Open Conflict - Server Information

[Mirknir]

For you, propellers fanatics :)

 

[Mirknir]

Maintenance

 

Hello guys

 

My internet connection will be upgraded Saturday "at some point when the guy show up".

 

At this point, I will shut the server down and use the interruption to do some maintenance.

 

If everything goes well, the number of slots should go back up progressively :thumbup:

 

[doodenkoff]

I'd like to think that was due to my recent, tiny donation being juuuuust enough....

[Mirknir]

I'd like to think that was due to my recent, tiny donation being juuuuust enough....

 

Every donations count, even tiny ones :thumbup:

 

I went to my ISP and told them that I am hosting a game server for chinese and russian hackers to chillax and without more bandwith, they might get restless and use their power for evil against my ISP.

 

Then I got an upgrade :thumbup:

Edited December 2, 2016 by Mirknir

[NASA6]

From now on, this is how the God Damn Bloody Fu**** Incursion is going to look like !!

no more Ak47s setting me on fire and sniping my Poor Crew :thumbup:

 

Heeeereeeee i coooooooome :pilotfly:

 

[Mirknir]

From now on, this is how the God Damn Bloody Fu**** Incursion is going to look like !!

no more Ak47s setting me on fire and sniping my Poor Crew :thumbup:

 

Heeeereeeee i coooooooome :pilotfly:

 

 

Until I add manpads like you all wanted! :music_whistling:

 

"Incursion really needed more manpads" PC-Gamer 2016

"More than your aircrafts, they now attack your FPS! Genius!" IGN 2016

"grumble grumble grumble F-18 grumble grumble can't wait grumble grumble DCS 2.5 grumble grumble" User Reviews Since 2002

 

 

Edited December 2, 2016 by Mirknir

[NASA6]

Until I add manpads like you all wanted! :music_whistling:

 

 

bow my head down, and slowly leave the room :cry:

[StandingCow]

[acdelta57]

Mi8 door gunners AND manpads?!?!!! I can only dream of the epic helo parties in the future!!!!!

[Mirknir]

Server internet connection has been upgraded and player slot count has been increased.

 

Let's see how it goes :)

[cosmicdoubloon]

Did someone say... MANPADs?

 

[Mirknir]

Did someone say... MANPADs?

 

 

It will be "Soon" released by our level design team.

 

However, our programming team needs to ship a new version of Skynet before.

Skynet map validation is preventing LD's from putting respawning-SAM-defended ground objectives.

 

Our QA team is hard at work right now monitoring the server on the new internet connection.

30 active players + Skynet =

- 65% upload bandwidth taken

- 10% CPU taken

- 33% memory taken

- average ping to outside (google/OpenDNS): 35ms

 

The metrics are way better than 30 players on my previous connection but...

...waiting for player's feedbacks to see how it's reflecting on their performance playing on the server.

All the good stuff :)

Edited December 3, 2016 by Mirknir

[NASA6]

- 65% upload bandwidth taken

- 10% CPU taken

- 33% memory taken

- average ping to outside (google/OpenDNS): 35ms

 

could this mean you can even make the player count higher than 31 ?

i mean 31 is pretty good don't get me wrong :thumbup:

so today's impression was very good, some people had some minor lag spikes now and then but i think the majority (me included) had a very smooth session :smilewink:

[marcoacv]

Many people on the blue side, perhaps because of the awacs "see everything"

 

Hello everyone, in the last two weeks I noticed that the staff is joining more of the blue side. So I did some flights on both sides to test. I really felt that the Blue Awacs is better. The big difference is that the blue Awacs are flying at an altitude of ten thousand meters above a flat region and the red awacs are constantly flying for seven thousand meters in a mountainous region. Please Mirknir try to equalize this, thank you very much.

 

I use the nickname "= BR = Wolverine"

[acdelta57]

Equality is for the weak! Use your strengths and your opponents disadvantages to YOUR advantage

[Mirknir]

The big difference is that the blue Awacs are flying at an altitude of ten thousand meters above a flat region and the red awacs are constantly flying for seven thousand meters in a mountainous region. Please Mirknir try to equalize this, thank you very much.

 

Map Symetry & Map Balance

 

First, I want to clear a confusion that is often made on the map design.

Even if I am aiming for a map relatively symmetric ; I am not aiming for a map perfectly balanced.

 

Lemme explain a bit more the difference and the design intents.

The map symmetry is here to give players a familiarity ; each side will have every playable crafts, a FOB, fleet, protected zone, same type of objectives....

The intent is to give player the same opportunities on each side and to encourage them to try each side and not be completely lost in the switch.

 

While this symmetry also helps me maintain a certain balance, the intent is not to have a perfect balance like you would see in a MMO battleground.

Then intent is to not have a big unbalance ; which is a bit different.

Even if you are offered about the same opportunities on each side, the conditions are meant to be different to offer variety.

Again, this can encourage players to switch side when they want a different context to the same task ; sometimes more difficulty.

 

Blue Pop VS Red Pop

 

I've noticed that a lot of people won't actually care about balance and will always choose red or blue.

The game / map / society associates blue to good guys and red to bad guys and people will be sometimes just be drawn to one of this.

A good example is MEDIC helicopters that are way more played blue side.

I've seen pilots jumping into blue attackers or helis while they were no fighter on their side and many on the red sides.

 

Of course, there will always be the players that want to be on the stronger side but usually, blue attracts more people and more diverse aircrafts.

 

Air Superiority and AWACS Position

 

The battle for air superiority is, of course, where the PVP is and where the fuzzy balance can be the more disturbing.

 

Comparing to the previous map "Khashuri", the current one "Tuapse" has a terrain very different from one side to another.

Blue assets and aircrafts are more exposed on a flatter terrain while red side offers more protection with more valley and mountains.

 

The AWACS position and altitude are also a bit different for variety.

In this map, the goal of the AWACS is to give a good defensive tool to protect your zone but a less unreliable tool for offense.

That's why they are so far away from the CZ and that's also one of the reason why the red AWACS is a bit lower to compensate the defensive mountain cover.

The AWACS is also very difficult to tweak as it's a black box for designers and for the script.

Do I wish I had better control over AWACS cover by putting zone and shit? F. yea

Do I wish I could make the AWACS not report helicopter? Maybe for a test ; definitely for MEDIC.

 

But apart from that, I like the fact that both sides have advantages / disadvantage for each opportunities ; including air superiority.

 

The only thing I can and will change "soon" is removing the AI CAP support for the "strongest" side.

It's started working on it but as usual, the only ETA I can give you is "before the F18"

 

Equality is for the weak!

 

You crazy texan!

For me, in DCS at least, equality is imposible to acheive and would be in the way of variety and diversity of experience. :thumbup:

Edited December 4, 2016 by Mirknir

[bertOC]

Seeing how Su27 and Su33 players are choosing sides usually on OC, I'd say its perfectly fine with the AWACS and DL capabilities as they are. Numbers equal it out pretty good most of the time.

[marcoacv]

Thanks for explaining your intentions. I just want to make it clear that I exposed the facts I saw as for example last night there were twenty blue players and seven reds. Then fine.

[Mirknir]

Thanks for explaining your intentions. I just want to make it clear that I exposed the facts I saw as for example last night there were twenty blue players and seven reds. Then fine.

 

The player pop in each side is irrelevant ; it could be 20 blue Medics versus 7 red fighters.

Try typing '-team' in chat and it will give you the number of fighters in each team.

That's a bit more representative of the air superiority status even if it not perfect either as not every fighter aircrafts are equals and some players can be in a fighter and do A2G :)

I will use this numbers in the AI CAPs respawn algorithm.

Edited December 4, 2016 by Mirknir

[acdelta57]

Seeing how Su27 and Su33 players are choosing sides usually on OC, I'd say its perfectly fine with the AWACS and DL capabilities as they are. Numbers equal it out pretty good most of the time.

 

Yes and from what I've seen, as long as bert is in A10C it is equal no matter what. Even 20 red su33s is no match for bert and his warthog love with quad aim9s!

[cosmicdoubloon]

Try typing '-team' in chat and it will give you the number of fighters in each team.

That's a bit more representative of the air superiority status even if it not perfect either as not every fighter aircrafts are equals and some players can be in a fighter and do A2G :)

I will use this numbers in the AI CAPs respawn algorithm.

 

Just a thought, would it be possible to modify this fighter counter, so that legacy and modern fighters are differentiated? For example, I would class the legacy fighters as the sabre, mig15, F5 and mig21 (and maybe mig-29G? it has 2 bad bvr missiles and 4 short range missiles, no ecm or datalink) and the moderns as the f15, mirage, mig29a/s and su27/33. This way it gives a fairer idea of the true air superiority battle. At the moment a team with 2 mig-21, an F5 and a sabre is shown as equal to a team of 4 F15s, clearly not the case in practice but without analysing each player's aircraft in turn in the player menu you wouldn't be able to tell.

[bertOC]

Actually I'm using the datalink quite a bit lately, all those fighters can be overwhelming sometime..

Can't deny the fun seeing ETs blowing up unsuspecting fighters, or that HMS in combination with the 73s. :music_whistling:

[Mirknir]

Just a thought, would it be possible to modify this fighter counter, so that legacy and modern fighters are differentiated? For example, I would class the legacy fighters as the sabre, mig15, F5 and mig21 (and maybe mig-29G? it has 2 bad bvr missiles and 4 short range missiles, no ecm or datalink) and the moderns as the f15, mirage, mig29a/s and su27/33. This way it gives a fairer idea of the true air superiority battle. At the moment a team with 2 mig-21, an F5 and a sabre is shown as equal to a team of 4 F15s, clearly not the case in practice but without analysing each player's aircraft in turn in the player menu you wouldn't be able to tell.

 

That's not totally true.

Right now, the counter is only counting "modern" fighters outside duel slots meaning, in OC, up from mig21.

The korean war / WWII planes are considered legacy and not counted.

I am not sure if counting separately mig21 and F5 would be really that useful.

 

A more proper way to give balance information would be to profile players using stats and have a veteran / junior pilot count but yea.... no :lol:

[Buckram]

I don't think there is an issue in terms of fighter balance, a lot of the time it comes down to pilot skill and battlespace awareness and I think it would be difficult to enact a truly "balanced" battlefield that everyone thinks is fair...

 

Su-27s come at me when I'm flying the F5 all the time, I still shoot down my fair share of Sukhois :)

[blast]

hi everyone,

I would like to say that many times players prefers stacking in blue team for a very simple reason: russian awacs speaks... russian. And honestly thats very annoying to not get info in english. why can't we have an option to turn on english for russian awacs? It would help a lot the balancing.