24-2014, 22:57

Nice one wavingwhiteflag guy! Displayed a lot of nice features and workload there.

I understand the BOS ME is due out before the end of the year.

Dutch

Oct-24-2014, 23:00

Nice one wavingwhiteflag guy! Displayed a lot of nice features and workload there.

I understand the BOS ME is due out before the end of the year.

Yeeeeaaah!!! They just don't say which year!!! Awesome!!!!! Thanks!!!!

1lokos

Oct-25-2014, 00:14

In true ZAK "promisse" the Dserver until end of the year, and ME "latter". In between come the Skin Viewer.

Player 1-When is the DServer going to be released?

ZAK - I believe, by the end of the year. A certain date is not yet available, unfortunatelly. But it's the first serious functional addition that's is awaiting.

Player 2 -It was nice of you to say about when Dserver will be released. I think earlier promises that "later" was a bit vague. Does it means that FMB will come out with Dserver?

ZAK - And this is when I'm saying "later". FMB will be released after dserver. There's a lot of work to be done before it goes public.

Player 3 - Will Mods-on mode be a feature soon? I'm feeling the urge to get creative.

ZAK - Between dserver and FMB release, I think. That's when the skin viewer and templates should go live.

LuseKofte

Oct-25-2014, 06:27

My word. Honestly?

I bought my current pc in anticipation of the release of Cliffs of Dover in January 2011. In a couple of months it will be four years old. Sure, I upgraded the gfx card, twice. Plus the power supply, but are you talking about the old guard of IL2, who were so pleased that they could run widescreen IL2 '46 on top graphics settings at 120fps with their Pentium IVs, who then threw their toys out of the pram because their machine couldn't run 'Cliffs'?

And they are still waiting to upgrade? Good Grief. Maybe they should buy a nice board game, such as Cluedo, Monopoly or Scrabble. :devilish:

In www.1946sas.com I have given GPU´s , my old hotas and all my equipment I do not need to countries that simply does not have it. We share to those who live in countries that these kind of equipment are expensive.
The high end equipment needed to run cod is a major wall against people who want the experience. I might be known as the BOS pro guy here, but I am pro cod guy elsewhere. No sim can ever be better squad related online flying as cod is today.
The offline campaign unlock system is a major drawback squadron wise in BOS, because not all get the time for these stupid unlocks. With a sideways eye block I learned to enjoy these offline campaigns, with ME available I think I can improve them and make them very immersive.
I was very optimistic about bos a week before the unlock system, it took me some weeks to get over that part, and I now starts to be optimistic again. I see it is about 300 players around primetime and in work hours Europe it is about 100

Skoshi_Tiger

Oct-25-2014, 07:42

In www.1946sas.com I have given GPU´s , my old hotas and all my equipment I do not need to countries that simply does not have it. We share to those who live in countries that these kind of equipment are expensive.
The high end equipment needed to run cod is a major wall against people who want the experience. I might be known as the BOS pro guy here, but I am pro cod guy elsewhere. No sim can ever be better squad related online flying as cod is today.
The offline campaign unlock system is a major drawback squadron wise in BOS, because not all get the time for these stupid unlocks. With a sideways eye block I learned to enjoy these offline campaigns, with ME available I think I can improve them and make them very immersive.
I was very optimistic about bos a week before the unlock system, it took me some weeks to get over that part, and I now starts to be optimistic again. I see it is about 300 players around primetime and in work hours Europe it is about 100

I'm running COD on a Q9400 CPU (2009 vintage) and a 460GTX (2010) graphics. This is probably the longest that I've gone between upgrades. COD (TF 4.3) runs fine on this hardware. Sure I'd like to get better hardware , but kids and life have got into the way. I would in no way say that "high end hardware" are needed to run CoD!