PDA

View Full Version : What would you like to see in a server



Tuphlandng
01-04-2010, 03:14 AM
Just a question

skarden
01-04-2010, 04:57 AM
For me personally I think spits vs 109s mods almost have it perfect,4.09 + U.P. 2 + Zuti's 1.1 + proper makings and full switch realism.(plus of course all the obvious stuff like no tk'ing,shoulder shooting,kill steeling....ect.)
The only thing I would change is to make it ok to strafe landing aircraft just like in real life which they don't allow.
In the servers I fly that do allow that I definitely don't do it all the time especially after a good dogfight with a good opponent who's limping home,but I like the option to do so should I see fit to.

I don't always play full switch either but when I do,I get sweaty palms,it get my heart rate up more,I panic more(not so good but really add to the realism I think) and I really tend to really try and fly properly using proper tactics which seems to make me enjoy it a lot more,it also makes getting back to base alive and in one piece seem like much more of an achievement.

just my 2 cents worth though.

megalopsuche
01-04-2010, 07:53 AM
Originally posted by skarden:
For me personally I think spits vs 109s mods almost have it perfect,4.09 + U.P. 2

I would prefer HSFX over UP2 because HSFX hasn't screwed with fm's and dm's. That said, stock 4.09m is great too.

I prefer all the switches on except for:
minimap path
icons, out to 3km
...and I do not care if the speedbar and padlock view are on or off.

A nice rotation of maps from different times and places is a big plus, but be careful with excessively one-sided PTO setups.

megalopsuche
01-04-2010, 07:53 AM
Doh! Clicked quote instead of edit.

thefruitbat
01-04-2010, 08:29 AM
Originally posted by megalopsuche:

I would prefer HSFX over UP2 because HSFX hasn't screwed with fm's and dm's.

This is just not true, only fm/dm changed was the new mod51's. check your facts.

To original poster, i like the Spit vs 109's, and ukded3 settings.

fruitbat

BillSwagger
01-04-2010, 09:41 AM
I like to see more use out of Zuti MDF, i've seen a few of its capabilities on Spits v 109s, particularly with the radar views.

I've had a few ideas for servers over the last few months, and built some campaigns around them.
i think closed pit, no externals has its challenges so thats what i would stick to.

Aside from settings, i was opting to make a high altitude server. One that allows you to airstart above 4000m and bombers are flying at 6000m.
There are various PTO, and ETO missions that i can think of, but much of it goes into saving time from having to climb so players can get right into the game with in minutes.

Maps would be very loose in terms of historical accuracy, id rather see a good match up, but the better point is that each side has a limited plane set rather than both sides sharing the same planes. Each side runs out of there best planes sooner and bombers are limited to define a mission.

For that reason i think icons would be limited to friendlies but i also had another idea about the maps.
Maybe they are also working on this, but radar or map icons to include only friendly planes would be different. It might even reduce the need for icons. It also presents a target to destroy to take away any kind of visual advantage during the game. Icons don't really add to that, they just help deal with the reality of defining a pixel on your screen which i can understand. I think having radar do this instead adds another dynamic however, that icons might take away from. Icons might only be visible from up to 2km which still seems reasonable.

Another server idea was completely different from anything i've seen or heard so far.
Basically, there is no historical basis at all, and teams have access to the same planesets however they limited to certain time periods depending on the map. There would then be different events like capture the flag, or missions that involve more team interaction. Maps would be larger and involve more strategy and really more time to have a game which might be the only downside as i see most players just want to fight and not deal with strategy so much.
This one has been in the think tank for a while and could be expanded upon. I just don't have the computer power to run such a server at the moment.

I'm not particular about any version of the game only that the mod packs do offer more variety and planes to choose from. For me, i would focus on keeping a crt=2 requirement to ensure that everyone is using the same version of the game. I'm unaware that there are any major differences between mod packs and stock, but it does help things run smoother if all players are on the same page, does it not?

Bill

Pudfark
01-04-2010, 11:13 AM
Howdy Tuph,

As has been discussed before...I believe the maps are the most important consideration.... Plane sets can be changed rather easily, I think...

What version of game to run? I think 409M at first or always...and maybe UP2.0? in the future...just my two cents worth...

NGW-Sancho.....

na85
01-04-2010, 01:08 PM
My ideal server:

Full switch.

Eastern Front.

No sissy easymode rules like Spits/109s have.

BillSwagger
01-04-2010, 02:16 PM
Originally posted by Tuphlandng:

I think that an Ideal server would cater to the most amount of players. I But that's just me. Privet invite champagnes and Dog fights of cours would cater to the experienced players. But I think that a DF server should cater to the inexperienced to.


Tuph

That's a thin line.
I'm sort of coming from the perspective that a lot of servers already cater to the inexperienced, and what happens is these dogfight servers get in congestive rumbles where everyone is clumped down low at about 2000ft. Great fun!.. for about ten minutes but then i have to do something else. I think some people are actually quite good, and really they should be in a more challenging sever but its their choice and no server rule against experience.

I have to say that making a server challenging is more about plane sets and map than actual difficulty settings. Mods also allow for quite a bit of manipulation in full switch view that i'd just assume stick with open pit so that everyone has an even chance. If i did it that way, then icons would need to be off or very limited where the arrows are none existent. This also assumes separate plane sets for each team.

My maps actually cover a lot of ground, probably too much cause upon testing them many people drop out or lose patience and start to wonder whats going on. The idea of flying ten minutes to battle is boring, however I'd also like to have bases separated enough so that it actually takes a coordinated strike for missions to be successful. I'm all for bombers having air starts, but further back from the start of the front marker.

I've also tried the MDF servers, and those bouts go on and on. Quite interesting to see those front markers move as your team advances.

Frankthetank36
01-04-2010, 02:44 PM
Runways that don't have trees and junk on them. Zekes vs Wildcats is pretty much perfect except for this. In two separate missions yesterday I crashed into a bush on takeoff and a tank on final.

PanzerAce
01-04-2010, 02:46 PM
The biggest complaint I have about some servers is based around the plane set. It always seems like it's the exact....same....planeset....for every map. Oh, sure, its the spit Vb one map and the spit Va or something on other, but the map creators never seem to realize that they can put I-16s, I-153s, A5Ms, etc into maps as well.

Also, if you're going to go for a historically correct plane set, don't remove some of the planes because you personally think they are noob planes.

na85
01-04-2010, 02:51 PM
Originally posted by Tuphlandng:

n85

"My ideal server:

Full switch.

Eastern Front.

No sissy easy moderules like Spits/109s have."

Although Ideal for you not so much for all
U do haw ever have the option of limiting your settings to the ones u prefer.

Are you, or are you not asking for people to give opinions on what they want to see in a server?

I gave my opinion about what would make a perfect server.

thefruitbat
01-04-2010, 03:16 PM
OK, I don't know about your server, but my 'perfect' settings would be,

cockpit on, no externals, speedbar, historical matchups with correct markings from all periods of the war, increased dot range via mp_dotrange, limited icons on for friendlies, maps with at least 2 pref 3 airbases for both sides, vulching allowed, all's fair in love and war. all on zutis MDS.

fruitbat

na85
01-04-2010, 11:46 PM
not offended, just confused

skarden
01-05-2010, 12:19 AM
Tuphlanding I meant that on the warbirds of prey server "spits vs 109 mods"
A server I enjoy playing on a lot because the full switch server settings.Only I'd like them to make vulching legal as it was IRL.

As far as

I think that it should be ok to Proper situational awareness is important. If I think the match is over and I am undamaged with rounds left and capable of a fight I should be considered a target and my flight wing should warn me of your presence. How ever I believe that damaged,to the point of being un flight worthy, Aircraft should not be repeatedly fired on if unable to ingauge.But thats just me.

I don't agree to be honest,IMHO all planes should be targets at all times,this of course is just a personal thing and I can definitely see why some don't like it.

As i said before I don't always shoot down all planes no matter what but I like the option to choose what I want to do with out breaking server rules,tis war after all http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_biggrin.gif

BillSwagger
01-05-2010, 04:51 AM
Originally posted by Tuphlandng:
I prefer ground starts and Bill wants high altitude air starts. To be fare I need to do both.
I can just put up a server and call it aday I have the gear to do that.
This is supposed to be fun and challenging. But if I cant find the run way how much for me can it be?
If all I offer is ground starts then is it fun for Bill?
When a real pilot climbs into his/her plane they know were the strip is when they walk to the plane. I prefer externals on. And I can choose not to use them.

Besides I will more then likely be putting up one more empty server any way.

But I still would like your input in the positive


Tuph


Not having air starts would still be fun to me, but my idea of running a high altitude mission requires the air start or people end up flying much lower than how the mission was intended. I know bomber pilots also enjoy the take off, and formation flying, so having ground starts available would be fine too.
An example of such a mission would be a B-17 escort mission. Bombers start at 6000m, while escort fighters start at 4000m.
The opposing side would start at 3000m. Its important that the bases be spread apart to allow the setting to develop, where fighters and bombers can duke it out with interceptor fighters between 20-30k ft. Its just one map, and not every map on the server would need to be like this.


There is a server running, i don't recall which one, but the externals are only on when on the ground which makes getting to the runway much easier. Once you are in the air, externals are off. I think that is one of the better settings needed for the closed pit, full switch enviornment, so it is possible to have ground/ runway views with out having externals on all the time.



Bill

na85
01-05-2010, 10:16 AM
Unless it's been modded recently, you can only airstart at ~2000m

TheGrunch
01-05-2010, 12:03 PM
Zuti's MDS has a airstart altitude setting for each homebase object, although I've never tried it to see if it works.

RSS-Martin
01-05-2010, 12:23 PM
Originally posted by BillSwagger:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Tuphlandng:
I prefer ground starts and Bill wants high altitude air starts. To be fare I need to do both.
I can just put up a server and call it aday I have the gear to do that.
This is supposed to be fun and challenging. But if I cant find the run way how much for me can it be?
If all I offer is ground starts then is it fun for Bill?
When a real pilot climbs into his/her plane they know were the strip is when they walk to the plane. I prefer externals on. And I can choose not to use them.

Besides I will more then likely be putting up one more empty server any way.

But I still would like your input in the positive


Tuph


Not having air starts would still be fun to me, but my idea of running a high altitude mission requires the air start or people end up flying much lower than how the mission was intended. I know bomber pilots also enjoy the take off, and formation flying, so having ground starts available would be fine too.
An example of such a mission would be a B-17 escort mission. Bombers start at 6000m, while escort fighters start at 4000m.
The opposing side would start at 3000m. Its important that the bases be spread apart to allow the setting to develop, where fighters and bombers can duke it out with interceptor fighters between 20-30k ft. Its just one map, and not every map on the server would need to be like this.


There is a server running, i don't recall which one, but the externals are only on when on the ground which makes getting to the runway much easier. Once you are in the air, externals are off. I think that is one of the better settings needed for the closed pit, full switch enviornment, so it is possible to have ground/ runway views with out having externals on all the time.



Bill </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

As a bomber pilot that likes full real settings that would not be my cup of tea....
That is just the challenge taxing with no externals. They managed then too, with out the wonder women view. Same with air starts
....thats more for furballers than bombers. As fighter jocks are usually too impatient to get proper altitude.
But I guess I am just an old odd ball.

BillSwagger
01-05-2010, 05:13 PM
I can understand why people avoid airstarts but what i usually see out of bomber pilots is that the smart ones climb to altitude first before pursuing a target. This sometimes means they fly in the opposite direction of the targets.
Lets say they climb to 4000m and turn around back toward the front markers. Why not just have an air start at 4000m where the bombers would normally turn around? I don't speak for everyone, but that's what i'm incorporating into some missions/maps.

Bill

RSS-Martin
01-06-2010, 04:48 AM
Originally posted by BillSwagger:
I can understand why people avoid airstarts but what i usually see out of bomber pilots is that the smart ones climb to altitude first before pursuing a target. This sometimes means they fly in the opposite direction of the targets.
Lets say they climb to 4000m and turn around back toward the front markers. Why not just have an air start at 4000m where the bombers would normally turn around? I don't speak for everyone, but that's what i'm incorporating into some missions/maps.

Bill

Well that is a sollution for the impatient.
Normally those that take bombers know it is going to be a long and slow flight. Yes I often fly first away from the target or in a big circle to get altitude, without being found by enemy fighters. But flying a bomber is a differant kind of flying compared to a fighter,
you plan lots of time, its all about getting to the target without getting intercepted, so it is big heights or long routes as to not be predictable from which side one is going to approach. Also depending on the settings 4000m can be very heavy with flak lead......level bombing a heavily defended target you are more looking at about 6000 to 8000m.
Also with all the time one has, it is ideal to hit the level stabelizer and have a drink while others are busy keeping their plane aloft.

jamesblonde1979
01-06-2010, 07:04 AM
In one word?

Teamwork

Billy_DeLyon
01-06-2010, 07:54 PM
Originally posted by thefruitbat:
OK, I don't know about your server, but my 'perfect' settings would be,

cockpit on, no externals, speedbar, historical matchups with correct markings from all periods of the war, increased dot range via mp_dotrange, limited icons on for friendlies, maps with at least 2 pref 3 airbases for both sides, vulching allowed, all's fair in love and war. all on zutis MDS.

fruitbat

Sounds great. I'd just add that with vulching allowed there should be plenty of AAA at the bases, which is fine by me. I have a pretty decent system for IL2.

One reason that some otherwise realistic servers ban vulching is that heavy AAA is required to prevent base-camping by some; but lots of AAA gives many PCs a performance hit. so they reduce the AAA and ban vulching, to make the game run smoother for more users.

megalopsuche
01-07-2010, 04:05 PM
The trouble with vulching is that it frequently becomes the only method of play for some people. You watch them come in above the people who are actually fighting air-to-air, they dive straight down to the enemy airfield, vulch if they can, climb out, dive back in, die to the tripe-A, rinse and repeat. I've seen the same guy suicide vulch three or four times in a row without ever attempting to engage anyone in the air, and without ever attempting to survive the encounter.

And I've said it before, but you all don't know what a real vulch fest is until you've played Aces High, i.e. 12 planes circling a field, shooting people as they take off, knocking out AAA as it respawns, etc. Sometimes these sessions can go on for an hour.

thefruitbat
01-07-2010, 05:08 PM
Originally posted by Billy_DeLyon:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by thefruitbat:
OK, I don't know about your server, but my 'perfect' settings would be,

cockpit on, no externals, speedbar, historical matchups with correct markings from all periods of the war, increased dot range via mp_dotrange, limited icons on for friendlies, maps with at least 2 pref 3 airbases for both sides, vulching allowed, all's fair in love and war. all on zutis MDS.

fruitbat

Sounds great. I'd just add that with vulching allowed there should be plenty of AAA at the bases, which is fine by me. I have a pretty decent system for IL2.

One reason that some otherwise realistic servers ban vulching is that heavy AAA is required to prevent base-camping by some; but lots of AAA gives many PCs a performance hit. so they reduce the AAA and ban vulching, to make the game run smoother for more users. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I know what you are saying, but aaa is not the only solution. The reason i suggested two pref three bases, is that regardless of aaa, any team that can put three airbases under pressure, deserves everything they get.

The reason vulching can be such a problem on servers, is bad design, with not enough bases to spawn from. If there is only one base for each side its easy to camp above, covering three bases spread around...

By the way, the settings i described are pretty much ukded3 http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/10.gif

BillSwagger
01-08-2010, 09:40 AM
vulching, from what i can tell, only happens on the kitty servers, even when it is outlawed.

I really don't see it as an issue, but i don't do it because it doesn't usually win you any friends, and its not a very sportsman like thing to do. If hitting a base is part of the mission then it makes sense to hit planes on the ground, but if the objective is to hit tanks on the other side of the map, and they choose to camp and vulch, i have to wonder what the heck are they in it for.

I have a bigger problem with being shot on landing. Its not to say someone doesn't deserve a kill, but if you have a cannon wielding insta-kill plane and i manage to wiggle away and still maneuver to safety, why not just let me land? I know..i know, i need to be more careful but that's not always possible considering that you need to bleed off speed from a decent, and get your wheels down while you are slow enough to stop on the airfield.
Before i begin to land, I'll have a good look around and see no enemies in site. Then once i've bleed off all my speed on final, there is a dot on the horizon and its the enemy plane that i just spent 20 minutes perusing and he avoided engaging until now. Why wait till i'm landing? is that not a cheap shot?
It actually happens more on some servers, and usually not even an issue where maps have properly disbursed bases.


Bill

megalopsuche
01-08-2010, 10:07 AM
Originally posted by BillSwagger:
vulching, from what i can tell, only happens on the kitty servers, even when it is outlawed.


You are either incorrect, or insulting the servers and players who enjoy settings that you do not.

na85
01-08-2010, 07:11 PM
Any team that is getting vulched repeatedly deserves it, for not setting up a proper CAP (Combat Air Patrol). No-vulching rules are for sissies.

There are many many points to be had shooting down silly people who come in solo hoping to strafe aircraft on the ground. Pity nobody realizes this.

jamesblonde1979
01-10-2010, 12:40 PM
I don't mind vulchers, they are usually pretty easy kills.

I do it occasionally myself but only opportunistically or in a dedicated mud-moving aircraft.

Having flown this sim for a while I'm not desperate for the kill like a lot of guys, I quite often let an opponent go if he puts up a good fight.

BillSwagger
01-10-2010, 01:48 PM
Originally posted by megalopsuche:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by BillSwagger:
vulching, from what i can tell, only happens on the kitty servers, even when it is outlawed.


You are either incorrect, or insulting the servers and players who enjoy settings that you do not. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I meant that in a light-hearted way, and i dont think anyone should be insulted, so lighten up a bit. I actually enjoy the "kitty servers" from time to time as it helps me get some target practice in. There are also many fine pilots on said servers. I just notice (with out naming specifics) that there tends to be more bickering and unsportsman like behavior. The settings have less to do with it than the quality of players.

RSS-Martin
01-15-2010, 03:04 PM
Originally posted by na85:
Any team that is getting vulched repeatedly deserves it, for not setting up a proper CAP (Combat Air Patrol). No-vulching rules are for sissies.

There are many many points to be had shooting down silly people who come in solo hoping to strafe aircraft on the ground. Pity nobody realizes this.
That Bud is rubbish! As that means if there are only a few on the server, waiting until someone might show up and do that, or not. So if few players are there you leave as not enough for a cap over your base? Or sit on the ground for an hour until someone shows up? Do you do that? No one in their right mind joins a server to sit on the ground for an hour in hope that some one will provide a cap over your base. I have known a few servers that used to be around that thought simularly like you, never many people ever on them though. Wonder why?
On Spits vs 109s or Zekes vs Wildcats you do not have those issues, as there are always a few bases that are out of bounds for attack. Even if someone is silly enough to attack, there is so much AA that the nut is blown out of the sky. As a bonus if a admin is around, or a track is sent to a admin that hero who tried the attack gets also a vacation from the server.
Very simple and effective. These servers are also frequented, and not just empties like you see often on Hyperlobby.

Erkki_M
01-15-2010, 05:29 PM
I personally dont understand why vulching, perching etc should not be allowed.

...if only typical online server airfield had also typical historical amount of flak, no one in his sane mind would ever dare to there: theres less risk in facing the enemy airborne and at altitude! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

And then theres the usual "flak lowers FPS" argument. True, but only extreme amounts of it slower computers of most players these days... Also, one could always give an airfield an insane amount of nothing but heavy flak(say, 30-40 guns) --> extremely effective flak cover.. Add some slow firing but effective guns, say, german 37mm AAA or Bofors 40mm for allies, and thats it. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

If people want and can organise an attack on an airfield, why shouldnt it be allowed? Its not easy if theres flak...

Martin: those same servers you mention are(or at least have been) notorious for their bias and unfair missions... In a typical mission there, the only German airfield with fighters you can actually fight with and not just shoot yourself with your Luger once you meet a Spit, there are 2 88 flaks and a single flak40 covering... or so... http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/partyhat.gif

na85
01-15-2010, 07:17 PM
Originally posted by RSS-Martin:
I have known a few servers that used to be around that thought simularly like you, never many people ever on them though. Wonder why?

You mean like Warclouds? They were one of the most popular servers in hyperlobby for years. Oops, sorry to wreck your argument http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif


On Spits vs 109s or Zekes vs Wildcats you do not have those issues, as there are always a few bases that are out of bounds for attack.

I like flying Spits/109s, but they have a host of other problems, like people crying every time they get shot down within 30km of a base. That is easymode, and it's a crutch. If you like flying in easy environments because you can't cope then that's fine; you are free to do so. But don't tell me my opinions are rubbish, and don't call me Bud.

RSS-Martin
01-16-2010, 04:03 AM
Originally posted by na85:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by RSS-Martin:
I have known a few servers that used to be around that thought simularly like you, never many people ever on them though. Wonder why?

You mean like Warclouds? They were one of the most popular servers in hyperlobby for years. Oops, sorry to wreck your argument http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif


On Spits vs 109s or Zekes vs Wildcats you do not have those issues, as there are always a few bases that are out of bounds for attack.

I like flying Spits/109s, but they have a host of other problems, like people crying every time they get shot down within 30km of a base. That is easymode, and it's a crutch. If you like flying in easy environments because you can't cope then that's fine; you are free to do so. But don't tell me my opinions are rubbish, and don't call me Bud. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I will call it rubbish Bud because it is exactly that, as a bomber pilot I am not going to sit and wait an hour. Warcloads and popular? Well everyone can have their opinion, I donīt share it, one of the best was 101 Missions. But donīt you tell me what I may say or not who do you think you are?
As far as I know IL2 is not just for furballers alone. But what ever. Your cap idea has never worked when few players are around, that is only a option when many are on a server, otherwise dream on. As the normal reaction is to leave and go to another server.
But I guess you prefer a so called top server which is empty, that is real skill. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

na85
01-16-2010, 10:11 AM
Originally posted by RSS-Martin:

I will call it rubbish Bud because it is exactly that, as a bomber pilot I am not going to sit and wait an hour. What does being a bomber pilot have to do with waiting an hour?


Warcloads and popular? Well everyone can have their opinion, I donīt share it, one of the best was 101 Missions. It's not an opinion. Their server was consistently full for a long long time. You may not like the settings but that doesn't mean it wasn't popular.


Your cap idea has never worked when few players are around, that is only a option when many are on a server, otherwise dream on. As the normal reaction is to leave and go to another server.
But I guess you prefer a so called top server which is empty, that is real skill. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_rolleyes.gif

Nah, I don't fly warclouds very much, and never really have. But I think they have the best rules going. And the reason it's empty now is not because of the rules, it's because of the mods.

All I'm saying is this: strafing is a legitimate tactic, that happened in the war. I think it is silly to set a rule that creates some magical boundary where planes are "home free".

In WW2 you never saw a P-51's strafing a Japanese airbase and then magically disappear from the sky, leaving behind the writing "Jimmy Walker has been banned from WW2" did you?

Nope.

Any artificial rule that makes it easier for pilots is a crutch, and there's no other way of putting it. In fact, I'm surprised you're in favor of it since you seem to dislike furballers, and having a no-vulching rule actually makes it easier for people to go out and furball. It becomes less of a team event and more of an individual event since you can just jump in your favorite La-7, take off perpendicular to the runway and speed at low alt to the middle of the map. There's no teamwork.

This is a thread about what we'd like to see in a server, and I'd like to see hard mode. Enjoy your easy mode.

megalopsuche
01-16-2010, 12:19 PM
I can see this either way.

Allowing vulching is certainly easier for the attacker who doesn't want to work for a kill, hmmmmm? By your logic that's easy mode.

BillSwagger
01-16-2010, 03:48 PM
Vulching or not, that rule is not a deal breaker for me. I'm more likely to steer away from a server if there are abusive game habits in play.

All the servers seem to be thinning out, where/when i once saw 30+ on some servers, that number is considerably less. I don't think it has anything to do with vulching.
Another thing, there is nothing easy about this sim. There are easier settings, but its still a pretty difficult game in a lot of ways. The reality is people hate to lose, and if one person can make one thing different so they will win, they do.
It has nothing to do with rules, or what is fair. People want to win, so they jeopardize the integrity of the entire game by making sure they do. Just accepting this has helped me avoid wasting kilobytes in heated debates.

I actually like vulching with rockets or bombs when its allowed. i will spend the majority of my flight time carry ordinance and hitting planes on the ground. It is as much fun as it is a challenge because its not best to dogfight with a full load of bombs. I also find that the outcome is more consistent than trying to turn and burn against a Yak or FW190. Sometimes i never know what i'm going to see in those situations.



Bill

myrrhcedar
01-17-2010, 09:48 AM
Originally posted by thefruitbat:
OK, I don't know about your server, but my 'perfect' settings would be,

cockpit on, no externals, speedbar, historical matchups with correct markings from all periods of the war, increased dot range via mp_dotrange, limited icons on for friendlies, maps with at least 2 pref 3 airbases for both sides, vulching allowed, all's fair in love and war. all on zutis MDS.

fruitbat

pretty close to this

I think rules against "kill stealing" are a bit cheesy as well.. We play this simulator with all of these "hardcore" settings for the sake of realism then adopt "kill-stealing" rules straight out of arcade FPS games. I don't mind at all when someone drops in and finishes off a plane I damaged personally, just as long as they're not accidentally hitting me or getting in our way. There are plenty of "kill steals" in real guncam footage, some really obnoxious, but better than letting the enemy get away.

megalopsuche
01-17-2010, 02:42 PM
Originally posted by myrrhcedar:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by thefruitbat:
OK, I don't know about your server, but my 'perfect' settings would be,

cockpit on, no externals, speedbar, historical matchups with correct markings from all periods of the war, increased dot range via mp_dotrange, limited icons on for friendlies, maps with at least 2 pref 3 airbases for both sides, vulching allowed, all's fair in love and war. all on zutis MDS.

fruitbat

pretty close to this

I think rules against "kill stealing" are a bit cheesy as well. We play this simulator with all of these "hardcore" settings... </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Lack of ROE to make things easier is "hardcore?" I don't buy it. Rules against vulching and kill stealing exist to enforce challenge and difficulty. There's no way for vulching to be "realistic" in a computer flight sim when there is no real death; it always makes a mockery of actual combat.

myrrhcedar
01-17-2010, 02:56 PM
I meant that most of us play on simulation settings (as in realistic gunnery, complex engine management, etc) for the sake of realism (believe it or not most video gamers consider all of that stuff tedious and pointless), but then somewhat ironically, selectively remove "real" aspects of combat because they're tedious and "unfun". Sometimes completely unfun stuff becomes fun when you realize that's how it really was.
I didn't mean that vulching/kill stealing themselves are "hardcore" -- more just consistency. It's all fun to me so long as it's played realistically rather than just griefing where its all someone does.

For me personally, the more like a real battle a multiplayer game *feels* the better, and that includes my wingman diving in and finishing my enemy off when I've lost a bit of speed from a maneuver, etc. Or if I see an opening to attack, then attack a smoking plane at low altitude without hesitating like I would in a real battle, not back off because I see the plane may be damaged enough to give someone else the kill, afraid to "kill steal".
Some people flip out about that but it just adds to the simulation to me. The only time it gets out of hand is when someone is so eager to "assist" that they nose in front of your cross hairs and get themselves teamkilled (which was unfortunately part of real dogfighting too from clips ive seen).

I have no particularly strong opinion on vulching.. obviously it was far less linear for the attacker in "real life", but explicitly disallowing it isn't very authentic either; neutral I guess.

Of course, if a server says no vulching or kill stealing, I won't, but the thread is asking what your ideal server would be like, so...

thefruitbat
01-17-2010, 03:20 PM
Originally posted by myrrhcedar:
I meant that most of us play on simulation settings (as in realistic gunnery, complex engine management, etc) for the sake of realism (believe it or not most video gamers consider all of that stuff tedious and pointless), but then somewhat ironically, selectively remove "real" aspects of combat because they're tedious and "unfun". Sometimes completely unfun stuff becomes fun when you realize that's how it really was.
I didn't mean that vulching/kill stealing themselves are "hardcore" -- more just consistency. It's all fun to me so long as it's played realistically rather than just griefing where its all someone does.

For me personally, the more like a real battle a multiplayer game *feels* the better, and that includes my wingman diving in and finishing my enemy off when I've lost a bit of speed from a maneuver, etc. Or if I see an opening to attack, then attack a smoking plane at low altitude without hesitating like I would in a real battle, not back off because I see the plane may be damaged enough to give someone else the kill, afraid to "kill steal".
Some people flip out about that but it just adds to the simulation to me. The only time it gets out of hand is when someone is so eager to "assist" that they nose in front of your cross hairs and get themselves teamkilled (which was unfortunately part of real dogfighting too from clips ive seen).

I have no particularly strong opinion on vulching.. obviously it was far less linear for the attacker in "real life", but explicitly disallowing it isn't very authentic either; neutral I guess.

Of course, if a server says no vulching or kill stealing, I won't, but the thread is asking what your ideal server would be like, so...

i think that sums it up pretty well http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

BillSwagger
01-17-2010, 03:52 PM
I rarely have trouble with "kill steals" but i think everyone's taken a wing off a plane to have a team mate chase it to the deck shooting at it. And i guess it wouldn't be so bad if it didn't take 20-30 seconds of engagement because i'm not using insta-kill cannons.

On this topic however, i think that if you have a cannon wielding insta-kill plane you need to recognize that many times it takes a few more passes to actually get a kill with planes of less caliber. If i see a teammate who's pecking away with 50 calibers, then i'm sure not to jump in his way even if i'm in position to get a blast in with some insta-kill cannons.

I think some servers do away with the rule just to avoid senseless bickering. To a degree, its virtually unenforceable anyway. Its left at the discretion of the players. And we know how much discretion players have.



Bill

EoW_WhamO_CO
01-17-2010, 07:05 PM
i'd really like to see a true FFA option. Even if u have a bunch of different colors it's still in essence, a team vs team game. I'd like an option to have a Free For All game, no teams.

xf86config
02-10-2010, 04:35 AM
What i would like to see in a server, and what is currently possible are two different things.

I would like to have a simple choice when joining, red or blue, then have my unit, aircraft and mission assigned to me ( i dont think real pilots got a chance to say "no, i am not flying the [insert substandard theater aircraft], i want the uber one" They took what they were assigned and got on with the job.

I would like to have automatic numeric side balancing ( if the map is designed for even sides ).

I would like to see more persistence in dogfight server missions, much more like SEOW but without the huge investment in manual planning.

DF servers could be so much more than they are, Zuti has made a huge improvement, but aspects that are common in SEOW are still missing, Supply, manufacturing etc

In effect, i think i would like to see a theater server, not a df server, so my post is probably totaly OT

Sporran

Wildnoob
02-10-2010, 07:12 AM
About kill steals, I really don't care. It's all about the damn score. I think it's the deed that counts, not the score.

blairgowrie
02-10-2010, 08:11 AM
Check PM please Wildnoob.

VonKlugermon
02-10-2010, 11:16 AM
Hmmm. Full Real settings, vulch and kill steal to your hearts content. Though it's nice to rack up a huge point tally, I'm in it for the fun. Shooting down someone, or being shot down, it's all good!
As for mods, ideally one server with, one without.
Plane sets - variety is the spice of life, so long as it's historically correct for the period.

Willy