PDA

View Full Version : BOB Spawning idea for DF servers



AirWireFox
01-28-2007, 12:49 PM
I have posted this on the warbirds server too.

It could be an idea to get us more organised in formations rather than always spawning on the runway half way thru a game

Any way please read on................

I believe when NATO do air combat exercises they have Sancturies.

Sanctuaries are areas that are safe to a particular side i.e. the opponents cannot enter the other teams sanctuary.


Sanctuaries could be bounded by height restrictions and lateral boundaries. Say a box 2000 feet high (start from any height) and one or more grids wide.You could spawn into this box. Guns are disabled in the sanctuary.

Any opponent nearing the box gets a grid warning on his hudlog and then if he enters the box the game sets his power to idle and disables his guns.
Or the game could just blow him up

The box could be shown on the map.

To prevent perchers and vulchers having a feast any opponent within a grid of the sanctuary has all his lights pulsed continually as a warning.

To prevent people running into the sanctuary to hide from a bandit you should not be allowed to re-enter either.

Ideally the sanctuary should not be too close to the fight.

You could form up in the sanctuary then head out to battle.


Whaddya think ???

Any refinements or a duff idea.


Best regards Moby



Original thread link

http://www.warbirdsofprey.org/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=447

ElAurens
01-28-2007, 02:24 PM
Huh?

I did not think an enemy airfield in wartime was a safe place, immune from attack.

Put up a good airfield CAP with some good flak and move along.

Perhaps your field is in Switzerland?

AirWireFox
01-28-2007, 02:59 PM
The idea behing this is to get people to form up in formation together before heading off on a mission.
The sanctuary or safe box provides an area for this to happen.
If it were to work we might see more realistic formations of players rather than a rag tag bunch of loners and odd pairs.

In a COOP this is possible due to everyone spawning together. But in a DF server this is only the case at the beginning.

The purpose of this idea is not to replicate reality BUT to make DF servers more realistic.


Best regards Moby

PBNA-Boosher
01-28-2007, 03:00 PM
Airfields are attack zones. If you're caught on the ground in the middle of an enemy's strafing run, then you better get airborne quickly. I'm sorry if you don't like vulching, I don't like it much either. I don't do it because I want my fun to be in the air. However, just because we don't like it doesn't mean it didn't happen. As long as there is good CAP and maybe a few decent flak guns, then you should be able to T/O and get up on your opponent's butt, or at least get away.

AirWireFox
01-28-2007, 03:16 PM
I think your missing the point.


I dont mind being vulched at all, I accept it as part of the game.
However what vulching does cause is everyone getting off the deck asap and clearing the base to get some height and avoid the vulchers.
If you had a safe area you could get your formations sorted with ease.

What I want to see more of in the DF servers is formations.
Bombers in a group, a couple of finger 4s of fighters.
I want to engage the enemy at a squadron level not always at individual level.
How great would it be to engage such a group. The reality factor would really kick in.

AS i said ---in a COOP you get these opportunities( to engage large formations).

We could have such chances in a DF server too..

And in reality both sides were able to form up with impunity most of the time.
Germans over Nth France in BOB before crossing the channel.
And the USAAF over Great Yarmouth East Anglia in the battle for Germany.

No not Switzerland tho except maybe on the shuttle raids to Italy and back later in the war

Best regards Moby

FritzGryphon
01-30-2007, 05:52 PM
I don't think an artificial zone is really the way to go, or even needed.

Dotting an area with heavy flak would do the same thing. For example, around an airbase for bombers, far behind the front line.

As for vulcher defense, thats what the flakvierling is for.

AirWireFox
01-31-2007, 05:16 PM
Flak= bad FPS or lag
And what is " flakvierling "

Cheers

BM357_Sniper
01-31-2007, 05:53 PM
The problem with airbases and vulching on DF servers is that airfields were not that close together. It is just totally unrelistic to have people taking off, flying for 5 minutes or less and strafe an airfield over and over and over. It's acadish, not to mention the fact that the most dangerous place to be would be low over and enemy field.

Tater-SW-
01-31-2007, 06:09 PM
Another idea is one I posted someplace in here:

Have a mission creation system within the DF game. Player A makes a mission (with waypoints, etc), and others join. Once in flight, new polayers can jopin the mission, and they will spawn in offset from the mission leader IN FLIGHT. Such a moving spawn point would have rules to disallow spawning near enemy airfields or aircraft. Ie: spawnign in flight would be disabled if any enemy aircraft or facilities were within X km of the mission leader's plane. X would be some distance outside of visual range.

Something else BoB should consider is a feature of Targetware. They have "disengagement circles" placed on the map. An example: you have an airstart mission for the attacker where the spawn point is 100 miles from the target area at 20,000ft. The defenders are to scramble (maybe airstart, whatever) over the target airfield. The attackes bomb, then RTB. They fly to the disengagement area, and once inside, they are assumed RTB if there are no enemy aircraft within a certain range, and they have enough fuel (taking leaks into account) to reach the real home base (say 400 miles beyond the engagement circle.).

This allows airstart missions, with a realistic RTB requirement for the attacker---he can stay and dogfight, but he must watch his fuel or he'll disengage, and be considered to have ditched short of home.

AirWireFox
02-01-2007, 07:39 AM
Originally posted by Tater-SW-:
Have a mission creation system within the DF game. Player A makes a mission (with waypoints, etc), and others join. Once in flight, new polayers can jopin the mission, and they will spawn in offset from the mission leader IN FLIGHT. Such a moving spawn point would have rules to disallow spawning near enemy airfields or aircraft. Ie: spawnign in flight would be disabled if any enemy aircraft or facilities were within X km of the mission leader's plane. X would be some distance outside of visual range.

Something else BoB should consider is a feature of Targetware. They have "disengagement circles" placed on the map. An example: you have an airstart mission for the attacker where the spawn point is 100 miles from the target area at 20,000ft. The defenders are to scramble (maybe airstart, whatever) over the target airfield. The attackes bomb, then RTB. They fly to the disengagement area, and once inside, they are assumed RTB if there are no enemy aircraft within a certain range, and they have enough fuel (taking leaks into account) to reach the real home base (say 400 miles beyond the engagement circle.).

This allows airstart missions, with a realistic RTB requirement for the attacker---he can stay and dogfight, but he must watch his fuel or he'll disengage, and be considered to have ditched short of home.


Great ideas Tater

rnzoli
02-02-2007, 10:01 AM
Originally posted by Tater-SW-:
Have a mission creation system within the DF game. Player A makes a mission (with waypoints, etc), and others join. Once in flight, new polayers can jopin the mission, and they will spawn in offset from the mission leader IN FLIGHT. Such a moving spawn point would have rules to disallow spawning near enemy airfields or aircraft. Ie: spawnign in flight would be disabled if any enemy aircraft or facilities were within X km of the mission leader's plane. X would be some distance outside of visual range.
Interesting idea, but I am afraid that it wouldn't really solve the antagonistic conflict between co-ordination and immediate refly. According to your (valid) restrictions, the only place where it is interesting to join a formation en route is from base to target. This might be interesting for late arrivals, or people crashing into each other during take-off. However, players will not be able to join the formation while in engagment with the enemy, and there is not much point to join a formation with a fresh aircraft only to return to the base, no action.

Now compare this with what the users want on DF server. They want to get back to action quick, after being shot down during the engagement with the enemy. Can they do it (in any fair way)? No, because the engagement is still on. They can wait and join the formation later, but by that time, the fun is over, the formation is returning to base.

With this setup, we are back to square one: co-ordinated flights are not attractive to players who what to rush to action. And by default, every player that was shot down wants to rush back to action, naturally http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif So either you play a co-op, or you play a DF, there is no realistic middle way between these 2 concepts.

You might think of repeated 'waves' of flights, so someone getting shot down in one flight might join another formation going towards the target at the meantime, however, you need to give some time for the enemy between waves (to to their RTB-ing), and you cannot keep too many AI aircraft in the air either (lag, etc.). So I would expect that the idea of co-ordinated flights will quickly degenerate into what we know from DF-servers already - lone wolfing, small waves of attacks, difficulties to set up formations before attack etc.

I wonder how AI objects in DF servers will be implemented in SoW:BoB, but my suspicion so far is that the co-operative mode will still remain the primary way of flying co-ordinated, flights-against-flights style, objective oriented missions. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

Tater-SW-
02-02-2007, 10:55 AM
There is no reason why joining on RTB (after getting near the target location) could not also be disabled.

The goal for this in a DF map, is to bunch up planes. It's always more interesting to see a formation of bombers than a stream. Yes, it only works (with the above tweak) on ingress, but that is what we want. Other tools could be added to help as well.

For example, the DF mission builder might be allowed to set the number of allowed missions, and by target/plane type. Note that the FMB might also allow for the builder to allow NON-mission flights as well. The distinction would be that "mission" flight has limitations, but also perks like in-flight joining. The idea is to add tools to the toolbox for mission builders. Heck, the rules for in-flight spawnign should be controlled in the FMB as well. Allow the builder to decide. Another option to allow the builder to set would be that once the ML is within visual range of any enemy plane, then in-flight spawning is disabled for the rest of the mission.

As an example, what if you (as mission builder) could allow only one (as many as you chose) B-25 mission in flight at a time? Players that come in too late to TO with the group can join en route. This increases the window to join an organized group from a couple minutes at the airfield, to maybe 10-15 minutes, depending on the map. Again, entirely up to the mission builder, and the philosophy of the server. I could see moving bases farther from the front if you could join in flight if the map was designed well.

Example: you have a NG map where the japanese fly from Buna, and the allies fly from Port Moresby. Usually, such maps have airstarts over the Kokoda trail in the middle of the map (on ZvW, anyway). In this case, the new map would start, and neither side would see action for a while while they transit to the target area. I'd make a couple "no-mission" airstart areas for fighters near the Front, but farther than they are now on the ZvW map. The bombers would all start on the ground, and would have useful targets both at the front, and the enemy air bases/ports for a variety of missions. The long flight time (relatively) for bombers would mean the window to join would be pretty big, maximizing the chance of a group forming by the time they get near the enemy. For this example, I'd set the spawning so that once detected by the enemy (aircraft), spawning stops til ML RTB. I'd make the planes used for escorts also mission-based, and they would be able to spawn offset from the bomber ML they are SET to escort. Same rules. Different bomber types would have different missions, so at any time, there might be 3 bomber waves en route from PM to Buna, A-24s (SBD), A-20s, and B-25s. If Buna was IJN, I'd put Vals and Bettys there as bombers (using IJA gets tricky for lack of bombers). The P-400s might be set to "normal" DF play, but ground based, vs the P-40s and A6M3s set to airstart back from the front a little.

Just an example.

Adding tools is ALWAYS good.

tater

rnzoli
02-02-2007, 01:23 PM
I beg to disagree, adding tools is great, but only if they are efficient. All I am trying to point out that no FMB tools are able to change human behaviour http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/35.gif no matter how well you are tooled, it is impossible to force cooperation onto players that simply can't wait 10 minutes for their mates in a DF environment, hungry for action.

Jumping onto the conveyor belt of bomber wave and escort fighters is nice http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif essentially it means running overlaying co-ops on the same server (same airspace), where each co-op remains open for joining during ingress, and gets closed when engaging the enemy (no more joining is possible or reasonable).

Maybe the weakness is that you can't have too many aircraft in the air at the same time due to bandwidtt/memory needs, so if you want to have a big, massive engagement, you can have only 1 flight from each side (limit is 16 + 16 flyable aircraft currently in IL-2), otherwise, if you want formation waves arriving every 10 minute to target, you might have to reduce the formations to 4 against 4, which is too small.


Have you also thought about conflicts between AI and human pilots? Would the B25 mission flight start even if no human pilot is in the flight, and as they come onto the flight, the AI would give way to human pilots? Also, what happens when a human jumps into the lead aircraft and deviates from the route? Would it be allowed that the flight splits up because humans go different directions? How would the new player know, where is he when he drops into the flight? What would happen when a human takes an AI position, but then leaves (changes location). Should AI take back position, or should the plane just disappear? What would happen when it's time to start next wave, but preivious wave is still in flight (got lost or something)? Delay next wave, or cancel it?