PDA

View Full Version : Operation Home Plate



Pages : [1] 2

Salmo
May-13-2013, 04:50
OPERATION HOME PLATE
Introducing a new battle coming to a theatre of war near you soon.

OBJECTIVES:
Red: Destroy X number of blue planes.
Blue: Destroy X number of RAF airfields.

Yes, that's right, blue can destroy (bomb) airfields out of action. Red players will no longer be able to spawn at destroyed RAF airfields & will have to spawn elsewhere. ie. The spawn-base is lost. I'm thinking, Luftwaffe to bomb coastal airfields (http://www.bbc.co.uk/history/events/germany_bombs_british_coastal_airfields) as in July-August 1940.

http://static.bbc.co.uk/history/img/ic/640/images/resources/events/germany_bombs_british_coastal_airfields.jpg

OPERATION HOME PLATE V2.0

RADAR/OBSERVERS
Chain Home Radar: Red has chain home radar units positioned approximately where these units were in RL in 1940. CH radar has a range of up to 190 kms. Effective minimum detection height varies with distance from the radar unit reflecting the upward angled broadcast radar beam.
Chain Low Radar: Red has chain low radar units positioned approximately where these units were in RL in 1940. CHL radar has a range of up to 46 kms. Effective minimum detection height is about 46m.
Freya Radar: Blue has Freya radar units. Freya radar has a range of up to 46 kms, and an effective minimum detection height of 2,200m at 40kms.
Ground observers: Both red & blue have ground observers positioned in towns or along the coast. Ground observers maximum range is about 11km but range is reduced early in the morning or late in the evening.
How radar works: 2.0 introduces a customised (scripted) radar feature. Radar & ground observer units contantly scan for enemy aircraft that are within range. When enemy airgroups are detected, they send airgroup heading, speed, altitude & aircraft numbers to a 'filter-room' for processing. The filter room processes information & broadcasts (voice) the most up-to-date information to pilots. Filter room processing takes a few minutes from the time of obseration to the time of a radio announcement.

Announced information includes, estimated aircraft numbers, estimated heading & altitude, and the estimated position the enemy airgroup based on observed speed & heading. It is important to recognise that if the enemy airgroup has changed course in the time between being detected & when the filter room makes the announcement, then the group may not be in the estimated position broadcast.

Custom menu (TAB-4)
Several custom menu options are available. Some options are plane or army specific & may not appear in your menu unless you have a certain plane type or are in a particualr army. Option include:
* Request weather report.
* Request radar contacts from filter-room.
* Request position of nearest LW bomber group needing escort.
* Personal stats (kills etc)
* Number of online players.
* Airforce aircrew losses.
* Airforce aircraft lossess.
* Show objectives status.

Planesets
Some changes to planesets to better represent the mid-1940 period.

Objectives
Increased number of aircraft red need to shoot down to 60. Blue still need to destroy 4 coastal airfields.

SG1_sandokito
May-13-2013, 05:04
Great news, i like a bomber.
THX for your work :thumbsup:

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
May-13-2013, 05:28
sounds like a superb idea Salmo.

Can you set the tonnage bombs required to knock an airfield out?

Salmo
May-13-2013, 05:32
Can you set the tonnage bombs required to knock an airfield out?

Started with 10,000 kg of bombs per 1000m (radius) of airfield needed for airfield to be destroyed. This can be adjusted as needed.

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
May-13-2013, 05:45
ok cool.

I also would not mind if there were (smallish) A.I raids targeting the RAF airfields.

I think it's time that destruction of the A.I bombers actually meant something with respect to mission objectives, rather than just being there as nothing more than easy kills.

Continu0
May-13-2013, 05:54
Sounds great! :goofy

Muffin
May-13-2013, 06:17
Sounds Brilliant! :-)

Gromit
May-13-2013, 09:17
Having been bombed at Lympne whilst rearming all I can say is this is going to be entertaining!:thumbsup:

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
May-13-2013, 09:24
Having been bombed at Lympne whilst rearming all I can say is this is going to be entertaining!:thumbsup:

Agreed, and hopefully, having a mission where airfields are explicit targets will finally put to bed the churlish anti-vulching attitude.

Air-fields are legitimate targets.

Bear Pilot
May-13-2013, 09:40
Sounds awesome, Salmo! Thanks for your hard work!

=vit_unit=
May-13-2013, 10:24
It's cool!
I remember this idea was implemented in one of early Salmo's missions.

Mattias
May-13-2013, 10:39
:clap:

Roblex
May-17-2013, 03:54
Thankyou. Now I just need to learn how get my bombs somewhere within the boundaries of an airfield while level bombing:)
OTOH it could be fun to go in low level as a group. I seem to remember the worst damage Biggin Hill ever took was from a small group of low level JU88s or Do17s.

On a related note, do bombs actually leave craters that damage taxiing aircraft? I see lots of mentions of this but I don't remember ever having trouble taking off from bombed airfields. Perhaps I did and just assumed it was the usual problem that some airfields have even without being bombed. I do remember a few weeks ago being surprised at a wheel being ripped off on take-off when I was only a few feet off the side of the runway and not going fast enough for a blown tire. If that is the case then I think we need craters modeled better to make them very obvious.

Salmo
May-17-2013, 03:57
On a related note, do bombs actually leave craters that damage taxiing aircraft? I see lots of mentions of this but I don't remember ever having trouble taking off from bombed airfields.
No they don't. This is an issue I'm trying to overcome using scripting, as it is much more realistic to have bomb craters at bombed airfields.

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
May-17-2013, 07:38
Hey Salmo.

Just spent some time on your own server playing the Homeplate 1.0 that you have up.

I noticed that at the tripod area (near Cap-Gris-Nez) there were upwards of 100 German aircraft all circling the same bases low around 2,000ft.

It made for a very laggy slideshow, impossible to spawn in at any nearby German bases, due to the tax on framerates.
Also, the aircraft all crash into each other all the time.

Are you aware of/ fixing this?

Maybe bombers need to go much further in land to end their missions? Or maybe they should dive back down low, and despawn once in land and away from likely RAF fighters?

Salmo
May-20-2013, 04:17
Battle sent to Bliss for inclusion on ATAG server (if acceptable to ATAG). Battle features:

OPERATION HOME PLATE V1.0

Period: July/August 1940
Red objective: Defend southern England airfields (shoot down 150 LW aircraft to win)
Blue objective: Bomb/destroy RAF airfields (destroy 7 RAF airfields to win)

RAF airfields - An airfield is damaged/destroyed by a bomb exploding anywhere within the airfield radius. It is not necessary to destroy a building or airfield object to contribute to an airfield's destruction. The amount of damage an airfield can take is proportional to the airfield size. ie. larger airfields will take more damage than smaller airfields. Any spawn base located at the airfield is lost when an airfield is totally destroyed. At this point in time, airfields do not repair themselves. Note: There's a problem with the bomb crater object in FMB, it does not appear ingame when loaded via scripts. I have a work-around. I spawn-in a "pseudo crater" when a bomb goes off. The pseuocrater is a collection of other FMB objects cobbled together to look similar to a bomb crater. Red should take care operating from bombed airfields, you'll rip your undercarriage off if you hit one of these 'craters'.

Dynamic AI numbers - The number of Ai planes varies with the number of players in the battle. The fewer player, the more frequently Ai will spawn-in, and Ai spawn less frequently as player numbers increase.

Dynamic Ai plane types - Bomber & fight types vary each time the Ai mission loads. Plane types liklihood is roughly in the proportion of the different types during the BOB period eg. For a LW bomber flight, you're about twice as likely to get a flight of Heinkels than Doniers.

Random planesets at bases - Planesets will be different at spawn bases each time the battle starts.

Dynamic planeset upgrades - Bases will upgrade theor plane types over time as the battle progreses. eg. A spitfire Mk1 will upgrade to a spitfire Mk1a; a Bf109E-1 will upgrade to a Bf109E-3 etc.

Dynamic Ai skill levels - Skill levels of planes in Ai flights vary every time an Ai mission loads. You could encounter rookies to aces. Pilot & gunner skills are independent, so you could get a rookie pilot & ace gunner or vice versa.

Large LW bomber formations - LW bomber formations from 9 to 40 aircraft.

Random AA at airfields - The number of AA units at airfields is randomised on battle startup. Airfields can have from zero to 6 AA units when the battle starts.

Dynamic airfield AA numbers - AA increases at frequently attacked airfields as the battle progreses.

Ai's contributing to battle objectives - I'm aware that this is a sensitive area. Here's how the various Ai's work.
LW Ai bombers LW bombers are tasked to bomb airfields, but the script reduces the total mass of bombs they drop on airfields, therefore they do much less damage than a human pilot with the same bomb load. IMO this is necessary to keep red players 'actively' hunting bombers (to defend airfields) at times when blue has few players online becuase airfields can still be lost to Ai bomber action.
Ai fighters (red & blue) There are occcassional red Ai fighters, these are necessary to maintain blue's interest in defending their bombers at times when red player numbers are low. Blue Ai fighters mostly defend bombers making it harder for red to get bomber kills. Occassionally a blue Ai will peel-off & do what it wants to do, such as straff an airfield (especially the Bf110's). IMO this just adds to the realism of the gameplay.
AA units Downed aircraft (players or Ai) are not counted towards mission objectives if more than 50% of their total damage has been done by non-human actors. This means that if AA or an Ai aircraft contributes more than 50% to a kill, that kill will not count towards winning the battle.

Special note: I'm trialing a script method that detects & removes the 'jumping/rocking' aircraft from the battle. ie. The aircraft that are stationary on the ground or in the air & jump backwards & forwards endlessly on the same spot. Please advise if you spot any of these in this battle.

Hope you enjoy this one?

Archie
May-20-2013, 11:16
Sounds fantastic! :thumbsup:

Bear Pilot
May-20-2013, 11:20
Thanks so much Salmo!!!

Talisman
May-21-2013, 12:16
Salmo,

Thank you for this mission. However, I would like to give you some feedback regarding dynamic plane set upgrades. I humbly request that aircraft used in the front line be available from the start, for both blue and red team, in line with the historical time line. If there is one thing that puts me off a map it is not being able to fly the aircraft types and technology that was in use at the time. Therefore, for example, please ensure that for red the Rotol prop and 100 Octane fuel is available for RAF Fighter Command from the start of this mission (the RAF should not be flying in Jul and Aug 1940 with 1938-39 fighter aircraft as standard front line equipment). Likewise for blue, please ensure that aircraft types of the time are also available from the start and upgraded historically. I believe that the Spit MkII made an appearance towards the end of Aug 1940 and would be a candidate for dynamic historic upgrade, but IMHO the RAF should start this operation with the CloD designated Sit 1a 100 Octane and the Hurricane Mk I 100 Octane. Using outdated aircraft just to provide a dynamic upgrade scenario is frustrating for those players that want historical accuracy and in my view adds a complication that is not needed.

Thank you again.

Talisman

Salmo
May-22-2013, 06:49
Salmo,

Thank you for this mission. However, I would like to give you some feedback regarding dynamic plane set upgrades. I humbly request that aircraft used in the front line be available from the start, for both blue and red team, in line with the historical time line. If there is one thing that puts me off a map it is not being able to fly the aircraft types and technology that was in use at the time. Therefore, for example, please ensure that for red the Rotol prop and 100 Octane fuel is available for RAF Fighter Command from the start of this mission (the RAF should not be flying in Jul and Aug 1940 with 1938-39 fighter aircraft as standard front line equipment). Likewise for blue, please ensure that aircraft types of the time are also available from the start and upgraded historically. I believe that the Spit MkII made an appearance towards the end of Aug 1940 and would be a candidate for dynamic historic upgrade, but IMHO the RAF should start this operation with the CloD designated Sit 1a 100 Octane and the Hurricane Mk I 100 Octane. Using outdated aircraft just to provide a dynamic upgrade scenario is frustrating for those players that want historical accuracy and in my view adds a complication that is not needed.

Thank you again.

Talisman
Hello Talisman, thankyou for the feedback. You rightly point out that the planeset starts with planes that are a little too early for the period. The idea of dynamically updating planesets was a concept to represent (not exactly reproduce) changing plane types as BOB progressed. I think the concept works well. The bases with new plane upgrades seem to spawn-in without causing players any issues. It's probably time to refine the concept further & think about how to better use the changing-planes-at-bases idea. In any event, I'll see if I can remove the very early (1938-39) planes from the rotations.

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
May-22-2013, 07:06
You rightly point out that the planeset starts with planes that are a little too early for the period. .

For the early plane-sets, we really need a BEF / Fall of France related scenario.

Kling
May-22-2013, 07:19
This sounds great Salmo!!!!

Jusdt a question, will bomb craters stay or disappear with time? if so, is there a way to extend that time limit to say a few hours? Just a thought but maybe FPS would go down drastically... no idea...

Anyway, I like the idea!!

EDIT: Just read your reply to the question a bit further up on in this thread.
But Salmo can you tell me how these "spawned in" craters work? If I drop a bomb on a red airfield, will the server automatically "spawn in" a crater at that part of the airfield or will the crater be spawned in randomly somwhere on the field? And howlong do these craters stay for?

regards

Salmo
May-22-2013, 07:35
This sounds great Salmo!!!!

Jusdt a question, will bomb craters stay or disappear with time? if so, is there a way to extend that time limit to say a few hours? Just a thought but maybe FPS would go down drastically... no idea...

Anyway, I like the idea!!

EDIT: Just read your reply to the question a bit further up on in this thread.
But Salmo can you tell me how these "spawned in" craters work? If I drop a bomb on a red airfield, will the server automatically "spawn in" a crater at that part of the airfield or will the crater be spawned in randomly somwhere on the field? And howlong do these craters stay for?

regards

Hello Kling.

will bomb craters stay or disappear with time? - They stay

Just a thought but maybe FPS would go down drastically... no idea... - We will have to see how it plays with several players online.

tell me how these "spawned in" craters work? If I drop a bomb on a red airfield, will the server automatically "spawn in" a crater at that part of the airfield or will the crater be spawned in randomly somwhere on the field? - A pseudo-crater is spawned-in at the point where the game code says the bomb lands. My experience is that this point is close to, but not always exactly where the bomb actually lands. One bomb = one crater, but (for technical reasons) craters may not appear for up to 1 minute after the bomb explodes. When an airfield is totally destroyed, the script will automatically spawn-in another 100 randomly placed craters around the airfield just to make sure it looks 'destroyed' & to make it virtually impossible for an aircraft to safely land there.

Kling
May-22-2013, 08:48
Hello Kling.

will bomb craters stay or disappear with time? - They stay

Just a thought but maybe FPS would go down drastically... no idea... - We will have to see how it plays with several players online.

tell me how these "spawned in" craters work? If I drop a bomb on a red airfield, will the server automatically "spawn in" a crater at that part of the airfield or will the crater be spawned in randomly somwhere on the field? - A pseudo-crater is spawned-in at the point where the game code says the bomb lands. My experience is that this point is close to, but not always exactly where the bomb actually lands. One bomb = one crater, but (for technical reasons) craters may not appear for up to 1 minute after the bomb explodes. When an airfield is totally destroyed, the script will automatically spawn-in another 100 randomly placed craters around the airfield just to make sure it looks 'destroyed' & to make it virtually impossible for an aircraft to safely land there.

This sounds great Salmo!! You really thought about everything!! Im on vacation now but cant wait to try this out later when im back in 2 weeks!

Good job Salmo!

Roblex
May-22-2013, 09:08
This sounds great Salmo!! You really thought about everything!!

Good job Salmo!

I agree. Thanks for your work Salmo.


(QJ-P)

You rightly point out that the planeset starts with planes that are a little too early for the period. .
For the early plane-sets, we really need a BEF / Fall of France related scenario.

A good idea that also allows us those huge areas of Northern France that are currently being wasted. It will also stretch everyones navigation skillls though as once you get away from the coastlines it becomes 300% harder to work out where you are :-)

56RAF_klem
May-24-2013, 05:35
Hi Salmo,

Thanks for moving missions closer to 'the competition' but can you confirm that there will not be player 109 or 110 jabo's (and perhaps no player bombers) because, with only 7 airfields to destroy (by just one bomb each!), 7 low level devious player jabos or high alt single bombers would undermine the entire RAF defences of only 45-50 a/c maximum in about a quarter of the map time as well as undermining the whole BoB concept.

Assuming blues only operate bombers in formations it will be interesting to see how this pans out with typically 30-40 reds trying to destroy a whole 150 LW planes before just 7 bombs do their work for the blues. It may turn out to be the flawed "Goering principle" coming true that once an airfield was attacked it was deemed "destroyed" - which of course it wasn't. I know in CoD its a question of scale but the ease with which a handful of lone/small-group Blue player bombers destroy targets on some existing maps suggests the Blue objective may be unrealistically easy compared with the red. Our Squad of say 6-7 will typically destroy maybe 12-15 aircraft before a a map is won but lets say the reds can kill an average of 3 each in that time. That means we need the full 45-50 red players at that standard on line at the same time to achieve the red objective of downing 150 aircraft while the blues only bomb 7 airfields (which I'm sure won't take long) and the blues may have 45-50 escort protection. I don't think the reds can win. Of course if the blue player bombers only fly with the AI bombers and they are spread more thinly over say four hours there's a better chance for the reds providing any Blues flying bombers have to fly with the AI formations.

Anyway, we'll see.

Thanks again.

Roblex
May-24-2013, 06:38
Salmo,

I think you confused Klem by saying
"An airfield is damaged/destroyed by a bomb exploding anywhere within the airfield radius." :-)

You did say elsewhere
"Started with 10,000 kg of bombs per 1000m (radius) of airfield needed for airfield to be destroyed. This can be adjusted as needed."

but it was easily missed.

Salmo
May-24-2013, 09:10
Hi Salmo,

Thanks for moving missions closer to 'the competition' but can you confirm that there will not be player 109 or 110 jabo's (and perhaps no player bombers) because, with only 7 airfields to destroy (by just one bomb each!), 7 low level devious player jabos or high alt single bombers would undermine the entire RAF defences of only 45-50 a/c maximum in about a quarter of the map time as well as undermining the whole BoB concept.

Assuming blues only operate bombers in formations it will be interesting to see how this pans out with typically 30-40 reds trying to destroy a whole 150 LW planes before just 7 bombs do their work for the blues. It may turn out to be the flawed "Goering principle" coming true that once an airfield was attacked it was deemed "destroyed" - which of course it wasn't. I know in CoD its a question of scale but the ease with which a handful of lone/small-group Blue player bombers destroy targets on some existing maps suggests the Blue objective may be unrealistically easy compared with the red. Our Squad of say 6-7 will typically destroy maybe 12-15 aircraft before a a map is won but lets say the reds can kill an average of 3 each in that time. That means we need the full 45-50 red players at that standard on line at the same time to achieve the red objective of downing 150 aircraft while the blues only bomb 7 airfields (which I'm sure won't take long) and the blues may have 45-50 escort protection. I don't think the reds can win. Of course if the blue player bombers only fly with the AI bombers and they are spread more thinly over say four hours there's a better chance for the reds providing any Blues flying bombers have to fly with the AI formations. Anyway, we'll see. Thanks again.

G'day Klem,

Your reasoning is flawed. Roblex (above) is correct. I try to think carefully about the kinds of things you mention when constructing battles. It's important to strike the right balance to give both sides an 'equal' chance of winning the battle. There are many factors to consider, & I try to weight one each carefully.

I'll explain how destruction of airfields works.

1. Damaging an airfield - Airfield damage is measured by the total kilograms of bomb dropped within the airfield perimeter. The battle script keeps track of the total kgs of bombs dropped on each airfield. When the total kgs of bombs dropped exceeds the airfield's "strength" then the airfield is totally destroyed.

2. Airfield "strength" - Airfield strength is related to it's size (airfield radius). Smaller airfields have less strength than larger airfields. The formula used is AirfieldStrength = (airfield radius) / 1000) * 10000. Effectively, this means that an airfield has to have 10,000kg of bombs per 1000m radius for the airfield to be totally destroyed. For example, to destroy an airfield with a radius of 1km, blue will need to drop 10,000kgs of bombs on the airfield. That's 40 x 250kg bombs for one airfield.

3. Percent damage to airfield - You will get messages in-game to indicate how damaged an airfield is ie. "RAF Lypne is 50% damaged". Percent damage is simply the total kgs of bombs dropped on the airfield divided by the airfield's strengh times 100.

4. Damage by Ai bombers - Ai bombers can damage airfields, but their bomb load is halved. So an Ai bomber dropping a 250kg bomb, will be registered as though a 125kg bomb landed on the airfield. This allows for large LW Ai bomber formations to carpet bomb airfields without their total bomb loads overly competing with the human element of the gameplay.

56RAF_klem
May-24-2013, 09:19
G'day Klem,

Your reasoning is flawed. I try to think carefully about the kinds of things you mention when constructing battles. It's important to strike the right balance to give both sides an 'equal' chance of winning the battle. There are many factors to consider, & I try to weight one each carefully.

I'll explain how destruction of airfields works.

1. Damaging an airfield - Airfield damage is measured by the total kilograms of bomb dropped within the airfield perimeter. The battle script keeps track of the total kgs of bombs dropped on each airfield. When the total kgs of bombs dropped exceeds the airfield's "strength" then the airfield is totally destroyed.

2. Airfield "strength" - Airfield strength is related to it's size (airfield radius). Smaller airfields have less strength than larger airfields. The formula used is AirfieldStrength = (airfield radius) / 1000) * 10000. Effectively, this means that an airfield has to have 10,000kg of bombs per 1000m radius for the airfield to be totally destroyed. For example, to destroy an airfield with a radius of 1km, blue will need to drop 10,000kgs of bombs on the airfield. That's 40 x 250kg bombs for one airfield.

3. Perecent damage to airfield - You will get messages in-game to indicate how damaged an airfield is ie. "RAF Lypne is 50% damaged". Percent damage is simply the total kgs of bombs dropped on the airfield divided by the airfield's strengh times 100.

4. Damage by Ai bombers - Ai bombers can damage airfields, but their bomb load is halved (so they don't overly compete with the human element of the gameplay). So an Ai bomber dropping a 250kg bomb, wil be registered as though a 125kg bomb landed on the airfield.

Thanks for the additional info Salmo. That makes much more sense.

It was my understanding that was flawed due to "An airfield is damaged/destroyed by a bomb exploding anywhere within the airfield radius." It looked like an impossible race against time (I only read from your mission description down thinking that was the baseline).

ATAG_Deacon
May-26-2013, 18:08
Salmo,

~S~ mate, love your missions!

Was just on the server a bit ago when Home Plate came on. Took off and flew towards France without issue. There were about 20-30 players in the game. Spotted a large formation of bombers and went to full stutter, bombers warping out/flying sideways, etc. Rush had his machine lock up and mine went soon after. Everyone on the server was having issues. Might want to see if there isn't too much happening at the start of the mission. Bliss was kind enough to restart the server as nobody could fly...

Other than that, as said, your missions are brilliant!:thumbsup:

Salmo
Aug-03-2013, 01:41
Thankyou for your feedback ATAG_Deacon. This mission has been further refined & large LW formations & other objects removed to limit the likihood of lag/freezes.

Roblex
Aug-03-2013, 04:05
Is this mission actually up and live? I have never seen it and assumed that after Deacons feedback it had just been taken down again.

Salmo
Aug-03-2013, 04:51
Is this mission actually up and live? I have never seen it and assumed that after Deacons feedback it had just been taken down again.

To my knowledge, the (early version) of this mission is no longer running on the ATAG server & was taken down due to lag/freezing issues. The mission has been greatly refined & object numbers reduced, & other changes made, but an updated version has not been submitted to ATAG.

A serious game flaw (in the game's code) is that too many objects in one location can create game lag/freezes. The issue becomes more pronounced as online player numbers increase, suggesting inefficient game net-code or memory management issues in the game code.

I construct my missions with this limitation in mind, but there is a circular problem that leads to my missions being pulled off the ATAG server:

1. I construct & test my missions for bugs in a limited player number environment (say < 10 players) (Australian time zones).
2. The ATAG server is the only server with any prospect of finding large player numbers (> 50 players at a time).
3. It follows then, that my missions can only be fully-tested for efficiency/problems with large player numbers on the ATAG server.
4. My missions seldom get a run on the ATAG server, & when they do, they are quickly pulled due to certain issues. As I understand it, ATAG's position is that they want to run a ‘unreliable’ server with no freezes etc.
5. ATAG missions are designed around a common (rather simple) scripting framework that has been determined to be ‘satisfactory’ for game stability. That's why the missions are mostly pretty generic "bomb small groups of static objects; x objects destroyed wins" type battles.
6. It becomes impossible to explore any innovation in mission design/game play that is compatible with large player numbers because the only missions run on the ATAG server are those that are constructed within the known framework that produces few gameplay issues in order to satisfy ATAG's desire to run a 'reliable' server.

Do you see my problem? It's not possible to further develop innovative & different battle scenarios because it's not possible to adequately test the missions with large player numbers.

What missions ATAG do or do not chose to run on their server is entirely a matter for them. This is not a criticism of ATAG or any ATAG members. I've resigned myself to the fact that ATAG prefer basic missions that run reliably to innovative missions that introduce new game concepts & possibilities, but that may also introduce some gameplay issues.

ATAG_Bliss
Aug-03-2013, 05:36
Salmo,

There is nothing wrong with trying to be innovative or trying new things, but you must realize there are limits to what you can do in the game engine. These limits are essentially the same as 46. The difference is 46 doesn't allow you quite the toolbox of scripting that Clod does.

Ive been fortunate to see and test these limitations early on as the server has remained popular. As I've stated before, I shot for the moon early on and watched how badly it failed. Then descaled and descaled and descaled until performance finally seemed negligible between 1 player or 100 players. So those object limits are fairly strict. Along with in game performance we can also monitor how the bandwidth works and interacts with each mission. That goes hand in hand for how well a mission is running.

Of course we want a server that runs smoothly and doesn't crash. And I've gone to great lengths to do just that. All my AI of any type only spawn after a previous group is out of any player view and about ready to land. This takes literally watching the entire mission run and watching the every single AI flight with a stop watch to when they get close to configure the next group spawning in with no performance hit. I even delay messages from the actual spawn or destruction event of triggers as firing those off at the same time can cause stutters.

The scripting piece may be very simple to you and the missions, but they are very thought out and have been changed / upgraded literally thousands of times for performance problems.

Having to come home from work to reset the server because it crashed because of scripting errors or because of AI that continually accumulate over time that kills the server is not something that I like having to do. Because when the server is down my inbox, phone, emails etc all start going off. And I'm forced to try and remedy the situation.

I don't know what to tell you, but the KISS method works pretty good. I would love to get some new concepts going on the server, but you gotta realize you must do it gradually (add to what is there already) not try to add 3000 lines of code spawning 100 AI in the course of an hour and only adding more and more accumulation of that as more time has gone by, not starting out with 10x the number of objects the game can handle for A MP server in the 1st place.

Ive even sent you pictures of the bandwidth graph the 1st time the mission ran, where less than 5 people could even get in the server. I then showed you when I skipped the mission and immediately how it was able to fill right up again showing again with the bandwidth graph. I even went so far as to give you some of my missions as a template for object/AI limitations. Again, I didn't just make up those numbers, this was learned through 1000's of changes, watching how those changes effect bandwidth etc. And the only reason I could see this is because we've been lucky enough to have a popular server to have, in a sense, plenty of beta testers to help me see all these changes in real time.

So I don't know what you want me to do. But I definitely don't want to have to babysit the server. I did that for a year while figuring all these limits out in the 1st place. If you would adhere to some of these limits, the missions probably would not crash the server/game/clients etc. then we could work on fixing all the errors in script. Bit this take a lot of time and a bunch of testing. I'm willing to help, but I hope you take a serious look at the templates I've sent you before the 1st test. It simply will not work well if you go over those limits.

Roblex
Aug-03-2013, 08:16
Just a thought but, didn't we try 'Homeplate' back in the days when the server would only allow 40 players in even a simple mission? The net code has since been drastically improved. I get that even with improved net code Homeplate might be a little cpu intensive but it could be that a cut down version will now work.

What exactly is the problem Salmo? Your description of Homeplate does not seen to necessarily involve extra ground objects or bigger formations of bombers than we currently have. I know there is a problem, I am just not knowledgable enough about mission construction to know what it is.

Kling
Aug-03-2013, 10:07
Why not run it in Beta mode on server two?1

Roblex
Aug-03-2013, 12:49
Why not run it in Beta mode on server two?1

I thought the same but if the overflow server crashes people will still complain and make Bliss reset it. Maybe it needs a message somewhere saying 'This mission is BETA and the server is not guaranteed to be available all the time. If this server crashes please inform ATAG ONCE then wait patiently' :D

Kling
Aug-03-2013, 13:24
I thought the same but if the overflow server crashes people will still complain and make Bliss reset it. Maybe it needs a message somewhere saying 'This mission is BETA and the server is not guaranteed to be available all the time. If this server crashes please inform ATAG ONCE then wait patiently' :D

Yes but of course it MUST be called BETA Testing or something!!
If that is the only issue then I dont see why its not there already... As a matter of fact I struggle to see the issue at all!
It could all be so simple if we just didnt make it so complicated.

SoW Reddog
Aug-05-2013, 04:43
This mission seems to offer exactly what a number of us have been looking for so can we get it to a workable state?

Bliss, you seem to have the best idea of what is and isn't acceptable in terms of objects and scripts. Is there any guidelines out there as to what these limits are?

Salmo, Although I appreciate the amount of "extra" stuff you've put in the mission from the description, I wonder given Bliss's concerns over performance if we couldn't strip the mission down to the important bits - what I personally would consider to be anyway, namely the different objective conditions - downing bombers, ai bombing of airfields and the loss of airfields as red spawns.

I'm thinking that if number of objects is an issue on server load, could we just cut out the "crater spawn" scripts, it should be obvious which bases are destroyed by either building destruction or the existing <obj<blue code?

Also, maybe cut the script which changes planeset over time, just include the final set for now.

I'm really encouraged that someone's made a mission like this, and I think there really is an appetite for it on the server, certainly on Red comms over the past weeks I've heard repeatedly that we want something like this and i think the discussions on the forum bear this out too. So, maybe if we strip it down to bare bonesand test it again, we might get to a point where Bliss is happy that it can be run on ATAG? I for one would be very happy to help test the mission.

Reddog

Roblex
Aug-05-2013, 15:29
I agree this style of mission is probably the closest to the spirit of BoB ie the RAF is focussed on stopping the bombers and the LW is focussed on keeping the bombers alive. Individual pilots may get sidetracked by the search for personal glory (as in real life) but the mission itself revolves around the bombers getting through or being stopped. If there is a way to strip it down and still keep the core focus then it is worth doing. Yes it gives little opportunity for human LW bomber pilots and none for red bomber pilots but it is just one mission. I like flying red bombers but I can give it a miss for one map (and soon we will have Blenheim fighters which were used against daylight bombers for several months before being switched to night fighter duties)

Kling
Aug-05-2013, 18:26
This mission seems to offer exactly what a number of us have been looking for so can we get it to a workable state?

Bliss, you seem to have the best idea of what is and isn't acceptable in terms of objects and scripts. Is there any guidelines out there as to what these limits are?

Salmo, Although I appreciate the amount of "extra" stuff you've put in the mission from the description, I wonder given Bliss's concerns over performance if we couldn't strip the mission down to the important bits - what I personally would consider to be anyway, namely the different objective conditions - downing bombers, ai bombing of airfields and the loss of airfields as red spawns.

I'm thinking that if number of objects is an issue on server load, could we just cut out the "crater spawn" scripts, it should be obvious which bases are destroyed by either building destruction or the existing <obj<blue code?

Also, maybe cut the script which changes planeset over time, just include the final set for now.

I'm really encouraged that someone's made a mission like this, and I think there really is an appetite for it on the server, certainly on Red comms over the past weeks I've heard repeatedly that we want something like this and i think the discussions on the forum bear this out too. So, maybe if we strip it down to bare bonesand test it again, we might get to a point where Bliss is happy that it can be run on ATAG? I for one would be very happy to help test the mission.

Reddog

I have spoken to Bliss and he is willing to run this mission on Server2 during a testphase to see if/how the mission runs...
I contacted Salmo about it and its up to him now to accept this offer or not. I hope he does!



Regards

ATAG_Bliss
Aug-05-2013, 19:36
This mission seems to offer exactly what a number of us have been looking for so can we get it to a workable state?

Bliss, you seem to have the best idea of what is and isn't acceptable in terms of objects and scripts. Is there any guidelines out there as to what these limits are?

Salmo, Although I appreciate the amount of "extra" stuff you've put in the mission from the description, I wonder given Bliss's concerns over performance if we couldn't strip the mission down to the important bits - what I personally would consider to be anyway, namely the different objective conditions - downing bombers, ai bombing of airfields and the loss of airfields as red spawns.

I'm thinking that if number of objects is an issue on server load, could we just cut out the "crater spawn" scripts, it should be obvious which bases are destroyed by either building destruction or the existing <obj<blue code?

Also, maybe cut the script which changes planeset over time, just include the final set for now.

I'm really encouraged that someone's made a mission like this, and I think there really is an appetite for it on the server, certainly on Red comms over the past weeks I've heard repeatedly that we want something like this and i think the discussions on the forum bear this out too. So, maybe if we strip it down to bare bonesand test it again, we might get to a point where Bliss is happy that it can be run on ATAG? I for one would be very happy to help test the mission.

Reddog

Yes there are some pretty stern restrictions on number of objects and number of AI that can be in a mission at one time. The problem with going over these limits is the people that have already joined get massive lags, ships start flying in the air, game freezes, server freezes, and a plethora of other problems. But even worse, when that is happening on the server, the people that are also trying to join can not do so. They are simply stuck waiting for ages trying to get into the server.

And as the more people wait, the problem exponentially gets worse. That's why I've sent Salmo some missions that do not contain scripting errors and will run smoothly with 100 people online (essentially the game limit).

I have absolutely no problem running anyone's mission on the server. I implore people that want to mission build to make them, but if the server is crashing with hardly any people, there are huge amounts of lag and freezes in certain areas of the map, ships flying in the air, or any of the above mentioned performance problems, then it will have to be removed until it can be fixed.

I offered a few of my missions because they are stable and can handle 100 players without a sweat, to use as a template of something that works good. I definitely would like to see some innovative new ideas in code / missions and the like, but where Salmo and I differ is what the limits are in the game in the 1st place.

So if I was to build some extra code, let alone a whole bunch of extra objects, I would start with what is known to work good then add to it. And what I mean by that is if limits = x amount of objects, a .mis file of size y, and some code that already works well, wouldn't it be best to start with those limits and gradually work your way up until problems arise? The 1st iteration of the mission Salmo sent me would not even allow 5 players to join it. The 2nd got up to 15, while 40 were sitting in limbo trying to join. But the 15 on the server were having major problems as well.

I guess what I'm saying is, Salmo disagrees with me for some reason, yet every single time I've tried to run his missions we've had major problems with them. But I'm made to look like the bad guy for pointing it out. I don't know what to do. As I said earlier I tried all the extra fluff, airfield stuff, immersion elements, etc., that all added to the eye candy of everything way back in 2011. I think my 1st .mis file was almost 2mb in size. To give you an idea of how many changes I made and gradually, bit by bit, toned it down within the confines of the game limit, my .mis files are usually less than 200kb now. It's essentially spot on for a 46 MP mission (which makes sense because the engine is basically that to begin with) So essentially 2mb to 200kb and about 1000 different changes to get it there and working right, stable, smooth etc.

I learned the hard way. All that time and work for immersion essentially thrown down the drain. All I'm asking for, is if someone, me for instance, already did all this work to find these types of limits, wouldn't the logical thing be to just expand on those limits, and expand on the scripting gradually and bit by bit until you run into a problem? Then not only do you know the exact problem that is causing the issue, but then, you may have very well found a whole new set of limits with TF 3.01 world.

None of this is to offend Salmo, but he seems to be very offended with me telling him the problems he has with his missions. The last thing I want to do is offend someone that's doing some mission building. It is not very easy in this game, and even worse to make everything work right. So the ball is in Salmo's court regarding his mission. I just hope he understands that I went through the same thing, problems, lags, freezes, server crashes, [insert problem here], that he is going through. And the only reason I make the suggestion or tell him why something isn't working right, killing the server, or w/e problem is going on, is because I've seen it before and had to adjust to fix it.

Roblex
Aug-06-2013, 02:17
If one of the problems is the number of AI in the game at one time then why do the existing maps often have Red & Blue bombers following the same route a mile apart? Is that just a problem with getting exact timings from the script or did you make a deliberate choice to allow both sides to defend their bombers & attack enemy bombers at the same time? That is not meant disrespectfully, I don't know anything about mission design, it just seems a bit wasteful of resources but maybe the way the game works makes it happen by accident despite what you intended.

Would it help Salmos mission if the bombers despawned as soon as they got back over France rather than wait for them to try to land when glitches in the game mean that often even healthy bombers crash for no reason? They can also take a long time landing and I am guessing we can't launch another raid while the old one is still taking its time landing. Maybe as a compromise they could descend towards a coastal field that is not really big enough for bombers then despawn at 500ft? I am shooting myself in the foot suggesting this as I often depend on doing just enough damage to bombers that I know I will get the kill as soon as they attempt to land with their damaged u/c or flaps :D Looked at logically, as this mission is about stopping the bombers dropping their bombs on the target, we could allow them to despawn any time after they have dropped but that could be very frustrating for fighters that were still chasing them which is why I suggest letting them try to get back to circuit height over France and if Red pilots choose to chase them that far and that low when they should be thinking about stopping the next raid about to leave France at 20,000ft then that is their problem.

In an ideal world I would love to see Blue bombers battling their way to London and decimating the Docklands area but that would frustrate the 109 pilots who would have to turn back before London or run out of fuel. We would also need the bombers to despawn after dropping because it would take too long to RTB and they would probably all get killed before leaving England anyway.

Just my uninformed view which may not match the realities of mission design.

ATAG_Bliss
Aug-06-2013, 02:50
If one of the problems is the number of AI in the game at one time then why do the existing maps often have Red & Blue bombers following the same route a mile apart? Is that just a problem with getting exact timings from the script or did you make a deliberate choice to allow both sides to defend their bombers & attack enemy bombers at the same time? That is not meant disrespectfully, I don't know anything about mission design, it just seems a bit wasteful of resources but maybe the way the game works makes it happen by accident despite what you intended.

Would it help Salmos mission if the bombers despawned as soon as they got back over France rather than wait for them to try to land when glitches in the game mean that often even healthy bombers crash for no reason? They can also take a long time landing and I am guessing we can't launch another raid while the old one is still taking its time landing. Maybe as a compromise they could descend towards a coastal field that is not really big enough for bombers then despawn at 500ft? I am shooting myself in the foot suggesting this as I often depend on doing just enough damage to bombers that I know I will get the kill as soon as they attempt to land with their damaged u/c or flaps :D Looked at logically, as this mission is about stopping the bombers dropping their bombs on the target, we could allow them to despawn any time after they have dropped but that could be very frustrating for fighters that were still chasing them which is why I suggest letting them try to get back to circuit height over France and if Red pilots choose to chase them that far and that low when they should be thinking about stopping the next raid about to leave France at 20,000ft then that is their problem.

In an ideal world I would love to see Blue bombers battling their way to London and decimating the Docklands area but that would frustrate the 109 pilots who would have to turn back before London or run out of fuel. We would also need the bombers to despawn after dropping because it would take too long to RTB and they would probably all get killed before leaving England anyway.

Just my uninformed view which may not match the realities of mission design.

The idea with the bombers coming from both ways was just to get the new folks some practice, and to be able to have something to shoot at regardless of how many players were on the server. There used to be many more formations because the player base for online was very low when the game was unplayable for many. The TF mod came out and next thing you know there was 100 players on the server again so this had to be restricted or they would all start flying sideways.

Ive read many suggestions like yours (I read them all) and I completely agree with you. My problem has simply been lack of real life time to finish more work. I haven't been able to play on the server in well over a month to give you an idea. But my traveling is about to end for work (I've been all over the country this year) and we only have a couple more races, then I'll have some actual free time to spend finishing many of the missions I've started based on all your feedback.

There's a bit of code that I maybe able to incorporate that actually will make the bomber groups objectives themselves. This makes what you're suggesting perfect because reds will have to shoot down x amount of bombers trying to destroy blue objectives, while blue objectives will still be land targets. So bombers mean something (only way to win for red) and because of that Blue will have to defend them or they will lose the map real fast.

Thats just one of the things Colander has helped me out with code wise. So by the time we are about to release the next TF patch, all the missions will be different with a plethora of ideas coming from you guys. I wish I could do it sooner, and I wish I had the free time I did 6 months ago. But there will be good things coming down the pipeline in the coming weeks. And once they are tested and everything works as it should, there will be an influx of ( hopefully fun and full of action with douse of historical sense) new missions.

And then I will actually be able to fly again. Or maybe I will be in a tank or a supply truck? :D

Roblex
Aug-06-2013, 05:11
Thanks Bliss. sounds like good things on the horizon.

Kling
Aug-06-2013, 07:46
I have plenty of time and would gladly help Bliss. But i need a tutorial for mission building!

Salmo
Aug-06-2013, 23:18
Amended mission sent to ATAG for consideration of hosting on server2. Virtually every feature has been turned off using code switches.

The battle is essentially bug-free from a scripting viewpoint. Stress testing needs to done to see if you can 'break' the mission (cause the server to crash) or get planes flying sideways etc. Then we'll turn other switches (introduce new features) on one-by-one & see what happens.

Old_Canuck
Aug-06-2013, 23:48
This is sound thinking, Salmo, turning off switches and turning them on again a little at a time. Will keep my eyes open for this on server 2 and hope to make some useful observations for you.

Kling
Aug-07-2013, 04:48
Great news Salmo!!! Will keep my eyes open and I will spread the word!!

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
Aug-07-2013, 04:54
Can we get a notification when this mission is up on Server 2?

We could organise an en-masse testing session. Server two is normally empty otherwise.

Kling
Aug-07-2013, 05:02
Can we get a notification when this mission is up on Server 2?

We could organise an en-masse testing session. Server two is normally empty otherwise.

Yes this would be a good idea!

SoW Reddog
Aug-09-2013, 17:10
Amended mission sent to ATAG for consideration of hosting on server2. Virtually every feature has been turned off using code switches.

The battle is essentially bug-free from a scripting viewpoint. Stress testing needs to done to see if you can 'break' the mission (cause the server to crash) or get planes flying sideways etc. Then we'll turn other switches (introduce new features) on one-by-one & see what happens.

Salmo,

Played it a little as soon as Bliss got it on the server. The first comment is "did you switch off the ai bombers?" If you didn't, then we couldn't find them, must have had 6-8 of us searching from 10-25k from England right over to France and didn't see a sausage. Then a bunch of blue players joined so I dived down to get a quick kill before disconnecting for my dinner. Little or no flak over the tripods was a nice change, but might need to be increased to stop Reds vulching if the action isn't enough to hold them over England.

Salmo
Aug-09-2013, 19:56
"did you switch off the ai bombers?" If you didn't, then we couldn't find them, must have had 6-8 of us searching from 10-25k from England right over to France and didn't see a sausage.
Not swicthed off. One Ai bomber flight spawns when the battle starts. If 10 players online, then Ai bomber flights spawn-in about every 30 minutes; if 20 players online, then Ai bomber flights spawn-in about every 45 minutes. Frequency of Ai bomber flights could be increased in the future if the mission is running without freezes.


Little or no flak over the tripods was a nice change, but might need to be increased to stop Reds vulching if the action isn't enough to hold them over England.
Flak numbers vary each time the mission runs. There is 100% chance that a spawn-base will have from 2 - 6 flak units, & 0% chance of a non-spawn base having flak. Flak numbers could be increased in the future if the mission is running without freezes.

Roblex
Aug-10-2013, 02:57
I notice both the ATAG servers crashed last night. What? I 'm just saying! :bricks:

ATAG_Bliss
Aug-10-2013, 03:39
I notice both the ATAG servers crashed last night. What? I 'm just saying! :bricks:

All my fault and not mission related :D

Kling
Aug-10-2013, 06:14
Well i flew the mission yesterday and at one point there were 21red vs 17blues and your mission ran perfectly fine Salmo! No stutters, no lag!
Well done!

May I suggest that you increase the frequence that german bombers spawn because right now at one point there were 10 players and no bombers to shoot at for 30mins and this got pretty frustrating to have nothing at all to shoot at.

Second suggestion is to increase red mission target from 40aircraft shot down to maybe 60?

As most people fly fighters only and bombers spawn so seldom, blue wont have a chance at all to win.

It was extremely cool however to see the message though that Hawkinge was 71% destroyed!!

Im happy to have the map in the rotation!

Roblex
Aug-10-2013, 08:21
Another vote here for 'More Bombers'. This morning it ended up as a sight-seeing mission and nothing to shoot at. I should have asked when Salmo was also in the mission but... are the AI bombers flying all the way home and landing? 20-30 minutes after the one squadron of AI bombers I saw had gone home we were still seeing messages about Do17s dying. If we could despawn them as soon as they enter the circuit to land would we be able to launch the next wave earlier?

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
Aug-10-2013, 09:26
Mission is working well Salmo,

The cloud height is great. Nice to see low clouds!

Two bits of construction that I think would help;

Can you set mission start time to 0900. By the end of the mission it becomes very difficult to see....
Can you put some more notes in the briefing to describe how blues can knock out the airfields. I was constantly fielding questions in the chat bar from blue bomber pilots asking how to take the targets out. Perhaps you can specify approximately how much tonnage of bombs is required to destroy the field, where the bombs should be dropped (i.e buildings are not the target) and how quickly repairs are carried out.

Kling
Aug-10-2013, 10:03
Mission is working well Salmo,

The cloud height is great. Nice to see low clouds!

Two bits of construction that I think would help;

Can you set mission start time to 0900. By the end of the mission it becomes very difficult to see....


You mean 21:00?

SoW Reddog
Aug-10-2013, 11:10
Salmo,

I'm not sure that bombers spawned at the start of the mission last night, as no one was getting any radar contacts for bombers until a player spawned into a 88. Might be wrong though.

Agree with phil too, the clouds were nicely placed.

Like the sound of the dynamic flak amounts, means that we'll have to take a different approach each iteration, nice one.

This mission is making me want to try out flying a German bomber in a group.

Bliss, just out of interest how many missions are in the rotation and do they just do that, rotate or is it random selection (don't know how it works)

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
Aug-10-2013, 11:38
You mean 21:00?

why would you want the mission to start at 21:00? that's after sunset...

Salmo
Aug-10-2013, 17:13
Another vote here for 'More Bombers'.
Now that the mission seems to run OK, the frequency of Ai spawning will be increased in the next version soon.


... are the AI bombers flying all the way home and landing? 20-30 minutes after the one squadron of AI bombers I saw had gone home we were still seeing messages about Do17s dying. If we could despawn them as soon as they enter the circuit to land would we be able to launch the next wave earlier?
Ai bombers fly to in-land France are despawned while they are in the air. They don't land at coastal French airfields.


Can you set mission start time to 0900. By the end of the mission it becomes very difficult to see....
Mission start-time is 2pm. I'll put mission start-time back to say 12noon.


Can you put some more notes in the briefing to describe how blues can knock out the airfields. I was constantly fielding questions in the chat bar from blue bomber pilots asking how to take the targets out. Perhaps you can specify approximately how much tonnage of bombs is required to destroy the field, where the bombs should be dropped (i.e buildings are not the target) and how quickly repairs are carried out.
Next version will have more info in the brief as requested. Airfields do not repair themselves at this time.


I'm not sure that bombers spawned at the start of the mission last night, as no one was getting any radar contacts for bombers until a player spawned into a 88. Might be wrong though.
A bomber flight does spawn at battle start. My experience is that red radar is notortiously bad at calling out the location of formations.

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
Aug-10-2013, 18:16
My experience is that red radar is notoriously bad at calling out the location of formations.

yes.. indeed.. add to that my experience; that the one true advantage that the RAF had in 1940 (RADAR warning) has not really been implemented in this game at all....
The tab-7-1 thing, especially for red, should also give height, to within say, 3,000ft margin of error....

Kling
Aug-10-2013, 18:33
Now that the mission seems to run OK, the frequency of Ai spawning will be increased in the next version soon.


Ai bombers fly to in-land France are despawned while they are in the air. They don't land at coastal French airfields.


Mission start-time is 2pm. I'll put mission start-time back to say 12noon.


Next version will have more info in the brief as requested. Airfields do not repair themselves at this time.


A bomber flight does spawn at battle start. My experience is that red radar is notortiously bad at calling out the location of formations.

Good to see youre on it Salmo! Looking forwards to seeing the bomber formations! Can u add a few at contrail altitude?

Roblex
Aug-11-2013, 04:37
yes.. indeed.. add to that my experience; that the one true advantage that the RAF had in 1940 (RADAR warning) has not really been implemented in this game at all....
The tab-7-1 thing, especially for red, should also give height, to within say, 3,000ft margin of error....

I was flying earlier today and took off from Manston and flew to Dunkirk pressing Tab-7-1 every 30 seconds only getting the '15 mile' messages for fighters and bombers. I then flew South for 5 minutes still checking radar every 30 seconds when suddenly I get a message saying there 13 Bf110s over Manston. Technically they could have spawned far South and looped round via Dungeness and up without ever getting within 15 miles of me but I am not aware of any maps spawning AI 110s at Tramecourt so basically the Radar was useless. A week ago I took a screen shot of a huge formation of JU88s leaving Calais while the message on my screen said there was nobody within 15 miles :D

Salmo
Aug-11-2013, 06:12
BLUE BOMBER INSTRUCTIONS:

To destroy red airfields, drop bombs anywhere inside enemy airfield perimeter. You do not have to specifically target buildings or other objects. Dropping bombs on runways & open green landing areas will create craters & make landing difficult for the enemy. Players should get a HUD message indicating airfield damage when bombs are dropped. Please advise if this does not occur.

How it works:

The script keeps track of the total mass of bombs dropped inside each airfield perimeter. When the total bomb mass exceeds 10,000kg per 1,000m of airfield area, then the airfield is totally destroyed.

eg - If you drop a 250kg bomb on an airfield that has an area of 1,000m, then you will do ... 250 / 10,000 * 100 percent (2.5%) damage to the airfield.

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
Aug-11-2013, 06:29
BLUE BOMBER INSTRUCTIONS:
To destroy red airfields, drop bombs anywhere inside enemy airfield perimeter. You do not have to specifically target buildings or other objects. Dropping bombs on runways & open green landing areas will create craters & make landing difficult for the enemy. Players should get a HUD message indicating airfield damage when bombs are dropped. Please advise if this does not occur.
How it works:
The script keeps track of the total mass of bombs dropped inside each airfield perimeter. When the total bomb mass exceeds 10,000kg per 1,000m of airfield area, then the airfield is totally destroyed.
eg - If you drop a 250kg bomb on an airfield that has an area of 1,000m, then you will do ... 250 / 10,000 * 100 percent (2.5%) damage to the airfield.

Can this be added to the mission brief for Blue? It's a very helpful description.

Salmo
Aug-11-2013, 06:39
Can this be added to the mission brief for Blue? It's a very helpful description.

Already done

Kling
Aug-11-2013, 09:00
Have you also already increased the frequency of bombers spawns Salmo?

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
Aug-11-2013, 09:25
Couple more things,

Just had a great time flying this mission Salmo.
The large afield targets are great. There were four of us doing level bombing in the He-111s! We knocked out both Hawkinge and Manston. Such great fun.
Having the large area target will encourage more guys to fly bombers. It's Much closer to the BoB! Best mission on the server to date.


One piece of criticism; (post-edit; this point has been resovled below by Roblex, please ignore it now)
I flew a bombing mission, then retuned to base. After leaving my aircraft, the AI proceeded to take over the plane (He-111) and tried to get it airborne. The A.I then crashed the plane. This contributed +1 to the allied 40 kills required.
There is no incentive to reuturn home, if the AI is just going crash the plane. In fact, it would be better (from an objectives point of view) just to ditch it as soon as the bombs are gone, and grab a new one...

Roblex
Aug-11-2013, 13:06
One piece of criticism;
I flew a bombing mission, then retuned to base. After leaving my aircraft, the AI proceeded to take over the plane (He-111) and tried to get it airborne. The A.I then crashed the plane. This contributed +1 to the allied 40 kills required.
There is no incentive to reuturn home, if the AI is just going crash the plane. In fact, it would be better (from an objectives point of view) just to ditch it as soon as the bombs are gone, and grab a new one...

How do you exit? I have noticed that if you hit Alt-F2 the AI takes over, even with fighters, but if you just hit 'esc' nothing happens. Did you hit Alt-F2 then sit and watch the AI until it crashed?

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
Aug-11-2013, 13:34
How do you exit? I have noticed that if you hit Alt-F2 the AI takes over, even with fighters, but if you just hit 'esc' nothing happens. Did you hit Alt-F2 then sit and watch the AI until it crashed?

ok good tip. I used alt+F2.

Thanks Roblex!

ATAG_Torian
Aug-11-2013, 20:39
+1 to Philstyles +ve comments. This mission is a huge incentive to fly the heavies and a lot of fun to be had by all.
Just one issue was when a He111 spawns in a one of the small aircraft bays at Oye Plage it will hit it's wings on the sides when u try to taxi out and self destruct. Need to put a stationary plane in all those bays otherwise we lose a plane if a heavy spawns there.

Gromit
Aug-12-2013, 06:18
Only had one sortie on this map , but have to say I think it's a big step in the right direction, I intercepted a pair of Ju88's coming in over Dover at 4kft, going like the clappers of hell, it was a race to see who got there first, the bombers hitting Hawkinge, me frantically curving in behind them in my Hurricane , or the 109's coming after me to protect the bombers!

The percentage damage reports of the fields was a great idea, there really is a point to flying bombers when you don't have to bomb point targets, but is it possible to have the craters on rendering the field unusable?, also we must think of a way to reward the bomber pilots for their endeavours as only aircraft kills get recognition and those boys work damned hard to get that big twin into the target area!

No.54 Ghost (KL-G)
Aug-12-2013, 06:57
give them a bloody shovel...

Gromit
Aug-12-2013, 06:59
Your such a help!

Kling
Aug-12-2013, 08:40
Your such a help!

Ghost´s comment is a quote from the movie "Battle of Britain" Gromit! ;)

Gromit
Aug-12-2013, 12:28
Yes I know mate! :thumbsup:

SoW Reddog
Aug-12-2013, 15:29
Why is it always the bloody Dunkirk map when I get home to play! I want to play this bad boy again. Argh!

Kling
Aug-12-2013, 15:44
Why is it always the bloody Dunkirk map when I get home to play! I want to play this bad boy again. Argh!

Same thing for me!

rollingstoned
Aug-12-2013, 16:39
no its the only map where the G50 is viable,i throw da meat balls at the spitfires from my cabriolet!

Dutch
Aug-12-2013, 17:58
no its the only map where the G50 is viable,i throw da meat balls at the spitfires from my cabriolet!

So was it you who collided with my Hurri yesterday? Those things're like invalid carriages on a major road. Weaving and bobbing, you never know what they're gonna do next. It's like following a learner driver on the road. Then his sensible mates in the 109s come up behind and blab ya. Bait, that's all they are, pure fishing bait. :D

SoW Reddog
Aug-13-2013, 02:03
Dunno, bloke in one last night got so scared of the 3 spits following him that he chose to dive into the ground instead. Italian courage for you I suppose.:)

Roblex
Aug-13-2013, 02:12
The percentage damage reports of the fields was a great idea, there really is a point to flying bombers when you don't have to bomb point targets, but is it possible to have the craters on rendering the field unusable?

I am pretty sure the official briefing mentions bombing the runway to make it unusable but I don't think you can see them. I would love to see craters but I think someone said that they cause a big drop in framerate which is the main thing Salmo is trying to avoid.



BLUE BOMBER INSTRUCTIONS:
To destroy red airfields, drop bombs anywhere inside enemy airfield perimeter. You do not have to specifically target buildings or other objects. Dropping bombs on runways & open green landing areas will create craters & make landing difficult for the enemy. Players should get a HUD message indicating airfield damage when bombs are dropped.

ATAG_Bliss
Aug-14-2013, 06:02
Updated version on the server.

Thanks Salmo :salute:

Kling
Aug-14-2013, 06:19
Updated version on the server.

Thanks Salmo :salute:

Thx Bliss and Salmo! Very happy this worked out in the end!!

Bliss can you tell us what has been updated?

1lokos
Aug-14-2013, 08:46
A squad mate ask:


...has a program/​​link showing the ongoing mission in ATAG?
There are some I want to fly, such as "Home Plate", but not that one
more "popular" since I got bored and did not want to open the CloD
only to find that the mission runing is the same one of "two years".

:angel:

Sokol1

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
Aug-14-2013, 08:54
A "current mission" ticker on the website could be a nice addition.

There are also other servers though Skokol, with some nice, different missions....

-Sven-
Aug-14-2013, 19:09
Good mission Salmo! Very much like to fly blue bomber on this map!

III./ZG76_Keller
Aug-14-2013, 19:21
This mission looks amazing! There is one major issue though; every time I spawn a He-111 it despawns 10 minutes into the flight and I'm left hanging in mid-air without a plane.

ATAG_Colander
Aug-14-2013, 19:32
This mission looks amazing! There is one major issue though; every time I spawn a He-111 it despawns 10 minutes into the flight and I'm left hanging in mid-air without a plane.

Do you need more time to bomb your target?

III./ZG76_Keller
Aug-14-2013, 20:19
Give me rocket assist takeoff and climb and I'll see what I can do. :thumbsup:

Dutch
Aug-14-2013, 23:20
There is one major issue though; every time I spawn a He-111 it despawns 10 minutes into the flight and I'm left hanging in mid-air without a plane.

That would be the 'Death-Ray', which the British Government funded Robert Watson-Watt to research in the early to mid 30's. An interesting off-shoot of this was 'RDF', commonly known as 'RADAR'. But it only came to light a couple of years ago, that Watson-Watt did indeed invent a death ray, but it only disintegrated metallic components to their constituent molecules, leaving human flesh unaffected. You must've flown too close to his gaff, mister. :thumbsup:

AKA_Recon
Aug-14-2013, 23:22
Excellent new mission tonight, really enjoyed it.

The % on the damaged airfields was a bonus.

Thanks and I look forward to flying this one some more!

Royraiden
Aug-15-2013, 20:49
Excellent new mission tonight, really enjoyed it.

The % on the damaged airfields was a bonus.

Thanks and I look forward to flying this one some more!

1+ I enjoyed it very much, thanks for your efforts.

ATAG_Freya
Aug-15-2013, 22:30
Great mission! I only did a few runs in a JU-88, but had fun hitting the airfields. ( well I hit them a couple times, I'm still needing practice:))) Can't wait to try other planes/roles, great job Salmo! thankyou!

Little_D
Aug-16-2013, 07:56
Hi Salamo,

maby it is ask before and i dont read it, but there is 1 thing that i whan to know.

As blue pilot you get a lot of info about "bomber recuest escort (P2 0m, P3 0m, etc.) i was wonder all the time what the server want to tell me. than some minutes later i flow over an blue base and saw a human flown bomber taking of and again the messanges comes bomber recusets escord. when i checkt my position and the position from the recuest, i saw i was directly at this position. so means this when ever a human flown bomber take of we get this messanges and know that a human bomber maby needs esecord or was it only randomly?

the best mission so far on ATAG


regards

Little_D

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
Aug-16-2013, 08:01
As blue pilot you get a lot of info about "bomber recuest escort (P2 0m, P3 0m, etc.) i was wonder all the time what the server want to tell me. than some minutes later i flow over an blue base and saw a human flown bomber taking of and again the messanges comes bomber recusets escord. when i checkt my position and the position from the recuest, i saw i was directly at this position. so means this when ever a human flown bomber take of we get this messanges and know that a human bomber maby needs esecord or was it only randomly?


Yes Little_D,

This message means a human has spawned into a bomber! It is beautiful!

I was flying the He-111 in this mission. And so did my squad mates.
When they spawned in, I got this server message.

This will help the friendly escort fighter boys locate the human bombers I think.

Little_D
Aug-16-2013, 08:24
Yes Little_D,

This message means a human has spawned into a bomber! It is beautiful!

I was flying the He-111 in this mission. And so did my squad mates.
When they spawned in, I got this server message.

This will help the friendly escort fighter boys locate the human bombers I think.

Hi Phil,

yes this is great, so lets hope the bomber try more high alt atacks ( over 3000m ) so it makes sence to escord them. a bomber that runs low to the target brings not only him into the playground from the low flying reds, the escord too and sorry to say this i dont risk my pilots live because the bomber need to make a kamikaze atack on the targets. Divebombing atacks from Ju88 and Ju87 is a different thing. there i have to go down with them to protect them.

regards

Little_D

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
Aug-16-2013, 08:29
yes this is great, so lets hope the bomber try more high alt atacks ( over 3000m ) so it makes sence to escord them.

Next time this mission is up, and we are both online, I will fly a He-111 at 3,000m+. I will let you know on TS, or on the chat bar.

Little_D
Aug-16-2013, 08:33
Hi Phil,

nice :), my wingman and me, will do our best to bring you save to the target and back home.

regards

Little_D

ATAG_Bliss
Aug-16-2013, 11:57
Great job Salmo! Looks like this is a hit!

How's everyone doing as far as stutters/lag? I noticed there were almost 70 players on it yesterday, and from the server side everything looked really good.

Talisman
Aug-16-2013, 15:53
I logged on to the ATAG server tonight to fly the 1940 historically correct Spitfire with a Rotol propeller and 100 Octane fuel (designated in CloD as the Spit 1a (100 Octane); however, I could not find this aircraft on the map, even though it is the most common front line Spitfire type that flew in 1940. Is it available or did I miss it?

I noticed that the Hurricane was available with Rotol propeller and 100 Octane fuel, but not the Spitfire that used the same Rotol propeller system and 100 Octane fuel as the Hurricane.

I also noticed that the Me 109 E3 that the Spitfire with the Rotol propeller and 100 Octane fuel flew against in 1940 was on the map and freely available to blue pilots.

I stand to be corrected if wrong, and I hope I am, but it would appear that a constant speed propeller is made available to the Hurricane with 100 Octane fuel, but not the Spitfire with 100 Octane fuel. Also, the most common Spitfire type appears to be missing!

To say that I was disappointed is an understatement, so I logged off to fly on another server.

So my question is, did I miss seeing the most common front line Spitfire type from 1940 on this map, or has it been missed off for some reason?

Happy landings,

Talisman

SoW Reddog
Aug-16-2013, 17:06
That was a bit OTT don't you think talisman?

I suspect that the lack of 1a 100oct is down to the switching off of the plane upgrading for performance reasons?

ATAG_Snapper
Aug-16-2013, 17:35
Hmm, I think Talisman's question on planesets, specifically referencing the Spitfire 1a 100 octane variant is a reasonable query in pursuant to Salmos's post #20 in this thread.

The planeset composition is Salmo's decision in this excellent mission, but I'm curious, too, why the ubiquitous Spit 1a 100 octane -- a very close match to the 109 E3 -- would be left out if that indeed is the case. Salmo's call, though.

Salute,

Snapper :salute:

Talisman
Aug-16-2013, 18:20
That was a bit OTT don't you think talisman?

I suspect that the lack of 1a 100oct is down to the switching off of the plane upgrading for performance reasons?

Do you really think it is unreasonable to ask why the most historically common front line version of the Spitfire is not available from the start when the most common front line versions of other aircraft are? Why should the red team start this map without a plane type that was the most representative of the time? I am just seeking some clarification. Perhaps it is available but I could not find it. On the other hand, if it is not what is the justification for providing red with Spitfires that were predominantly pre war versions as far as the RAF is concerned? Are these not valid questions?

ATAG_Bliss
Aug-16-2013, 18:30
Hmm, I think Talisman's question on planesets, specifically referencing the Spitfire 1a 100 octane variant is a reasonable query in pursuant to Salmos's post #20 in this thread.

The planeset composition is Salmo's decision in this excellent mission, but I'm curious, too, why the ubiquitous Spit 1a 100 octane -- a very close match to the 109 E3 -- would be left out if that indeed is the case. Salmo's call, though.

Salute,

Snapper :salute:

If I were to guess its because the mission originally allowed you to work up to / unlock the planesets as you go. I would imagine it was just a very simple oversight to not have the 100oct 1a.

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
Aug-16-2013, 19:03
So my question is, did I miss seeing the most common front line Spitfire type from 1940 on this map, or has it been missed off for some reason?



I think the mission was originally going to have dynamic aircraft upgrades. With the limited plane-set available it would have been natural to remove the "newest" two (1a and 2a, and the E4 and E4/N).


However, upgrades are not enabled (scripting?) so, as Bliss said, probably just an oversight.

Talisman
Aug-17-2013, 13:56
If I were to guess its because the mission originally allowed you to work up to / unlock the planesets as you go. I would imagine it was just a very simple oversight to not have the 100oct 1a.

I sincerely hope that the oversight can be corrected at the earliest opportunity because without the Spit 1a 100 Octane the RAF side is not being treated fairly in terms of the technology it historically deployed during this time of the war. Since this is a competitive combat flight sim mission based on historical conflict between the RAF and the German and Italian air forces, it is very disappointing to see that the RAF is being put at a disadvantage in this way.

Kling
Aug-17-2013, 14:01
Well since Salmo has stoped replying in this thread we can all speculate as much as we want to...

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
Aug-17-2013, 14:46
Well since Salmo has stoped replying in this thread...

lol, give him some time... ;)

Talisman
Aug-17-2013, 15:13
I think the mission was originally going to have dynamic aircraft upgrades. With the limited plane-set available it would have been natural to remove the "newest" two (1a and 2a, and the E4 and E4/N).


However, upgrades are not enabled (scripting?) so, as Bliss said, probably just an oversight.

I hope that the oversight will be corrected soon. However, I do not agree with your remark that it would be "natural" to remove the newest two re upgrades. Natural in what way? Certainly not from an historic perspective and certainly not from a fairness perspective as far as I can see. I see no natural correlation rule of use between the version of the Spitfire that was the most common for 1940 (took part in BoF at Dunkirk and was the mainstay of the Spitfire force for the whole of the BoB) and the introduction of the E4 and the E4/N later in the BoB. Using such thinking I shudder to think what some map makers would produce in terms of plane set if CloD was to introduce another fighter aircraft version.

If a map maker makes a map for a competitive combat flight sim that is historically based, for example RAF vs German and Italian air forces 1940, then I think the map makers should be obliged to provide the plane set that flew at the time and introduce upgrades and new aircraft in accordance with the real time line, other wise one side or the other will be disadvantaged in terms of the historical time line and the planes available at that time. Please note that a competitive combat flight sim like this cannot be balanced as history is not balanced and there can be no proper balance in plane sets when the air forces fighting against each other have different aircraft. So lets just have a fair time line please. I am sure the LW pilots are looking forward to the FW 190 and would not wish to be deprived of its use in the correct place and time.

However, balance can be attained by flying servers that do not pit historic air force plane sets against historic plane set, but rather pit Red team against Blue team with all or same aircraft types on the sim available to each team. Also the geography of the map for one team would need to be the mirror of the geography for the other team. So, with this sort of set-up balance is possible.

I assume that most of us who fly ATAG are looking for the competitive combat flight sim experience that pits historical air forces against historical air forces, rather than red team vs blue team with total balance; I stand to be corrected on that if opinion is shown otherwise. Therefore, I for one would like to see ATAG map makers making aircraft available in accordance with the historical air force plane set of the day (as long as the flight models are accepted as reasonably accurate) rather than a make believe version of the historical air forces depicted. I believe that a competitive combat map needs some sort of integrity and objectivity in its making, otherwise it will be seen as unfair and can be the cause of friction. It is easy for the red team vs blue team maps to have integrity using the production model I have describe above, but it is not so easy to produce other types of map with integrity unless a few good principles are followed me thinks.

Perhaps this should be the topic of a new thread. What standard of mission maps to we expect and should maps accepted on ATAG abide by certain principles of fairness, when reasonably practicable, in terms of the competitive playing field between historical air forces and plane sets?

I am already embarrassed enough when introducing new players to CloD, as I have to explain about the shortcomings of the CloD due to the mistakes of the original developers. But to then have to explain that on one of the best CloD servers we are unable to actually fly the Spitfire version that was the mainstay of the Spitfire force in the BoB is a double embarrassment; especially when that is the version he has practised on and is familiar with. Lucky I have some good news for him about TF and there are other servers to go to and fly the common BoB version Spitfire.

Happy landings,

Talisman

Talisman
Aug-17-2013, 15:18
Well since Salmo has stoped replying in this thread we can all speculate as much as we want to...

Why has he stopped replying?

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
Aug-17-2013, 15:23
. However, I do not agree with your remark that it would be "natural" to remove the newest two re upgrades. Natural in what way? Certainly not from an historic perspective and certainly not from a fairness perspective as far as I can see. n

Ouf...Well what would you suggest in order to provide a progressive "upgrade" in plane-sets?

Talisman
Aug-17-2013, 15:55
Ouf...Well what would you suggest in order to provide a progressive "upgrade" in plane-sets?

I should not need to suggest anything. Just follow the history in order of introduction. For example upgrade to Spit 2 after the Spit 1a (100 Octane). Follow same for LW aircraft in order of introduction. Start at the proper beginning and don't distort the history is all I ask. If the RAF only had one upgrade in the time frame then so be it. It the LW had more, then so be it. What is the problem with starting at the proper beginning and following the order? Also, progressive upgrade is ok, but not the be all and end all that should drive everything else and distort the historic air force plane set; IMHO of course.

P.S.

Phil, what is Ouf? I am an old git and not up to date with all this short text stuff you young ones use, LOL.

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
Aug-17-2013, 16:21
For example upgrade to Spit 2 after the Spit 1a (100 Octane). Follow same for LW aircraft in order of introduction. Start at the proper beginning and don't distort the history is all I ask. If the RAF only had one upgrade in the time frame then so be it. It the LW had more, then so be it. What is the problem with starting at the proper beginning and following the order? Also, progressive upgrade is ok, but not the be all and end all that should drive everything else and distort the historic air force plane set;

(emphasis added by me)

Well I think the idea was to have multiple upgrades... at least that's what I recall from earlier version of similar missions by Salmo.
Having just the one might be historical.. but less of a "feature" mission wise. But, hey ho.... This is partly where strict adherence to historical sets can be a burden. nearly two years now of playing the same plane-set.. on essentially the same map, repeating the same 3 or 4 months of history.... one can surely understand why mission makers might chose plane-set variation in order to try and add some diversity

Anyway, hopefully this will be a moot point if more air planes become available soon. Then upgrades can add to both 9!) improving existing capability as well as introducing aircraft that add new capability (i.e. different roles)

"Ouf" - say it out loud in a low voice, with High Rising Terminal.

SoW Reddog
Aug-17-2013, 17:54
Talisman, I understand exactly where you seem to be coming from as can be seen from my posts on other missions.

I simply wonder at the tone of the posts you've made. It occurs to me that they are unnecessarily uptight in their appearance and suggest an "entitlement" which none of us have. Atag can only host the missions they're given.

9./JG26_Brigg
Aug-17-2013, 18:57
flew the mission for the first time tonight and have mixed feelings towards it to be honest. firstly i quite liked the fact that the blues were attacking the airfields instead of some random target in the middle of nowhere as it felt a bit more realistic.:thumbsup: however what i didnt like was the fact that i had to unlock the spitfire mostly used by the raf as i find it adds a feeling of cheese to the game aswell as not been historically correct. :( i mean if i want to unlock something then i can go on the playstation. all in all it is good that people like you are taking time to make extra missions and breath more life into the sim and for that i applaud you:clap:

Kling
Aug-17-2013, 19:03
flew the mission for the first time tonight and have mixed feelings towards it to be honest. firstly i quite liked the fact that the blues were attacking the airfields instead of some random target in the middle of nowhere as it felt a bit more realistic.:thumbsup: however what i didnt like was the fact that i had to unlock the spitfire mostly used by the raf as i find it adds a feeling of cheese to the game aswell as not been historically correct. :( i mean iof i want to unlock something then i will go on the playstation.

You dont have to unlock it as its simply isnt an option yet. Im sure its a mistake from the mission designers side to not have the Spit a(100 oct) in the map.
The unlocking function is not activated yet.

Kling
Aug-17-2013, 19:05
Why has he stopped replying?

No idea, but he hasn't replied for a week..

9./JG26_Brigg
Aug-17-2013, 19:10
You dont have to unlock it as its simply isnt an option yet. Im sure its a mistake from the mission designers side to not have the Spit a(100 oct) in the map.
The unlocking function is not activated yet.
oh ok my bad i must of read something wrong somewhere.

ATAG_Bliss
Aug-17-2013, 19:16
Since Salmo must be busy right now, I'm going to add the 1a 100oct right now to the mission. If it's not supposed to be there (based on Salmo) I will remove it.

Edit: Mission Updated

Salmo
Aug-17-2013, 19:33
Since Salmo must be busy right now, I'm going to add the 1a 100oct right now to the mission. If it's not supposed to be there (based on Salmo) I will remove it.

Edit: Mission Updated

Remove it please Bliss ..... [edit by author]

ATAG_Snapper
Aug-17-2013, 20:28
This thread is closed until tempers have cooled.

This mission was designed, built, and generously provided to ATAG by Salmo. His decisions on how it is run, including planesets, are his.

I ask that everyone treat fellow forum members with respect at all times.

Edit: Back open!

ATAG_Bliss
Aug-18-2013, 02:41
Several more features have been turned on including plane upgrades. So within the 1st hour of the mission you all should have access to E4/B and 1a 100oct, along with other features.

Please leave feedback on any performance issues good or bad.

And please try to be kind. There's not many mission builders in this game, and it's not easy to build a good working mission either. Just think about that before you comment. We all want constructive feedback, whether it be positive or negative. Just try to keep the insults out it. :salute:

indyscout
Aug-18-2013, 04:13
I have only played the mission once, but I could not find an Bf109-E1. Is there any particular reason for this? Only the E3 model was avalible (due to the aircraft unlocking system being disabled). I would assume the E1 would be unlocked if the E3 is.

Salmo
Aug-18-2013, 05:02
Planeset in this mission is as follows ....

RAF
BlenheimMkIV
HurricaneMkI_100oct
SpitfireMkI_100oct ... upgrades to SpitfireMkIa_100oct during the battle

LW
Bf-109E-3 ... upgrades to Bf-109E-3B during the battle
Bf-110C-4 ... upgrades to Bf-110C-7 during the battle
BR-20M
He-111H-2
He-111P-2
Ju-87B-2
Ju-88A-1

9./JG52 Lopp
Aug-18-2013, 11:46
I recently received a book about the Spitfire which is very interesting. Spitfire the History by Eric B Morgan and Edward Shacklady.

Some pilots keep posting that 100oct fuel was the main fuel for Spits in 1940. According to this book 100oct didn't become available until Sept. 1940 and then only to 16 fighter sqds and two twin engine bomber sqds.

I can quote word for word if necessary.

ATAG_Snapper
Aug-18-2013, 12:13
I recently received a book about the Spitfire which is very interesting. Spitfire the History by Eric B Morgan and Edward Shacklady.

Some pilots keep posting that 100oct fuel was the main fuel for Spits in 1940. According to this book 100oct didn't become available until Sept. 1940 and then only to 16 fighter sqds and two twin engine bomber sqds.

I can quote word for word if necessary.

No, you're not.

You obviously missed the 100 octane debacle at the 1C Forum. It will not be repeated here.

Kling
Aug-18-2013, 12:14
Salmo I would like to report what might be a bug.
Yesterday I saw two bomber formations at 16 000 feet over Calais hdg towards Hawkinge. One of them suddenly veered of towards the french point and disappeared and I decided to follow the other one that kept going towards England. As I caught up with them just after reaching England i realised that they were Bf110s. 9 of them flying straight and level as if they were level bombers. They made a right turn over Hawkinge and set course towards Eastchurch and at no point did they drop any bombs.

Is this a bug and were they actually supposed to be he111, ju88, Do17s? Or were they simplu 110s on a fighter sweep??
Anyway just wanted to hear your opinion...
Thx for a great map

Old_Canuck
Aug-19-2013, 02:26
Played this for the first time today and for the session I was on it seemed there was action from Hawkinge to Eastchurch. After helping out with high alt bombers East of Hawinge and spawning in a hanger at Manston it was cool to see 3 low flying LW bombers cratering the runway and later two 109s making a head on firing pass with a Spit near Ramsgate. Good fun.

Greywing
Aug-19-2013, 02:55
Nice one Salmo. Played it for the first time today also and really enjoyed it.

Cheers Greywing

Salmo
Aug-19-2013, 03:26
Salmo I would like to report what might be a bug.
Yesterday I saw two bomber formations at 16 000 feet over Calais hdg towards Hawkinge. One of them suddenly veered of towards the french point and disappeared and I decided to follow the other one that kept going towards England. As I caught up with them just after reaching England i realised that they were Bf110s. 9 of them flying straight and level as if they were level bombers. They made a right turn over Hawkinge and set course towards Eastchurch and at no point did they drop any bombs.

Is this a bug and were they actually supposed to be he111, ju88, Do17s? Or were they simplu 110s on a fighter sweep??
Anyway just wanted to hear your opinion...
Thx for a great map

You will find that in most battles, the mission builder will spawn-in an Ai flight (from a sub-mission file) after some predetermined period of time. It's the same sub-mission file with the same Ai planes, same skills, same bomb loads, same targets etc. Thus you get Ai flights with highly predicable flight-paths & characteristics. ie. After a while, you'll 'know' where the Do17's spawn & where they're heading.

I don't like this method at all. It's far too immersion-killing for me. Let me explain how the Ai flights work in my battles, it's very different to how other mission builders spawn their Ai's ...

* Waypoints & targets: Ai waypoints are taken from a mission file randomly selected from about 14 possible mission files. The type of LW aircraft, the aircraft skill level & loadout in the selected file are all ignored, only the waypoints & target objectives are used. However, because I dislike bombers that bomb exactly the same spot (same XY target waypoint in the mission file), my script will randomly select a new XY target coordinate that varies by (say) 200m from the designated spot in the selected mission file. This is why the AI bombers in Op. Home Plate do not bomb exactly the same position on an airfield time & time again.

* Bomber type: The script itself determines the LW aircraft type based upon the approximate frequency of LW aircraft types in mid-1940. Here's the % chance for each LW bomber type:

He111_H2 = 50.5% chance
Do17Z1 = 26.9% chance
Ju88A1 = 2.6% chance
Bf110C7 = 15.2% chance
BR20 = 4.7% chance

* Fighter escort type: If the bombers in the randomly selected mission (step 1) have escorting fighter aircraft, then the fighter aircraft type in the mission is ignored & a different randomly selected fighter type is chosen by the script based upon the approximate frequency of LW fighter aircraft types in mid-1940. The escort fighter type matric is as follows:

Bf-109E-1 = 43.5% chance
Bf-109E-3 = 44.1% chance
CR42 = 3.7% chance
Bf-110C-4 = 8.7% chance

* Aircrew skill levels: The script code then goes through every aircrew position in every aircraft (pilot, gunners etc) & randomly allocates a skill level to that position. Here's the skill probability matrix:

Rookie = 25% chance
Average = 45% chance
Veteran = 25% chance
Ace = 5% chance

* Loadout: The script code detects which LW bomber type has been chosen, & then will randomly select an appropriate bomb loadout for that aircraft type. eg. A Ju88A may be loaded with just front bomb bay bombs, or just with rear bomb bay bombs or with both front & rear bomb bays loaded, or even perhaps both bomb bays & wing racks loaded. Bomb weight is also randomised, so bombs may be 250kg or 500kg or some other weight appropriate for the aircraft type. In addition to bomb loadout variability, the gunner loadouts are also randomised from available ammo types.

* Constructing the AI mission: The script then uses all this randomised information to dynamically create a new mission file. It is this file that is loaded into the battle when an Ai flight spawns-in.

* This means that even I have no way to know exactly what bomber types, fighter escort types, waypoints, targets, aircrew skill-mix, or loadout any particular AI flight will have.

In the case sited above, it sounds like the Bf110's were not loaded with bombs & they were sent on a scouting flight. This is not a game bug, it's exactly how the randomised Ai flight system is supposed to work.

Just to highlight the range of variability & unpredictability the Ai spawning system offers, I have encountered a flight of Bf110's between Manston & Hawkinge. Instead of flying their usual waypoints pattern, I've seen them dive down & straff ground targets at these airfields. I did not code them or build a sub-mission for them to do this. They did this on their own based upon the randomisation that the Ai flight building script system provides.

I hope you can see that it's possible to get Ju87's escorted by Bf110's; or perhaps He111's escorted by CR42's or any number of possible combinations of Ai flight configurations.

Kling
Aug-19-2013, 07:10
You will find that in most battles, the mission builder will spawn-in an Ai flight (from a sub-mission file) after some predetermined period of time. It's the same sub-mission file with the same Ai planes, same skills, same bomb loads, same targets etc. Thus you get Ai flights with highly predicable flight-paths & characteristics. ie. After a while, you'll 'know' where the Do17's spawn & where they're heading.

I don't like this method at all. It's far too immersion-killing for me. Let me explain how the Ai flights work in my battles, it's very different to how other mission builders spawn their Ai's ...

* Waypoints & targets: Ai waypoints are taken from a mission file randomly selected from about 14 possible mission files. The type of LW aircraft, the aircraft skill level & loadout in the selected file are all ignored, only the waypoints & target objectives are used. However, because I dislike bombers that bomb exactly the same spot (same XY target waypoint in the mission file), my script will randomly select a new XY target coordinate that varies by (say) 200m from the designated spot in the selected mission file. This is why the AI bombers in Op. Home Plate do not bomb exactly the same position on an airfield time & time again.

* Bomber type: The script itself determines the LW aircraft type based upon the approximate frequency of LW aircraft types in mid-1940. Here's the % chance for each LW bomber type:

He111_H2 = 50.5% chance
Do17Z1 = 26.9% chance
Ju88A1 = 2.6% chance
Bf110C7 = 15.2% chance
BR20 = 4.7% chance

* Fighter escort type: If the bombers in the randomly selected mission (step 1) have escorting fighter aircraft, then the fighter aircraft type in the mission is ignored & a different randomly selected fighter type is chosen by the script based upon the approximate frequency of LW fighter aircraft types in mid-1940. The escort fighter type matric is as follows:

Bf-109E-1 = 43.5% chance
Bf-109E-3 = 44.1% chance
CR42 = 3.7% chance
Bf-110C-4 = 8.7% chance

* Aircrew skill levels: The script code then goes through every aircrew position in every aircraft (pilot, gunners etc) & randomly allocates a skill level to that position. Here's the skill probability matrix:

Rookie = 25% chance
Average = 45% chance
Veteran = 25% chance
Ace = 5% chance

* Loadout: The script code detects which LW bomber type has been chosen, & then will randomly select an appropriate bomb loadout for that aircraft type. eg. A Ju88A may be loaded with just front bomb bay bombs, or just with rear bomb bay bombs or with both front & rear bomb bays loaded, or even perhaps both bomb bays & wing racks loaded. Bomb weight is also randomised, so bombs may be 250kg or 500kg or some other weight appropriate for the aircraft type. In addition to bomb loadout variability, the gunner loadouts are also randomised from available ammo types.

* Constructing the AI mission: The script then uses all this randomised information to dynamically create a new mission file. It is this file that is loaded into the battle when an Ai flight spawns-in.

* This means that even I have no way to know exactly what bomber types, fighter escort types, waypoints, targets, aircrew skill-mix, or loadout any particular AI flight will have.

In the case sited above, it sounds like the Bf110's were not loaded with bombs & they were sent on a scouting flight. This is not a game bug, it's exactly how the randomised Ai flight system is supposed to work.

Just to highlight the range of variability & unpredictability the Ai spawning system offers, I have encountered a flight of Bf110's between Manston & Hawkinge. Instead of flying their usual waypoints pattern, I've seen them dive down & straff ground targets at these airfields. I did not code them or build a sub-mission for them to do this. They did this on their own based upon the randomisation that the Ai flight building script system provides.

I hope you can see that it's possible to get Ju87's escorted by Bf110's; or perhaps He111's escorted by CR42's or any number of possible combinations of Ai flight configurations.

Ok that explains!!
Thx!

Gromit
Aug-20-2013, 05:37
Had an hour or so on this mission last night with 50+ players, love the mission but I feel it needs a slight edit, I fly Hurricanes but starting red team with Spit1 100oct seems to be a mistake when the Luftwaffe is starting with E3 not E1, we had all but one guy last night in E3 brawling over Hawkinge/Lympne, Blue team seems to have noted the performance difference and all gone dogfighting, It would be more "balanced " to start the Blue team with E1.

Just my observation.

Kling
Aug-20-2013, 06:03
Had an hour or so on this mission last night with 50+ players, love the mission but I feel it needs a slight edit, I fly Hurricanes but starting red team with Spit1 100oct seems to be a mistake when the Luftwaffe is starting with E3 not E1, we had all but one guy last night in E3 brawling over Hawkinge/Lympne, Blue team seems to have noted the performance difference and all gone dogfighting, It would be more "balanced " to start the Blue team with E1.

Just my observation.

As a blue player I wouldnt object to this... at all!

Or let the red have the Spit1a100oct o from the start but then also blue team the 109E3B from the start.. Then the upgrade can be towards the SpitII and the 109E4...
Anyway, Good job Salmo! This seems to be becoming the most appreciated map currently!
My respect!

SoW Reddog
Aug-20-2013, 07:29
I had a flight on this mission a few nights ago now, and noticed that the 109 spit furball over hawkinge with jabo's coming in to bomb the airfield seems to be taking over again. Can we make the aircraft needed to be killed for the reds, bombers only, forcing the blues to actually escort them? I spawned at manston, climbed up and took on 9 111's unescorted with another couple of spits.

Gromit
Aug-20-2013, 07:48
Surely you need the blue strikers flying Stukas , Ju88's etc, rather than E3b for this to work properly?

SoW Reddog
Aug-20-2013, 09:01
Well I've seen more human flown bombers on this map than any other "casual" mission so from that perspective it's good, but lately there seems to be a jabo faction.

9./JG26_Brigg
Aug-20-2013, 14:58
Surely you need the blue strikers flying Stukas , Ju88's etc, rather than E3b for this to work properly?

yes i agree with you gromit, in order to make it a more realistic scenario take the option of bombs off all the fighters and make using a bomber the only way blues can destroy an airfield and then they would have to escort them to the target.

Salmo
Aug-21-2013, 01:56
yes i agree with you gromit, in order to make it a more realistic scenario take the option of bombs off all the fighters and make using a bomber the only way blues can destroy an airfield and then they would have to escort them to the target.

Just some comments:

* Blue starts with Bf109E3's (& other plane types) at bases.
* A Bf103E3b's is not available until after at least 1 hour into the battle.
* Becuase airbase upgrades are random, it's possible that blue would not get a Bf109E3b until after 1 1/2 or even 2 hours (or perhaps even longer) into the 5hr battle.
* Maximum bombload on a Bf109E3b is a SC250kg bomb, which does approx 2.5% damage to an airfield.
* Most heavy bombers will carry a bomb load that can do much more than 2.5% damage to an airfield, but ultimately it's the players choice to go Jabo or heavy.
* You cannot force fighter pilots to fly a heavy bomber or vice versa.

SoW Reddog
Aug-21-2013, 03:41
* You cannot force fighter pilots to fly a heavy bomber or vice versa.

True you can't. However you could force them to escort by making jabo's unavailable full stop. It might only do 2.5% damage, but when you've got flights of 5 coming in at a time, the damage racks up quite quickly and it's very difficult to stop them given the visibility issues at present.

Talisman
Aug-21-2013, 06:21
True you can't. However you could force them to escort by making jabo's unavailable full stop. It might only do 2.5% damage, but when you've got flights of 5 coming in at a time, the damage racks up quite quickly and it's very difficult to stop them given the visibility issues at present.

Reddog,

You and others are probably wasting your time with providing objective and fair feedback on this map, because with some map makers it can all fall on deaf ears and we have to accept that or use a different mission/server. Some map makers want to provide a non-historical mission without a level playing field, that gives the advantage to one of the sides, for various reasons, to achieve a mission outcomes that they are looking for. With this particular map we appear to be stuck with what Salmo wants and possibly what the side with the advantage enjoys. I find that as grateful as I am to map makers, they each inevitably have different styles, approaches and intentions, so we have to take the rough with the smooth. I have recognised the map for what it is and moved on.

Happy landings,

Talisman

Kling
Aug-21-2013, 06:26
Reddog,

You and others are probably wasting your time with providing objective and fair feedback on this map, because with some map makers it can all fall on deaf ears and we have to accept that or use a different mission/server. Some map makers want to provide a non-historical mission without a level playing field, that gives the advantage to one of the sides, for various reasons, to achieve a mission outcomes that they are looking for. With this particular map we appear to be stuck with what Salmo wants and possibly what the side with the advantage enjoys. I find that as grateful as I am to map makers, they each inevitably have different styles, approaches and intentions, so we have to take the rough with the smooth. I have recognised the map for what it is and moved on.

Happy landings,

Talisman

which side would you say has an advantage on this map?! I find it very balanced. Its a great map!

Talisman
Aug-21-2013, 06:54
which side would you say has an advantage on this map?! I find it very balanced. Its a great map!

LOL Kling, a few posts back you said you were a "blue player" (not sure if that means only blue and never red though) so perhaps you are kind of proving my point.

Happy "blue" landings,

Talisman

Kling
Aug-21-2013, 07:23
LOL Kling, a few posts back you said you were a "blue player" (not sure if that means only blue and never red though) so perhaps you are kind of proving my point.

Happy "blue" landings,

Talisman

Oh no I prefer Blue but mainly because I have a weak spot fot the 109 and because BnZ is my style of fighting butI happily fly red when I must. Although I can agree that I feel untouchable when flying the 109 its more due to my fighting style than due to the enemy planeset. For me it does not matter if reds have spitA100oct or not. They simply wont touch me until I screw up or am bounced by an unseen enemy.
Anyway reds have a tendency to always and always circle of Hawkinge and never leave the area no matter if there are any blues there. this puts them as disadvantage from the start as the 109s can simply pick them off at will.
If reds would make it out across the channel and climb and instead pick off 109s and incoming bombers then the situation would change.
When I fly red and pass by Hawkinge I often wonder what all the Spitfires are doing there low and slow just turning checking each other out over and over again until a 109 swoops in and long after this 109 is gone the spits and hurris will circle and circle and suspisiously check each other out sometime for many minutes until the next 109 swoops in.
Low and slow, any plane is at disadvantage. i tend to fly my Spit as a BnZ plane and when i do, blues cant catch me so its up to people if they want to be at disadvantage from the start.
On one point I agree with you however, the 109 is clearly superior to the Hurricane(although I believe the hurricane will get some more power and better turning in the next patch) and therefor I wouldnt mind seeing more 109E1s vs early spits and Hurris.
maybe have the 109E3 base alot further inland on the French side to promote people to take the 109 E1?

regards

SoW Reddog
Aug-21-2013, 08:34
Although I can agree that I feel untouchable when flying the 109

You weren't untouchable last night when I got you over Hawkinge :D

Talisman, I don't think the map has been deliberately designed to be biased, in fact I think it's been deliberately over engineered to provide a sort of RPG element with the upgrades and extra features which I personally don't like and wouldn't mind if they were removed. Salmo's put an incredible amount of time into the scripts behind the mission and quite rightly wants to use them.

I was working on a similar idea (although much stripped down to be area targets and bombers being the victory conditions) which I've stopped to see where Salmo goes with his mission as its already released. I've long thought that most ATAG missions feel the same, except the actual target locations, so wouldn't want to end up following down the same route copying Salmo's ideas.

Kling
Aug-21-2013, 08:37
You weren't untouchable last night when I got you over Hawkinge

Bastard!!! :P
You gave me one hell of a shock, i looked back and saw a spit sitting right on my tail 20m behind. Well i did what i could and cut the power to make u overshoot and hope my wingman could come down and take care of you but it was too late as u hit my radiator when we started scissoring ;)

SoW Reddog
Aug-21-2013, 08:56
Yeah, did you also have the "oh shit" moment watching me come straight at you and unable to turn away? I didn't see what happened to you, but I lost a wing and bailed, did you explode?

ATAG_Snapper
Aug-21-2013, 09:14
Kling has called it 100% right IMHO. Please don't feed the vultures. Predictable gets you dead.

AKA_Knutsac
Aug-21-2013, 18:10
Nice mission Salmo. I love the randomization scripts...helps with immersion not knowing exactly where or what type of AI you'll run into, or whether they're escorted by AI or real pilots. Also, mission goals encourage actual BoB tactics. Thanks!

~S~

AKA_Knutsac

Kling
Aug-21-2013, 22:27
Yeah, did you also have the "oh shit" moment watching me come straight at you and unable to turn away? I didn't see what happened to you, but I lost a wing and bailed, did you explode?

i wasnt aware that we were about to collide with each other until i felt my plane jump a bit. I completely exploded and that was it.
Youre still a bastard for interfering while im peacefully strafing Lympne.. :P

ATAG_Freya
Aug-22-2013, 00:17
scrubbed this post, sorry!

Gromit
Aug-22-2013, 10:00
:laugh:

Klunker
Aug-22-2013, 17:36
This mission map is really a lot of fun. It came as a great surprise the first time I joined a flight of Blue bombers to provide escort and discovered there were already AI 109's providing Escort. It was also great fun the first time I tried to attack a Blue bomber formation and got jumped by the whole AI escort group. The AI 109's chased me down from 18k to the deck and never let up until i had to bail. I've flown as both Blue and Red and find I like the Red game better due to all the targets and action provided by the multiple bomber streams and AI escorts.

I suppose it's a game AI design issue, but I have noticed that once the AI fighters begin to RTB they don't put up a fight from pursuing enemy fighters. If this could be changed it would add more to the game.

It would also be better if the Radar control function worked. I've had visual sighting of bomber raids with no Radar indicated.

It seems like a faster paced action packed game and I thank you for the the fun mission map!

Gromit
Aug-23-2013, 09:09
Can I suggest increasing the number of blue aircraft required to be destroyed to 60 as red have won this map each time I have played it without having an airfield put out of action yet!

I suspect this is partly to do with the number of blues in 109e3 not bombers but also the number of targets available when you include the AI.

Great mission, this works really well!

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
Aug-23-2013, 09:15
each time I have played it without having an airfield put out of action yet!

!

Hmmm, I've been on the blue winning side two times recently. With HE111s the bases don't last long.

A concerted effort from 5 He111 pilots with some 109 escort can bring the reds to their knees!

Kling
Aug-23-2013, 09:57
Can I suggest increasing the number of blue aircraft required to be destroyed to 60 as red have won this map each time I have played it without having an airfield put out of action yet!

I suspect this is partly to do with the number of blues in 109e3 not bombers but also the number of targets available when you include the AI.

Great mission, this works really well!

this is my observation as well and I suggested the exact same a few pagesback...

Roblex
Aug-23-2013, 10:53
Last time I played the map Reds lost because the 109 sweep was dragging down any high CAP then the high bombers were shutting the field without anyone being able to stop them as they no longer need to descend into the danger zone. Admittedly the Reds only needed a small number of planes to win themselves so it may be that more aircraft are needed for Red to win. Alternatively, stop the blue using fighters to bomb and only count bomber kills for Red.

SoW Reddog
Aug-23-2013, 11:03
stop the blue using fighters to bomb and only count bomber kills for red.

this.

spud3030
Aug-25-2013, 07:31
+1 that would be good , it's my favorite mission as it is.
Great work Salmo

thanks ATAG

spud


Last time I played the map Reds lost because the 109 sweep was dragging down any high CAP then the high bombers were shutting the field without anyone being able to stop them as they no longer need to descend into the danger zone. Admittedly the Reds only needed a small number of planes to win themselves so it may be that more aircraft are needed for Red to win. Alternatively, stop the blue using fighters to bomb and only count bomber kills for Red.

III./ZG76_Keller
Sep-10-2013, 20:25
Salmo, love the mission but the He-111H-2 still despawns 5-10 minutes after creating the plane. I've yet to be able to use a 111H on this mission and it's getting very frustrating.

Klunker
Sep-11-2013, 21:24
Played this mission today as Blue and wonder if there's a bug in the program. According to the brief the Blue forces only need to destroy 4 coastal airports. Today we destroyed Manston, lympne, Hawkinge, and Littlestone but did not get a victory. We were left wondering if we also needed to take out EastChurch as well since it was listed in the briefing as a designated coastal airport target?

Also have a suggestion:

It would be good if there was an additional German bomber base at Tramecourt in order to provide at least one sanctuary for take off. The Ju88 bomber bases are too close together and too close to areas that Red forces can CAP over. Flying a Ju88 I was attacked shortly after take off from one, and on take off from the other two Ju88 bases. All within a period of less than five or ten minutes.

AKA_Recon
Sep-12-2013, 00:37
Alternatively, stop the blue using fighters to bomb and only count bomber kills for Red.

+1 perfect :)

Roblex
Sep-12-2013, 02:59
Now I have played it a few more times I can report that, as long as both sides have reasonable numbers, it always seems to end in a very close finish which would seem to indicate the map is quite evenly matched as it stands. On the other hand, I have not seem the usual Blue organisation on this map so the Reds are racking up kills because there is no escort on the AI. It seems Blue are more interested in flying their own bombers and fighter bombers and dogfighting over Hawkinge. What we have is a race to see if Red can shoot down all the AI bombers quicker than Blue can bomb the airfields with human bombers. If Blue started escorting the AI bombers they would win almost every map.

Klunker
Sep-12-2013, 16:58
Now I have played it a few more times I can report that, as long as both sides have reasonable numbers, it always seems to end in a very close finish which would seem to indicate the map is quite evenly matched as it stands. On the other hand, I have not seem the usual Blue organisation on this map so the Reds are racking up kills because there is no escort on the AI. It seems Blue are more interested in flying their own bombers and fighter bombers and dogfighting over Hawkinge. What we have is a race to see if Red can shoot down all the AI bombers quicker than Blue can bomb the airfields with human bombers. If Blue started escorting the AI bombers they would win almost every map.

I've only had limited experience with this map, but the few times I have flown as Red, the Blue AI bombers already had anywhere's from 4 to 10 AI fighter escorts which do a pretty good job defending the bombers. However, the last time I played Red, the Blue AI bombers were very scarce, with only two raids in detected in over an hour of play. I tried flying Blue yesterday as I reported above and encountered what must be a bug unless the Brief itself in incorrect. Yesterday, Blue had destroyed four coastal airfields far in advance of Red shooting down the required 40 planes. Two of my fellow human bomber pilots quit playing when it appeared the game was bugged, although I continued to play, I encountered difficulty taking off as reported due to airfield strafing.

I believe this map needs a little more massaging to iron out some kinks.

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
Sep-12-2013, 17:25
I tried flying Blue yesterday as I reported above and encountered what must be a bug unless the Brief itself in incorrect. Yesterday, Blue had destroyed four coastal airfields far in advance of Red shooting down the required 40 planes. Two of my fellow human bomber pilots quit playing when it appeared the game was bugged, although I continued to play, I encountered difficulty taking off as reported due to airfield strafing.
.

would you mind telling us what this bug is?

Zisi
Sep-13-2013, 01:21
Played this mission today as Blue and wonder if there's a bug in the program. According to the brief the Blue forces only need to destroy 4 coastal airports. Today we destroyed Manston, lympne, Hawkinge, and Littlestone but did not get a victory. We were left wondering if we also needed to take out EastChurch as well since it was listed in the briefing as a designated coastal airport target?

Also have a suggestion:

It would be good if there was an additional German bomber base at Tramecourt in order to provide at least one sanctuary for take off. The Ju88 bomber bases are too close together and too close to areas that Red forces can CAP over. Flying a Ju88 I was attacked shortly after take off from one, and on take off from the other two Ju88 bases. All within a period of less than five or ten minutes.

+1, I was there as well and we did destroy the 4 bases.. I do agree that tramecourt or another field farther away might be a good idea to open up, all the open fields are quite near each other.

Zisi
Sep-13-2013, 01:40
would you mind telling us what this bug is?

The map did not end when the required (according to the brief) 4 bases were destroyed. I was there and can confirm this as well.

Roblex
Sep-13-2013, 02:06
I don't know if it is connected to the supposed bug but... A few days ago I took off from Manston and while I was still climbing out the report came up in the buffer listing what targets had been destroyed and included Manston. Surely I would not have been allowed to take-off if Manston was closed?
I did not see any signs of damage and it was not under attack as I climbed out. It could be that the game is reporting fields as closed that are not actually closed.

Klunker
Sep-13-2013, 16:18
I don't know if it is connected to the supposed bug but... A few days ago I took off from Manston and while I was still climbing out the report came up in the buffer listing what targets had been destroyed and included Manston. Surely I would not have been allowed to take-off if Manston was closed?
I did not see any signs of damage and it was not under attack as I climbed out. It could be that the game is reporting fields as closed that are not actually closed.

That may be a bug as well.

After bombs are dropped on a target yellow numbers appear to indicate what percentage of airport damage has happened as a result of the bombs. The final tally of the bomb drop percentage is in red. When the airfield is destroyed it is stated as 100 percent damage.

Manston was targeted several times by human piloted bombers and we stopped bombing after it was reported 100 percent damaged.

Of note also there doesn't seem to be game report of damaged airfields when <obj<Blue is selected. I tried selecting this several times in the chat window and did not get a server response. May be a bug there as well.

If an airport is reported as destroyed, it should be taken out of action as a spawning field.

Combat Wombat
Sep-15-2013, 01:16
It was nice having you explain some of the technicality's on TS today when flying red as you cleared up a few problems we had with bombers, bomb craters :ilike: and bombs needed to destroy an airfield as to spawning aircraft,This is a great map that both klunker and I always have a good time be it red or blue as do many by the numbers flying it. thanks :thumbsup:

Roblex
Sep-15-2013, 01:40
I like the concept but....

1) I don't think anyone is going to be motivated to bring their Spit IIa to a base that only has inferior fighters because it just means that as soon as they despawn some suicidal pilot will spawn in and take it and waste it. Similarly I doubt anyone is going to devote their playing time to transferring fighters from rear fields just so someone else can waste them. Is it feasible for AI to ferry aircraft to front fields or for them to get teleported in a short time after the original has been destroyed? Maybe the whole field gets replenished 5 pr 10 minutes after the last plane is destroyed? How about a road convoy representing new aircraft on low loaders? :D

2) It is now possible for a couple of fighters to put an airfield out of action in just a few minutes. A handful of fighters could disable all the front line bases in the first ten minutes. I know that technically someone could bring more aircraft in but, as said in point (1), it won't happen that way.
Yes, Red could so the same to the Blue airfields but they would probably be doing Blue a favour forcing them to use rearward fields as they would be more likely to escort the bombers if they came from further back. Either way we will have changed the whole style of the mission from 'Hunt/Defend the bombers to a low level skirmish over the airfields. Perhaps we need better quality AAA to make straffing harder? That would also stop the complaints about 109 bombers being used too much.

3) You may find people joining the mission half way through and immediately leaving again because all the good aircraft have been destroyed.

To work properly we need a way for people to have their own supply of aircraft so losing a good one costs them personally but that is probably very difficult to script. Is it possible to script a simplified version of Refuel/Rearm that only has a 60 second delay and does not care if you are out of ammo? It does not even need the fuel tender animation. If you RTB with too much damage to make RR useful then at least you can still despawn and make a fresh one available for you or someone else.

Above all you need to make sure you are not changing the character of the mission to a low level furball over the fields as getting away from that and chasing high bombers is the whole reason this map is popular.

Salmo
Sep-15-2013, 02:43
I like the concept but....

1) I don't think anyone is going to be motivated to bring their Spit IIa to a base that only has inferior fighters because it just means that as soon as they despawn some suicidal pilot will spawn in and take it and waste it. Similarly I doubt anyone is going to devote their playing time to transferring fighters from rear fields just so someone else can waste them. Is it feasible for AI to ferry aircraft to front fields or for them to get teleported in a short time after the original has been destroyed? Maybe the whole field gets replenished 5 pr 10 minutes after the last plane is destroyed? How about a road convoy representing new aircraft on low loaders? :D

2) It is now possible for a couple of fighters to put an airfield out of action in just a few minutes. A handful of fighters could disable all the front line bases in the first ten minutes. I know that technically someone could bring more aircraft in but, as said in point (1), it won't happen that way.
Yes, Red could so the same to the Blue airfields but they would probably be doing Blue a favour forcing them to use rearward fields as they would be more likely to escort the bombers if they came from further back. Either way we will have changed the whole style of the mission from 'Hunt/Defend the bombers to a low level skirmish over the airfields. Perhaps we need better quality AAA to make straffing harder? That would also stop the complaints about 109 bombers being used too much.

3) You may find people joining the mission half way through and immediately leaving again because all the good aircraft have been destroyed.

To work properly we need a way for people to have their own supply of aircraft so losing a good one costs them personally but that is probably very difficult to script. Is it possible to script a simplified version of Refuel/Rearm that only has a 60 second delay and does not care if you are out of ammo? It does not even need the fuel tender animation. If you RTB with too much damage to make RR useful then at least you can still despawn and make a fresh one available for you or someone else.

Above all you need to make sure you are not changing the character of the mission to a low level furball over the fields as getting away from that and chasing high bombers is the whole reason this map is popular.

I removed the post quite quikly. Not quick enough it seems :) I've started new thread HERE (http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5747&p=59753#post59753)so people can have input into the concept as it develops. Thankyou for the feedback.

III./ZG76_Keller
Sep-15-2013, 17:53
Salmo, it appears as though blue bombers despawn if they leave the area of the map grid. Chasing_Fear had his 88 despawn right before my 111 did today right as we were both at the south end of the map grid.

Salmo
Sep-15-2013, 21:04
Salmo, it appears as though blue bombers despawn if they leave the area of the map grid. Chasing_Fear had his 88 despawn right before my 111 did today right as we were both at the south end of the map grid.

More likely the script is despawning planes as they fly in-land France. The fix has been sent to Bliss. Let me know if the issue continues.

EG14_Marcast
Sep-23-2013, 20:54
More likely the script is despawning planes as they fly in-land France. The fix has been sent to Bliss. Let me know if the issue continues.

It just happened again. I was on landing run with my Ju88 south of Campagne Les Guines and my aircraft just disappeared leaving me mid-air :stunned:

EG14_Marcast
Sep-25-2013, 05:06
This is one of the historically most realistic maps, but in my opinion it has a shortcoming: the great amount of bombs needed to destroy airfields makes almost impossible for the blues to win, unless to gather groups of heavy bombers (two nights ago I hit Eastchurch with my Ju88 full load and I got only 30% damage, so it would need at least 4 bombers to accomplish the mission), but usually there aren't so many heavy bomber pilots. This makes the map an almost endless dogfight, as it's not fast for the reds to reach 40 kills. I think that if there were some more frequent AI bomber raids, even removing the limit of half damaging power, this map could be faster and more enjoyable.

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
Sep-25-2013, 05:18
unless to gather groups of heavy bombers (two nights ago I hit Eastchurch with my Ju88 full load and I got only 30% damage, so it would need at least 4 bombers to accomplish the mission),

I think that 4 bombers is a pretty small requirement to be honest.
The problem is not how many bombers it takes, the problem is how many people seem prepared to get into a bomber and fly it! why can't 4 guys be found who will fly blue bombers?

On the red team, there are regularly get 4 or 5 guys who will team up in Blenheims. It's almost a nightly occurrence at the moment.

Given the diversity and hitting power of the Luftwaffe bombers, It surprises me that so few people seem interested in flying them.

EG14_Marcast
Sep-25-2013, 05:37
I think that 4 bombers is a pretty small requirement to be honest.
The problem is not how many bombers it takes, the problem is how many people seem prepared to get into a bomber and fly it! why can't 4 guys be found who will fly blue bombers?

On the red team, there are regularly get 4 or 5 guys who will team up in Blenheims. It's almost a nightly occurrence at the moment.

Given the diversity and hitting power of the Luftwaffe bombers, It surprises me that so few people seem interested in flying them.

I suppose it depends on the availability of fighter bombers on the blue side. If you are a bomber pilot when you fly Red you have only the Blenheim, but on the Blue side you can get a Jabo 109/110, you can run away faster and after bombing you can also make some free hunt. On both sides I like to fly bombers, but I understand that it's somewhat disturbing to feel like a duck on the hunt's opening day.

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
Sep-25-2013, 06:13
. On both sides I like to fly bombers, but I understand that it's somewhat disturbing to feel like a duck on the hunt's opening day.

This map is specifically designed to be different to the other maps. It's designed to encourage the medium bombing effort of the Luftwaffe. It requires the following;

1 Escort!
I jumped in a He-111 and easily made two trips across with escort from Little_D and Flugelbieger. I got all my bombs on the airfield, and got the target over 50% destroyed.

2. Medium Bombing
Jabo is not effective enough against the airfield targets. If blue want to win this map, then they have to adopt the appropriate tactics. Flying around in 109-Bs is NOT going to win the map. there are other Jabo-maps. This is not one of them.

3. Teamspeak organisation.
A mixed flight of 4 x 109s and 4 x He-111s can take out an airfield in a single sortie.

It's not difficult.

AKA_Recon
Sep-25-2013, 06:41
I think that 4 bombers is a pretty small requirement to be honest.
The problem is not how many bombers it takes, the problem is how many people seem prepared to get into a bomber and fly it! why can't 4 guys be found who will fly blue bombers?

On the red team, there are regularly get 4 or 5 guys who will team up in Blenheims. It's almost a nightly occurrence at the moment.

Given the diversity and hitting power of the Luftwaffe bombers, It surprises me that so few people seem interested in flying them.

I'd just like to see this mission more in the lineup - the more it's there, the more people are going to get interested in bombing the targets and not just dogfighting. I like the % counter, it gives good feedback on success, and the target to level bomb is really easy to hit.

Outside of this particular mission setup there is less reason to fly them.

I just hope the despawn problem is fixed :) Also, I would like to see more bases carry the He111, every single time I fly the He111 on this map, I have some allied pilot come over and vulch me, I wasnt' even able to get out of France one night - quite frustrating!

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
Sep-25-2013, 06:54
every single time I fly the He111 on this map, I have some allied pilot come over and vulch me, I wasnt' even able to get out of France one night - quite frustrating!

It's also critical that the 109s provide cover for their bombers too. Teamspeak is vital for this.
Next time this mission is up, and I see you online, I'll team up Recon.

EG14_Marcast
Sep-25-2013, 09:27
.....Also, I would like to see more bases carry the He111, every single time I fly the He111 on this map, I have some allied pilot come over and vulch me, I wasnt' even able to get out of France one night - quite frustrating!

Yes, vulching is another problem, and not only in this map. I never do it, I don't like to strike harmless aircrafts and I don't enjoy it, but I know it's absolutely allowed in ATAG, and of course it happened historically. But it isn't good for the fun. I think the only solution, as someone else said, is to make it much more difficult heavily increasing the flak at spawn airfields.

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
Sep-25-2013, 09:40
YI think the only solution, as someone else said, is to make it much more difficult heavily increasing the flak at spawn airfields.

I think people should be able to vluch. But I think things can be done to dis-incentivise it.
All of the below would help.


more low-level flak at airfields
more spawn bases on each map
more maps with different sets of bases being used
RAF aircraft warmed up ready for take-off
damaging an aircraft with its wheels on the ground and stationary does not contribute to an aerial "kill"

AKA_Recon
Sep-25-2013, 10:26
It's also critical that the 109s provide cover for their bombers too. Teamspeak is vital for this.
Next time this mission is up, and I see you online, I'll team up Recon.

+1 sounds good!

Thanks!

AKA_Recon
Sep-25-2013, 10:27
I think people should be able to vluch. But I think things can be done to dis-incentivise it.
All of the below would help.


more low-level flak at airfields
more spawn bases on each map
more maps with different sets of bases being used
RAF aircraft warmed up ready for take-off
damaging an aircraft with its wheels on the ground and stationary does not contribute to an aerial "kill"


Agree to all here, I like your thinking!

Even if we had just the option of more than one type at a base would help. ie. I'd probably spawn out of a different base rather than take off at one where there was a dogfight, but I'm often limited to a certain base in order to fly a certain plane. (ie He111 H2)

Salmo
Oct-03-2013, 22:32
OPERATION HOMEPLATE v2.0

Ver 2.0 of HP will be released soon after the TF4.0 patch. I've tried to accomodate most of the player suggestions in this & other threads. Below is a summary of some changes in the battle.

RADAR - Red have working chain high, chain low radar & ground observers. This is different to the in-game radar that is notoriously unreliable. Here's how it will work:
- Only detects bombers & bomber groups.
- Chain high, chain low radar effective height & range is roughly to historical parameters. Ground observers range dependent upon weather, up to 11km on a clear day.
- When a LW bomber or bomber group comes with range, the detecting unit will send contact information to a radar filter-room.
- The filter-room takes about 4 minutes to 'process' the information & will then make a general (voice) announcement.
- Contact announcements contain the estimated number of bombers, their altitude when the contact was sighted (4 min ago), and their estimated postion based on their heading & speed (from 4 min ago). This is quite accurate, provided the bomber group has not changed heading between the contact sighting & the filter-room announcement.
- In addition, there is a list of radar contacts in the TAB-4 custom menu option. This is a list of the current contacts calls from the filter-room (4 min ago).

VULCHING - Let's face it, you can't stop someone vulching. But I can 'encourage' players not to vulch by making vulching a risky thing to do. With this in mind, AA at bases has been significantly increased (we'll have to see if this affects fps) and there is a built-in disincentive (not saying what) for red to fly over France. AA will still increase automatically every now & then over the most attacked bases.

WEATHER - Basic battle weather information is available using the TAB-4 custom menu.

BLUE FIGHTER ESCORT - In addition the blue bombers requesting escort in the HUD display before they leave France, blue bomber that are under attack will make a voice announcement giving their position & requesting assistance.

WIN/LOSS OBJECTIVES - Current status for win/loss objectives is now available in the TAB-4 custom menu. I anticipate that red will more easily be able to locate bombers using their radar, so I've increased their objective count. Blue need to destroy 4 bases; red need to down 60 aircraft. We'll have to see how this goes & whether there is a fair balance to the battle.

LANDING AT ENEMY BASES - Pilots landing at enemy bases will be captured & their plane counted towards the opposing teams mission objectives. Blue pilots landing at red airfields will add 2 planes to red's objectives; red pilots landing at blue arfields count as 3% damage to a random blue objective airfield.

HE111 DESPAWNING BUG - Reworked the Ai despawning routine. Hopefully this has fixed the human He111 despawning in-flight bug.

RANDOM Ai PLANE TYPES - Reworked the random Ai plane-types routine. Ai's now include Ju87's. Fixed the no-bombs for Bf111's bug.

RANDOM Ai SKILLS - Reworked the Ai skills routine by increasing skills for all levels. Rookies, average pilots, veteran's & aces will all be slighly better at each of their various skills.

AKA_Recon
Oct-03-2013, 23:36
looking forward to this - thanks Salmo!

Roblex
Oct-04-2013, 02:30
Thanks from me too Salmo. You are a hero.

One question though; why is there a penalty for reds landing on Blue fields? Maybe that question should be why would reds want to land at blue fields? I know that some blues have been 'gaming' the rules by landing at the field they have just bombed to deny the reds a kill but what do reds gain by landing at a blue field? Is it just the old trick of causing airfield AA to shoot up its own airfield and hit its own players? Maybe I have missed a rules update somewhere as the ones in this thread are very out of date.

Salmo
Oct-04-2013, 03:19
Thanks from me too Salmo. You are a hero.

One question though; why is there a penalty for reds landing on Blue fields? Maybe that question should be why would reds want to land at blue fields? I know that some blues have been 'gaming' the rules by landing at the field they have just bombed to deny the reds a kill but what do reds gain by landing at a blue field? Is it just the old trick of causing airfield AA to shoot up its own airfield and hit its own players? Maybe I have missed a rules update somewhere as the ones in this thread are very out of date.

Reds don't gain anything in HP by landing at a blue field. However, a penalty has been applied to both sides for landing at enemy airfields, simply as a means of being 'fair' to both sides. It seemed somewhat inconsistent to penalise blue for landing at enemy fields while not penalising red. The issue doesn't even raise itself, if players don't land where they shouldn't. I'm happy to remove this feature if players disagree with the idea.

EG14_Marcast
Oct-04-2013, 03:47
It looks very good. The despawning bug was also for Ju88, I guess it has the same solution?

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
Oct-04-2013, 04:20
Cracking stuff Salmo!

Kling
Oct-04-2013, 04:33
Great work Salmo!!

Salmo
Oct-11-2013, 06:02
Now that the new TF4.0 patch is soon to be released, it's time to roll out Operation Homeplate 2.0 for testing. Mission is running on the Nations@War server over this weekend. Feedback welcome.

Note: Red radar announcements are enabled, but contacts list in the custon Tab-4 menu is not yet working.

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
Oct-11-2013, 10:17
Operation Homeplate 2.0 for testing. Mission is running on the Nations@War server over this weekend. Feedback welcome.
.

Cheer Salmo, will try to stop by with the 92 sqn boys for a run sometime over next few days.

Kling
Oct-11-2013, 11:31
what is new in version 2.0?

SoW Reddog
Oct-11-2013, 11:37
Kling, it's like 8 posts above yours....http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4507&p=63196&viewfull=1#post63196

Kling
Oct-11-2013, 12:24
Kling, it's like 8 posts above yours....http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/showthread.php?t=4507&p=63196&viewfull=1#post63196

Sorry my bad!!!

AKA_Recon
Oct-11-2013, 21:11
I joined tonight on Blue side to fly He-111 H2... but there isn't one, just a P2

Why ??? Confused why no H2 is available ?

Salmo
Oct-12-2013, 04:46
I joined tonight on Blue side to fly He-111 H2... but there isn't one, just a P2

Why ??? Confused why no H2 is available ?

The H2 is available & has not been removed. Correcting bug that may have not allocated it to a base's planeset.

|450|Devil
Oct-12-2013, 19:51
Had a great time flying Home Plate on the Blue side yesterday. One small suggestion - move the Blue bomber airfields much further inland. In that way the likelihood of sustained Red interdiction of Blue bombers when they are taking off should be reduced and it would also allow more distance/time for the Blue bombers to get to altitude before crossing the Channel inbound for England.

rollingstoned
Oct-12-2013, 22:45
Salmo I LOVE YOU, thank you for the time you take to build these missions. but seriously Homeplate the spit 1a100 oct is the best spit at any alt in the sim. ive tested this with the best spit pilots... we get stuck with E3's on the blue side... blues have no incentive to play this map... no AI to kill and we have inferior planes... PLEASE change this.. i log out immediately along with many other blues when home plate is up... not all of us play at ideal hours and if you fly blue and there are minimal reds on.. id rather play single player.. in fact a bunch of us left this map and ATAG server to another server because its not only unfair for blue but un fun unless you have TONS of people on. Reds enjoy the best spitfire models against no blue fighters and thus they wonder around shooting down the plethora of 9x bomber formations constantly heading to england. PLAY BLUE ON THIS MAP AND YOU WILL GET IT... i mean what % of blues fly bombers seriously? not many.... so this is a mission built for blue bombers with a task far harder than downing 40 aircraft. I love all atag and all the people who take the time to design missions ... but i log out every time this one comes up.

PLEASE TAKE THIS SERIOUSLY HOME PLATE IS INSANELY FLAWED AND DRAMATICALLY IN REDS FAVOR.

and Salmo don't take this the wrong way but i really enjoy playing dover on ATAG and your missions but this map comes up and i promptly leave along with most BLUES.

sorry to offend, RS

Salmo
Oct-12-2013, 23:56
Thankyou RollingStoned, feedback is always welcome. Can I address some of your issues:


<snip> the spit 1a100 oct is the best spit at any alt in the sim. I've tested this with the best spit pilots... we get stuck with E3's on the blue side...
Hurricane rotol 100oct & Spit 1a 100oct were the most prolific models of allied fighters in mid-1040. My research suggest that many LW 109 airframes were upgraded to E-4 standards starting at the beginning of the Battle of Britain, so I'll introduce a mixture of E3's & E4's for blue at mission-start.


<snip> blues have no incentive to play this map... no AI to kill <snip>
There are red Ai's in the battle, they spawn at about the same rate as blue Ai bomber flights. They will often engage enemy fighter & bomber formations.


,snip>Reds enjoy the best spitfire models against no blue fighters and thus they wonder around shooting down the plethora of 9x bomber formations constantly heading to england. <snip>
Red starts with spit 1a's & Spit MkII's are not available until after 1 hr into the battle. Blue now start with Bf109E-4's upgrading to E4N's. It's not correct to say that red just shoot down blue bombers with no blue fighter escorts. Firstly, 50% of all blue Ai bomber flights are escorted by significant numbers of Ai fighters. Secondly, every blue bomber formation that spawns calls for escort from blue human fighters. If blue fighter pilots choose not to escort their bombers then that's their decision, but I'd suggest that blue is far more likely to win the battle if they support their bombers.


<snip>PLEASE TAKE THIS SERIOUSLY HOME PLATE IS INSANELY FLAWED AND DRAMATICALLY IN REDS FAVOR.,snip.
I take seriously your perception of undue bias in favour of red for this mission. Balance & fairness are primary considerations when building missions. Feedback from others to date suggests that there is a fairly 'even' chance of either blue or red winning the battle. This does not accord with your perception of the battle.

No.401_Wolverine
Oct-13-2013, 01:24
Just had a brilliant play of Home Plate, Salmo. Great times. I can't wait for this mission to get RDF since that will make interception of the player flown sorties more practicable.

Didn't see a single blue human pilot escorting any bombers. Some AI escorts occasionally, but no players. Intercepted about 4 to 5 AI bomber flights. We sent our first section in to strip off the AI escorts, and the second section went in to chew on the bombers. Great immersion in that.

All the human blue pilots, except for a couple of bomber pilots that were doing single aircraft sorties against airfield targets, seemed to be strafing Red on the ground at Hawkinge and Lympne.

I actually engaged a pilot near Lympne who strafed a fighter on the ground. I attacked him and he pulled up and around and went back to attacking the guy on the ground instead of manoeuvering to engage me. He dove so hard on the guy on the ground desperate to...vulch? I dunno. I have no idea why you would do that if you being attacked. Anyway, he dove so fast and hard to get him he had to pull up really hard and snapped a wing off. I put one bullet into him before he hit the ground and *ding* another one out of the 40 aircraft chalked up for Red. Couldn't believe it.

I think if Blue escorts their bombers, or puts together larger bomber raids of more than one or two aircraft, they could quite quickly demolish the airfields. Especially with heavy Ju88 bomb loads.

Anyway. Great map. Can't wait for RDF on it.

rollingstoned
Oct-13-2013, 02:41
Thankyou RollingStoned, feedback is always welcome. Can I address some of your issues:


Hurricane rotol 100oct & Spit 1a 100oct were the most prolific models of allied fighters in mid-1040. My research suggest that many LW 109 airframes were upgraded to E-4 standards starting at the beginning of the Battle of Britain, so I'll introduce a mixture of E3's & E4's for blue at mission-start.


There are red Ai's in the battle, they spawn at about the same rate as blue Ai bomber flights. They will often engage enemy fighter & bomber formations.


Red starts with spit 1a's & Spit MkII's are not available until after 1 hr into the battle. Blue now start with Bf109E-4's upgrading to E4N's. It's not correct to say that red just shoot down blue bombers with no blue fighter escorts. Firstly, 50% of all blue Ai bomber flights are escorted by significant numbers of Ai fighters. Secondly, every blue bomber formation that spawns calls for escort from blue human fighters. If blue fighter pilots choose not to escort their bombers then that's their decision, but I'd suggest that blue is far more likely to win the battle if they support their bombers.


I take seriously your perception of undue bias in favour of red for this mission. Balance & fairness are primary considerations when building missions. Feedback from others to date suggests that there is a fairly 'even' chance of either blue or red winning the battle. This does not accord with your perception of the battle.

thank you for your response Salmo, at what time in the maps progression should i expect AI red bombers? not that i hunt AI as my main purpose but i log on a lot when nobody else is on and i am forced to do this... PS.. you have my absolute respect for taking the time to generate maps that give us all endless hours of fun. WE ALL LOVE YOU RED AND BLUE .. i just feel kinda fucked when this map comes up.. sorry.. but if the designer can counter my points i trust that and ill accept that im wrong. cheers

rollingstoned
Oct-13-2013, 02:49
Just had a brilliant play of Home Plate, Salmo. Great times. I can't wait for this mission to get RDF since that will make interception of the player flown sorties more practicable.

Didn't see a single blue human pilot escorting any bombers. Some AI escorts occasionally, but no players. Intercepted about 4 to 5 AI bomber flights. We sent our first section in to strip off the AI escorts, and the second section went in to chew on the bombers. Great immersion in that.

All the human blue pilots, except for a couple of bomber pilots that were doing single aircraft sorties against airfield targets, seemed to be strafing Red on the ground at Hawkinge and Lympne.

I actually engaged a pilot near Lympne who strafed a fighter on the ground. I attacked him and he pulled up and around and went back to attacking the guy on the ground instead of manoeuvering to engage me. He dove so hard on the guy on the ground desperate to...vulch? I dunno. I have no idea why you would do that if you being attacked. Anyway, he dove so fast and hard to get him he had to pull up really hard and snapped a wing off. I put one bullet into him before he hit the ground and *ding* another one out of the 40 aircraft chalked up for Red. Couldn't believe it.

I think if Blue escorts their bombers, or puts together larger bomber raids of more than one or two aircraft, they could quite quickly demolish the airfields. Especially with heavy Ju88 bomb loads.

Anyway. Great map. Can't wait for RDF on it.

this is my point exactly wolverine... unless you are a bomber pilot this mission is discouraging to blues.. we are forced to fight superior planes and the german bombers are FAR more complex than the blennie which is literally like nuckle draggingly easy to use. BTW us blues escort bombers i would say 2-3 times more than reds do (REDS TELL ME THIS)... but who can prove either point? nobody. So lets just realize that if 1 red fighter logs into homeplate and 1 blue fighter does as well.. the blue has 1 guy to kill.. the red has about 150 bombers to attack.. pretty lame imo.. ATAG isnt historically accurate they are mass market... so shit lets give both sides something to do regardless of when they log on.

Salmo
Oct-13-2013, 04:38
<snip> Anyway, he dove so fast and hard to get him he had to pull up really hard and snapped a wing off. I put one bullet into him before he hit the ground and *ding* another one out of the 40 aircraft chalked up for Red. Couldn't believe it.<snip>
... Before there are howls of 'unfair' from blue, let me explain that a destroyed blue plane has to have more than 25% of it's damage done by a human player for the aircraft to be counted as a red 'kill' counting towards the red mission objective.

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
Oct-13-2013, 05:17
. the spit 1a100 oct is the best spit at any alt in the sim.

Hey RS.
I suggest you check the TF wiki. 1a 100 has lower performance (certainly in terms of airspeed) than the 2a above 15,000 ft, and is more likely to overheat. The obtainable performance characteristics are all spelled out clearly for RAF aircraft in the wiki.


. the german bombers are FAR more complex than the blennie

Not sure how you quantify "far more complex"... what features exactly do you think distinguish them as so significantly beyond the blennie in terms of difficulty/ complexity?
In find the JU88 pretty damned similar.
The He111 is tricky, mainly because of the way it handles.


.1 blue fighter does as well.. the blue has 1 guy to kill.. the red has about 150 bombers to attack

As Salmo has pointed out, this is factually incorrect. There are already equal or similar numbers of red and blue AI bomber flights.


I hope players aren't making decisions en masse to leave the servers based on incorrect information....

SoW Reddog
Oct-13-2013, 06:21
I really don't understand RS's point of view at all. Well I kind of do I think, basically you'd be happiest with the Red's in Tiger moths, ceiling limited to 1000ft and the Blues in E4N's booming and zooming at will, racking up insane kill numbers against AI bomber streams and players forced into inferior airframes all the time.

I think what you're looking for is the antithesis of what I'm looking for. What I'd suggest is that you do what I have done, if you want a specific mission then make it your self, get it approved and on the server.

56RAF_klem
Oct-13-2013, 07:27
Salmo I LOVE YOU, thank you for the time you take to build these missions. but seriously Homeplate the spit 1a100 oct is the best spit at any alt in the sim.

Wrong! It's the best Spit below around 13k and the SpitIIa is far better at higher altitude and comes in later. Like the E4N.


... ive tested this with the best spit pilots... we get stuck with E3's on the blue side... blues have no incentive to play this map... no AI to kill and we have inferior planes... PLEASE change this.. i log out immediately along with many other blues when home plate is up... not all of us play at ideal hours and if you fly blue and there are minimal reds on.. id rather play single player.. in fact a bunch of us left this map and ATAG server to another server because its not only unfair for blue but un fun unless you have TONS of people on. Reds enjoy the best spitfire models against no blue fighters and thus they wonder around shooting down the plethora of 9x bomber formations constantly heading to england. PLAY BLUE ON THIS MAP AND YOU WILL GET IT... i mean what % of blues fly bombers seriously? not many.... so this is a mission built for blue bombers with a task far harder than downing 40 aircraft. I love all atag and all the people who take the time to design missions ... but i log out every time this one comes up.

As has already been said, escort the bombers BUT...

Do you fly alone? Where is your Squad or your group of guys pulling together? Its easy for a Red squad, even just four of us, to brush off a single 109. Don't fly alone, change your tactics. Why do we see so few Blues on Teamspeak?


PLEASE TAKE THIS SERIOUSLY HOME PLATE IS INSANELY FLAWED AND DRAMATICALLY IN REDS FAVOR.

and Salmo don't take this the wrong way but i really enjoy playing dover on ATAG and your missions but this map comes up and i promptly leave along with most BLUES.

sorry to offend, RS

"along with most BLUES". So you have numbers. Stop vulching airfields, get together and get after the Reds that are after your bombers.

AKA_Recon
Oct-13-2013, 07:55
The H2 is available & has not been removed. Correcting bug that may have not allocated it to a base's planeset.

ok - great! Thanks Salmo :thumbsup:

AKA_Recon
Oct-13-2013, 08:10
I had heard rumors of blue not flying.

Let me tell an opposite story.

Timezone EST:

Every time I see this mission, I try to fly He111 H2.. I try to bomb from altitude (realistic).

Here are my steps:

1. I join ATAG comms - it's typically empty. those that are there don't seem to respond at all to #3
2. I get no escort
3. I typically get vulched because there are no blue fighters

Now, if I can actually get off the ground w/out #3 - my success rate is as follows: I've hit the target every time from 5k and greater - I've done over 25% damage per drop. Now, in my timezone we don't have very many pilots - so it would take 4 sorties of climbing to 5k+ to take out a single base.

Now I see that blue pilots like RS skip flying - I wonder how many others. It's too bad to see such of a quitters mentality.

Just give the blue a 109e4n to stop them from whining - I'd rather they get what they want than have no pilots flying.

I'm mostly a Blenheim pilots nowdays - if you want to see a true complaint, imagine me having a payload like the Ju88 has.

When pilots quit they are saying they want 'equal' - yet they only want 'equal' when it benefits them.

AKA_Recon
Oct-13-2013, 08:28
I was a bit harsh perhaps.

But would reiterate, give each side the fighters they want - I'd rather them show up and fly vs. not join because they can't fly their favorite aircraft.

In my timezone, we are desperate for more pilots, we don't want any to not fly!!!

That, and I love this mission concept, I would hate for it to fail over something like this.

ATAG_Snapper
Oct-13-2013, 10:28
"But come, gentlemen, I have chastised you enough! What can I do to help you secure victory?"

"Give me a squadron of Spitfires......."

Roblex
Oct-13-2013, 10:50
56 RAF decided to fly Blue on this mission last week just to see how hard it was. There were about 30 Blues on and all of them in 109s so three of us took JU88s. We hit two airfields, closing one, over four sorties without being caught and RTB's. The only bomber to be shot down was shot down by one of our own pilots in a 109 who forgot he was Blue :D 56 RAF rarely fly JU88s and had to remind each other how to fly them. Those four sorties don't include the abandoned ones when we overcooked the engines before leaving France and had to RTB but we still closed a field and damaged another in the time it took for the furballers to lose the last 5 109s so why on earth are experienced Blue pilots complaining that it is too hard to close 4 fields before the reds can destroy 40?

Talisman
Oct-13-2013, 11:10
Salmo I LOVE YOU, thank you for the time you take to build these missions. but seriously Homeplate the spit 1a100 oct is the best spit at any alt in the sim. ive tested this with the best spit pilots... we get stuck with E3's on the blue side... blues have no incentive to play this map... no AI to kill and we have inferior planes... PLEASE change this.. i log out immediately along with many other blues when home plate is up... not all of us play at ideal hours and if you fly blue and there are minimal reds on.. id rather play single player.. in fact a bunch of us left this map and ATAG server to another server because its not only unfair for blue but un fun unless you have TONS of people on. Reds enjoy the best spitfire models against no blue fighters and thus they wonder around shooting down the plethora of 9x bomber formations constantly heading to england. PLAY BLUE ON THIS MAP AND YOU WILL GET IT... i mean what % of blues fly bombers seriously? not many.... so this is a mission built for blue bombers with a task far harder than downing 40 aircraft. I love all atag and all the people who take the time to design missions ... but i log out every time this one comes up.

PLEASE TAKE THIS SERIOUSLY HOME PLATE IS INSANELY FLAWED AND DRAMATICALLY IN REDS FAVOR.

and Salmo don't take this the wrong way but i really enjoy playing dover on ATAG and your missions but this map comes up and i promptly leave along with most BLUES.

sorry to offend, RS

RS, I suppose that you realise the Me 109 series is the best performing aircraft in the climb to altitude that we have in CloD and that you can disengage from Spits in the vertical. Of course, you need to have enough separation to start the climb and it needs to be steep (spiral is good) so that the Spit is unable to pull his nose up high enough for a good shot. You can just go up and up and there is nothing to catch you. Fly to the strength of the 109 and work as a team and all should be well. I do not understand how you can say the LW planes are inferior. The 109 is not inferior as it has the best climb, the 109 has cannons which are the best armament and therefore not inferior and the LW has the best bombers; this is because that is how it was historically and is correct. The RAF was not engaged in a strategic bombing campaign against the LW or France during the BoB. It was the LW that was engaged in a strategic bombing campaign against Britain. The RAF was primarily defending and the LW was primarily attacking during the BoB and the time period reflected by the CloD plane set. Surely if you have researched the history of the BoB and the planes of the time you would not have posted in this way. The RAF fighters attacking LW bombers are at your mercy if you escort the LW bombers in a 109 from above. If 109 pilots escort LW bombers and RAF fighters attack LW bombers we should get some truly great air battles together RS :)) Later on in the war the situation was reversed in that there was a strategic bombing campaign against Germany and LW fighters were attacking hoards of RAF and American bombers; but that is not now and not the BoB or this current plane set. I often fly this map in a JU88 and am surprised at the lack of co-ordination from blue pilots. If more squads got together and flew a mixed package of bombers and fighters to take out targets in England this map would be over very soon in favour of the LW.

P.S. With the next TF patch I suggest you may find that all maps on the ATAG server will be very full and people will be glad to see others leave to give them room to join the server.

AKA_Recon
Oct-13-2013, 11:33
They know...
http://theairtacticalassaultgroup.com/forum/showthread.php?t=5793&p=62424&highlight=#post62424

There isn't much excuse :)

No.401_Wolverine
Oct-13-2013, 12:59
... Before there are howls of 'unfair' from blue, let me explain that a destroyed blue plane has to have more than 25% of it's damage done by a human player for the aircraft to be counted as a red 'kill' counting towards the red mission objective.

Must have got more into him than I thought then! :)

EG14_Marcast
Oct-13-2013, 15:45
56 RAF decided to fly Blue on this mission last week just to see how hard it was. There were about 30 Blues on and all of them in 109s so three of us took JU88s. We hit two airfields, closing one, over four sorties without being caught and RTB's. The only bomber to be shot down was shot down by one of our own pilots in a 109 who forgot he was Blue :D 56 RAF rarely fly JU88s and had to remind each other how to fly them. Those four sorties don't include the abandoned ones when we overcooked the engines before leaving France and had to RTB but we still closed a field and damaged another in the time it took for the furballers to lose the last 5 109s so why on earth are experienced Blue pilots complaining that it is too hard to close 4 fields before the reds can destroy 40?

No complaint, but you found the limit yourself. To destroy the airfields, Blues need coordination and team work, what you had flying as a squadron and rarely can be found on the blue side. No fault of the map.

Roblex
Oct-14-2013, 14:42
No complaint, but you found the limit yourself. To destroy the airfields, Blues need coordination and team work, what you had flying as a squadron and rarely can be found on the blue side. No fault of the map.

Which is odd because I have always been frustrated by the Reds inability to organise themselves while the Blues are methodically taking down our targets. What has happened recently? Has a bossy Blue pilot stopped organising people? Has a good squad stopped flying recently?

No.54 Ghost (KL-G)
Oct-14-2013, 15:09
ok, this is just an idea so dont send flak my way just yet.

how about letting the blue side see where there bombers are on the map by enabling map icons.
that way they could protect them without having to communicate with them. or at least they would see where they are.

Bear Pilot
Oct-14-2013, 15:37
The following is just an observation...

I think often we generalize too much about mission wins and losses and how well one side is flying compared to the other. I think the most organized group on one side is just as organized as the one on the opposing side and the same goes for the most disorganized. I think it all has to do with timezones and people's schedules. A blue pilot may very well say he almost never loses on a particular map and a red may say the same about the exact same map. How? They're simply not online at the same time.

This is nothing new. We all know it. I just think we underestimate how much of a difference it can make.

Yes mission/map adjustments and corrections need to be made from time to time, it's silly to think otherwise. But maybe our own pride blinds us in defeat more than we think.

From a statistician's standpoint, we hardly ever get the consistent numbers for a decent sample on mission outcomes. What we do have is skewed and full of error, otherwise we would all be of pretty much the same opinion and adjustments would be simple.

Alas, that is not the world we live in. I love to win, we all do. But we're not going to win the war no matter how well we fly in our little virtual world. As long as I have a chance, that's good enough for me. Some pilots in the real thing didn't even have that.

TF gives us great planes and a great environment, map makers pour their hearts into missions, and I supply the beer. Most of it's a bonus really, I would be content with just the beer.

:salute:

Zisi
Oct-14-2013, 18:06
ok, this is just an idea so dont send flak my way just yet.

how about letting the blue side see where there bombers are on the map by enabling map icons.
that way they could protect them without having to communicate with them. or at least they would see where they are.

I don't necessarily disagree in spirit, but it's not practical because it is so easy to abuse features like that (switch sides, see target, etc). Theres no substitution for real communication.

SoW Reddog
Oct-15-2013, 03:47
I'm thinking that in the same way tab 4-1 gives RDF for the reds, that tab4-1 *could* give a ground controller trying to vector escorts to the current AI bomber raids. Wouldn't need such complicated code I don't think either. I shall be having a look at it.

9./JG52_J-HAT
Oct-29-2013, 07:34
I'm thinking that in the same way tab 4-1 gives RDF for the reds, that tab4-1 *could* give a ground controller trying to vector escorts to the current AI bomber raids. Wouldn't need such complicated code I don't think either. I shall be having a look at it.

Thread necromancing...

But please do that!!!!!! :)

III./ZG76_Keller
Nov-07-2013, 21:33
There are certain times in this mission, towards the end, where there are no fighters except for G.50s for axis to fly. Some E1's or E3's that remain for the entire mission would be nice.

EG14_Marcast
Nov-09-2013, 20:52
Operation Home Plate is already hard for the Blues, please leave us at least the Ju88!:)

ATAG_EvangelusE
Nov-13-2013, 06:59
Is it possible to script the scoring system so that any Blue ac that land on an allied airfield are counted as a kill?

I notice a lot of blue players simply come in low, drop their bombs, they are attacked and, though badly damaged, land on the airfield that they have attacked to avoid their ac loss incrementing.

EG14_Marcast
Nov-15-2013, 02:53
Great fun last night in Operation Home Plate, with several Blue bombers striking together escorted by fighters. Who won? When I had to leave it was 1 airfield destroyed and 16 Blue aircrafts shot down. Pity that this map arrives so late in CET.

Salmo
Nov-15-2013, 04:55
Op HP v2.0 now running on Nations@War server. Final testing before sending to Bliss for ATAG hosting. Here's your chance to provide feedback.

Red has working radar that will announce predicted LW bomber positions. Blue to destroy 4 airfields, red to down 60 aircraft.

ATAG_Snapper
Nov-15-2013, 05:00
Great to hear , Salmo! :thumbsup:

EG14_Marcast
Nov-15-2013, 05:54
Op HP v2.0 now running on Nations@War server. Final testing before sending to Bliss for ATAG hosting. Here's your chance to provide feedback.

Red has working radar that will announce predicted LW bomber positions. Blue to destroy 4 airfields, red to down 60 aircraft.

This will encourage team work and cooperation between bombers and fighters in the Blue side. I think it's getting harder for the Blues, but it's historical. I like it. :thumbsup:

Catseye
Nov-15-2013, 11:49
Op HP v2.0 now running on Nations@War server. Final testing before sending to Bliss for ATAG hosting. Here's your chance to provide feedback.

Red has working radar that will announce predicted LW bomber positions. Blue to destroy 4 airfields, red to down 60 aircraft.

Sounds like a fun test.

Hope the server is up late afternoon Pacific Time.

Cheers,

indyscout
Nov-15-2013, 12:16
I think the change from kill count from 40 to 60 will be a good one. Flew the old version of the mission last night on the blue side with a lot of Atag guys that play during NA timezones, had a lot of fun (roughly 30 players on, pretty good for that time of day). We were running 3 ju88's, 3-4 109's, and 2 g50's all working in formation heading to blow the snot out of littlestone. Unfortunately, I didnt get to see the end of the mission as I had to head off, but it was bound to have been a close game. Each attack on little stone, we managed to get all the ju88's bombs off (excluding any that went down on the way there due to engine failure etc.) as well as claiming roughly 6-10 british fighters (I set my new record of 6 kills in 1 sortie :D) each assault. The problem was we would eventually get over run and lose around 7 planes in the end as we were facing heavy British resistance. So by the time we took our first airfield, we had lost 14 planes. So if we had kept on going, we would have lost before we destroyed the last airbase. By increasing the planes downed by the reds to 40 to 60 I think we will give blues a solid chance to win!

SoW Reddog
Nov-15-2013, 16:47
Just played the map on ATAG, Blues didn't manage (attempt?) to close any airfields, there were a bunch of jabo's but for the most part just one huge dogfight ranging from Dover to Lympne.

Salmo
Nov-16-2013, 02:27
Just played the map on ATAG, Blues didn't manage (attempt?) to close any airfields, there were a bunch of jabo's but for the most part just one huge dogfight ranging from Dover to Lympne.

This is the issue really. Blue go off hunting. Don't protect their bombers & then complain that they lose the battle becuase red shot down the required number of blue aircraft.

In any event, the game has changed. I've just sent Op HP v2 to Bliss. I have not responded to the many comments & suggestions here but I have read posts as they are made & have tried where practicable to incorporate the ideas into the battle. Just try the new version & see if you like it. Feedback & critique is always welcome, complaints & whining are not.

Red radar control will announce the precicted position of LW bomber groups. This is scripted & different to the in-game announcements. Red now has to down 60 aircraft, we'll see how this affects the mission balance. Lots of other goodies too, but far to much to mention. Just a few tips; both sides - don't land at an enemy airfield; reds - don't fly for too long over France.

If the new HP is not running on the ATAG server, you can sample it on the Nations@War server.

ATAG_EvangelusE
Nov-16-2013, 18:29
Not sure how long the mission had run when I tried the new version on Nations War Server but the Spit Mk2 will be popular for sure.

I liked the spread and varying altitudes of one of the bomber formations I came across and the AI escorts should encourage more solo Players to join them at Altitude.

I wasn't sure about the standard in game Voice radar reports (which only give the Vector and numerical part of the map reference) but having read your post I assume that is what you mean by Voice Radar now only giving 'an estimate' of enemy map sector position.

A group of bombers hit Littlestone and damaged it - within a few seconds the AA defences for Littlestone were then increased. There is a lot happening on this version and it will be interesting to see how it all plays out on when the mission has a lot of players.

Great work Salmo....look forward to testing and trying it on the ATAG rotation, having said that, as someone who struggles with the Winter maps once the light fails I will certainly jump onto the Nations Server as an alternative. :thumbsup:

AKA_Recon
Nov-23-2013, 22:19
great work Salmo - I love your setup and hope this can be the defacto standard!

EG14_Marcast
Nov-27-2013, 04:03
Good fun last night….when there are enough Blue bombers and fighters on comms this is really one of the most involving maps for both sides. When will we see version 2.0 in ATAG? I suppose it is no more on Nations@War as Salmo announced Operation Trader.....

Salmo
Nov-27-2013, 16:33
Good fun last night….when there are enough Blue bombers and fighters on comms this is really one of the most involving maps for both sides. When will we see version 2.0 in ATAG? I suppose it is no more on Nations@War as Salmo announced Operation Trader.....

Op HP v2 was sent to ATAG_Bliss some time ago. He will put it on the server when he can. He's rather busy at the moment moving house & attending to other matters.

SoW Reddog
Nov-28-2013, 04:18
Op HP v2 was sent to ATAG_Bliss some time ago. He will put it on the server when he can. He's rather busy at the moment moving house & attending to other matters.

Ah. That explains why London Raids v2 hasn't been seen either! Cheers Salmo.

EG14_Marcast
Nov-30-2013, 05:53
Congratulations Salmo for version 2.0. I liked especially the new tab menu for the Blues and the increasing AA on strafed airfields :thumbsup:

ATAG_EvangelusE
Nov-30-2013, 17:50
Another great mission on the server - thanks Salmo!

Had a problem with Spawn points at Gravesend - Spit Mk2. Start is in tall grass, taxi for a few metres and ac flips into the air and somersaults. Happened three times, had to use another base.

9./JG52_J-HAT
Dec-01-2013, 04:47
I was able to enjoy 15 minutes of it yesterday, before red finished destroying all the planes :)

Very nicely done, thanks again, Salmo!

EG14_Marcast
Dec-07-2013, 21:38
Something strange just happened: I dropped a full load from 4000 m. over Hawkinge with a Ju88 when it was 95% damaged and nothing happened; I'm absolutely sure that the bombs were armed and that they hit the target. The same happened to Keller on Eastchurch when it was 89% damaged. In another mission I dropped over Hawkinge from low altitude and it worked. A possible bug?

Salmo
Dec-07-2013, 22:33
Something strange just happened: I dropped a full load from 4000 m. over Hawkinge with a Ju88 when it was 95% damaged and nothing happened; I'm absolutely sure that the bombs were armed and that they hit the target. The same happened to Keller on Eastchurch when it was 89% damaged. In another mission I dropped over Hawkinge from low altitude and it worked. A possible bug?

Thankyou marcastel57. I've skoken to ATAG_Keller about this issue. I believe this has hapened to you, Keller & Kushviper (& perhaps others). I can't see a problem with the script. It acurately records bomb drops & airfield destruction on most occassions but this nasty little bug pops up from time to time.

I suspect there's a game bug somewhere, but we need to collectively isolate exactly where the issue lies. Those that have experienced this bug, can you let me know answers to these questions please:

1. Did you change aircraft places after bomb-drop? Maybe to look out the back & see how they went? ie. Was the pilot seat "empty" when bombs went off?

2. Is there a common bomb-type this happens with? Maybe 500kg bombs?

3. Does is occur with particular plane types & not others?

4. Does it occur at any level of damage of an airfield, or perhaps just occur when an airfielsd is almost completely destroyed?

5. Does it occur only at one ot two airfields?

trademe900
Dec-08-2013, 02:13
Thankyou marcastel57. I've skoken to ATAG_Keller about this issue. I believe this has hapened to you, Keller & Kushviper (& perhaps others). I can't see a problem with the script. It acurately records bomb drops & airfield destruction on most occassions but this nasty little bug pops up from time to time.

I suspect there's a game bug somewhere, but we need to collectively isolate exactly where the issue lies. Those that have experienced this bug, can you let me know answers to these questions please:

1. Did you change aircraft places after bomb-drop? Maybe to look out the back & see how they went? ie. Was the pilot seat "empty" when bombs went off?

2. Is there a common bomb-type this happens with? Maybe 500kg bombs?

3. Does is occur with particular plane types & not others?

4. Does it occur at any level of damage of an airfield, or perhaps just occur when an airfielsd is almost completely destroyed?

5. Does it occur only at one ot two airfields?

1. Pilot seat was empty when bombs hit. Still in bombardier.
2. I only level bomb using full load out of sc50 and 4X sc250. Do not know about sc500.
3. Only had this happen with Ju88.
4. Only happened to me when the airfield was nearly destroyed.
5. Only had it at Hawkinge.

EG14_Marcast
Dec-08-2013, 05:39
1. Did you change aircraft places after bomb-drop? Maybe to look out the back & see how they went? ie. Was the pilot seat "empty" when bombs went off?

2. Is there a common bomb-type this happens with? Maybe 500kg bombs?

3. Does is occur with particular plane types & not others?

4. Does it occur at any level of damage of an airfield, or perhaps just occur when an airfielsd is almost completely destroyed?

5. Does it occur only at one ot two airfields?

1. I was in the bombardier position looking through the bombsight and I stayed there until bombs' release, then I shifted to the pilot seat
2-3. I only fly Ju88 in Home Plate, loaded with 4 x sc250, 18 x sc50, 10 x sc50. I use low altitude fuses also from high altitude, but they esploded all the other times
4. In my case Hawkinge was 95% damaged, in Keller's at Eastchurch it was 89%. This made me think..
5. That at Hawkinge was the only case it happened to me.

SoW Reddog
Dec-11-2013, 14:02
"92 Sqn Reddog (QJ-R) Crashed at Destroyed Airfield Manston". Apart from the fact I made a perfectly good landing and didn't crash, what's the significance of this message Salmo??
There's been a few people asking about the "landed at an enemy airfield +2 aircraft" message as well, I presume that's counting 2 aircraft lost to the Blues, not increasing the target to 62 for example?