Stop passwording every DCSW server

[RagnarDa]

No one is impressed by you being able to ramp-start the A-10C. Your racecar analogy is false because if anything it's the other way around.

 

+1 for stop passwording the servers (I know, I should be better and start joining the respective ts-servers)

 

+1 for more FC3 missions on the servers. At least I have been flying A-10C and Ka-50 for years now and are tired of it. Let's do mixed capabilities operations!

[159th_Viper]

So you're seriously trying to tell me that the FC3 style push a button and go fly is just as hard has having to know all your aircraft's systems, how to manage them and use them correctly in specific situations that you do in a DCS fidelity aircraft? Pah! :lol:

 

Thta's the common misconception that exists and will continue to do so until we actually have a DCS Fast-mover and only then will people realise that said DSC Fast Mover actually has it easier and has a distinct advantage when it comes to combat :)

 

Yes, it goes without saying that insofar as flying and system management goes, DCS flyables are more difficult purely because there are more systems. At the end of the day, whether you are clicking buttons in a cockpit or using your keyboard to do so, what's the difference? It still gets done.

 

What DCS does not teach you and has not taught you to date is how to stay alive and conduct missions against opponents with a brain, be it the opposing bomber pilot, his top cover in a fast-jet or the opposing ground commander directing troops.

 

As Frostie correctly stated, Combat skill is earned and developed. If one is of the opinion that said skill will be better developed by focusing solely on DCS then you are sorely mistaken. Both FC3 and DCS have the tools to help you develop said combat skill in equal measures. Not taking advantage of servers that cater for all flyables in major ground, sea and air wars is OK and up to the individul concerned. Just keep in mind that what you put in you'll get out.

 

Again, this pertains to what you want out of an Air Combat Simulation. Virtual Ace or Target Drone, you decide. Just remember that at this stage DCS alone in not enough and never will be to wipe that bulls-eye from your butt, that is of course if Virtual Digital Combat is your vice.

[Eddie]

Yes, it goes without saying that insofar as flying and system management goes, DCS flyables are more difficult purely because there are more systems. At the end of the day, whether you are clicking buttons in a cockpit or using your keyboard to do so, what's the difference? It still gets done.

 

The problem with that statement is that as you well know, it doesn't "still get done" because the vast majority of aircraft systems are not modelled in FC airframes, and therefore the corresponding aircraft management tasks do not exist either. It's not simply a case, as you say, of DCS pilots using cockpit buttons and FC pilots using the keyboard, it's a case of DCS pilots using the cockpit switches and FC pilots not having to do anything at all.

 

What DCS does not teach you and has not taught you to date is how to stay alive and conduct missions against opponents with a brain, be it the opposing bomber pilot, his top cover in a fast-jet or the opposing ground commander directing troops.

 

Sorry but, rubbish. By that logic no one who has flown any sim other than Lock-On/Flaming Cliffs would have any combat skills or tactical knowledge, when that is clearly not the case. FC with it's obvious uses when it comes to DACT is undeniably a useful training tool, but DCS is far, far, far from useless. Anything you can learn in FC, you can learn in the current DCS airframes.

 

In fact spending the time mastering a single DCS airframe will make you a far more effective combat pilot, in that airframe, than you would ever be jumping from one aircraft model to another. Its a case of jack of all trades, master of none.

 

Not that there is anything wrong with that, if that is what someone enjoys, but don't go around saying it makes you better than someone who concentrates on one airframe, because it simply doesn't.

 

As Frostie correctly stated, Combat skill is earned and developed. If one is of the opinion that said skill will be better developed by focusing solely on DCS then you are sorely mistaken. Both FC3 and DCS have the tools to help you develop said combat skill in equal measures. Not taking advantage of servers that cater for all flyables in major ground, sea and air wars is OK and up to the individul concerned. Just keep in mind that what you put in you'll get out.

 

Indeed you do get out what you put in, and the one dimensional air combat seen on most public servers will turn you into a pilot who is very good at that one dimension of air combat, but that is all. Again, DCS or FC it doesn't matter at all, what matters is how much effort you put in to mastering your chosen airframe. And someone who works to truely master a DCS standard aircraft will always be a more capable vpilot than someone who masters an FC airframe, simply because they have more to master.

 

Again, this pertains to what you want out of an Air Combat Simulation.

 

Indeed it does.

 

Virtual Ace or Target Drone, you decide. Just remember that at this stage DCS alone in not enough and never will be to wipe that bulls-eye from your butt, that is of course if Virtual Digital Combat is your vice.

 

Once again, simply not true. Don't mix one dimentional air to air combat with a realistic and dynamic air combat environment. It doesn't matter if you're flying an FC level airframe or a DCS level airframe, if you don't put in the effort to learn and master both your aircraft and its weapon systems, and all the relevant tactics then you won't make it beyond the "target drone" stage. Flying on public servers might be one way to learn some of these skills, but it is neither the only way to do so or, in my opinion, the best way to do so.

[159th_Viper]

Opinions.......everybody has one. Time will however tell, and until we return to the Epic server battles that once was characteristic of the Community, all we can do is ping-pong arguments.

 

Would be good to, rather than arguing the odds behind a keyboard, we all actually take proactive steps to unite the Community, the first step thereto providing missions/servers that cater to the entire Community and all airframes. Might be a hard sell for some out there and that's ok - all we need is one or two servers to lead the way.

 

The results will, in time, speak for themselves, as they always have, as us Old Timers will no doubt recall.

Edited November 15, 2012 by 159th_Viper

[BRooDJeRo]

As a missionbuilder and unpassworded hoster im already thinking of scenarios where the FC3 module plays a significant role.

 

For me the DCS experience started out with the A-10C and the Ka-50 as a basis. As an addition lateron came implementing decent CA action and thats where it still is. Its nice to at least have something functioning properly there first. Theres still bugs there where youre not able to use CA, but its also still in beta, just as FC3.

Creating missions is one and also costs alot of time when done correctly. You also often run into not properly working functions or still a work in progress in terms of functionaly options where the hole purpose and idea of the the mission doesnt work and goes into the recycle bin for the time being.

 

In a nuttshell i ask myself the question if its not better to invest my time better and wait till something has more chance of succeeding instead of being busy on something for hours and eventualy get you stranded at the end of the day.

 

Ask an STP guy how much time is involved in a single/dual module (A-10/Ka-50) localised mission to work fully properly in any scenario, let alone implementation of 2 other beta modules. After every little update there is a need of rechecking every item in every missionfile too. Its all less simple than it looks. And theres lives and wives and kids and a demanding bosses lol.

 

You can also try and create something multi-module yourself, get comfy with a host and see if its good enough to host and see how reactions are. The overal standard quality in hosted mission is something growing inside the community too in which larger official missioncreators play a significant role. Yet they cant create higher standards than the software provides them.

Edited November 15, 2012 by BRooDJeRo

[Case]

If you guys want to fly with these mixed aircraft, go and host your own ;) If you enjoy that kind of thing, great.

 

Go back under the rock you crawled from please.

 

The 51st (Frostie, myself and others) and 104th (Crunch and others) have ran open FC2/BS1 servers since these games were published. We've never seen the need to password them because someone doesn't stick to our rules. Sure, people teamkill (be it accidental or on purpose), but in an open server there are always people that are willing to help the noobs, or report repeat offenders to the server admins. This is how a community works. Passwording servers to keep them out doesn't help; education does.

 

It is funny that you may feel your precious DCS server is getting invaded by arcadish FC3 pilots. In fact it is the opposite; most Flaming Cliffs servers have been around before there even was DCS, and now with FC3 we are going to welcome you into ours with open arms!

[JABO2009]

 

Would be good to, rather than arguing the odds behind a keyboard, we all actually take proactive steps to unite the Community, the first step thereto providing missions/servers that cater to the entire Community and all airframes. Might be a hard sell for some out there and that's ok - all we need is one or two servers to lead the way.

 

The results will, in time, speak for themselves, as they always have, as us Old Timers will no doubt recall.

 

I appreciate getting support in this respect...

 

from my online experience (which is still not the biggest though), I can only confirm that mixing DCS with FC planes works out without any trouble..

 

thx to some greek, german and croatian guys, we had 2 F15s; 2-3 Su27s; 4-6 Ka 50s, 1 Su25T and at least 6 A10Cs up in the air + 1-2 ground commanders, on a FC3/DCS/CA mission recently, and the battle experience was A.W.E.S.O.ME.

 

during the debriefing, everbody on TS was excited about the big fun he had.

 

NO ONE at any time complained about the mixture of FC/DCS airframes, or having a specific disadvantage because of this and that...(unfortunately some guys had loadout troubles, but that was a mission editing issue)

 

So yes, its what YOU make out of your skills and tactical knowledge... we had experienced and not so experienced pilots around both in DCS and FC frames.

their "staying alive time" out there stayed in pretty much direct proportion to their overall combat and flying skills.

 

one guy f.e. perfectly managed his A10C, attacked ground targets successfully and also downed a Su25T. Was he at any time overstrained with anything? NO, he perfectly managed his aircraft and was kick ass out there.

Edited November 15, 2012 by JABO2009

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

When ED releases a DCS World dedicated server that can handle all the players and keep the misbehaving players out we can see more open servers. But we also need some good server tools to administer the server remotely with functions like the once in ServMan or SLMod.

 

Jack

 

+ 1

[chokko]

+ 1

 

+ a million

 

I would also like to see ED put an extra box on the server list screen, where server admins can list the server rules.

Only has to download that info when a client single clicks on the server name in server list (rather than retrieve that info for every server on server list refresh).

 

This way clients know what is expected of them instead of:

- clients having to read rules on server hosts webpage (if they have one)

- having servman broadast rules AFTER the client has already joined

- requiring server hosts to edit each mission to have server rules

 

There's plenty of wasted space on the MP server list screen to implement this, even when viewing it on my 1366x768 netbook.

[BRooDJeRo]

When you visit somebody in RL you use some basic respectable behaviour too, why not when 'visiting' a server?

 

Do not kill friendlys seems obvious. Its a little bit like putting a 'stop!! here is a wall sign' right in front of a wall you can see. In Japan you eat with sticks. You may only enter a gipsy home without shoes. In Alaska its for bidden for a moose to flirt with a female moose during mating season on town squares. the list goes on.

Edited November 15, 2012 by BRooDJeRo

[Steel Jaw]

No one is impressed by you being able to ramp-start the A-10C.

 

Incorrect.

[Steel Jaw]

It is funny that you may feel your precious DCS server is getting invaded by arcadish FC3 pilots. In fact it is the opposite; most Flaming Cliffs servers have been around before there even was DCS, and now with FC3 we are going to welcome you into ours with open arms!

 

That's because you have nothing to lose.

 

The reverse is not necessrily so.

 

Here is my issue with mixing FC/DSC:

 

I spend 5-15 minutes getting my DCS Hawg prepped and off the ground, I then soon after get shot sown by a rinse-and-repeat FC Flanker flier who was airborne in 2 minutes and prolly couldnt care less therefroe if he gets shot down as he knows he will back up with minimum fuss. The stakes are too far out of whack. Also, With the DCS jet, my head is down alot while there is virtually no reason for the FC flier's to be so, he can focus on shooting things down. Workload is disproportinate.

 

Is there a way to disable respawning?

 

IMHO.

 

...damn I got involved anyhow.

 

Having said all that, boredom with FBMS (and its crappy terrain) and the need for a Fast Mover fix (in a modern terrain setting) will see me buying (sim lite) FC3 next week and happily flying it on the servers. Still fly FC2 sometimes.

 

Right, carry on.

Edited November 15, 2012 by Mower

[Case]

I spend 5-15 minutes getting my DCS Hawg prepped and off the ground, I then soon after get shot sown by a rinse-and-repeat FC Flanker flier who was airborne in 2 minutes and prolly couldnt care less therefroe if he gets shot down as he knows he will back up with minimum fuss.

 

I've flown DCS:BS in an FC2 environment on countless occasions and, at least on the 51st server, this has never been a problem. Your argument about being airborne in 2 minutes and not caring about getting shot down are wrong.

 

First off, you should design smart missions; obviously you're going to get shot down if you put the ground targets for Ka-50's and A-10's below the air-to-air arena. In most of the missions we run on the 51st, the target areas for strikers are offset from the main air-to-air battle.

 

Second, we put the airbases where fighters spawn from a long way away from the battle. They may be back airborne in two minutes, but it'll take them 10 minutes to get back into the fight. Equally, we try to use forward airbases where both fighters and strikers can rearm and refuel (but not spawn), to encourage them to value their life.

 

Thirdly, the missions are designed to promote teamwork, both between fighters and strikers.

 

Finally, and this has been crucial for the success of the 51st server, we run a stats page where all actions, both air-to-air and air-to-ground are logged. As such, repeat offenders, either teamkillers, or base bombers, will stand out and can be dealt with if ServMan hadn't already. Furthermore, we find that the stats page works as an incentive for new players to improve their flying skills. Besides counting kills and deaths, we use a point based system where players are rewarded for good behaviour and punished for bad behaviour. If you manage to return to your airbase your points will be doubled (to get people to value their life). Kills on fighters are awarded more points than on strikers (to get fighters to focus on fighting fighters). (see 51st stats rules).

 

Honestly, all your points are moot if you care to think about mission design and educating the people that fly on your server. If you do both there is absolutely no need to password servers to 'keep the noobs out'.

[Grimes]

Damn AI DCS aircraft, their startup is way shorter than the player controlled DCS version. Its totally an unfair advantage!

 

I spend 5-15 minutes getting my DCS Hawg prepped and off the ground, I then soon after get shot sown by a rinse-and-repeat FC Flanker flier who was airborne in 2 minutes and prolly couldnt care less therefroe if he gets shot down as he knows he will back up with minimum fuss. The stakes are too far out of whack. Also, With the DCS jet, my head is down alot while there is virtually no reason for the FC flier's to be so, he can focus on shooting things down. Workload is disproportinate.

 

Even when you get multiple DCS fighters, the workload needed for each one will be different enough that an advantage of some kind will be gained purely by aircraft selection. Hell the Razbam F-15E and Iris F-15E could be different enough that it might matter which version a player uses. Asymmetrical warfare is what its all about and its what makes most games interesting.

 

But you know what, you have an advantage also, because you are in a rather serious vFS. You have access to a higher form of teamwork that has been gained through flying with your squadmates over the years. You can call on their collective experience to help get you out of a bind. Or perhaps they will fly a highly coordinated escort with you that no random public player can simply live up to. From past experiences I know that a well organize squad will almost always steamroll individuals on a team. Is that fair, is that balance?

[Steel Jaw]

Case, you make some points: sucks to be you cause I may start to frequent your servers... :-P

 

...you guys on TS?

[Eddie]

Opinions.......everybody has one. Time will however tell, and until we return to the Epic server battles that once was characteristic of the Community, all we can do is ping-pong arguments.

 

Would be good to, rather than arguing the odds behind a keyboard, we all actually take proactive steps to unite the Community, the first step thereto providing missions/servers that cater to the entire Community and all airframes. Might be a hard sell for some out there and that's ok - all we need is one or two servers to lead the way.

 

The results will, in time, speak for themselves, as they always have, as us Old Timers will no doubt recall.

 

Now you see, this is what has me both confused and somewhat troubled. Why is it that you and others have a need to try and force 2 elements of a community who fly in very different ways from each other to fly together in the same servers? Here's the thing, people who fly on the public servers do so because they enjoy it, fine. But here's the thing, those of us why fly on private servers (be they squad servers or just a couple of friends flying together) do so because that's how we enjoy flying.

 

Those of us who fly as part of organised groups, be they very realistic and structured like the 476th or more relaxed, do it because that is how we enjoy our flying. And squads/wings/groups/whatever else who do so have been around since the biginning of MP sims, certainly as long, if not longer than public type servers you and others speak of. We are never, ever, going to switch to the way you and others like you play the game, because we don't enjoy playing that way.

 

We don't spend our time trying to force anyone else to do things our way, so why should anyone try and force us to change how we fly?

 

Go back under the rock you crawled from please.

 

The 51st (Frostie, myself and others) and 104th (Crunch and others) have ran open FC2/BS1 servers since these games were published. We've never seen the need to password them because someone doesn't stick to our rules. Sure, people teamkill (be it accidental or on purpose), but in an open server there are always people that are willing to help the noobs, or report repeat offenders to the server admins. This is how a community works. Passwording servers to keep them out doesn't help; education does.

 

It is funny that you may feel your precious DCS server is getting invaded by arcadish FC3 pilots. In fact it is the opposite; most Flaming Cliffs servers have been around before there even was DCS, and now with FC3 we are going to welcome you into ours with open arms!

 

Case, the attitude you exhibt here is the very thing that I fail to understand. And I simply have to respond to some of your points.

 

Your first sentence, well what can I say other than is that really necessary or in anyway helpful to your case of the discussion in general?

 

Nobody is saying there is anything wrong with playing on or running a public server. All they are saying is that they don't want to play on them. What's wrong with that?

 

You comment "Passwording servers to keep them out doesn't help; education does." I hope you're not trying to infer that those who don't fly on/run public server do nothing to help newbies or anyone else. Because if you are, then I'm afriad you simply don't know what you're talking about.

 

As far as your last paragraph goes. No I (we) don't feel our server are being invaded by anyone, because they are not, because they are locked. Many of us in the "locked server world" have been flying in "closed" groups/servers long before the first DCS module was released, when we moved to DCS we carried on flying the way we enjoy. Some people decided to include FC2/3 aircraft other didn't. Again, why do you think that is wrong?

 

I've said it before and I'll say it again, there are many elements and aspects to the sim community, and they are NEVER going to merge into one. Or to put it another way, if you guys want me to fly on your server you'll have to change how you fly and start doing things the way I do. And given that I would never expect or ask for that to happen, why do you expect and/or ask me (and others like me) to do things your way?

 

All elements of the community can quite happily continue to exist along side each other, as they always have.

[Steel Jaw]

But you know what, you have an advantage also, because you are in a rather serious vFS.

 

I dont fly with them on the public servers.

[Steel Jaw]

What *IS* neat about the FC/DCS integration is (as others have said) that we can now have a true all human mutliplatform strike package.

[JABO2009]

 

I spend 5-15 minutes getting my DCS Hawg prepped and off the ground, I then soon after get shot sown by a rinse-and-repeat FC Flanker flier who was airborne in 2 minutes and prolly couldnt care less therefroe if he gets shot down as he knows he will back up with minimum fuss. The stakes are too far out of whack. Also, With the DCS jet, my head is down alot while there is virtually no reason for the FC flier's to be so, he can focus on shooting things down. Workload is disproportinate.

 

Either design missions with FC planes spawning further away from the battle zone, or like Grezagk does, integrate an 8-10 minute respawn pause for FC plane drivers to eqal the DCS plane start up times. Problem solved, no big deal at all.

[Steel Jaw]

Either design missions with FC planes spawning further away from the battle zone, or like Grezagk does, integrate an 8-10 minute respawn pause for FC plane drivers to eqal the DCS plane start up times. Problem solved, no big deal at all.

 

Then get on it. :P

 

Seriously, didnt know that was an option, I dont know much about the DCS server mgt.

[SNAFU]

I don´t think it is about the start-up time, Mower is about. I rather it is the difference in mindset of common DCS simmer and the common FC2/3 simmer.

 

For the hardcore-role-playing approach, which is more common in DCS it can be an immersion killer if another player is just not acting according to his role... (f.e. doing a single-ship sortie deep into hostile areas, ignoring traffic pattern etc.) The common FC3 simmer is rather seldom looking for the realism-role-playing approach, rather for the action or the e-peen (scoreboard&stats) and does not get the his thrill from studying real-life procedures, but rather from general tactics and execution of them and not the details and whys.

 

These two mindsets simply just fit together to a limited degree, what is wrong about that? It was the same in the old Il2-1946. Even though all players might use the same planes and the same realism settings, there was a mindset of flying strictly coops in closed rooms (because they seeked the immersion in the role-playing approach) and the other mindset (more common) of players only enjoying the Dogfight-Servers. These two different mindsets didn´t fit well together either, eventhough they shared 100% the same game to the same planes and often same tactics.

[Steel Jaw]

ignoring traffic pattern

 

Funny you say that, as well as not yielding right of way on the ground at airbases, MAJOR beef of mine on the public servers.

[Case]

Case, you make some points: sucks to be you cause I may start to frequent your servers... :-P

 

You're more than welcome.

 

...you guys on TS?

 

Yep; http://www.tsviewer.com/index.php?page=ts_viewer&ID=61407

[Steel Jaw]

Added your TS server to my bookmarks. Will pop by when I get FC3 in a week. :-)

[Case]

Your first sentence, well what can I say other than is that really necessary or in anyway helpful to your case of the discussion in general?

 

No, it wasn't necessary and it wasn't helpful. This is me being grumpy in the morning, and I apologize.

 

Nobody is saying there is anything wrong with playing on or running a public server. All they are saying is that they don't want to play on them. What's wrong with that?

 

Nothing.

 

You comment "Passwording servers to keep them out doesn't help; education does." I hope you're not trying to infer that those who don't fly on/run public server do nothing to help newbies or anyone else.

 

This is not what I am inferring.

 

Many of us in the "locked server world" have been flying in "closed" groups/servers long before the first DCS module was released, when we moved to DCS we carried on flying the way we enjoy. Some people decided to include FC2/3 aircraft other didn't. Again, why do you think that is wrong?

 

I do not think this is wrong.

 

Or to put it another way, if you guys want me to fly on your server you'll have to change how you fly and start doing things the way I do. And given that I would never expect or ask for that to happen, why do you expect and/or ask me (and others like me) to do things your way?

 

This is where I think the crux of the problem lies. Our community is small and as the original poster mentioned in the opening thread, new players are put off by seeing lots of empty but passworded servers in the master server list. These new players may have all sorts of interests, and it will take them some time to figure out what it is they want from the multiplayer environment. That process of figuring out largely depends on the interaction with other players, players of whom some will belong to squadrons that do things their way. I think the great benefit of open servers, be it A-10C only, Black Shark only, FC3 only or mixes of the different DCS titles, is that new players can try them out and figure out what they want. How else are they going to figure out that they want to do things the way your squad does?

 

I think closing servers to keep new players out is wrong for the reasons I outlined in this post and the post before. Educate new players instead.

 

I think closing servers to force people on comms is dubious; I'd prefer to ask them to join comms when they join the server and if they don't join comms, ask them to leave (or kick them).

 

I think closing servers to fly with your friends is fine, but please, take it offline or open them up once you and your friends are done playing. Why keep an empty server passworded?