Coffee999 Posted October 23, 2005 Share Posted October 23, 2005 Let me see if I understand this thread. 1.11 finally comes out, with good MP improvments, and at the same time they take away the ability for the server to dictate terms and keep everything on the same playing field? Does this mean then for example that even though the server restricts lables, someone joining can change it? If this is the case, this is very bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwingKid Posted October 23, 2005 Share Posted October 23, 2005 Do SP folks really need ED to stop them from cheating themselves? Do MP folks really need SP folks to change their filenames for them? -SK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwingKid Posted October 23, 2005 Share Posted October 23, 2005 Does this mean then for example that even though the server restricts lables, someone joining can change it? Wherever did THIS idea come from now? Actually, the war in Iraq can also be blamed on being able to change payloads in Classified missions. Please, let's add more confusion to the thread! Everybody, all the bugs you ever saw in Lock On, Falcon 4, any sim you name it - it's all due to being able to change your payload! -SK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted October 23, 2005 Share Posted October 23, 2005 No, this only affects things that are in the meinit file. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S77th-GOYA Posted October 23, 2005 Share Posted October 23, 2005 This even includes the whole SAMs-hitting-ARMs fiasco, because the SAMs were described as "unbalancing" multiplayer without being able to do this. Ask yourself who made this description of '"unbalancing" multiplayer' and see if you think they really represent the MP community. There is absolutely no reason for a rift between SP and MP over this. Different elements could be classified seperately. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weta43 Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 It's interesting that so many people are surprised about this - it was flagged ages ago as a feature of 1.11 So from this - really the only problem is the bug that allows users to declassify missions, not the fact that classified payloads can now be changed per se. Can it really be that difficult to have a number of MeInit.xml tailored to those missions where you want to limit the available loads? It's a single file swap before the session starts, no? From what's been written the server hands out possible loads with its MeInit.xml as long as the mission is classified & if that bug was fixed then a server's gunzo or heater only mission would stay classified at the player end & they'd get their MeInit.xml & loadout from the server? The ability of SP players to change loadouts in classified missions can only be a good thing. Use the default if you want to try it as the writer intended, change if you're just not up to it or feel like "playing" a bit, & if they're only playing against themselves - who cares. Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 I think I do represent the MP community in some way - and I'm answering since I was the one who asked for this to be reviewed and provided evidence that some SAMs can and will do it. No, the intention was not to see a 100% shoot-down of the weapons, but rather to end up with a simulation that would require the salvoing of ARMs to achieve success LIKE IN REAL LIFE. It -does- unbalance multiplay, -and- makes SP SEAD missions too easy as well. Not everyone likes to put Su-25T's on -both- sides, you know. And yes, I agree, there doesn't need to be an SP/MP rift on this, and insofar as I can see, there really isn't. I spoke with a few members of the MP community on this issue before I considered bringing it up - and a little more challenge didn't seem to be an issue. Unfortunately, there are issues with this, just as there were when SAMs would -not- engage these weapons. In any case, I would still like to know results of any testing using a 1.11 made mission, NOT old 1.1 missions. So far, a double-tap against a tunguska almost always nails it for me. One maverick followed up by a second one five to ten seconds later ... not a big problem. And yes, I think we all agree that different elements should be classified differently - eg. you might not want to classify skin and tailnumber selection at all, you might want to classify hidden things, and you may or may not want to classify payloads. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 It's interesting that so many people are surprised about this - it was flagged ages ago as a feature of 1.11 So from this - really the only problem is the bug that allows users to declassify missions, not the fact that classified payloads can now be changed per se. Can it really be that difficult to have a number of MeInit.xml tailored to those missions where you want to limit the available loads? It's a single file swap before the session starts, no? From what's been written the server hands out possible loads with its MeInit.xml as long as the mission is classified & if that bug was fixed then a server's gunzo or heater only mission would stay classified at the player end & they'd get their MeInit.xml & loadout from the server? The ability of SP players to change loadouts in classified missions can only be a good thing. Use the default if you want to try it as the writer intended, change if you're just not up to it or feel like "playing" a bit, & if they're only playing against themselves - who cares. Having to swap files all the time is pretty annoying when you're running a server, you know. It is a solution, but it's also a bandaid solution. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwingKid Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 Ask yourself who made this description of '"unbalancing" multiplayer' and see if you think they really represent the MP community. Hey hey, don't give one guy all the credit! It takes a GROUP EFFORT to make a mistake that big. ;) -SK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwingKid Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 It's interesting that so many people are surprised about this - it was flagged ages ago as a feature of 1.11 thank you So from this - really the only problem is the bug that allows users to declassify missions, not the fact that classified payloads can now be changed per se. I love you Can it really be that difficult to have a number of MeInit.xml tailored to those missions where you want to limit the available loads? It's a single file swap before the session starts, no? will you marry me? -SK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwingKid Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 Having to swap files all the time is pretty annoying when you're running a server, you know. It is a solution, but it's also a bandaid solution. What kind of solution is prohibiting legitimate payloads in the first place? "Quadruple-bypass surgery?" -SK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 Yes, that one. Didn't you hear it's all the rage now? ;) In some cases the server owner may wish to run guns only, heat only, or perhaps SARH+HEAT only missions. It has happened and will happen that on such occasions, someone will jump in with a payload that essentially upsets the balance of that mission by using unwanted ordnance. I think it's quite narrow to think that all ordnance should be available at all times. What if the server owner wishes to have a 'desperate' mission for one side where guided AG munitions are not available, or due to supply problems, there are no active radar guided missiles? Why is it wrong to have the -choice- to host in this manner and do have it supported readingly through the game? [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S77th-GOYA Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 I think I do represent the MP community in some way Which way is that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 The 'being a member thereof' way. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weta43 Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 "Why is it wrong to have the -choice- to host in this manner and do have it supported readingly through the game?" It's not - it's a good idea & having it readily suported rather than possible with a bit of fiddling around would be great, but if ED fixed the bug allowing anyone to declassify any mission at least it would be the latter. (I'm at work but - just out of curiosity - if you're at the first screen in FC and ALT+TAB to explorer is the MeInit.xml file accessible (sp?) or do you have to quit FC to free it up?) Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S77th-GOYA Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 The 'being a member thereof' way. The "just one guy who has his own ideas of what's important and what's not" way? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 Goya, you're pushing your very own agenda here. I'm not going to get into it with you. Get a grip. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S77th-GOYA Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 Precisely the opposite. You are pushing your agenda in the name of the community. I've yet to hear any ovation from the MP community because SAMs will now engage ARMs. And I never heard any complaints about that fact that they didn't before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwingKid Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 The "just one guy who has his own ideas of what's important and what's not" way? Hey, that's MY way! :mad: Get your own! -SK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwingKid Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 Seriously though... GG wasn't alone on the ARMs issue, and he did a lot of great research. There really was a consensus that only Patriot, S-300 and BUK should have this ability, which is actually pretty realistic based on available documentation, it just didn't turn out that way in the end because the feature was implemented really late in the testing. But that's OT. More to the point of this topic, there were plenty of multiplayer testers, NONE of whom realized that allowing free payload changes would cause problems for gunzo servers. No reason to single GG out, at least not on either of these issues that I can tell - he's just the only one of the MP testers willing to to hang around here, take flak, answer questions and admit to his role, while I suppose others are running for cover, leaving you all on your own? ;) Very dedicated member of the community IMHO... even if I disagree with him about everything. "And that's about as friendly as I get." -SK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 Thanks SK :D I say something, then SK says 'but did you know that ...' and my argument's toast. ;) Anyway, I should've kept an eye on the classification bug, I sort of feel responsible for that one since Ice addressed it specifically to me :( I hope we may see a better system come 1.2. Edit: I am referring specifically to the cheat bug ... the other one I didn't think there would be time to really deal with in terms of providing options. I'd lie to point out that while I see maybe 100-200 people total who show up to play MP on HL, I think that you can count on 50 times this figure playing SP and prefering to be able to choose their payloads. The dirty way of dealing with weapon restrictions right now is a modified meinit file for the server and a classified mission. Annoying, but at least doable. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ice Posted October 24, 2005 Author Share Posted October 24, 2005 Ok group hug:icon_syda A quick tutorial on how to edit and change the xml file is in order. GG? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 Sure. I can do it sometime this week (not tomorrow, I'll be busy as a bee). It's actually fairly easy, you just have to be -very- careful not to mess up any tags while performing surgery, otherwise you might cause very strange things to happen in-game, and likely crash LOMAC, so first order of business: Back up the original meinit.xml and keep it safe :) [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S77th-GOYA Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 No reason to single GG out, at least not on either of these issues that I can tell I didn't single GG out, GG singled himself out. I think I do represent the MP community in some way - and I'm answering since I was the one who asked for this to be reviewed and provided evidence that some SAMs can and will do it. If this was implemented correctly, noone would have a problem with it, so the real blame lies elsewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hitman Posted October 24, 2005 Share Posted October 24, 2005 I say fight fire with fire. Think everyone should fly sues with '54's...and lots of them too. Itll make the game that much less enjoyable for everyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts