PDA

View Full Version : new missions on the server, and few players



ereisermisti
May-16-2013, 14:00
it is possible that players are migrating to other servers for 2 new missions in the server????


that actually fills these missions server when you do not like a few are?

ATAG_Snapper
May-16-2013, 14:56
Possibly. The numbers fluctuate greatly through the day, as different time zones hit prime playing times. At this time of year in the Northern Hemisphere the weather is getting warmer and the days longer, so fewer players are sitting at their PC's. The next Team Fusion patch will bring everybody back online! :thumbsup:

:)

9./JG52 Ziegler
May-17-2013, 08:05
I agree with Snapper, I think it's more a spring is here, the sun is out, etc...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKbDJ8E8zyM


"Somebody get this man a burger!"

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
May-17-2013, 08:27
it is possible that players are migrating to other servers for 2 new missions in the server????


All servers have low participation at the moment.

Old_Canuck
May-17-2013, 10:02
Classic video :thumbsup: Wait a minute - the sun is out? [looks outside shakes head] obviously you guys don't live in B.C.


I agree with Snapper, I think it's more a spring is here, the sun is out, etc...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKbDJ8E8zyM


"Somebody get this man a burger!"

FTC_Snowy
May-17-2013, 14:37
I'm off the server only because I'm away from home on a business trip. Can't wait to get back on actually.

Roblex
May-18-2013, 03:57
I must admit I logged on yesterday, saw it was Operation Waterfall and logged off again. OTOH I should point out that the only players on were two spitfires and there was no way I was going to try sinking 12 ships all on my own while they took potshots at me :-)

Gromit
May-19-2013, 07:44
Some guys just want to dogfight repetitively for their stats and have no interest in missions at all, they are probably better off on an arcade server!

A lot of us however like to fly the missions or attempt to play a role in the mission, I fly Hurricanes and fly as CAP and home defence, for me the mission is important and the more realistic the aims the better!

In reality the two don't mix and if the server is oriented toward missions and historical aims then numbers will drop as the brawlers go elsewhere to just fight, numbers will also drop as the weather improves, I have seen that consistently on every server and game I have played on!

ATAG_Snapper
May-19-2013, 09:56
The ATAG Server is designed for everyone. Dogfight brawlers and mission players alike. Those who choose to fly the missions must contend with the possibility that opposing fighters will seek to upset their carefully-laid plans and may show up at the worst possible time.

The missions are in place to provide challenge and enjoyment for those who wish, but there is no expectation whatsoever that this is what players are expected to do. The dogfight brawlers (good term :thumbsup:) add a dynamic aspect to the unpredictability of war.

KGJ54Lord_Pyro
May-21-2013, 03:42
I noticed that yesterdays mission had no german medium bombers. We therefore switched to the other atag server. But why were they excluded in the other mission? Do they cause still some instabilities?

Osprey
May-21-2013, 06:47
Some guys just want to dogfight repetitively for their stats and have no interest in missions at all, they are probably better off on an arcade server!

A lot of us however like to fly the missions or attempt to play a role in the mission, I fly Hurricanes and fly as CAP and home defence, for me the mission is important and the more realistic the aims the better!

In reality the two don't mix and if the server is oriented toward missions and historical aims then numbers will drop as the brawlers go elsewhere to just fight, numbers will also drop as the weather improves, I have seen that consistently on every server and game I have played on!

I think you are dead right, but with great respect Gromit, then why don't you ever fly in Storm of War? We have RDF and historical raids plus full Hurricane squadrons which operate in this very way, and campaigns are even more organised when we are running them. I've been genuinely bemused actually, it is our loss because you can damn well fly that thing.

It's a great shame this game doesn't have enough players for more than one server - it's a major problem in fact, we need a "Team Fusion" team for community marketing of COD, to bring in more people - War Thunder is advertised everywhere! I've been talking to one of our guys about marketing and this very problem, a long term one. I feel it's up to the community to grow this or we're wasting everybody's time.

Continu0
May-21-2013, 08:56
I think you are dead right, but with great respect Gromit, then why don't you ever fly in Storm of War? We have RDF and historical raids plus full Hurricane squadrons which operate in this very way, and campaigns are even more organised when we are running them. I've been genuinely bemused actually, it is our loss because you can damn well fly that thing.

It's a great shame this game doesn't have enough players for more than one server - it's a major problem in fact, we need a "Team Fusion" team for community marketing of COD, to bring in more people - War Thunder is advertised everywhere! I've been talking to one of our guys about marketing and this very problem, a long term one. I feel it's up to the community to grow this or we're wasting everybody's time.

Oh, I think the community grew quite a bit since the TF patch... I keep reading new names in the stats, on the server...
I agree that everything that can be done in terms of marketing should be done. But what else could you do more than spreading the TF-News to all possible forums?
I am starting to give copys of the game away to friends, but there are just too few friends who really are interested in flying...

9./JG52 Ziegler
May-21-2013, 09:07
Well said Osprey and quite true. Yesterday, I logged into and flew a bit of waterfall but it was close to the end and there were only a few players on the server.
Storm of War, on the other hand had quite a few players and most of those players were all very accomplished, dangerous opponents and/or squad/staffel mates. That is where I spent the "valuable" hour or so of time that I had available to me.

Usually, it is the other way around and there are more people flying ATAG. I don't know if it is the mission or not? I only know that myself, who only has limited time available to fly, will always look at the amount and quality of players first and foremost to decide where to fly.

It's great that we have a choice and Osprey is correct that we need to "grow" the experiance in any way we can to preserve and add to it.:thumbsup:

92 Sqn. Philstyle (QJ-P)
May-21-2013, 10:04
I am starting to give copys of the game away to friends, but there are just too few friends who really are interested in flying...

You're right. Flying sims generally require hardware investment too, at a minimum a 3-axis joystick.
If you're inclined to get TrackIR and/or pedals etc you're looking at a pretty serious outlay. I can understand why many people would not want to make that kind of investment.

Osprey
May-21-2013, 15:03
That and getting battered by aces when they join. This is why I think we need some way to bring people in and get them up to speed, hand hold their way through.

Dutch
May-21-2013, 18:03
That and getting battered by aces when they join. This is why I think we need some way to bring people in and get them up to speed, hand hold their way through.

ATAG_Torian had a grand idea for this. He set up his own training server with a mission full of novice level AI formations, so's people could get up to speed flying the aircraft but could still go shoot something. A training server. Brilliant idea.

Trouble was, Torian's in Oz, so the great bulk of players are online when he's in the land of nod. Also, the new chaps usually want to just get stuck in, and would probably feel a bit wimpy using this approach. Of course that doesn't address getting them interested in the first place. Is it even possible to fly Cliffs of Dover with an X-box controller? I have no idea.......

In some ways, this line of conversation reminds me of scale model clubs, i.e. 'How do we get new people interested?'. I used to say 'How do we get someone interested in sticking bits of plastic together and painting it, when they can experience (sort of) flying it on their computer?'. Maybe we've just got to a stage where combat flight sims are the new Airfix kits. Or Tamiya, Hasegawa, Trumpeter etc.

Having said that, there were 206 people in Hyperlobby earlier, and only 70 or so in Cliffs of Dover, most of them on ACG. Maybe our 'fraternity' is just simply getting bored of Kent, and especially the Spit II vs E4/N nonsense. :(

ATAG_JTDawg
May-21-2013, 18:05
That and getting battered by aces when they join. This is why I think we need some way to bring people in and get them up to speed, hand hold their way through.

roflmao I have been saying for 2 years, stop shooting me down ! an really m8 I lean a little bit towards 790402 times I got shot down, as slow an painful lessons learned, a good wingman can make you or break you.
So in summary it was the 790402 times I was shot down , that made me a better pilot. :) so even I should be able to kill someone slipping, flying straight an level , even repeat if needed :D

1lokos
May-21-2013, 18:49
Having said that, there were 206 people in Hyperlobby earlier,

Dutch,

Hyperlobby player numbers include dozen of empty servers, for example now (in bad time zone) he report:

137 players - But populated servers has:

Battle-Fields1 = 17
=IRSS=Dogfight = 13
Skies~of~Valor = 13
Spit_vs_109= 13
FUN~4~ALL= 7

Few more have between 2 and 5 players. In resume, of 137 "players" ~half are empty servers...

Anyway CLoD:

ATAG = 16
Raven-Host = 7
ACG= 5
LeadFarm=2

Perhaps people are migrating for.... War Thunder. :)

Sokol1

Dutch
May-21-2013, 19:08
I take your point Sokol mate, but there were 37 in Battlefields1 alone when I looked. A strange server, where one flies objective based missions, but with 'wonder woman' view and external views available. The highest populated Cliffs of Dover Server was ACG with 46, and they were running a Dunkirk mission, which looked very much like notafinger!'s.

If we're talking about bringing new blood to the game, and/or populating servers, maybe we should ease up on the 'full real' aspect of Cliffs of Dover. It does seem to have become the 'expert's choice', and therefore a small but select group. Most Cliffs of Dover servers are full real. If we are going to attract new blood, maybe server 2 should be set up as a beginner's server, maybe we should have wonder woman view/external views enabled.

I suppose that the point i'm trying to make is that full real isn't everyone's cup of tea. Battlefields1 is still the most popular IL2 server, and it has been for 7 or 8 years to my knowledge. Cliffs of Dover seems to be keeping hold of the idea of being a realism sim, which for some is not necessarily a fun sim.

New blood needs to have fun, or they'll go play something else. I hope I'm making sense here.....

ATAG_Snapper
May-21-2013, 20:12
Some excellent thinking here, gents.

A second server with "relaxed" settings sounds like a positive step towards bringing new players in. Some areas that could easily be addressed:

1. Complex Engine Management (including Engine Temperature Effects)

2. Views - outside views, padlocks, Wonder Woman, etc

3. Icons (both contacts and map icons)

4. Flight modelling - simple (well, simpler)

5. Damage modelling -- a little more forgiving

6. Shooting/bombing -- not necessarily laser trajectories, but not as difficult as in Full Switch.

Although some of us old (and young) farts recoil in horror at the very thought of the above, it may well attract the yank & bank, instant gratification console crowd. The idea is to introduce a potentially huge target market to a FUN PC-based "game". Lots of things to shoot and blow up, and not die too easily in the process.

Just my 2-cents.

Wulf
May-21-2013, 22:28
Some guys just want to dogfight repetitively for their stats and have no interest in missions at all, they are probably better off on an arcade server!

A lot of us however like to fly the missions or attempt to play a role in the mission, I fly Hurricanes and fly as CAP and home defence, for me the mission is important and the more realistic the aims the better!

In reality the two don't mix and if the server is oriented toward missions and historical aims then numbers will drop as the brawlers go elsewhere to just fight, numbers will also drop as the weather improves, I have seen that consistently on every server and game I have played on!

Given the size of the community these days, stigmatizing what you consider to be non-conformist elements doesn't sound to me like the the very best way to foster increased participation. In my experience, name-calling hardly ever works.

As regards Waterfall, well from what I've seen thus far it's OK(ish), but quite a long way for a 109 to fly for what is often not a lot of action. I'm frequently left wondering if I'm actually in the right place because there's bugger all happening; even when you arrive over the ships when there are reasonable numbers on the server. And then there's the whole flak thing which, if described as a bit anaemic or pathetic would be a serious understatement. I just don't believe you could fly over a sizable British convoy steaming out through the Thames Estuary in 1940 and expect to come away from the experience unscathed. There should be an ominous black mantle of flak over the ships as you approach but alas, we just have the odd desultory 'puff' - scarcely enough to frighten a seagull. If life had been as easy as that for the LW in 1940 the War would have been over in a matter of weeks. Back in the old IL-2 days, after the TD people had done their thing, we had great flak; stuff that was dangerous and intimidating. Stuff that made you think very carefully before approaching defended targets. That, it seems to me, has been largely left out of CloD which, in my view, dulls the environment considerably.

Osprey
May-22-2013, 03:25
1. The server idea - very good and that really would be a good suggestion for an 'overflow' server which never seems to have anybody in it. I think most of us started in open pit and 'graduated' to the hard stuff eventually. Even if you had outside views on I think that would appeal to a lot of the less comfortable pilots - certainly the CEM seems to be the biggest hurdle for new people - imagine how many don't come in and post about their problems then put the game down? Surely we want newbies to come in and blast away, perhaps even to the point of stalls and spins off, unlimited ammo, unrealistic gunnery etc
2. Mapping. Unfortunately yes, it appears the BOB was fought between Calais and Manston :stunned: Some of the best fights I've had were over the Isle of Wight though, a 25 min flight from the relative safety of South London (in formation) to meet the Luftwaffe and 40+ coming up from Cherbourg. This is of course mission/campaign stuff, shame it doesn't seem to translate into casual fighting. ACG Storm of War missions are pretty much in a variety of places and you can see the briefings here if you want to know what's there: http://sowc.forumotion.co.uk/f62-mission-briefings

Still, I digress, it seems there is agreement on community growth and I'm pleased that I've sown a seed about this at least. It's not about populating ATAG or ACG Storm of War the most, it would be best if both servers were bursting round the clock and more, so really this is the goal. Only ATAG can decide what they want from their servers and a 'step up' server is a good idea imho, maybe we've a chance of pulling people into our nerdy hobby in the longer term.

KGJ54Lord_Pyro
May-22-2013, 03:42
You can save the money for a second server if you just increase the amount of AI activity. New ppl want to lern how to flight and fight but are slaughtered by aces? Add more ai flight so they can train. I know there are already ai flights but the amount is not as big as it would have to be for attracting lone wolves or beginners. Yesterday none of my friends was available and i took a 109 and paid little britannica a visit. On 6000m all was fine. But as soon as i dropped to dustlevel for strafing some parked planes on an airfield i got 2 or 3 spits on my six. I am certainly not new to this business (and the same happend to me minutes later at RoF xD) but imagine some new folks getting in this kind of situations all day long...
Of course i don't know exactly how many flights are created during the missions but it would be helpfull to have some easy targets in the air so you are as german pilot not doomed to fight spit2s or bomber and also as brit you dont face 109 E4s all day long. I could imagine some recon 2 shipflights or other small fries. They don't have to be announced via ingametextmessages on the screen, the normal groundofficercalls would be enough. It would create more sense of a war going around, creates immersion and provides some fun for those who don't want to fight topclass enemy fighters nor ontercept well protected bombers.

Kling
May-22-2013, 08:15
Oh, I think the community grew quite a bit since the TF patch... I keep reading new names in the stats, on the server...
I agree that everything that can be done in terms of marketing should be done. But what else could you do more than spreading the TF-News to all possible forums?
I am starting to give copys of the game away to friends, but there are just too few friends who really are interested in flying...

One way could could be for TF to be more present here on the forums...( i know some members are here and sometimes answer questions in individual thread, but thats not what i mean)
They dont need to give photos and videos but just weekly updates such as "this week we managed to crack the code for this and that" or "we are currently working on this and that", "our vision is this and that" etc etc..

Its very quiet from TF since last patch and all the info we read is from the threads where some individuals have replied but not one dedicated thread from TF.

Personally it think it would be ALOT more clever to release many small patches with few fixes and tricks than releasing major patches every 6 months. People lose intrest and only come back every 6 months whenever a patch is out.
I know people who said "great patch but let me know when they have fixed either the "LOD issue" or the "stuttery clouds". A TF patch with only only 1 fix would be perfectly fine for most and would keep people intrested , knowing that things are being worked on constanly. Personally I think a patch should come out for every little fix (although I understand that this is not possible all the time). But it surely would give people the feeling that "things are happening quickly".

Most people dont even know that TF is working mainly on the DM for the next patch. I think WE as a community, both TF and ATAG server members, are really bad at advertising the future of CLOD and the plans and visions for this great sim.

regards

Osprey
May-22-2013, 08:41
Basically what I was saying there Kling, that we need a TF type community team to push COD - I was going to write an essay about this but saw this post and got prompted.

This team would have to be close enough linked to TF to market COD better, it would need a head to pass decisions through. I also agree Kling about the number of releases, those little patches drip fed are lovely trinkets we can enjoy, they don't have to be all of the time but the little stuff could come in monthly/bi monthly releases. An updater, such as with HSFX, would be the best way to distro this imho.

It's easy for me to talk this of course, I'm not capable of actually doing most of these suggestions, but they are suggestions and if anybody wants to "pick up the ball and run with it" (as you Yankees like to say) then they would be doing a service to the community imho. Let's face it, IL2 people batter themselves too much, we are too niche for that, we need to pull together more.

Time for mods to split this into a brand new topic please? or edit the title!

Roblex
May-22-2013, 09:54
I am uncomfortable with the idea of removing CEM because it really does not take that long to learn it and then you realise that it is not as constrictive or difficult as it first appeared. Let's face it, with most aircraft if you open your rads and adjust the prop pitch as soon as you have taken off then you can pretty much fly around for an hour without further issues or adjustments needed.

What we need to concentrate on is some good sticky tutorials that show the *basics* The reason I stress the word *basics* is there we have hoardes of carefully researched articles culled from original WW2 documents and high level engineering manuals that just scare the sh*t out of new players. They click on these articles to get some pointers to get up in the air and stop the engine blowing and they 500 words on venturi effects and technical diagrams showing how decreasing pressures at altitude affect cylinder head temperature and coolant performance and fuel/air mixtures. Who can blame them for saying 'Whoa! I can't do all that maths in a classroom never mind in my head while dogfighting!' The reality is that the mixture controls are rarely needed at all.

Yes there are people who want to know every detail of engine mechanics and every switch a pilot pressed in the real thing but the newbies just want to get up and stay up then when they are comfortable they can start looking into how using prop pitch more than just at take-off and landing will improve their dogfighting. While we are still scaring them away from CEM then they will never leave the dumbed down server and we will not be achieving our aim of getting more people into the proper server.

Is it is possible for someone with good mission building skills to put together a training mission that takes someone who has learned to fly without CEM through the basics of doing a short flight with CEM? Tell them in advance what keys need to be set up then sit them at the end of a runway and talk them through start-up and warming up and then take-off and climb-out and setting pitch and revs for cruise then tell them to RTB and set pitch back to 100% before landing as normal. Just showing someone how easy it is to make a basic flight using CEM will be a major step. Do one for a Spit and one for a 109 and maybe later do the same for the Blenny and the 110.

Yes, personal tuition would be even better but many people would be happier playing around offline first without feeling uncomfortable about taking someone away from his gaming to nursemaid them.

There are also some very good videos around demonstrating simple circuits (and also some overcomplicated ones!) I think my first forays into CEM came after watching a nice easy video of a spit being started at Bembridge and doing a circuit and a stall recovery while the pilot described everything he was doing. A sticky thread with links to the good videos would probably be very useful.

Osprey
May-22-2013, 10:20
I'm talking about numbers in the game itself, as a whole - the whole community Roblex whereas you refer to a server, 'the proper server' in fact. What is 'the proper server'? And how exactly would that help COD?

Aside that glaring issue ;) you make some very good points.

Roblex
May-22-2013, 14:16
I'm talking about numbers in the game itself, as a whole - the whole community Roblex whereas you refer to a server, 'the proper server' in fact. What is 'the proper server'? And how exactly would that help COD?

Aside that glaring issue ;) you make some very good points.

oops! Apologies :getaway:

I think what I was saying is that I think once they got over the initial fear of using CEM people would find it adds to the experience. I am not a hair-shirt pilot who likes to make everything as hard for myself as possible but I still find the ability, even the 'need', to tweak the engines for better performance makes the flying more enjoyable.

I think a novice server could have icons and even GPS, I am not sure the gunnery or damage needs to be dumbed down though.

SG1_sandokito
May-22-2013, 14:46
A lot of player migrate to other server, because no like to fly a spit 1 or hurri DH5. They only like 100 oct or e3 or spit 2A.

When i ask to they why you no fly on ATAg?
- Because the mission is not good to me, a have not my 100 Oct......
They fly good 2a or 100oct, but when they go to fly dh5 or spit1 the say can not fly because they are badly.

This ios my conclusion.

noxsphere
May-22-2013, 18:48
I agree with SG1_sandokito.

It's more than easy to notice that a small amount of players on the ATAG server is connected to the mission "no Spit IIA this time".
A lot of us feel a huge advantage of 109's, so there's nothing worse than fighting your own machine in addition (I'm ambitious so I try to go no matter if it's Hurri 100oct or Spit IIA,
but when I jump in IIA it's more like - "finally!").
---
I believe a huge amount of players jump in the ATAG server and goes right away over Hawkinge/Manston to hunt for 109's, as some of the others just go over France and await enemy bombers.
Maybe moving the objectives (ships?) away from east England sometimes to -let's say- somewhere south (ships closer to Eastburne instead of Dover?) would help?
I'm not familiar in what's possible so I'm just giving a brainstorming suggestion.
We - polish fighters - would be also happy to fight over Northolt and London itself ;)

What's more, maybe there should be some admin who could give some orders - i don't know - "real-made" announcements visible for reds or blues?
I mean "Reds needed over the ships immediately" or something like that. I know there is a chat, but it'd be a completely different thing I guess.
This could help people without TeamSpeak to feel there is a real battle somewhere. Like a campaign (radio would be great - just imagine! - but i know it's probably impossible).

Sorry if I'm terribly wrong and naive in some of suggestions, I know I probably am.
But I really do care of the ATAG's future, it is really great and I really admire your ideas :) So just wanted to add my thoughts!

Cheers guys and keep up the good work!

Nox from Poland

PS
I can't imagine anything worse than making the ATAG server easier - it would become a Battlefield3-style arcade game with some hack'n'slash trolling noobs over the server :)
A nightmare!

9./JG52 Hans Gruber
May-22-2013, 19:16
Fragmenting the already tiny community with different play modes is a very bad idea. I have seen this done with other games and it never works out. A person does not come to a series like IL-2 without the understanding that this is a serious sim. You cut you're teeth offline in single player and then make your way online. Problem was the single player for Cliffs was worse than awful and many gave up right there. A server with dumbed down settings is not going to do anything, there are other games out there that do this already 1000x better and with large communities. I don't believe anybody is buying Cliffs for a casual flight experience.

In my opinion what's needed more than anything is a new map. A North Africa map would do wonders for ripping the community out of its current funk.

Dutch
May-22-2013, 19:16
I can't imagine anything worse than making the ATAG server easier - it would become a Battlefield3-style arcade game with some hack'n'slash trolling noobs over the server :)
A nightmare!

I agree wholeheartedly mate. :thumbsup:

Making ATAG server 1 easier would be a disaster. But server 2 is there, and is usually pretty much unpopulated, so why not make it the 'fun server' rather than the 'overflow' server. Similarly, ACG have a dogfight server as well as their 'Storm of War' server. Why not make that dogfight server the fun server too? Then all us old hands could jump in the fun server, have a laugh shooting things, but also encourage the flyers there to go full real, and teach them what we know whilst we're at it.

Seems reasonable to me.......

Dutch
May-22-2013, 19:37
In my opinion what's needed more than anything is a new map. A North Africa map would do wonders for ripping the community out of its current funk.

Sorry mate, didn't see your post before my last one. But I periodically jump up and say 'But we haven't yet used a tenth of the Map available!!!'

Where are the escorted bomber groups flying up from Normandy to attack Southampton and coming in over the Isle of Wight? Where are the opportunities for RAF 10 group to get involved? Or RAF 12 group for that matter, although the map struggles to be north enough for them, but we could improvise. :D.

It seems to me that mission designers are petrified of players having to fly any sort of distance. Is that 'full real'? Of course it isn't. So we're stuck with 'Hellfire Corner'. Is that because mission designers somehow 'know' what players want? Or is it just their own preconceptions of what the 'community' would accept? In a full real server, both bomber and fighter pilots should accept distance as being a part of the mission. I'm sure most of us have flown MS flight simulator at some point, so it's not too far a stretch to get a flight sim community to add combat to their navigation skills.........

Maybe another 'attractor' for the flight sim community would be just that. Navigation exercises for pilots. First you have to navigate, then you fight. That's 'full real'. Instead we have 'oh yeah, I know where Hawkinge is, follow me.....' :D

SG1_sandokito
May-22-2013, 20:02
Maybe another 'attractor' for the flight sim community would be just that. Navigation exercises for pilots. First you have to navigate, then you fight. That's 'full real'. Instead we have 'oh yeah, I know where Hawkinge is, follow me.....' :D
:thumbsup::thumbsup:

I normaly fly medium bombers, and i like soo much a navigation misión. Usually practise on our squad 2 ours of navigation and formation whit 6 or 8 He111 or ju88.
We enjoy a lot of whit this mission tipe. on atag, we like very much wen our squad bomber are scort by a lot of german pilots, is a very imersive to me and my friends.

Wulf
May-22-2013, 20:22
One way could could be for TF to be more present here on the forums...( i know some members are here and sometimes answer questions in individual thread, but thats not what i mean)
They dont need to give photos and videos but just weekly updates such as "this week we managed to crack the code for this and that" or "we are currently working on this and that", "our vision is this and that" etc etc..

Its very quiet from TF since last patch and all the info we read is from the threads where some individuals have replied but not one dedicated thread from TF.

Personally it think it would be ALOT more clever to release many small patches with few fixes and tricks than releasing major patches every 6 months. People lose intrest and only come back every 6 months whenever a patch is out.
I know people who said "great patch but let me know when they have fixed either the "LOD issue" or the "stuttery clouds". A TF patch with only only 1 fix would be perfectly fine for most and would keep people intrested , knowing that things are being worked on constanly. Personally I think a patch should come out for every little fix (although I understand that this is not possible all the time). But it surely would give people the feeling that "things are happening quickly".

Most people dont even know that TF is working mainly on the DM for the next patch. I think WE as a community, both TF and ATAG server members, are really bad at advertising the future of CLOD and the plans and visions for this great sim.

regards



I think these are all good ideas. In particular, the suggestion that patches are drip-fed to the community sounds like a great way to build and maintain momentum. Having said that, I have no idea how difficult or time consuming this might be. Perhaps it's impractical.

Increased feedback from TF would also be useful. Again I appreciate that this invariable means someone has to find the time but if it was possible, I think people would feel a greater sense of involvement, particularly if they knew more about what was going on right now and what difficulties were being encountered along the way and the overall vision for the future. Only the TF guys are going to have any real understanding of the actual potential. Obviously I can't speak for others but I'd love some idea as to where all this was going. I assume it must have been discussed.

Finally there's the whole question of the new guys. How do you introduce the inexperienced ("sprogs" in RAF parlance) to the hyper-competitive world of on-line combat flying in such a way that they don't become immediately discouraged and leave? One option may be to have dedicated threads on the forum for each on the various aircraft flown in the game. These threads could serve as a kind of class room or reference for new guys who are new to the community or just individuals who have been around for a while who want to try a different type. What I had in mind would be more 'tactical' in nature than than technical - especially as we already appear to have information available on things like CEM. Maybe these threads could be started with an opening few paragraphs by someone who is an acknowledged 'Ace' and most importantly, someone who who fights in what could be described as a conventional manner for the 'type'. This would then give others with experience the opportunity to chime in with their own ideas, and new guys the opportunity to ask questions and pull apart the various theories in an environment dedicated to learning.

9./JG52 Hans Gruber
May-22-2013, 20:30
Where are the escorted bomber groups flying up from Normandy to attack Southampton and coming in over the Isle of Wight? Where are the opportunities for RAF 10 group to get involved? Or RAF 12 group for that matter, although the map struggles to be north enough for them, but we could improvise. :D.

Storm of War did that already and then some. I created over 20 historic BoB scenarios that we ran in a public rotation and got very little traction. The Isle of Wight missions in particular were server killers.



It seems to me that mission designers are petrified of players having to fly any sort of distance. Is that 'full real'? Of course it isn't. So we're stuck with 'Hellfire Corner'. Is that because mission designers somehow 'know' what players want? Or is it just their own preconceptions of what the 'community' would accept? In a full real server, both bomber and fighter pilots should accept distance as being a part of the mission. I'm sure most of us have flown MS flight simulator at some point, so it's not too far a stretch to get a flight sim community to add combat to their navigation skills.........

Roll up those sleeves and get busy in the FMB. I can count the number of people who have made public missions on one hand. Maybe your fresh ideas are just what is needed. :thumbsup:

Dutch
May-22-2013, 21:33
Roll up those sleeves and get busy in the FMB. I can count the number of people who have made public missions on one hand. Maybe your fresh ideas are just what is needed. :thumbsup:

Yep, I know. I really wish i knew how. And I do appreciate the irony of 'fresh ideas'. :D

But as I'm sure you know, I'm just a player. I dive into the FMB to make little scenarios for silly films. That's as far as my knowledge of the FMB will stretch. Let alone 'scripting' ffs.

That doesn't mean that my contributions to this thread are either unfounded or without substance. We should try many variations, whether in adjusting realism settings or mission parameters. How else can we 'test the water'?

Osprey
May-23-2013, 03:42
oops! Apologies :getaway:

I think what I was saying is that I think once they got over the initial fear of using CEM people would find it adds to the experience. I am not a hair-shirt pilot who likes to make everything as hard for myself as possible but I still find the ability, even the 'need', to tweak the engines for better performance makes the flying more enjoyable.

I think a novice server could have icons and even GPS, I am not sure the gunnery or damage needs to be dumbed down though.

I am in total agreement :)

Osprey
May-23-2013, 04:07
Sorry mate, didn't see your post before my last one. But I periodically jump up and say 'But we haven't yet used a tenth of the Map available!!!'

Where are the escorted bomber groups flying up from Normandy to attack Southampton and coming in over the Isle of Wight? Where are the opportunities for RAF 10 group to get involved? Or RAF 12 group for that matter, although the map struggles to be north enough for them, but we could improvise. :D.

It seems to me that mission designers are petrified of players having to fly any sort of distance. Is that 'full real'? Of course it isn't. So we're stuck with 'Hellfire Corner'. Is that because mission designers somehow 'know' what players want? Or is it just their own preconceptions of what the 'community' would accept? In a full real server, both bomber and fighter pilots should accept distance as being a part of the mission. I'm sure most of us have flown MS flight simulator at some point, so it's not too far a stretch to get a flight sim community to add combat to their navigation skills.........

Maybe another 'attractor' for the flight sim community would be just that. Navigation exercises for pilots. First you have to navigate, then you fight. That's 'full real'. Instead we have 'oh yeah, I know where Hawkinge is, follow me.....' :D

Yup Dutch, I've had this argument but as naf! points out, people don't seem to want to fly those distances. The best I could get is bombers into Kenley (Aug 18th), but that presently isn't in the cycle. August 15th is the longest mission atm I think, the second raid goes to Eastchurch and south of London somewhere before heading back out. Use the RDF when prompted, you'll find them.

The trouble is with Sector A is that it's ok to follow a long flight of bombers right at the beginning of the mission, but as it runs for 4 hours it diverts to into the old 'Folkestone low dogfight' stuff. If you are disciplined though, and with fellow pilots decide that you want to actually do the missions, then you'll get that immersion, but unfortunately you also need an enemy to decide the same. This is why it was fantastic in campaign but doesn't necessarily translate.

I am referring to ACG SOW mission btw, I cannot comment on the ATAG ones.

Roblex
May-23-2013, 06:51
I think Salmos new mission (Home Plate) might be a step in the right direction. All the emphasis is on large waves of AI and human bombers carpet bombing the airfields to close them and win the map. This makes bomb carrying 109s less useful so the fight is less likely to end up down low and it makes it more important for the RAF to attack the bomber formations and for the LW to defend them. The RAF has the extra impetus of knowing that if they ignore the bombers they will no longer be able to be lazy and use Hawkinge and Manston and might have to fly 'all the way' from Eastchurch or Gravesend of even... Biggin Hill :stunned:

Regarding 'using the rest of the map', in a recent conversation about using 1938 aircraft in a 1940 BoB scenario someone suggested we would need to have a 'Battle Of France' map to use them correctly. This is a good idea as at least the first part of the BoF had the RAF operating from bases in France and much of it was in the Normandy area, an area well covered by the current map but rarely used.

For those not familiar with this stage of the war, it was the period just after Britain had declared war on Germany. We had sent the army (the British Expeditionary Force) and several squadrons of fighters to France to help the French army defend its borders then the Germans had overwhelmed and outmaneuvered us with their new blitzkrieg tactics leaving us standing at the maginot line wondering what had happened while the panzers were half way to Calais. We then had to withdraw quickly, ending up trapped at Dunkirk. During this time the RAF were fighting a rear-guard action while being continually pushed back to more Westerly airfields as territory was lost on the ground.

Osprey
May-23-2013, 07:30
Regarding 'using the rest of the map', in a recent conversation about using 1938 aircraft in a 1940 BoB scenario someone suggested we would need to have a 'Battle Of France' map to use them correctly. This is a good idea as at least the first part of the BoF had the RAF operating from bases in France and much of it was in the Normandy area, an area well covered by the current map but rarely used.


Those aircraft were already replaced by the BoF, mostly. The RAF had 100 octane and even rotols during the BoF, more so toward the end. There's plenty of evidence of this. Those 1938 types were made by misunderstanding imho, they were phoney war types and largely replaced by the time actual flighting broke out.

9./JG52 Ziegler
May-23-2013, 08:04
For me, Notafinger makes good points with the Africa map idea and Roblex with the Battle of France idea.

I'm not one of those instant gratification players that takes off on the "front lines" every time. I can do that in single player. I don't mind flying distance either but as some stated, it is allot "easier" when you are flying with your squad/staffel or at least a wingman or as one. Myself, I like to take off a ways inland and get some "energy" anyways. But I also know that I'm in a minority and most players want the that fast contact.

I'd say what Dutch mentioned but the reverse "get some combat pilots to add some navigation to their skills" :thumbsup:

We all love the game and want it to grow. Maybe it's time to (in my case) put up or shut up and invest the time to learn to use Full Mission builder. I do agree that the insertion of more AI's would be ok too. Just to satisfy some of that IGrat.

Osprey
May-23-2013, 09:16
The FMB is a doddle, always has been. This new one has it's quirks and one has to invest time in testing what you've done. The big problem is a lot of the triggers included in the game are flaky. For instance, the airgroupdestroyed trigger did work on my August 18th mission, scoring points for the RAF as they batter the bombers (therefore crucial for the LW to escort and defend them to meet their objective) but next next time it ran they just didn't work. Nothing changed. The other thing is getting some half decent scripting going, a template, and briefings to match - this is the difficult part because coding takes skill - credit to the likes of Salmo for having a damn fine crack at it. Give that man a medal and a cup of tea. :salute:

I wonder if reliable triggers is one tranche of work for TF, for the community to make better missions, or if there's an external code way to do it better which can be community shared.

Vas
May-23-2013, 10:18
I thought I'd throw my perspective into the conversation as I'm relativelty new to the community and the ATAG server, maybe it will add some insight into the options being discussed by the server veterans.

I started flying in Cliffs around 2 years ago I guess (maybe 3, I can't remember when it was released and when I purchased thru steam). I flew, until the last couple months, exclusively off-line in the single player campaign. Prop planes have always been a struggle for me to manage in any combat sim I flew that featured Prop planes. As such, when I first started flying Cliffs I kept with a simpler flight model (it seemed if I wasn't flying that bird straight and level I'd inevitably induce a spin I knew not how to recover from :) ). Also, CEM back then? HAHAHA forget about it - just flying the bird in a dogfight was enough challenge for me. So I kept CEM off. I enjoyed flying with a simpler flight model and no CEM for a very long time, but what was missing from the experience was the human element.

Fastforward about a year after I started flying Cliffs and I started looking for multiplayer servers to seek out that human element the sim was inherently missing flying against the AI. I tried a couple different servers I can't remember the names of now, all of which featured the full flight model and CEM. I took off and either spun myself to a firery death or was overheating my engines before I knew it. It was a miserable experience from where I was coming from. I decided to just stick to my offline single player campaigns just because I was too frustrated trying to figure out how to fly under full-real conditions, and I didn't have a community to turn to at the time to help me learn.

I spent another year or so flying offline under simpler flight conditions, enjoying the sim, etc. I started searching for Cliffs of Dover communities and found ATAG. Thru ATAG I learned of Team Fusion and the patch. I found several tutorials on flying the 109, and watched Ape's videos on repeat for about week. I downloaded and applied the patch, jumped onto the server and have been flying Cliffs here (and only here), and flying Cliffs exclusively in multiplayer now. I've been flying on the server, fumbling my way about my sorties. I still spin myself out of fights. I still overheat my engines. Thankfully, due to the community and Ape's 109 tutorials it's happening in far less frequency then it used to. I still can't fly spitfires and hurricanes though - I still constantly overheat those buggers.

So, what I hope the server admins and veterans of the ATAG community take away from my tale above is this: For a very long time, I flew exclusively offline because there wasn't a quality community or server I could find that featured a simpler flight model and no CEM. It was an enormous barrier that kept me offline for 2 years plus. I can't say for certain how much the Cliffs community could grow with a server that featured simpler flgiht modeling and no CEM, but I do believe it would help.

There are several flyers out there, like myself, that have a tremendous hurtle to overcome to be comfortable flying full-real like we do on the ATAG servers currently. If ATAG offered a simpler server I do believe it'd help grow the ATAG and Cliffs community. Granted, not everyone who would join the server would make the conversion to full real, but I firmly believe such a server would present an opportunity for those flyers who struggle with full-real the to get assimilated into the community and thus have a greater likelihood of making the step to flying full-real with us on the main server.

I think more tutorials on flying the Spitfires and Hurricanes, as well as both side's bombers would also go a long way towards converting those flying under simpler settings to flying full-real. Like I said above, if it weren't for Ape's tutorials on the 109 I don't know if I'd be flying online at all, let alone on the ATAG server. More quality tutorials on the Spits and Hurris would go a long way to helping newbies make the conversion to full real. Maybe they're out there already and I've just overlooked them. Consolidating all those tutorials unto the forums here would be a great step though.

So, yeah. Hope all of the above adds some valuable insight worth considering. I know for a fact, had ATAG had a server that featured simpler flight modeling and no CEM I would have joined this community over a year, maybe 2 years ago. If that's the case with me, I reason there has to be other flyers not amoung us that would be the same. Apologies for the length, I didn't intend for there to be so much to this post. See ya'll in the air, watch me spinnin' :)

1lokos
May-23-2013, 11:58
Vas,

I think if in these two years you find appropriated instructions your learn this CEM (that are not complex) in few days/one week.
The CloD release mess end in myths and Youtube "tutorial" videos that more add complications that help for novices.

For example, to start SpitIIa engine the only thing that one need do plus what he did in il-2(1946) is open fuel cock.

Play with magnets, mixture, open throttle X%... is only "for show".

In resume:

Open fuel cock, hit "I", open radiator and fly around until last your ammo. :thumbsup:

What this game need is like some "Battleground Europe" training.

Sokol1

Roblex
May-23-2013, 13:14
I have to say I agree with 1Lokos, the 'difficulty' of CEM is a myth and I have already said earlier that I feel some of the overcomplicated manuals are to blame.

Here is how to fly a Spit under CEM without blowing the engine:-

1. Turn on fuel.
2. Start Engine
3. Wait until oil temp is at 40.
4. Open radiator fully (ie indicator at top of line) I underline this because forgetting this is the major cause of overheats.
5. Taxi out and take-off promptly (note: even on full radiator it is a bad idea to sit still with the engine running for more than a few minutes)
6. As soon as you have climbed a few thousand feet and doing at least 140kts reduce the prop pitch so the revs are around 2550 to 2600 (about 70%)

That is it! If you are flying fast you can leave the throttle fully open at 2700 revs and it will not overheat though generally it is recommended to treat the engine a little more gently when not in combat then when you do need full throttle just keep an eye on the water & oil temps)

7. When you are slowing down to join the circuit and land then put the pitch back to 100% (top of the indicator) but that is just to help you slow down and give you more precise speed control, you don't have to.

Everything else is just 'tweaking for extra performance i.e.

Using less revs will mean it will stay cool even at lower speeds but you will also find the spit can fly fast at 2550 and run so cool that you can reduce the rads to 25% and go even faster (as long as you remember to open them again if you decide to slow down)
Obviously there are also in-between speed and revs situations where you can use 50% or 75% rads but at the end of the day, you can leave the radiators at 100% open and not touch them again and hardly notice that you are not getting the absolute fastest performance.

Similarly for the prop pitch, you can fiddle with them constantly to get peak performance during climbs and dives and steep turns etc. but early spits & hurris and the blenheim only had two settings, 100% for take-off and landing and about 65% for all else and you can fly the later models just the same.

My recommendation to all CEM newbies is just learn to fly around with 100% rads and less than full throttle then start pushing the boundaries of what the engine will take later.

---------------------
I will add one other thing, as it was something that confused me in the tutorials when I first started using CEM; they kept using Boost and RPM interchangeably in the tutorials!

Boost, in simple terms, is a measure of how much power the engine is producing and that is mostly a function of throttle position.
RPM, while it can be seen changing with throttle position, is mostly a function of, or at least mostly controlled by, prop pitch.

Think of Boost as the position of your gas pedal and Prop Pitch as the gear you are in. First gear is good for getting going but leave it in first gear and you wont be able to go very fast plus you will blow the engine if you stay in first gear. Lifting your foot off the pedal will reduce the reading on the revometer but you will still be very slow. What you actually do while driving is go up a gear thus reducing the revs and also allowing you to go faster with less revs.

I could expand on everything above but for a newbie it is unnecessary complication and I hoping others will refrain from expanding on it for the same reasons :-)

FTC_Snowy
May-23-2013, 15:47
I am pretty new to CloD and did find it daunting to start out with CEM. However I was very fortunate to have the help of ATAG_Torian who very kindly guided me along on the overflow server or on his terrific training servers. After leaving divots around a number of English and French airfields I began to be able to take off and land without breaking the ground crews hearts each time. After a while I felt confident enough to venture onto the main server. Very quickly I found it both a very welcoming and fun place to be. Virtual death could come at any time but I was soon hooked. I very much like the main server and its cockpit only view, full engine management and various mission opportunities, just as it is. It is all new and exciting to me. I also like hopping onto the overflow server to practice some of the tips I have been given by the likes of DRock and other kind souls. Thanks again guys. At the moment I am sort of concentrating on the Blenheim, my thinking is I would like to come to grips with one type but do enjoy other types as well. It will be a few weeks yet before I can get back on due to being away on business but I look forward to it.