Wha...

I'm so sorry, but what the HELL are you on about? In an online war (such as the AFW, see http://www.war.by-airforce.com ) the outcome certainly isn't fixed, since the side who gathers more tactical and strategic victories (and thus either gains sufficient territory or destroys the enemy's supplies and production) will win the map - and they can only do it when their combined arms work together!

So what "never changing fixed outcome" is it that you're talking about - say, the Reds, always winning regardless of how the Blues wage their war, or what?

http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d1...eys/thumbs.gif Spot on! Dynamic campaign outcome is needed, but Oleg has said he prefers historical campaign outcome...ie...fixed outcome static campaigns.

In case you missed our discussion last page...

LEXX (last page)::

Yeah, but as I pointed out none of the current OL wars to my knowledge _are_ static - whereas you OTOH stated that:

And hey, fair enough, neither would I for that matter... but as I said there is NO NEED FOR THAT because all of them _are_ nowadays dynamic!

Capiche?

...and thus you're more than welcome in joining us playing AFW at will, because as I stated the individual episode / map outcomes most certainly are dynamic - and thus should suit your stringent offliner criteria 100%, now shouldn't they ;)

...or, yet in other words, you wouldn't NEED to join a static OL war w/ a fixed outcome because they're NOT static BUT dynamic! U catch my drift, eh?

...which, again, brings me back to the original reason for my bewilderment, namely: WTF are you talking about static OL wars because they're not static but DYNAMIC???

I refer to Oleg's personal preference for static and scripted "historical" campaigns -- to the extreme of calling dynamic campaigns "arcade" -- because if he fails to see the fundamental value of dynamic campaigns to his customers, it *might* negatively affect the development of an immersive dynamic Online War available through the publisher for Oleg's next sim: BoB And Beyond.

If we fly in airplanes, we all hope the airplanes' designers like airplanes. :grin:

Hey, guys, if you want to debate on-line wars and campaigns, start another thread. This has NOTHING to do with Gryphon's original post.

And yes, I would hope we could get something done in this area to secure the integrity of servers. I had hoped the hackers would leave 4.09 alone, but they seem determined to "improve" Il-2 to death.

Actually, this HAS something to do with Gryphon's original post.
... since an important part of the online crowd do play online wars and campaigns.

And the original proposal of a "hack-free" server could solve the problem only for the dogfights servers, leaving all online coop style (including wars and campaign) online games subject to cheating.

So, to solve the problem for every style of online play, the solution can't be reduced to a "hack-free" server, but should be a file check (either by a new CRT, or whatever other method) working also for player hosting (either dogs or coops).
Something insuring that the host and the clients are using the same code and the same files.

1. Il-2 will not be fixed (due to difficulties with code and financial calculations)
2. Bob will everything (especially online security)
3. Oleg has suggested that it is likely Bob could well have several modes for online play:
- without security and allowing mods
- with security and only allowing official releases
- finally a 'pay for use' massive multiplayer dedicated historical campaign

Now go back to sleep...