Now What?

[Cali]

 

I wish the servers were as populated as il2.

 

I don't think we'll ever see that. I don't know what it is but people like flying the old stuff more. Maybe the new gen is too complicated for them to comprehend. It would be nice to have at least 100 people online all the time.

[Grimes]

If we had a steady stream of a minimum 100 players online through out the day, I think things would be fine. Within a DCS game I really see no need to have more than 16 player slots anyway. Hell with 4 people in a server I might just think of that server as "full."

[Kuky]

I don't think we'll ever see that. I don't know what it is but people like flying the old stuff more. Maybe the new gen is too complicated for them to comprehend. It would be nice to have at least 100 people online all the time.

 

IL-2 was simply a very well made WWII sim... yes it is lot simpler for weapons but not for engine management :smilewink: Having said that I can't wait for BoB SoW

[ZQuickSilverZ]

You know I have always wondered that myself. Granted IL2 1946 is a top tier product but what about it draws so many people to it? I mean honestly DCS is superior in every way (technically I mean) yet...... I am of the opinion they like the "in thier face" aspect present in IL2 (I say they, I play IL2 also but prefer more modern aircraft). IL2 combat is more close quarters. Also in IL2 there is no electronic crutch to lean on. It's YOU vs THEM. Maybee they don't feel like thier as much of a part of the combat as they do in IL2 (because of the modern electronics). What do you guys think?

[KeyCat]

Within a DCS game I really see no need to have more than 16 player slots anyway. Hell with 4 people in a server I might just think of that server as "full."

 

I have to disagree... Beeing used to organized ~80-100+ player TvsT in ArmA II I personally need a bigger player count than 4-16 in MP else the virtual airspace feels really empty (at least when it's TvsT, co-op's is another thing)!

 

I fully understand that DCS is different than ArmA II but last spring while actively playing on 104th's server there where regulary ~40-50+ FC2/BS pilots in the air at nighttime (maybe some 104th guy knows the peak number?).

 

IMO it was great fun teaming up with 3-4 friends in such an active airspace even if it wasn't really "organized" all over (since it's a pub server) and it would be even more fun if it was organized in some way or another!

 

Just my 0.20 SEK.

 

/KC

Edited October 20, 2010 by KeyCat

[Grimes]

I have to disagree... Beeing used to organized ~80-100+ player TvsT in ArmA II I personally need a bigger player count than 4-16 in MP else the virtual airspace feels really empty (at least when it's TvsT, co-op's is another thing)!

 

 

IMO it was great fun teaming up with 3-4 friends in such an active airspace even if it wasn't really "organized" all over (since it's a pub server) and it would be even more fun if it was organized in some way or another!

 

Don't mistake my comment to mean that a few players will be the only aircraft involved and in the air. Quite the contrary. Sadly FC2 will never see the project I was working on to remedy the need of 20+ people populate the combat space. A-10C might though. :music_whistling:

[Insanatrix]

I think people just like IL-2 because it is simpler. Up is up down is down there's not much to learn except energy concepts and FM. It also has a more personal or competitive feel and aspect to it. It also is based around WW2 and too many people think that missiles are the end all of air combat and are for noobs who can't make gun kills. I had a friend in my IL-2 squad who HATED FC2 because the planes have missiles. It wasn't just that fact though it was because he didn't know what to do when fired upon. He just assumed that once he's fired on he's screwed because it's the all powerful missile. He also didn't know how to scan radar or use EOS or any of the very simplistic systems. Same reason CoD4 was more popular than ArmA. Games are for people who want to have fun. Simulations are for people who want to learn and have fun learning.

[power5]

IL2 is also instant combat. Flip the thing on and you are airborne in less than 1 minute. No systems to align, or setup. Just take off and have your finger near the trigger. Much more air quake than FC2. Its all about kills and not about the method. "Oh, we are flying over water on this board, yay, oooh, spit to kill, lookout." Its fun for what it is, but very 1 dimensional online. I do not even think there are missions on any servers just deathmatch.

[ZQuickSilverZ]

power5 I have to ask how much experience you have in IL2. When I fly online with my squad there is definitely a "Method" to thier combat. I don't know if they offer anything but deathmatch online on public servers but we fly coop. Also the missions we play are usually anything but "instant". Sometimes we have to fly for a while before we even see enemies. In my experience it takes alot more teamwork to down a single target in IL2.

Edited October 20, 2010 by ZQuickSilverZ

[Lodestone]

IL2 is also instant combat. Flip the thing on and you are airborne in less than 1 minute. No systems to align, or setup. Just take off and have your finger near the trigger. Much more air quake than FC2. Its all about kills and not about the method. "Oh, we are flying over water on this board, yay, oooh, spit to kill, lookout." Its fun for what it is, but very 1 dimensional online. I do not even think there are missions on any servers just deathmatch.

 

Hi power5,

 

As a guy who spent years running one of the most successful servers in IL-2, I feel you are quite wrong on a few counts:

 

There are several excellent mission goal oriented servers out there. They are classified as "dogfight" servers, but that is just what IL-2 calls all non-coop servers. I ran Skies Of Valor for years, and it was always a point of pride for me to design fun MP missions designed around historical mission goals. Aerial combat is not real if it doesn't revolve around moving mud and/or protecting said mud-movers. Of course there is plenty of airquake in IL-2, but that is due to the fact that IL-2 is an extremely rare kind of sim which caters to the desires of both air-quakers and historical simmers. You just need to choose where to play, and if there is no place to play which fits your needs, then start a server and make it into your kind of place. That's what I did ;)

 

Saying IL-2 is about kills rather than method just cuz it has no pre-flight procedures is as silly as saying there is no method to flying the Hokum since it has an auto-pilot. Il-2, and WWI/II aviation in general, requires a lot of skill and practice, as I am sure you know. It is just a different skill-set. Finding your enemy in a big blue sky with no sensors but for the Mk.I Eyeball is not exactly easy. And then once you have found him downing him is no small task either; especially if he has friends. To succeed in SOV and servers like it you must know your aircraft intimately, and you must know your enemy. You must be practiced and patient, and above all you must not fly alone. It is kinda the opposite of air-quake, imo. At least that's what I tried to imbue SOV with.

 

Also, I can fly a P-40 through a hangar building at 500 km/h in truck and trailer formation with my wingman. Upside down. There is a method to that :P

 

I love the detail of the real start procedures; I really enjoy learning all the intricacies of the machine. But I fully agree with Oleg when he says that spending resources making accurate startup procedures for a sim with over 100 planes is wasteful and stupid. People don't want to wait for a fight. There is offline and coop for that. Study sims are where we go for the insane deatils, but by their very nature we ought not be surprised when not a whole lot of people want to play a study sim. They are an immense time investment, and (contrary to how we all feel) not everyone derives pleasure from learning intricate procedures. One kind of sim is not more valu able than the other, they simply fill two different needs. I for one enjoy both kinds of sim immensely, if they are well done. So if what you mean is the only good sims are study sims, then I guess we just see things differently.

 

If you still think there is no method in IL-2 then I shall smack you across the face with my glove, and challenge you to a duel, good sir!

 

:)

 

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

So for what it is worth, my two cents on the DCS issue at hand is as follows:

 

I think the whole idea of fusing Lomac with DCS is contrary to the very essence of DCS. I thought DCS was supposed to be a series of study sims which plugged into one another. Lomac is fun, but it is not a study sim. It, like IL-2, is a sim built around human v human online or LAN play. I think attempting to make a study simulator which plugs into an existing online-geared combat simulator is like trying to play water polo with a horse, just cuz it has the word "polo" in the title.

 

Study sims are on their side of the ballroom staring suspiciously at the "dogfight" sims on the other side of the hall. Both are fun, but they just do not wanna dance together yet. Maybe someday the tech will be good enough and the market will have grown enough for us to have a study sim which can play like a PvP online game too. Until then we have to get used to them being two separate things.

 

Of course I don't mean study sims should not be played online, just that study simmers should be playing with other study simmers. So my vote is forget about FC2 compatibility and focus on more DCS modules which work well together. Ideally we will at some pouint have a rotary wing, a fixed wing CAS, and an air superiority fighter for each side. Then we can all hang out without these "airquakers" who seem to make some folks so frustrated.

 

Sorry for the huge. I talk like a GAU.

 

~S~

Edited October 21, 2010 by Lodestone

[power5]

Sorry. I played IL2 offline for ever and then tried online a couple years ago. Definitely much harder fighting a human than AI. I was shredded most times. Then found out most people do not use the cockpit view. Once I tried that, it was much easier to get kills and keep my SA. I still did not play online very much so never really looked at all the servers. Just found a couple like SOV and SOF that had a good feeling when I was on them. Not being part of a sqaud, nor having any TS really hurt my chances of surviving. Maybe I did not take a long enough search time on the IL2 servers and I appologize for generalizing.

[Steel Jaw]

IL2 missions are usually not flown online IMHO because flying a prop plane in formation over long distances is hard work and sux a$$. I know, I tried my hand at it for a while. And went back to jets.

[ZQuickSilverZ]

Lodestone if you did indeed run Skies of Valor your opinion should carry a HUGE amount of weight (I think anybody that has played IL2 knows about THAT server). How about starting a thread giving tips on mission design since you ran one of the most popular servers in IL2. I think the DCS/FC2.0 crowd could benefit from your expertise.

[Cali]

Lodestone if you did indeed run Skies of Valor your opinion should carry a HUGE amount of weight (I think anybody that has played IL2 knows about THAT server). How about starting a thread giving tips on mission design since you ran one of the most popular servers in IL2. I think the DCS/FC2.0 crowd could benefit from your expertise.

 

A lot of the missions in servers are very good, it's how people fly on them. Someone said that a small amount of people actually get on comms, that's a big part in coordinating strikes and what not. If he can change how people fly that would be the ticket, but that won't happen.

[MemphisBelle]

Sorry guys, I havent read through the whole threat now only the first few pages to become a mind about whats going on in this threat.

I am not sad about FC2 is planed to be fired once DCS grows up. These both games are definatelly not supposed to represent one single game(World), there´re just too different.

 

FC2 has just been an in between solution to not make us more cry for not having a new DCS Module. I dont think and pretty much don´t hope that once the Hog has finally been released ED cares about MP Compatibility between FC and DCS. I hope that they care about MP Compatibility between the Shark and the Hog and after that straight going on to enable pru-purchasing option to AH-64 or any other lovely Aircraft.

 

:joystick::pilotfly::thumbup:

Edited October 21, 2010 by MemphisBelle

[KeyCat]

Then found out most people do not use the cockpit view.

 

Unfortunately you managed to pick the "wrong" server, if you give it another shot someday look for so called"Full switch" servers.

 

I haven't flown IL-2 for a while but usually I jumped on to the WoP (usually 50+ pilots evenings) and their TeamSpeak server. Great guys all around and some of the guys who fly IL-2 are truly skilled with tons of knowledge about WWII era planes and tactics! As others said, to survive do not fly alone ;)

 

IL2 missions are usually not flown online IMHO because flying a prop plane in formation over long distances is hard work and sux a$$. I know, I tried my hand at it for a while. And went back to jets.

 

Nhaa, not so much pain if you know how to properly trim those old kites :)

 

/KC

Edited October 21, 2010 by KeyCat

[Steel Jaw]

Nhaa, not so much pain if you know how to properly trim those old kites

 

Oh I trimmed 'em just fine. But did not overcome the boredom enroute. :P

[power5]

Unfortunately you managed to pick the "wrong" server, if you give it another shot someday look for so called"Full switch" servers.

 

I haven't flown IL-2 for a while but usually I jumped on to the WoP (usually 50+ pilots evenings) and their TeamSpeak server. Great guys all around and some of the guys who fly IL-2 are truly skilled with tons of knowledge about WWII era planes and tactics! As others said, to survive do not fly alone ;)

 

 

 

Nhaa, not so much pain if you know how to properly trim those old kites :)

 

/KC

 

Probably wont get back on IL2. DCS is just too good to go back to that era. If IL2 was redone in DCS quality and fidelity (not sure what that means for a plane with a couple machine guns and a single piston engine) it may be a different story. I did notice that some planes did not trim for some reason. Not sure what that was about. Could have been my setup, or maybe the FM of the specific airplane. Hitting the trim directionals did nothing for me in many planes though.

[Humbug]

Probably wont get back on IL2. DCS is just too good to go back to that era. If IL2 was redone in DCS quality and fidelity (not sure what that means for a plane with a couple machine guns and a single piston engine) it may be a different story.

 

It's already being worked on and have been for some time. It's called Storm of War: Battle of Britain and is the next generation of WW2 air combat sims from Oleg Maddox. So far it's looking great.

[power5]

Is it a game or a mod? Will probably check it out when its released then. I did fire up IL2 a couple weeks ago before WH and was shocked how bad it seemed from what I remembered after flying BS. Then WH came around and I have not looked back.

[ZQuickSilverZ]

power5 again you have lost me. You really think IL2 seemed that bad? I mean you are entitled to your opinion of course but DCS is based on the Lock On engine which itself is pretty old. Oleg will NEVER make a sim as high fidelity as the DCS series. Oleg makes (in my opinion) a very high quality sim with many aircraft that is very playable. How many hundreds of models of aircraft are in IL2? You can't expect that kind of fidelity with that kind of variety. Oleg knows what he is doing. He knows who is audience is.

 

What do you feel (besides the advanced avionics thats a given) that DCS offers that IL2 does not? Physics? Damage models (which is very sophisticated in IL2)? Navigation instrumentation? Radio communications? Engine management? Headtracking? IL2 has all of these things.

 

I can't help but feel that your letting your enthusiasm (which is great) for the DCS series interject faults onto IL2 that are not there. Maybee you can clarify why you felt it was "bad".

Edited October 23, 2010 by ZQuickSilverZ

[GGTharos]

A distinct lack of high performance jet engines.

[power5]

Bad in its interface and graphics mostly. No idea about the FM of the aircraft. Problems I had with trim in many planes did not make them fun to fly. All in all IL2 is great. The map was always a PITA to utilize in my mind. I could never get a hang of the bombing either. The variety of planes is amazing and Oleg makes a great game. But with DCS, IL2 just feels like GranTourismo compared to Rfactor. Its a game trying to be a sim when its really a game. A very very good game, and entertaining for sure. BoB could very well be a WW2 DCS type game. Not much to be high fidelity really. No systems in the a/c, just a stick, pedals, throttle, and trigger. Not sure about the damage model in IL2. No idea how those planes took a burst from the enemy, but I always seemed to lose a control surface from the first couple squeezes of the enemies trigger.

 

The new shiny may be tarnishing my memories of IL2, but that is what happens when progress moves on.

[Steel Jaw]

Now he's right about the IL2 GUI, absolutely horrible.

[Bucic]

Not much to be high fidelity really. No systems in the a/c, just a stick, pedals, throttle, and trigger.

Oh really? :music_whistling: