Multiplayer Lobby - Hide opposing side.

[Jarlerus]

I suggest that when joining a server, players first have to choose side, and only then they can see who is in what airframe on that side. The opposing side would be totally hidden, bar the a total/number of players.

 

Additionally, these steps should be configurable through scripting and/or the ME - so that callsigns/IP-addresses can be logged and bound to the different sides for an amount of time set by the mission maker.

 

 

//Jarl

[Mig Fulcrum]

+1 no more cheats by looking the enemy aircrafts choosen by players

[Deano87]

+1

[Lixma 06]

+1

[RedBat07]

+1

[312_JS]

+1

[bies]

+1

[Vigo68]

+1

[Harker]

+1

[shomke]

+1

[mousepilot]

+1

[Lurz]

+1

[WARSZAWARC]

+1

[Mike_Romeo]

+1

[Amarok_73]

+1

 

[Mig Fulcrum]

+1 Yes please

[SharpeXB]

Actually it’s important to be able to see what the aircraft are on either side when you might have the same airframes on both teams. It’s good to know that the F-15 out there is actually an enemy vs friendly etc. It’s not unrealistic to have this information. IRL you would know the type of aircraft your adversaries were flying, it’s not a mystery. 

[bies]

Whole MP role selection should be revised.

It should be graphical selection of the airfield on the map (with man don't being forced to remember where every single airfield is located at given map) - and then selection of specific available airframe on selected airfield.

This would be whole lot more beginner-friendly. I personally know at least 2 guys who were discouraged seeing massive list of airfields which location in relation to the front they didn't remember/imagine and all airframes thrown to one super long list.

Super long mouse scrolling through everything, without even knowing where is given airfield, scrolling through both sides, different airfields, different airframes etc. everything thrown in one single list.

I guess ED already has this in their TO DO list, but they obviously have limited manpower and not everything can be a priority. Though this one seems like really easy task, not requiring any specialized knowledge of complex coding like graphic engine, aviation engineering etc. so it can be done by one of the less experienced guys.

Edited January 1, 2023 by bies

[rob10]

58 minutes ago, SharpeXB said:

Actually it’s important to be able to see what the aircraft are on either side when you might have the same airframes on both teams. It’s good to know that the F-15 out there is actually an enemy vs friendly etc. It’s not unrealistic to have this information. IRL you would know the type of aircraft your adversaries were flying, it’s not a mystery. 

From what I've read in other threads (AWACS related), I think this is more about knowing WHO is in what aircraft so the "best" players on the other side can't be targeted just based on that info.

[falcon_120]

Whole MP role selection should be revised.
It should be graphical selection of the airfield on the map (with man don't being forced to remember where every single airfield is located at given map) - and then selection of specific available airframe on selected airfield.
This would be whole lot more beginner-friendly. I personally know at least 2 guys who were discouraged seeing massive list of airfields which location in relation to the front they didn't remember/imagine and all airframes thrown to one super long list.
Super long mouse scrolling through everything, without even knowing where is given airfield, scrolling through both sides, different airfields, different airframes etc. everything thrown in one single list.
I guess ED already has this in their TO DO list, but they obviously have limited manpower and not everything can be a priority. Though this one seems like really easy task, not requiring any specialized knowledge of complex coding like graphic engine, aviation engineering etc. so it can be done by one of the less experienced guys.

+1

I would love to see some kind of war room/battle ops center (aka improved f10 map) where you could see realistic information you would know IRL like:
-battlefront
-Points of known enemy position or last received fire
-remaining longs range enemy IADS infrastructure....

and ofc being able to click on an AB to pick and aircraft, the current scrolling system is very outdated, unfriendly and it does not go smoothly at all. So many time I join a slot just to know that the particular AB I have selected has no additional fuel... something I should know from the beginning.

All of the above is not intended to tilt towards a war thunder kind of style, but to improve the realism more similar to that other simulator where you see ATOs, awacs and tankers routes, etc.... and even let's you make some basic planning like selecting weapons and a basic flight plan, that would also be a breath of fresh air for FC3 aircraft that have no option to create way points in MP

Enviado desde mi ELE-L29 mediante Tapatalk

[SharpeXB]

27 minutes ago, rob10 said:

From what I've read in other threads (AWACS related), I think this is more about knowing WHO is in what aircraft so the "best" players on the other side can't be targeted just based on that info.

Well if AWACS can see who all the enemy players are, maybe fix that. But hey maybe the “best” players deserve to be targeted anyways, keeps them humble

[Tank50us]

I'm in support of the idea of hiding the opposing Team list. IRL, you may know that your opponent has X-Type of aircraft, but you won't know:
1: How many they have (just an estimate by the Intel Guys, and since when are they ever 100% spot on?)
2: Where those planes are based. Especially in ht Pre-Satellite days When you had to rely on things like information from other pilots (EX: "I saw BF-109s over there... I think...") and dedicated recon runs to gain that intel.
3: Who's flying them. Unless you saw specific "Ace Markings" on specific aircraft (like some of the brightly colored BF109s in WW2), you'd have no idea who's flying any of the aircraft at that base. And even today you won't know unless someone snuck in and stole a manifest (be it by foot or interwebs).

On 1/1/2023 at 10:17 AM, bies said:

Whole MP role selection should be revised.

It should be graphical selection of the airfield on the map (with man don't being forced to remember where every single airfield is located at given map) - and then selection of specific available airframe on selected airfield.

This would be whole lot more beginner-friendly. I personally know at least 2 guys who were discouraged seeing massive list of airfields which location in relation to the front they didn't remember/imagine and all airframes thrown to one super long list.

Super long mouse scrolling through everything, without even knowing where is given airfield, scrolling through both sides, different airfields, different airframes etc. everything thrown in one single list.

I guess ED already has this in their TO DO list, but they obviously have limited manpower and not everything can be a priority. Though this one seems like really easy task, not requiring any specialized knowledge of complex coding like graphic engine, aviation engineering etc. so it can be done by one of the less experienced guys.

 

I'd also like to see this, and to add to that, when a Mission Designer goes to equip an airfield, they should just add a list of potential aircraft, and when the player goes to spawn in, they can choose from:

• Hangar/Cold: Aircraft is cold and dark, no INS allignment, and no weapons
• Ramp: Aircraft is plugged in too a power and air cart with the INS pre-aligned and a weapons load pre-selected
• Hot: Aircraft is ready to fly now, just get in and go.

Bonus points if you see some graphics showing the action going on.

[SharpeXB]

Being able to see the roster in the game has some important functions. It helps the players balance the game and select roles and loadouts. It can help prevent friendly fire in cases where the same aircraft are available on both side and when some don’t have an IFF. Besides the role screen this info can also be seen on the scoreboard and the main mp menu. The idea of suppressing all of those isn’t very appealing. I have a hard time imagining how this info can be meaningfully exploited. The benefits outweigh the drawbacks. 

[Oceandar]

Actually it’s important to be able to see what the aircraft are on either side when you might have the same airframes on both teams. It’s good to know that the F-15 out there is actually an enemy vs friendly etc. It’s not unrealistic to have this information. IRL you would know the type of aircraft your adversaries were flying, it’s not a mystery. 

I agree with this.

Sent from my SM-A536E using Tapatalk

[Tank50us]

1 minute ago, SharpeXB said:

Being able to see the roster in the game has some important functions. It helps the players balance the game and select roles and loadouts. It can help prevent friendly fire in cases where the same aircraft are available on both side and when some don’t have an IFF. Besides the role screen this info can also be seen on the scoreboard and the main mp menu. The idea of suppressing all of those isn’t very appealing. I have a hard time imagining how this info can be meaningfully exploited. The benefits outweigh the drawbacks. 

Funny, you're usually against any kind of gamey features, and yet this is one of those more sim features I wish we had.

As for preventing friendly fire... well.. it's simple. You do that by using your IFF equipment, talking to your side, and just paying attention at the merge (if the AWACS calls you as merged, than that guy that just passed you isn't a friendly). Also, if you're dealing with WW2/ECW, then just look at the other guy when you pass by him. There's a reason those roundels back then were huge... if the other guy isn't wearing a roundel you recognize as friendly, then he probably isn't. And if you accidentally shoot down a teammate, well... look at the onion... and figure out how many layers were missed to get to that point. Were you/they in the right airspace? Did they use the prescribed livery (as in, did they choose a livery that didn't fit the faction because the one they chose was cooler)? Were they on coms? How did they act at the merge? All valid questions