PDA

View Full Version : So, any chance of bigger bomber formations?



Kling
Apr-14-2013, 05:42
The question has been up already but the answer was more, lets wait and see what the netcode can handle.

Well i propose.
1 Skip the italian bombers all together. They wer very few irl and to be honest dont fit into most peoples picture of BOB anyway.

2. Increase german bomber formations to maybe 15 or more with a few AI fighters as escort. The current formations are too small and get slaughtered too fast. bigger formations but maybe more seldom.

3. maybe increase the bomber altitude by 4000 feet and we will get the beautiful contrails behind them.

4.Reduce the number of british bomber formations dramatically. At this stage of the war they didnt send many daylight raids into france.

By completely stoping the italian Br20 formations and reducing the amount of british bomber formations, we can free up recources for some proper german bombing waves.
Lets see what the netcode can handle and what the Fps for people will be like.

Just my 5 cents.

Bear Pilot
Apr-15-2013, 02:29
I agree with you Kling. I know almost nothing about mission building and even less about the parameters and intricacies of net coding. Not even sure if it's a noun, verb, or both hahaha. And so I am grateful for any mission. I do know, however, that most of the bombing raids occurred between roughly 12,000 and 16,000 feet because of the extreme difficulty of hitting relatively small targets from several miles up. The larger the targets the higher they could fly and bomb with relative accuracy i.e. the London docks at 20,000 ft and up.

I believe increasing the number in German bomber formations would also encourage players to make missions more historically accurate by flying more hurricanes than spits. We all know the general percentage of RAF fighter command at the time. Roughly 2/3rds hurris to 1/3rds spits. Of course it's not a set in stone rule, just a guideline and each one of us purchased the game and have every right to fly whatever we want. I just think some may hop into a hurri and find that it is an incredibly smooth and stable plane if flown correctly but 15,000 ft. should be it's operational ceiling. And so, with a large increase in bombers AND the raids themselves coming in at lower, more historic altitudes. Coordinated interceptions of large raids with hurris attacking bombers and spits on 109s, in theory, we may get a more team-based experience. All that is up to individuals and completely my own opinion of fun. Right now I feel taking a hurricane up to the bomber's altitudes just isn't worth it as most of the time they done for by the time you can get to altitude and you're so unbelievably outclassed, as a hurri should be up there, that if 109's are in the area with or without spitfire support you're pretty helpless and are left to lose an energy fight or dive away.

I think larger AI bomber formations attacking the missions objectives is just what the server needs. At least one mission thrown into the rotation so we don't get the same mission slightly altered and at different times of the day. Will guys actually fly historically accurate proportions? Who knows. That's not the real issue. But I know it would present more of a focal point in missions and at least large engagements would be more frequent and spectacular up there. In the end, all fights end up on the deck sooner or later unless someone is shot down or disengages. After all, what goes up must come down. IIa's and E4N's seem to dominate the teams which is a shame as the IIa didn't see combat until very late September when the battle had already been lost and the E4/N as we all now know was in extremely limited numbers. And so maybe in a select few maps they can find a home but for the most part engagements weren't nearly as high as the operational ceilings of those two planes.

As you said, Kling, larger but less frequent raids may be a solution. I agree also that high flying contrailing bombers would be beautiful but maybe not practical in every wave. We may appreciate them more if they aren't the norm. Maybe for larger targets like docks or industrial centers much farther over English soil than the relatively smaller targets of airfields and radar stations. I know the targets deep in red territory will severely limit the 109's operational time over the target area but personally I think that just spices it up that much more and that is absolutely realistic.

Sorry for any ideas that seem odd or spelling errors. It's quite late here on the east coast. Also I freely admit that many of my ideas accurately portray me as a babbling fool at times, if not most of the time, and so if any ideas above seem repetitive to those mentioned in previous threads, as they probably are, than I apologize. I also want to thank those clever enough to both make the wonderful missions we enjoy and those at and working with team fusion who have given us the game we now have and not to mention for finding the time to do it!

Happy Hunting

Bear Pilot

Salmo
Apr-15-2013, 03:04
G'day Bear, can I make a few comments?


I believe increasing the number in German bomber formations would also encourage players to make missions more historically accurate by flying more hurricanes than spits.
I disgree. The problem is that too many mission makers make all (or almost all) plane types available at spawn bases. It's a no-brainer, because most pilots will then choose their favourite plane or in most cases the 'best' plane available. Mission builders need to be much more selective with their planesets. The solution is two-fold: Careful planeset selection & limiting the number of certain plane types.


I just think some may hop into a hurri and find that it is an incredibly smooth and stable plane if flown correctly but 15,000 ft. should be it's operational ceiling.
In real life, the hurricane service ceiling was about 36,000 ft (10,970 m).


Coordinated interceptions of large raids with hurris attacking bombers and spits on 109s, in theory, we may get a more team-based experience..... As you said, Kling, larger but less frequent raids may be a solution. .... I'd love to see more team-based MP play & larger enemy bomber formations. The ATAG guys advise me that ATAG would likely not impliment moving targets or large aircraft groups due to netcode/lag issues.


Will guys actually fly historically accurate proportions? .... IIa's and E4N's seem to dominate the teams which is a shame ... I've previously make this point, and tried to encourage ATAG to introduce more varied missions, but we still have the same mission set that's been running for over 6 months now. Some more variety would be nice.

ATAG_Freya
Apr-15-2013, 09:57
Coordinated interceptions of large raids with hurris attacking bombers and spits on 109s, in theory, we may get a more team-based experience..... As you said, Kling, larger but less frequent raids may be a solution. ....


I'd love to see more team-based MP play & larger enemy bomber formations. The ATAG guys advise me that ATAG would likely not impliment moving targets or large aircraft groups due to netcode/lag issues


Not that I know a damn thing about what it takes to make the server missions, I just wish to point out that many times I've seen a formation of Wellingtons "pass" a formation of Ju-88, so I shot them all down in confusion...(ok jokes on that last part).... but thats just food for thought as I'm guessing its sometimes just happens due to random spawn times? Anyway there has been no lag for me with 10 AI bombers is all I trying to say...Cheers and thanks all for your work and dedication!

TX-Gunslinger
Apr-15-2013, 12:02
I have experience running both Il2 and RoF servers and working with squadmates and server admins to help populate servers.

Traditionally, as you guys probably are aware - there has always been divide between those that want action and those that want historically correct missions. In the history of Il2, even at the peak of it's popularity - where one would find several thousand pilots playing from Hyperlobby - purely historical servers were populated less than "action servers". Greater Green, Historia and others, were populated alongside War Clouds, TX-OC3, Prowar - not to the exclusion of the actions servers, but as an alternative to them.

Current state of ATAG server, to me - is a partial BoB scenario + post BoB circus/rodeo setup. Not historical, but playable. Playable enough to draw more pilots than any other server in CoD history - right now - every day. That makes the server and mission configuration of strategic importance to the entire online community. Most new pilots are not choosing ATAG because of it's settings or exact mission configuration - they are choosing it because it's the only place to find other pilots AND there is action to be found, even when there are only 3 or 4 pilots on the server (thanks to the AI aircraft - brilliant). The AI flights provide an easy focal point for action - particularly for inexperienced pilots.

The upside of the current configuration, is that it provides maximum action for minimum time investment - with full-switch settings. This produces an environment that eases the "entry point" for new sim pilots (and old ones who haven't flown in years) testing the waters or getting back into online flying after departing Il2 years ago.

Some people have more time in life to spend on the server, some have less. You want to attract the folks who have maybe an hour per night or every other night - to fly and be productive. Longer "time to action"/transit times drive away those folks.

Now for me, every time I encounter the bomber flights with 5/6 aircraft - I think "there should be more - I wish there were 12 or 24 in that flight" - just as you do. With that said, I notice thorugh perceptible lag/stutter - every time a flight of more than 1 aircraft comes into visual range. I don't see them a lot of the time, but I feel them. This is from a guy that lives a few hundred miles from the ATAG server (50ms ping), with a fairly high end system. What's it like for a pilot with 200ms or more and an older system?

Right now, one of our pilots in TX has a pretty old system - and he can fly with us, with pretty much no issues. That's a good thing. The kind of capabilty that draw more pilots.

Anyway, completely understand your requests - and find myself wishing for the things you do. I just don't think the software nor community is quite "there" yet.

Respectfully,

Gunny

Bear Pilot
Apr-15-2013, 12:52
"In real life, the hurricane service ceiling was about 36,000 ft (10,970 m)."

Yes of course, I just meant doing any serious dogfighting at altitudes of 15,000 ft and up (at 20,000 ft. or so the performance seems to significantly drop compared to 109's, again, as it should) without a large inital E advantage is usually not very wise and after a turn or two you're in big trouble if you haven't significantly damaged you're opponent.

*sorry screwed up quoting

AKA_Knutsac
Apr-15-2013, 20:45
If single large German bomber formations aren't possible because of performance issues, what about spawning several 5 to 6 plane formations flying the same route? Also, how about mixing up the routes more, instead of all coming directly across the Channel, how about some formations coming in from the east and flying up the Thames estuary? Or some low level raiders (Bf-110s?) coming in from the west? There was a mission that used to have the Do-17s dive out after dropping their bombs and race for home at low altitude...that was a nice effect. Anyway, not complaining; great server and alot of fun, but the missions currently in rotation have become quite predictable.

~S~

AKA_Knutsac

ATAG_Torian
Apr-16-2013, 02:24
What may be an option for those interested is for individuals to host co-op style sessions with custom made missions. I made myself a scenario (which I can host online) with 27 Ju88s, a couple of 109e 1 escorts and a couple of flights of AI hurricanes. Played quite well but definitely don't set the mission above 20,000ft. The number of AI is one thing, add in contrails and it can get a bit jittery. Add in a few like-minded friends and it could be a lotta fun. It really is an impressive sight with that many bombers and AI attacking them. Need a reasonably high end PC tho to make it happen. Of course it means a little arrangement of time to get evry1 together but we used to do this all the time back in IL2 1946 and had a ball. This way u have complete control over plane sets, objectives and runtime. The ATAG servers will always provide action and will change things up from time to time as the guys experiment with new ideas that try to cater to a wide range of reasons for flying. For more historically based missions it may be a case of... "build it and (host it and see if) they will come".

II/JG53_Felix
Apr-16-2013, 23:57
Interesting discussion. I'm guessing that most of the ATAG mission builders are also Team Fusioners! And are Fusioning rather than mission building!

Some good ideas among the posts. Like the idea of some bf109 AI close escorting the bombers.

Maybe the question is "How does a non-ATAG mission builder, build a mission and post it to ATAG for their consideration to add to the mission cycle?"

What criteria must be met? etc

9./JG52 Hans Gruber
Apr-17-2013, 08:41
More AI is not the answer. This is multiplayer after all. A few weeks ago in Storm of War campaigns we ran a mission with several human players in He111s protected by 109s. The escorts kept the interceptors away and we hit our target at Hornchurch. 100% human flown aircraft on both sides, no AI at all. One of the best experiences I've had in this sim.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTlrs9kCfs4&feature=youtube_gdata_player

I know you would see more human bomber pilots on ATAG if there weren't 100 bofors guns over each target & the targets weren't obscured by cloud.

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
Apr-17-2013, 09:28
More AI is not the answer. This is multiplayer after all. .

Unfortunately, at the times when there are only a few people on the server, say 5 or so, Bigger AI formations are precisely the answer.
I just spent 30 minutes on the ACG server with 4 of my squad mates. We intercepted about 20 Dorniers. We all got amongst the bombers and got to practice against a target that did not get destroyed after one pass (c.f. the small raids). Sure, we could have hosted a pre-made map of our own with a large AI raid, BUT why build something new to do the job that ACG is already doing quite well?

If there were 20 human pilots prepared to form up in bombers, then that would have been just as fun, nay, a lot more fun. But for 70% of the day, particularly for those outside of the EU timezone, there just aren't enough humans online to provide this kind of engagement.

This is where Salmo's AI script would come in handy. It can reduce the number of AI in the mission as more human players join. That would be nice, and would, I think, provide the balance between stacking with AI, and allowing human players to control the game environment.

ChiefRedCloud
Apr-17-2013, 09:57
More AI is not the answer. This is multiplayer after all. A few weeks ago in Storm of War campaigns we ran a mission with several human players in He111s protected by 109s. The escorts kept the interceptors away and we hit our target at Hornchurch. 100% human flown aircraft on both sides, no AI at all. One of the best experiences I've had in this sim.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTlrs9kCfs4&feature=youtube_gdata_player

I know you would see more human bomber pilots on ATAG if there weren't 100 bofors guns over each target & the targets weren't obscured by cloud.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uTlrs9kCfs4&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Very nice finger .... and I agree that coordinated flights and missions are very very nice. However as mentioned above, I think you/we have to play to both crowds. Those that fly alone Wolves is not a proper term as most hunt in packs) and those who wish to be part of something larger (like group activity). Perhaps a simple, informational poll could be taken where we ask who leans towards A. Historical B. Freelance C. Both or Either ... ok, ok .... D. Neither or no comment.

gavagai
Apr-21-2013, 14:22
The AI bombers seem incredibly easy to knock down. 1 pass with hits to the engine and they lurch over... I doubt it is so easy with a human trying to keep the aircraft stable.

I also haven't felt anything to fear from the AI gunners no matter the team I'm flying for.

I have tried escorting them but it is nearly impossible to prevent a diving attacker to get in a burst. For that I would have to able to ID medium range aircraft, and at the moment they are nearly invisible between the large-dot and high-detail stage.

Anyway, I still like the idea of larger bomber formations, and fewer British bombers. I'd rather see a simulation of the BoB. The rodeo stuff can wait for the proper aircraft.

Uriah
May-01-2013, 19:06
I miss EAW.

ATAG_Snapper
May-02-2013, 11:15
The AI bombers seem incredibly easy to knock down. 1 pass with hits to the engine and they lurch over... I doubt it is so easy with a human trying to keep the aircraft stable.

I also haven't felt anything to fear from the AI gunners no matter the team I'm flying for.

I have tried escorting them but it is nearly impossible to prevent a diving attacker to get in a burst. For that I would have to able to ID medium range aircraft, and at the moment they are nearly invisible between the large-dot and high-detail stage.

Anyway, I still like the idea of larger bomber formations, and fewer British bombers. I'd rather see a simulation of the BoB. The rodeo stuff can wait for the proper aircraft.

Try the AI LW bombers on the ATAG server. I guarantee you that you will not emerge unscathed. Their AI gunners are very good.