PDA

View Full Version : The community has lost perspective! (online flow)



F19_Ob
03-26-2005, 06:44 AM

F19_Ob
03-26-2005, 06:44 AM

Chuck_Older
03-26-2005, 07:19 AM
Anyone?

I don't play online, but jeez, somebody give input here

JG54_Arnie
03-26-2005, 07:56 AM
Hm, I think you got a point there, so the question is, would there be demand for one or more smaller servers that cater for these lower end systems?

It seems that the 128 players online feature was overrated indeed, but still for systems that can hack the number of players and objects, some increased ammounts are possible. But as you say, thats only for those that have the systems.

As I said before (but didnt get a response back then) I'd be a happy to revive EasternHotshots that would run realistic planesets per year with say some 28 players or something? No stats and scripting around it, apart from mapchange every few hours, just plain old dogfighting but also with bombers and some targets for those. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

But I still see plenty of empty servers around, dont they already fill the demand?

Capt.LoneRanger
03-26-2005, 08:13 AM
PF offers a LOT of options for gameplay, mission generation and effects. It's not that the 8Player servers are replaced by 128player servers. The additional bandwith is used for more complex missions and goals.

Is that bad?

No, absolutely not. Some people still prefer it the FreeChoice-FreeFight-way, but I'm very glad to see more and more servers like GG and WC popping up with many players on very good maps with realistic settings and planesets. Especially for WC, I've never before seen people working together like this, communicating via TS2 and chat, seeking to fullfill the mission, etc.
That doesn't mean the death of the smaller servers, but it surely does mean that people have a better choice of what gameplay they want. Quick action (with most of the time very rude HotShot-Noobs, Teamkillers and BadLoosers) or Teamplay to fullfill a mission, mostly on larger servers.

But of course this has also be seen in perspective. It's not as easy as you put it. It's more like "Oh, there's players on this server - so I rather join that, than fly alone" - of course that leaves some servers empty, but hey, the pure number of servers on HL has more than trippled in hot times!!! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-surprised.gif

Hunter82
03-26-2005, 09:07 AM
personally I stopped playing online after AEP release...last patch of FB was tops.. Hoping new FM patch will make it great online again since that was my main focus.

F19_Ob
03-26-2005, 09:29 AM
Dont get me wrong Capt. LoneRanger....I also am very happy with the many options and the development of the sim.

I'm just less happy with the huge increase of everything on servers (most of mine changed to this "newer" standard) after AEP and PF and the worser general flow for most people I know of If i compare with FB days.

I know that Many do have topsystems today and connections, but also think another big portion of the community doesnt have it and for one reason or the other wont be able to obtain it fast enough for the "evolution".


Ofcourse its interesting with historical and accurate battles.
It would be hard to be accurate when depictiting attacks on carriers without thousands of flakburst during a short timeperiod but is the community ready as a group for this "new" standard.

I mean if 100-300 members of the community are forced out because of low-end systems its perhaps ok and the way of progress.
But Does anyone know how many these low-enders and slow connecters are?

Is the increase of these groundobjects/flak and big maps so important for the newer style of onlinebattle so its worth to have a part of the community excluded from the online gaming?
Atleast it wouldnt to me, even if I had a better system and even faster connection.
All parts of this community is important for this sim.

So, I have no problem with the technical evolution and the sim but I wish the onlinecommunity should have tuned the gameplay better so a 'perhaps' impotant part can join instead of booted because of a few more fregging objects wich most dont see anyway.
http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

JG54_Arnie
03-26-2005, 09:35 AM
So do you think it would be usefull to set up a server for that (refence to my post http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif ). That is possible, but then perhaps its usefull to start a poll or something? To see how many people would be interested.

VMF-214_HaVoK
03-26-2005, 09:49 AM
I like it as is. I dont need anymore flack but 30-50 players with objectives is a good time. Greater Green, Zeke_vs_Wildcat are two of the best servers in HL and a blast to play in. IMO

F19_Ob
03-26-2005, 09:49 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I belive there would be such an interest if people knew about it.

The reason for me to write this post is that I myself know quite many who just wont be able to upgrade fast enough.
What I dont know but suspect is that there are many more low-enders and low-connecters out there.
So I'd thought this was one way to find out.
What is the general knowledge or feeling about this in the community? What is Mr Maddox thoughts on this ? The companys?
Is it important?

Lets see where this leads......if anywhere.

Perhaps there should be a low-end online community http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/cry.gif

thnx for the input

VFS-22_SPaRX
03-26-2005, 10:23 AM
Currently on HL:

10 servers @ 32players max
7 servers @ 16 players max

All these servers are empty. I am sure these fill your desire for low end systems. But as you can see no one uses them. I really do not understand what the problem is. You wan low player count servers, but they are on HL every day. I think the problem is no one wants to play on low player count servers.

SPaRX

LStarosta
03-26-2005, 10:26 AM
Most have awful settings.... If we could get a server with WC/GG settings but with smaller amounts of ground objects and smaller maps and a smaller player limit, it'd be really cool.

stathem
03-26-2005, 10:31 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by F19_Ob:
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Perhaps there should be a low-end online community http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/cry.gif

thnx for the input <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

There is. 30+ players still playing the original IL2 on UBI, some real low end stuff there, but still fun sometimes.

I must be odd in that I like to seek out the DS's with low numbers in. GG, WC, and Warbirds run like a dream with 10-12 players in, so fast my old eyes can barely keep up. I often find myself in Warbirds_WF when the rest are busy, it just takes someone to make the initial jump.

VFS-22_SPaRX
03-26-2005, 10:39 AM
If you do not like the settings and such on these smaller server, then maybe you should talk to the admins of these servers and see if you can help them. Instead of complaining, how about maybe offering your help.

JadehawkII
03-26-2005, 11:09 AM
I'm with Chuck as I don't play online at all. I have no reason too due to the fact I just like playing this game myself. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif I do however wish the AI's in the game here smarter than they currently are. Leading a squadron once, I had 2 flights protecting myself and 3 other AI team mates in the first flight loaded with bombs heading in for flak targets. Once the Enemy AI's showed up and made a beeline straight for my flight, I called in for some help. To my dismay, my flight AI's dropped their bombs and went after the Enemy AI's leaving myself alone to bomb the Flak target. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/354.gif Next time I played this mission, I did not call for anything. Just hoped like hell my flight stuck with me all the way to target. Seems to work that way but lost a member or sometimes they shoot down all accept myself before target. So the result is the same either way. I would be nice if I could call in help without my flight losing it's bombs. Yes I have tried several different ways to call the other flights, but same thing happens, my flight drops it's bombs way before target. It's was one of the Io Jima mission that came with PF game. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif I know, I know, I know....this is nit nicking and overall, I do love this game. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/heart.gif
OK. off my soap box... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

VW-IceFire
03-26-2005, 11:22 AM
I think a good server size is 30 players with ground targets on medium sized maps with flight times of 5-10 minutes at the most.

That makes for interesting experiences.

-HH-Quazi
03-26-2005, 11:37 AM
Although I have a cable connection and have no troubles, I would like to see a few servers set up with our dial-up brothers in mind. If I had the resources to do it, I would. I'd say it would stay busy.

WOLFMondo
03-26-2005, 11:39 AM
I really enjoyed the occasions when I went on servers with 60+ players, it seemed like what WW2 fighting was...an intense and chaotic situation that makes you think quick or get taken down.

I find with smaller servers theres not to much action, when there is its over a base or the target only, you never see a group of players working together en masse like they really did.

I played on the zeke vs wildcat server a bit the other day and thats great, lots of players, very hectic, not just one on one or 1 plane with the entire other team behind them in a conga line cause that the only plane that had the nuts to go and bomb the objective.

LStarosta
03-26-2005, 11:44 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VFS-22_SPaRX:
If you do not like the settings and such on these smaller server, then maybe you should talk to the admins of these servers and see if you can help them. Instead of complaining, how about maybe offering your help. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Wow, way to get all righteous on me Sparx...


Most of these admins don't leave any contact information. I'm not going to start hunting down people to leave "suggestions".

DONB3397
03-26-2005, 01:09 PM
After years offline, I recently started flying with a group of friends online. It's great fun, a whole different set of requirements. On the big servers, however, the entry of new players and respawning causes stutters...usually at the wrong time.

Wasn't it always that way? It happens offline, too, when you schedule delayed starts or change the mission content. Large numbers of ground objects and a/c simply slow things down with this technology and engine.

On the other hand, ten or fifteen years ago, who could have imagined what we take for granted. Get over it.

Capt_Haddock
03-26-2005, 02:10 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by DONB3397:
Get over it. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Oh. Come on. There's no need to be harsh. Ob is just trying to have some polite debate http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

I also feel that something went wrong at some point.

A year ago I could play in any server without problems. Yesterday I just wanted a quick game with realistic settings, and had to give up after a while. The low framerates made the game unplayable for me.

The interesting thing is that these new breed of servers are also making the game more boring. Just check this example:

One of the servers I tried had 3 bases per side (all full of static objests and AA) and 3 different ground targets to be atacked/defended. As a result the players were diluted in a big map, and instead of having a proper frontline fight with organised bomber flights, escorts and intercepts, you could only see scattered players flying unrealistically alone. And when you did finally find the target, the AA was so over the top that the framerate made the whole game unplayable.

Did the quantity of players, bases, ground targets, and AA units make the game better? No.
A smaller and more focused mission, with fewer bases and targets would have made the game more realistic and ejoyable for everyone. People with low and high-end PCs.

As they say... it's not about quantity, it's about quality http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

http://www.haddock.f2s.com/sig/F19bannerh.jpg
http://www.haddock.f2s.com/sig/F19banner.jpg

F19_Ob
03-26-2005, 02:52 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VFS-22_SPaRX:
Currently on HL:

10 servers @ 32players max
7 servers @ 16 players max

All these servers are empty. I am sure these fill your desire for low end systems. But as you can see no one uses them. I really do not understand what the problem is. You wan low player count servers, but they are on HL every day. I think the problem is no one wants to play on low player count servers.

SPaRX <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Thnx SPaRX....but low objectcount is better than low playercount. I can handle 30 players if the other things i mentioned are lower.

I infact checked some servers several months ago.(f16 was still up) And have also done that on occasion earlier but no luck yet.
Now my stick broke so dont have to worry about online play at the moment. I wont go online again before I can get a decent one this time.
I cant remember the names of the servers I was on but as u said; several were empty...and the ones I did try had lesser than 50+ players but plenty of objects and some big maps so the performance was same as on f16 so I went there to meet mates I knew instead.
Those atleast was in no way optimized for fluid gameplay as I see it.

I also perhaps fail somewhat in "hitting the nail" in this matter because English is my third language and sometimes I cant express delicate things easily.
What I mean is that this phenomena To go for quantity instead of quality isnt a thing I blame servers or serverkeepers for.(I'm not much for blaming anyway)
But in the gamingworld as a whole there is this mentality that "more is better" and therefore true creative development gets lost in the race sometimes. The creativity I like is when one do the best one can within the limitations or rules of a game in this case.( I guess examples exists in the gamingworld aswell )
So its not olegs fault that the game has many features and neither servers for hosting big maps and 50 or 100 players. Its the mentality that we must have "more" objects and whatever than nescessary.

People are drawn to the best servers and ofcourse the server decides the level it wants, but I cant see that it has benefitted the popular servers to have lagging and warping low-enders wich get kicked all the time in the wrong moment. The usual picture I see anyway.

I was brought up with "doing lots with little"
so its partly my own fault that this issue feels like a "wrong" since it still are good for some.
-----------------------------------------

Wonder what the effect would be if one cut the skins on all objects down with half? Who would notice?
How would it have been if fluidity was more important than those objects?
Yeah.......I think too much http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif


Still happy to be able to yank around offline though. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Badsight.
03-26-2005, 03:13 PM
FB running at its best = v1.22

best FB version ever

DONB3397
03-26-2005, 03:14 PM
Unlike sims in the past, this is actually a self-adjusting community. Server admins seem to have several options -- complex, loaded servers/missions, or simple server/missions. And in my very limited experience, they respond to regular users.

What I wonder is this: Is the problem with increased usage (number of players), or more detailed maps. If it's the number of players, it seems to be out of their hands. If it's too many objects, set up three levels of servers.

Badsight.
03-26-2005, 03:17 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VFS-22_SPaRX:
I think the problem is no one wants to play on low player count servers. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>people flock to where other people are

once your DF starts to empty it can go under crtical mass( (i.e. , go completely empty)

all too often i have opened up a room to test something with another & you get 1 or 2 join then its filss like that *snaps fingers*

but once its empty theres no reason for someone sitting in the lobby to join

not when they are used too , & want to fly against 15-30 other people

Badsight.
03-26-2005, 03:20 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by F19_Ob:
I think that after AEP and Pf the whole community lost perspective in a way.

_"Is the increase of these groundobjects/flak and big maps so important for the newer style of onlinebattle so its worth to have a part of the community excluded from the online gaming <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>prehaps it is that thinking the online part of FB/PF is the most important part of FB/PF that is to blame http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

offline you cant have enough to fill out replicating WW2 in the air http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

DF rooms are just airquake after all

robotech
03-26-2005, 07:51 PM
I personally liked the big servers 32-64 players (mad dog's server anyone?) as there were more targets to choose from instead of me always being the target like it is nowadays http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif I still don't mind those big servers just go easy with the ground objects. The way I see it- include some ground objects for the bombers to attack but don't bother with the eye candy since most players won't see the ground action as they are way up there in the sky.

VFS-22_SPaRX
03-26-2005, 10:02 PM
Well Ob, i do not know what to tell you. We keep the object count on our server to a bare min. We do not overload our bases with flak and the ONLY objects we place on the maps are the ground targets. We do not place un-needed objects to make the map "look" better. Our bases have 4-6 20/25mm and 4 80/88 flak guns. Our target areas have even less AA. And i repeat again, we ONLY place objects that are part of the ground objectives. So if you are having problems with WarClouds, I do not know what else to tell you. We have ALWAYS designed our missions keeping mid-range PC users in mind. If you cannot handle the map load on our server, I really do not know what else we can do.

psychobabbler
03-26-2005, 11:09 PM
i'll play this game as long as my rig will run it.
when my current rig won't run this game any longer
i'll find another hobby. no way in hell am i going
to spend 2grand on upgrades to play a 50 dollar
game. man that would just be stupid.

TooCooL34
03-27-2005, 12:10 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by psychobabbler:
i'll play this game as long as my rig will run it.
when my current rig won't run this game any longer
i'll find another hobby. no way in hell am i going
to spend 2grand on upgrades to play a 50 dollar
game. man that would just be stupid. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Ok. It's just a game. But do you really think FB worth JUST FIFTY DOLLARS? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

Try find other hobby that is less expensive than this one. I failed. hmm.. Gateball?

JG54_Arnie
03-27-2005, 01:27 AM
And if you dont by the top of the line all the time you dont need that much money anyways. one grand does just fine. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

Capt_Haddock
03-27-2005, 03:33 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by VFS-22_SPaRX:
Well Ob, i do not know what to tell you. We keep the object count on our server to a bare min. We do not overload our bases with flak and the ONLY objects we place on the maps are the ground targets. We do not place un-needed objects to make the map "look" better. Our bases have 4-6 20/25mm and 4 80/88 flak guns. Our target areas have even less AA. And i repeat again, we ONLY place objects that are part of the ground objectives. So if you are having problems with WarClouds, I do not know what else to tell you. We have ALWAYS designed our missions keeping mid-range PC users in mind. If you cannot handle the map load on our server, I really do not know what else we can do. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

Excellent settings. Nice to know one of the main servers out there is aware of the problem.

Do you guys have Eastern Front missions?

There is so much content in this game that it's becoming almost impossible to find the right combination of Theatre of Operations + Planeset + Game settings. At least for Early Eastern Front fans line me.

http://www.haddock.f2s.com/sig/F19bannerh.jpg

F19_Ob
03-27-2005, 03:47 AM
Thanks for the input guys and I guess u are right, some do see DF as airquake Badsight.
I Also think one can do a lot with the sim off-line. 50% of my flying and testing is offline.


-------------

Thank you too SPaRX.
Personally I know my ram is too low and I had recently a chance to upgrade but chose not to. So in my case its clearly my own fault. So I'm out of the count here.

My concern really was for the many (I thought) Low-enders in the community.
By judging from the answercount I perhaps should have changed the topictitle to "Lagging and stuttering low-enders online!" or such.
Or perhaps we are few online afterall since so many read but few answered?

During these last two years I have talked to many (perhaps 40 or so) who could fly 'almost' without problems on servers like GG and F16 (like myself)and almost fluidly when the playercount was down to around 30 and on smaller maps, semingly with less objects and flak aswell. So I thought there should be many more in the same situation
and tried to find out this way.
I often record tracks online and looked through some maps to try too see how objects and flak was distributed.
One thing that struck me was the high count of objects and flak on some maps, the other was the players usage of a big map. Now, I only went through some 20 sessions but in most of them fighting was concentrated to small areas like 2-5 grids of a map with 50 or so.
Mapsize in itself shouldnt be a too big problem but whith lots of objects and flak as addition and with players joining and leaving there should be some impact.

I must admit that it was a long time since I visited WC but I'm almost certain that the last time I was there with olli72 We stuttered around in a big furball over a large industrial area, and had to go to GG instead. Perhaps we got the completely wrong impression of WC because we aren't regulars there and the heavy concentration of events on that particular spot?

virtualpilots is also one that some have problems with but ok on occasion. I've had some good sessions there when playercount was down a bit.
--------------------------------------

One thing that interests me is how much different things impacts gameplay.
For example :

How does it flow on a small (medium or large ) map with 50 players if one removes all objects and flak?
Is it a big improvement or not?

If one lower to 40 or 30 players. Any noticeable improvement?

An then with objects. Does flak in action impact performance and at what count is active flak interfering gameplay.

I dont run a server and dont know if these type of tests have ben made but on the servers I have flown the most mapsize and objectcount seem to differ quite a bit in the mapcycle. Atleast it appears so because others also say " This map is too stuttery but this one is fine", and such.

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

F19_Ob
03-27-2005, 04:02 AM
He he...
My dear captain haddock and favorite j8 modeler...How can it be so that U can be "allowed" to have a crapsystem to run this sim on?
I mean ...its not like u are down here among us weeds ....U should more like be soaring high above the troubles of the world...

Now I heard it all.......If I had endless supply of american bucks (my printer cant print those) I'd send U some good systems.

F19_Orheim
03-27-2005, 04:17 AM
I am lucky enough to have a high end computer so I don't have the problems my fellow Squadmembers are talking about (Ob and Haddock), but I do think that it is important for map/mission makers to take account for the fact that just because you can have more objects does not necessarily mean that it will be more fun. It is quite easy to "hurl" in loads of objects in a mission and map and think it will be more fun to play, but mapmaking is actually really difficult.

However it is more or less up to each player what he needs/wants. I myself don't have the time these days to play for hours in a row, therefor I evade huge maps with long missiontime and servers with deathkicks (don't get me wrong, deathkicks is an excellent idea for realistic gaming but I don't have time to wait 5-10 minutes before I can play again, when I can spend those 10 minutes flying on another server....)

The most fun I have had on any server is actually on our own server F19_Cr@PGalore. No groundobjects, only one plane available (Cr@p of course), bases up close ..... intense and very challenging.

P11 vs P11 is just one long laugh http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

PS: Sparxx, stop taking things so personally, Ob was just venting an observation which should be listen to. He is expressing a concern that lots of guys with less powerful rigs have and should be taken serious. You guys are running a great server.

Ketalar
03-27-2005, 05:28 AM
I have to agree. Bigger isn't always better. (Rarely so as a matter of fact...).

I would say I'm somewhere around the middle of the line as far as computers go, and I visit GreaterGreen, Zeke_vs_Wildcat, WarClouds and others. I (usually, when the stutters aren't too bad) have a blast on these servers but to be honest some of the best times I've had online have been on small servers with small maps and few/medium number of players.

Some of the servers worth mentioning are F19_Cr@pGalore (always a blast!) and the server that F16_Matz hosted (small maps with a flow of the bases depending on who won the mission, intense fights and just the right balance of planesets and targets).

F16_Dedicated (now -=VALHALLA=-) works fine for me too, but then I live in Sweden where the server's located.

Few people in a small space makes for more fun than many people in a big space. This goes for online games as well as parties. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif


Orheim:
Nice hat! I was wondering when you'd give Santa his hat back. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

F19_Orheim
03-27-2005, 05:37 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Ketalar:
_Orheim:_
Nice hat! I was wondering when you'd give Santa his hat back. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>
Give? He took it and I need someting to protect my scalp from the draughthttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Capt.LoneRanger
03-27-2005, 05:38 AM
I see your point, but not the problem. There maybe some people not able to join certain servers, but that was always the case. (i.e. with every patch some people had, some not or even more with major upgrades like from IL2 to IL2Fb to AEP to PF)
But is it really a question of your PC? I flew with my dedicated (1400Mhz, 512MB, GF2MX400) for a week recently and never had problem with a server and even hosted a session (for 8 ppl). You can't play with all details and you'll slow down over heavy AAA, but you do that on high-end machines, too!?

Besides that, as I allready said, there are always many crowded smaller servers with nice maps or for pure dogfight. So I still don't see the break up of a community here!?