Where is everybody
 

Where is everybody or has no one noticed. This sure isn't like 2001 IL-2. It started out at 400 all day long and peaked at 1000. This game isn't that crappy. It's getting very good and when new planes come and more theaters it will be great. There's rarely 20 in a room now. Is it too hard or has no one heard of it? I think many people are still having a good time with old IL-2 and who can blame them. There's probably 300 flyable planes now with every map you could ever want. Those guys will probably get in to Vietnam next and they'll have Mig 21s and F4s...I wouldn't be surprised one bit. People will be making IL-2 movies with Jimi Hendrix soundtracks and it will be historically correct.

I think if we could get some organized leaders...NOT ME!!!....maybe we could start an online war room call it Eagle Day, Finest Hour what ever.

Here's an IL-2 online war site

http://war.by-airforce.com/index.html

I remember when the online wars started with 2001 IL-2 D.I.D. Dead Is Dead would be altered each time by actual pilot notes sent in to the administration if I remember correctly. They would have to tally up the points that everyone got and decide if the front line should be moved one way or the other. That's dedication lol. There are no front markers in 2001 IL-2 I don't know why but anyway that would make you make sure you knew witch towns were yours and witch were the enemies. There was a practice of having a notebook on the floor as each mission was flown so you could jot down important things you had to remember so you didn't screw up. If you were killed you were out for the day you couldn't fly until you replacement persona reached the front. One day you were Heinz Schmidt next day you were Otto Schneider.

Plenty of players in the ATAG server on Sunday night!

I think this is currently a case that many people have the game but arn't playing it until it is fixed.

Or they are learning the single player.

Aswell 1946 with MODS is still pretty popular, patience grasshopper...they will come.. :|

S!

Mini

Asked one of developers naryv who is more actively helping community with missions to code a script for a small war (post #38 ) http://translate.google.com/translat...%23post1671559

The script would allow anyone to place frontline markers in a mission builder and the rest will be done automatically by the script: tank-, arty- and air-groups generated in turns for each side. Thus with one script any kind of mission can be built in 5 minutes by only placing frontline markers on any map. This initial version will not include resource and supplies management that can be added later.

Not sure when/if he has time to accomplish it. If you want to support an idea post a note there. Naryv speaks English.

It's a combination of several factors, for example:

1) For some the sim doesn't work to an acceptable standard, even though it's leaps and bounds ahead of what it was initially and most of the people are actually flying by this point in time.

2) For some the sim is a bit complicated and they are not being in their comfort zone just yet. The amount of people asking how to turn on their engines or why the gauge needles shake in the ATAG server chat are a testament to that and i've only been online twice, imagine how many times the regulars have seen it pop up :-P
Which brings us to the final point...

3) Official documentation is good and well laid-out in terms of how understandable it is, but doesn't cover a lot of things. Meanwhile, people either tend to be a bit "lazy" at times due to real-life getting in the way of their available flying time (and who can blame a young father who only has a couple of hours tops to spend on the sim between work/home/kids/etc), or just expect to jump right in and do reasonably well because that was their previous flight sim experience, so they often don't bother to read up on the community resources we got stickied here :grin:


Long story short, take the time to type a couple of lines in chat for the rookies telling them to visit here and check up on the sticky how-to threads: saves you time trying to explain everything mid-session, saves them time getting up and running. Maybe it would even be a good idea to have server transmitted messages that point the newcomers to community resources.

I think that even when the sim is fully, completely optimized and documentation and community resources are better, the complexity will still be a factor that slows down the rate of online participation even for those that do like to fly full switch and welcome the challenge. I mean, wanting to fly with CEM on didn't automatically make me a guru on internal combustion engines, there was a lot of trial and error involved and quite a bit of reading time over some months to help me get to a simply acceptable standard (that was before CoD though, so i was more or less ready when i got it).

I'm not trying to slight anyone mind you, to the contrary in fact: I find it absolutely natural and in agreement to my own previous experiences that it takes a reasonable amount of time before everyone is up to speed with the new CEM and comfortable to fly online on a full switch server.

In my case i learned what i needed to a couple of years ago out of my own curiosity, thanks to flying some high quality add-on FSX aircraft on a friend's PC whenever i would visit him over the course of a couple of months.

If i was just now starting to know CEM i would be totally swamped and not at all confident to go online, make no mistake about it :grin:

Sounds great Ataros.

Yea that would be sweet

With helping noobs that's why I like the Hyperlobby so much. You have everyone gathered around and the internet is right there for the countless helpful links that the new comers need. We've all seen and have been these folks who are running around tearing their hair out because they can't figure this or that out. Along comes a guy with a little understanding and patients, fixes the problem and things are wonderful in a matter of minutes.

I had such high hopes for CloD when it was released. I couldnt wait to play it full real online with up to 128 players.
I think my disapointment with the sim was heightened by my previous anticipation of how good it would be.
After a few patches I was still a bit disheartened with the game and the lack of full real players on the servers, so I put the game away for a while and went back to good old Arma2OA.

Then not long ago a few people were trying to organise battles on the syn server, online player numbers seemed to be up to 40ish ppl, so I came back to the game and give it another go.
Well it was a blast ! Great fun with players organising themselves into flights on vent and lots going on. Hey I thought to myself " this games not as bad as I thought" I had kinda forgotten how much I just love flying these planes, and how much untapped potential this game has got.
Work intervened but I was really looking forward to getting back on the syn server for some more fun.
Oh no, the syn server had disappeared, the webpage was down and nobody seemed to be online playing full real.
So syn has gone, its now the ATAG server and Im sure players will soon be on this server in healthy numbers.

Reading this forum Im struck by the number of people who claim they need to "learn the game", or "arnt ready yet to play online". this lack of confidence is rather suprising to me.
Online players are not all ace fliers, sure you do come across some highly skilled fliers on either side and some well organised flights (usually on blue side in my experience) but honestly the best way to learn this game is to fly online against human pilots, theres no shame in being shot down, in this game a hard lesson is a good lesson.

I think the most important thing to do if online is to get on comms either vent or t/s.
With comms its so much easier, advice from other players is always available, joining other players as a wingman always increases your survival chances, and simply following a "leader" for a few missions teaches you a great deal about this sim. The other day I listened in while an experienced Hurricane pilot talked his wingman through engine managment and how to get the best from his aircraft, where the enemy were and when to attack and when the lurking 109`s were about to attack. That rookie pilot learned more in 30mins than he would in 6hrs sitting on the runway typing questions like "how do I start my engine" or "why does my engine keep blowing up" I never can type when flying, only when in the lobby do I type in chat.

To sit at a base and watch players spawn, try to start their engines fire their guns in frustration then disconect is a crying shame. My advice is Get online. Get on coms. Get on someones wing.

Yes. Exactly. Even I am having trouble with the manual pitch in the 109 in dogfights. I just read a flight test on the 109 E7 white 14 and the man remarked that very same thing about it that it must have been distracting...a high work load to be playing with that knob while twisting turning and firing at a target. I like it though and I'm sure the 109 Fs will be out of this world..What will the poor Spitfire V's do?

Just to add one thing the way these COD 109s land is great. I like it better than IL-2

As a "ground pounder" taking 5 minutes to warm up the Blenheim and then get some 50m off ground only to have multiple engine failures no matter procedure makes the overall il2cod experience.. well, boring.

il2-46 attracts way more than this.

So yeah, as soon as I see the il2cod icon on my desktop I just feel the word "Boring" and continues to -46 or ArmA2 so nope, no MP for me.

Absolutely. I'm not much of an onliner and that's how i would do my "refresher course" in a few sorties every time i would jump back into MP after a lengthy absence.

That being said, people who can't get on comms as easily (work hours/flying late at night with kids sleeping in the next room/etc) will be reluctant to try it not because it's a shame to get shot down (like you say, it's not), but because their inability to join comms and coordinate makes them cannon fodder and the experience frustrating. It's these guys that will try to reach a certain level of comfort before joining up.

Well when we compare iL2 2001 with iL2 2011, I think we need to look at the human factor. It seems for me at least that CoD runs smother then its 2001 rendition did way back when. What seems so different is the way people's decisions are influenced. IMO these days people make their choices based on what others say as opposed to making their own, I.E. many will probably wait until the multitude of dedicated forum complainers have every niggle that offends them fixed to their specifications so it is "them" who will deem when the sim is ready for "all" of us to enjoy.

What is sad is that the ones who give the most damaging opinions regarding the sim are also rarely seen in (if at all) the multiplayer servers and never on coms.

in 2001 IL2 had the Hyperlobby and a much better understandable FMB that a lot of people were able to build COOP missions.
4 month after IL2 release i had plenty of COOP missions flown out of the HL.

And btw, the main GUI of IL2 worked in 2001....................

Poor CLoD newbies. There's a reason the magnetos in the "toy" game (a.k.a. 1946) don't work. Someone figured out this is a novelty and after a few times, adds no gameplay value what so ever. After the 300th time, it become a pita. Put CLoD fuel pump, fuel cock, anthropromorphic and cockeyed 109 gunsight in that bucket too. You want CLoD fixed, go back 1C and re-learn the lessons from the old game. The old game, thank god it didn't stop in a vacume when 1C started developing BoB/CLoD. It kept growing with the modders and still grows and is totally awesome today. CLoD stays off my machine. No regrets. Calling it a "toy". Sorry, that is agenda driven language and less than truthful!

@Richie, the CLoD 3 way switch, this can be simulated more or less in the old game too with Glovepie script . How - set up 2 buttons, one for pitch up and the other for pitch down. Default position is autoprop pitch "on" when both buttons are not pressed. When you press one of the buttons, it does two things: first, toggles autoprop pitch to manual...second, toggles the pitch to either 0 (ppaxis value =-1 pitch up) or 100% (pp axis value =1 pitch down). When you release either of the buttons, the auto prop pitch toggles back on. So you can move the rpms/pitch angle much fast than relying strictly on the auto prop pitch clock to catch up. This means more zoom climb and more acceleration in power dive. The only way to burn it up with this setup is hold down the pitch down button (pitch decreases). It isn't exactly like CloD, but you get the acceleration effect and much less risk burning up the engine by running strictly manual prop pitch mode. You still have to manage the throttle a bit to keep the rpms in range with this setup.

It's one thing to defend the developers of CLoD. It is quite another to malign the best WWII flight simulator "1946 modded". Reminder, Oleg left the building. We now know why.

What are you going on about?

A few things.

1)I'm pointing out why newbies would disconnect from the CLoD server. Simple, due to unnecessary novelty complications in CLoD.

2)I'm pointing out how CLoD fails to balance gameplay with realism. See lesson learned in the old game (i.e.,the magneto check at startup is unecessary for a good reason.)

3)I'm pointing out that he who said the "toy" thing, this is not moderation. This is agenda.

4)I'm telling the OP that the 109 3-way switch capability that is supposedly new and nifty, can actually be found in the old game with a simple Glovepie script and will bring the 109 to life.

I will add one more thing to the CLoD worthless novelty bucket. See my agenda? Defend, Attack!

Controls for two radiators is unneeded. This takes up controls that the user can use for other things. I think the old game actually modeled two radiator, but under one control. How do I conclude this? If you go up 7000 meters, you see water temps drop significantly on the water temp gauge. But you can still overheat the engine via high oil temp gauge. Then, when you open the "radiator", oil temp cools. So, conclusion is that oil rad is modeled in combo with water rad as one control.

Hmm, well thanks for clearing that up.

Each to their own I guess

Theres is no" unnecessary novelty complications in CLoD" in fact if anything its far to simple.
In a RAF fighter with CEM to take off all you have to do is switch your fuel on, open your radiator and press "i" to start the engine, hardly difficult is it ?
In a sim the gameplay IS the realism.

Actually, it's even easier than that. If you want it to be, Ctrl-E.:-P

I personally like it realistic as possible, but that's not going to fit everyone. Just shed some realism settings - although I might agree that perhaps more fine-grained options for realism might be appreciated for some people.

I'm guessing, for instance, that you're not very interested in DCS A-10C. There literally aren't enough keys on a keyboard for all of it (MAYBE with all the ctrl/alt options), and you constantly have to use the mouse to operate systems in-flight... you also have to manually turn them all on, wait for them to bootstrap, etc etc. That's what makes it brilliant, and that's what I want out of CoD.

That's fine if you don't like it - you can turn down the settings, but please don't assume that's the way CoD should be for everyone :)

P.S. if you really think you don't need separate mixture/prop pitch/radiator controls, you haven't flown a damaged Blenheim back to base ;)

I think we will draw more IL-2 people as soon as we get some more maps and theaters. This next patch doesn't have any new theaters but it looks like there will be big improvements with ground colour frame rates and sound. If I remember right the person reworking the sound did Rise Of Flights sound and it's awesome. The next theater to come up appears to be Russia, then I hope the Mediterranean, I love North Africa :)

Some pics of good old 2001 IL-2 just to show how good it still holds up. I started in August 2001 on the demo on the Hyperlobby. You could play 4 in a dogfight at a time that's all there was. The plane were the 109G-2 Sturmovik and a P-39 to chose from. That went on up until November when the game came out. Even when the demo was still being flown everyone was joining up with Squads and Jagdgeschwaders. One of the funniest moments was when Herr-Spray Uhoh7 Burn and myself..Hackl were flying in a dogfight mission. Burn was plastered but still able to dogfight . He wasn't speaking English very well, he was a Swede. Uhoh7 was from the States and had taught skying in Austria..strange :)....anyway they could communicate with each other by speaking German. It was Burn and Uhoh7 VS Herr-Spray and Hackl all on the same Roger Wilco channel. Burn was yelling and screaming this German into his mic and getting drunker and drunker. We were all laughing so hard it's a wonder we could fight at all. By the end Burn couldn't even take off anymore. Good times :)

Mixture/prop pitch/radiator controls, these all impact flight in real time and of course I agree should be included in CLoD as they were in IL-2 46. I have always flown full switch btw. I use the gauges.

The things I mention above, these appear to me to be mundane pre-flight checklist items. Or in the case of the anthro restriction that I would guess hardly anyone uses online, or the crooked 109 gunsight where many on this board are trying to find a workaround with their TrackIR/Freetrack, these are simply failures. I would just get rid of them. On the other hand, if Luthier can tell use that modeling separate fuel cocks for each engine of the Blenheim and shutting it on a smoking engine will help to prevent engine fire, then "yes", keep that in the game. That would be good and enhance realism experience. But leave it default "open" at start-up so I don't have to check it each time I fly. Priming the fuel pump? Luthier, tell me how this feature will help in actual flight. Maybe a fuel hose leak is modeled and can be offset/mitigated this way? How about at start-up also making the fuel pump primed by default so we don't have to pump it five times every single time we fly.

You may have it the nail on the head. I don't play DCs-10, but maybe that is part of the problem. They tried to turn IL-2 into DCs-10. The mouse click-able cockpit and the little icons. I want to be able to turn that off completely. I just want a cockpit. No icons or windows or overlays. I use my controls or voice command to execute. No moving my mouse around clicking all over my screen. This is inefficient. I also want them to get rid of all that radio chatter. It is annoying. In old IL-2 it is not annoying. I understand what they are saying and it isn't a blobby mess of sound like it is in CLoD. What the hell went wrong??? Gawd!!!

That he is not content to turn down his difficulty settings, he would rather want the new realism options to be unavailable to all.
Ok, just joking, no offence meant :-P


It's just that while i do get that people have busy lives and limited gameplay time available, i don't get the reluctance to learn new things in something that's supposed to be a hobby.

Going from European Air War to IL2 had me spending quite some time learning all the new things i had to learn. Going from IL2 to CoD is the same. I just think that many people forget about this and if something prevents them from getting instant results on previously acquired habits they lose their will to remain involved.

Everyone can still become adept at CoD by spending the same amount of hours per week that they did back in the day with IL2. The difference is that when 50 hours meant you knew quite a bit in IL2, it's barely scratching the surface in CoD (you either know a couple of planes well or you can just fly a lot of them but not fight well in them after logging 50 hours) and it's not good enough for someone who expects to join a server and have his first online kill in the sim within the first week while switching flyables on every sortie.

If i list the amount of legitimate features mistaken for bugs that people have mentioned since the day of release we'd need a new thread ;-)

That doesn't mean those of us who enjoy those features should suffer reduced gameplay, especially when those features

a) have already been worked on
b) are representative of the real aircraft and
c) can be toggled off.

Nobody's forcing anyone to fly with CEM on, disable it for single player, host/join a server with similar settings for multiplayer, etc and go have fun.

Calling the new features a novelty is like calling accurate ballistics a novelty because i was used to flying red baron 3D before moving on to IL2.


In other words:



Furthermore, if anything, the aircraft systems modeling is actually very automated in terms of the actions demanded by the player. What it does is have a more accurate model of engine parameters and how they interact with each other, but there's no actual checklists to speak of.
90% of the time is turn on fuel, open radiators, give it a bit of throttle and press "I" to start the engine.

If that's too much then CoD is probably not the sim for you MadBlaster. That's not a stigma or anything like that and i'm not being a smarty-pants, it's perfectly fine to have your own opinion and stick with the old sim.

People have different tastes and that's why a lot of us like exactly the kind of things you describe as "novelties" and would want even more of them with consequences for mishandling them, that's why i haven't booted up IL2 a single time ever since i installed CoD: the aircraft always operate at full capacity with minimum effort and after sampling the increased pilot workload and the challenges it brings to the table (which also force more realistic tactics and mission profiles simply because people have to account for the loss of situational awareness in high workload situations), IL2 is just not doing it for me anymore.

That doesn't mean IL2 is not good, it just means that CoD is much better (at least for what i personally expect from a next-gen sim) under the hood, despite the initial avalanche of bugs. CoD just needs debugging to do what it set out to do, IL2 would need a major engine rewrite to achieve the same, it's not even a fair contest.

Once again, if it was in the real aircraft and can be modeled in a sim i say go for it. Better to let the players disable a feature themselves if they don't like it, than not including it at all and having players who would like it being unable to use it.

If there's CEM in the sim you can turn it off. If there's no CEM in the sim i can't magically turn it on. It's as simple as that ;-)

The agenda again. I rest my case.;)

The irony, my first virtual flight online this morning on WoP Spit/109, in HE-111-6, a destroyer blew my right engine on a torpedo run. So I cut the power on it, opened the rad and retrimmed. When it died, I feathered it. Made it home safe and sound on the left engine. But of course, if it was CLoD, I would of had that fuel cock and a fuel pump!!! That would have made all the difference between "toy" CEM and realistic CLoD...NOT!!!

You might've missed MadBlaster's latest post there, Blackdog.

I think I get what he's trying to say. He's all for full-real, as long as whatever comes with it has an actual impact in the game, while flying, and isn't just "going through the motions".

I can definitely see an option for that. I might even use it from time to time if I just don't want to bother heating up the engines (suppose you still fly with CEM, you just don't have to wait 2m for the engines to heat up like on the Blenheim). Sometimes we can't be flying for too long, and those things don't add much more than the feeling of actually being there.

I still don't think they should be removed from the game. I do believe that realism for realism's sake is a good thing - even if it means individual fuel cocks, priming the fuel for a while and all that. I want to feel like I'm there - I wish I could smell it, and feel it on my hands. The whole experience... heck, I sometimes even wish someone would do a Pacific carrier battle taking a whole real-life weekend, 24/7 - forget sleep! You're going up at 5am morning patrol/scouting! 6 hours of scouting for the enemy fleet! I would be the first to register for a whole weekend of that! (Any takers?:P)

However, I totally understand your position, where you just don't want to bother with it if it doesn't affect flight at all, and definitely think it wouldn't be bad for it to be an option. I still want to be able to do those things, for the sake of immersion.

It's ok to like different things.

I could just as easily claim that people who declare the new features to be mere fluff have an agenda to keep the rest of us flying IL2 for as long as possible, so that they can keep their favorite servers populated while engaging in their preferred form of flight simming, instead of having the majority of the community gradually move to a platform they dislike/can't bother to learn/whatever, but i won't.

I'll just chalk it up to them liking different aspects of the whole flying thing and let them do their thing in peace ;-)

As far as i and my personal entertainment are concerned though i can't put my voice behind design decisions that i firmly consider to be steps of regression, especially when we have new features dealing with some very real limitations of aircraft operation and this creates a new set of challenges and tactical situations for me to master.

On one hand i have a new and varied environment of evolving gameplay where i can learn more about a subject i like, on the other i have the choice of sticking with something that will accommodate past acquired habits of mine to ensure a greater rate of success. And this is pretty much a subjective choice, depending on what makes each one of us tick.

Well, i'm not really putting my life at risk here like those pilots did back in the day, so as far as i'm personally concerned i say success be damned, i want to learn some new stuff about aircraft of the day and how they operated, flew and fought, not pretend to be a top ace while simu-flying with 1/10th of a real pilot's workload. I'm not dissing it but it's not for me, so i'm very glad i got a sim that focuses on the kind of aspect i like. It can be too much for some people, sure, but that's what the difficulty options are there for.


EDIT: I missed Alvinfolk's post (we must have been typing simultaneously), so let me address it here. Rest assured, whatever is modeled in CoD is not about going through the motions. Some stuff doesn't work properly yet but it's in the list of documented issues to fix and when it does it will have a big impact on gameplay.

Example, the Blenheim's hydraulic selector is modeled but automatic, because it's something that the pilot uses maybe twice in the course of the entire mission. The hydraulic pump can't run gear and flaps at the same time as the turret and it's prone to overheating, so what they did was use a three-way switch: off when cruising, set to drive the gear and flaps during takeoff and landing, set to power the turret when nearing enemy airspace. That's why the turret doesn't work when the engines are off and we are sitting on the ground. This however is something that CoD handles on its own without input from the player, once i'm airborne my turret works fine because the sim sets the hydraulics for me.

The fuel controls though? Entirely different story and there are very good reasons they are modeled. Got a fuel leak? You'll get asymmetric weight distribution and since it doesn't have aileron trim you can be potentially stuck in an unrecoverable roll. What do you do then? You jettison some fuel from the "heavy" wing. This is a control we're currently missing in the sim, so we're actually missing features that have an impact on gameplay and not the other way around.

Or let's assume that the weight difference is not that big and the aircraft is controllable even when all the fuel on one side of the wing has leaked out. How do you keep that engine running? That's what the third fuel selector is for, it enables cross-feed so that you can feed both engines from the tanks on one side of the wing.

There are many examples like these and i'm sure that in a future expansion people will be grateful that they will be able to first burn the fuel from the rear tank that upsets their center of gravity when flying a P-51, instead of having them all drain at a similar rate and fly in a spin prone condition like we have to do in IL2 ;)

@Anvifolk
Yes that is what I'm saying. The missions I fly online are two hours long. So I want to get in the game, not the start-up ritual.

@Blackdog
My criticism is meant as constructive and should be taken that way. I also think it fair to defend the game I choose to play because it is better than CLoD. If CLoD met my expectations, then I would be playing that. It's up to 1C to fix it or not.

To the topic, just remember the HL in the golden IL2 days. Of the 1000 online players maybe 10% were playing on full-real servern. But then you still hat the Hud-Log and usually on even on the full-real servern you had far from realistic surroundings. The most popular servers were the servers with shorts flight time to the mass furball on deck. Now take a look at the CloD, despite the state it is in, there is one populated arcade server and one populated full- real server. Also here you only have minimized flight distances to action, no realisitc surroundings. CloD went one step furhter in the direction to a simulation, event though is pretty much still an action shooter like IL2 with simulation elements, what do all the rest of the 90% online players do, who populated the acrade servers in the HL?

As far as I`ve read, switching off CEM is no option, due to program issues, and if the simple start-up procedure is already too much for the most players, how are the supposed to get along with simulated plane characteristics as the 109 ReVi, wariming up, the pitch control or temperature monitoring, where you don´t get a hud log message "Overheating"? I think there will be servers soon, which have airstart next to each other, so the gameplay will be reduced to what the most players seek - action as fast as possible, without any abstract obstacles like simulation elements.

I personally hoped CloD would be sophisticated simulation, but I am fine with the action shooter it is now, because there simply is no other WWII game, which is as close to a simulation as CloD.

Back in April there were several servers with easy engine management. They were not as popular as CEM servers because CEM is the fun of this game. Thus these servers switched to CEM settings eventually. I witnessed this process when decided on Repka settings. None of 3 Repka servers has CEM off because there is no demand for easy settings in CloD.

If anyone wants an arcade server he can run it without any problems. CloD just gives us the option to have CEM on unlike any arcade game. It is good to have more options isn't it?

Another example is RoF where 3 out of 4 populated servers have CEM on.

Some people prefer arcade setting however. There is nothing wrong with this. They can start their own server on their PC every time they go online and find friends on this forums to fly together.

Sure, diversity is a great thing and I don´t see why someone complains about the few simulation elements in CloD and wants them to have gone for the rest of all players too?

Finally someday, if CloD will see old age, there will be more diverse server options. I just predict, that the most popular server will not be the full real server, which centers around realisitc simulation immersion. ;)
More just like the old Il2 1946 Spits-vs-109 airquake servers - and that`s what the most players want and so why simulate at all? Why not go for WoP, but I am drifting... :rolleyes:

Spits VS 109s...That's who I want to get started up with COD. When they start a few missions with their name on them maybe some of the old cronies will finally start up with COD.

i personally just want build some 'easy' COOP misions (without the need to go too deep in this script programming......) and fly them with my squadmates.
time will tell.......

Unfortunately without HL style online war coops there is not much interest for me now.Hopefully it will get better, but I have serious doubts, and have all but lost interest.
Once the new patch is here there will be a jump in online numbers, but if there are still problems then the numbers will die off again.

Dude, you want to snap off wings with 1 cannon round...your have mucho fun, your also love the way Yaks n La's are the best fighters of WW2..lets not talk about the Ki....Cockpits? Ummm um truly works of arts, real 20th century they are

Do wish some people (not you cheese btw) will stop banging on about IL2 and its Mods...pi*s off and play it then

Some of us have faith in this game and what it will turn into and certainly its potential..I like IL2 and have loved and played that game for a long time but the comparison thing is getting old now..

Numbers will return here with the new patch, i have faith it will fix alot of things and more people will be able to join in and enjoy the game for what it is..

The one thing its missing is a Chat Lobby imo

Well as I said earlier I'm sure things will come around when we have a little more variety with Russia. There was a mission up last night that I liked where there was some low straffing of a base. That was cool. One thing I don't get. How come there are no mission briefs at the beginning like IL-2. I miss those because I get in there and I don't know what to do...not really. IL-2 is completely different you get what ever the mission builder has written and it's usually very detailed if it's done by a big server.

Rich,

Trust me there's quite a few of us that have very detailed mission briefs, but they just aren't working / showing up in MP yet. Chalk it up as another bug.

That's why you see our server, for instance, having all those messages on screen telling you what's going on.

Again, it's written. Just doesn't show up yet :(

I thought that might have been it.

Nothing wrong with that. I'm just doing the same and providing my personal opinion, which happens to differ from yours. I'm not here to convince anyone, just drawing some exposure to the reasons a lot of people like the new system better than the old one. Happy flying and clear sixes, no matter what sim and difficulty settings you choose to fly ;-)


That's pretty interesting and i find it very encouraging. I didn't know there was such a strong demand for CEM-enabled servers, good to know.

From what I see, there are two different approaches to IL2 and CoD. CoD is more of a simulator and IL2 is more of a video game. I started in flight sims because of IL2 and absolutely love it if I want to go fight and rack up kills. But CoD is far more complex and challenging if that is what I feel like. Skipping the CEM and airstarts, go to IL2. Trying to feel like you are in a real fighter? CoD for sure. I got a chance to fly the Collins Foundation dual seat P-51 and all the time spent learning the gauges and procedures in IL2 paid off. I felt really connected and at home in the airplane.
One other thing; I wish everyone would build at least a partial pit at home to do their flying. Flipping real switches and knobs changes it from being boring key commands to a real feeling of control.
Blackdog you are right. Dont take away realism, add more!! People forget that these guys pay attention to the forums and feedback, they are having issues but will get them sorted and it will be amazing.

For those who would like to see CLoD in Hyperlobby please feel free to stop by and make a post.I would like to see CLoD get the home it deserves.In my Opinion if it had HL support from the start it would be much better by now and many more servers to fly in.It needs a community where it can grow and not be held back like it is in Steam.Maybe if some of you guys can make a post and ask Jiri what he needs it can get the home it deserves.
~S~ to all.

As I see it the reason for this is CloD did not get enough positive publicity yet to attract many newcomers. A few newcomers that came are discouraged by MP interface that is not absolutely intuitive. When CloD has better publicity to attract rookies and most bugs are fixed I think at least one 'newbie' server with easy settings will be needed as in some other sims.

I never found Spits vs 109 to be airquake, in-fact as 1946 dogfight servers go it is the farthest from it. Now of course being a dogfight server there is a certain amount of instant gratification and short(er) flight times to targets and opponents, but I can’t think of another 1946 DF server that has nearly as many pilots trying to achieve the objectives laid out in the brief, most other servers pilots just go for air to air action and don’t even bother with the objectives.

What I am looking forward to are the campaigns in CoD. I am sure there is going to be some time before we see these as the game is developed into a more refined product and the brilliant folks who put these together work into C ++. I do miss the days of VOW, VEF, VWF, Bellum (and all of its clones), Forgotten Skies, Ghost Skies (which is running again), SEOW and all the other campaigns where there was true immersion into a mission. At one point in “old” IL2 there were so many choices in terms of what you could find in HL that 99% of what an online WW2 virtual fighter pilot wanted could be found easily. I still fly in a regular Il2 1946 campaign and I have done so since 2003, Hopefully sometime in the future I can say the same for CoD.

JD
AKA_MattE

I was the one who started the subject up over in the Hyperlobby forums quite some time ago under my Hyperlobby handle...II./JG27_Rich


http://hyperfighter.sk/modules.php?n...ewtopic&t=7954


Now I remember you woodstock :)

Well, as one of the guys that hasnt had much to do with it I can tell you why I havent, and why everyone I know hasnt.

I don't have anything against it exactly, but its just uninteresting, unfinished, and hollow. I'm sure that when a finished product is released the players will come in droves but the reputation that this sim has precedes it far and wide. I know many guys that simply wont bother with it, and wont until its of the same quality as IL2. Understand their mindset, why leave a good thing right?

If we wanted to just fly a simulator, we would fly FSX or some such sim. In that regard as far as CEM sure, CoD is fine.
But its a COMBAT simulator, and in this regard its just a bit, hollow compared to the alternatives.
Then add in that it isn't visually gratifying and confined to a very small, and to many uninteresting part of the war and well its just a recipe for disaster. Why should we bother to learn to fly the new sim when it doesn't offer anything that we want?

Spits/109s used to be good until they gave GunRunner admin rights. It used to be a solid, full real server and then they started adding airquake rules like "no vulching" and then it became "no attacking landing/taking off planes" and then it became "no going anywhere near enemy airfields". That's why it's called airquake: everybody has a cylinder of "Home Free" extending upwards from their airfields that they can retreat to.

So now you have a bunch of mediocre pilots who just dive away to their airfield if they lose the advantage and then call the admins to ban you if you chase them home to shoot them down.

Awful, awful servers with egotistical administrators.

I think that's too narrow minded. Warclouds yes but not Spits VS 109s. I'm a 109F nut. To me there's nothing more boring than screaming down, firing and zooming away. I like long fights where I get killed 75% of the time.

If you vulch in a server where it's permitted you're a dirty SOB though. :)

Ive never understood this "Vulching" concept. That's combat!
The only thing I hate is the d-bags who shoot parachutes. That was not tolerated for the most part, and as far as I'm concerned anyone who does so should earn an instant ban.

Its one of the reasons I don't care for spits V 109's, too many times I see a guy shoot someone down, then swing around and shoot the pilot in his 'chute. Disgusting.

So for the things that happened in real life that you agree with, "that's combat, suck it up" but for the things that happened in real life that you have a problem with, "ban those guys, they're d-bags". Got it.

Ha! Whatever dude.
There are rules to combat, and things that you just don't do.
If one of my soldiers had shot a captured enemy combatant, he would have earned a prison sentence. Now it happens, sure, but that doesn't mean its right or endorsed. And when it does happen its punished severely unless there are extreme extenuating circumstances.

Same thing then. It happened, but was not wide spread, and those that did it without a dang good reason were ostricised and punished. Galland himself said he regarded it as murder.
You implying that because it happened on extremely rare occasions that it should just be accepted and condoned, which is utter BS. It was bad conduct then, its bad conduct now.
But of course armchair warriors think that anything and everything goes.

That was a nice little jab, implying that I have no military experience (as if that matters even a single iota). You'll notice I didn't give my own views on the matter; I was just pointing out your cognitive dissonance on display.

I could make the argument that war in general is not right, and warmongering nations are ostracised and condemned. Should we therefore cease all simulation of war? I think not. We do this for fun, and lots of people take it way too seriously.

Have a good evening.

Didn't mean it as a jab towards you, sorry if it was taken as such.
And call it what you want, but adherence to what actually did and does happen in the highest goal, yes? Then you don't shoot non combatants, unless I suppose your playing an SS simulator.
I simply get annoyed by the vast majority of people who have never been insisting on the way things are/were (remember the tracers thread where his model was an airsoft rifle? lol!)
And ya, experience absolutely matters. Would the opinion of a guy that has never even looked under the hood of a car matter when your planning your Trick-flow headed blown 408 LS2 monster motor? Not really. I wish that those who have been in such situations (I know there are at least a few here) would speak up when discussing these issues. They are really the only ones that can speak with much authority on these issues.
But hey, its the internet.

I agree on the base straffing I think it should be aloud..1 it's fun..2 it will cancel out a time of no action boredom in a hurry, scramble and get that fkr!!. How many times have you been shot in your chute? It's the only arena I fly in and I've been flying in it from the start. Maybe 20 times from the start that I've been shot in my chute. That's what 5-6 years? I can put up with that and the ones that do it are idiots not the people who fly in there constantly.

You know why straffing bases was canceled though? It was canceled for the bomber pilots. People were hanging around bases waiting for the heavy bombers to come back then jump them. Who wants to spend half and hour going there and back just to be clobbered over your own base. I see their point. No one was using the big bombers to do the missions. If everyone wanted to do this perfectly there would be escorts for every mission perfect fighter intercept coordination the best Teamspeak coms of any server but it ain't going to happen, we all have a lot of fun in there so that's all that matters really.

Chute shooting is just plain poor form, though I have never seen it happen often enough to be an issue. Shooting up airfields should definately be allowed in the historical type servers, but in saying that the fields need good AA coverage, make em work for it! Also there is nothing more fun than spawning at the next base along and jumping on the vulcher while he is preoccupied, easy pickings, they are usually low and slow and moreoften than not end up spinning in as soon as you jump them, great laugh! Not a great fan of the guys that pick you off as you try to land your smoking barely flying wreck though, but as they say what goes around comes around! Vulcher hunting is a great motivator to get people on comms too, get some team work happening.

Craig

IMA if this is truly a simulator then anything goes. Chute shooting was reported on both sides of the channel, though more often by the Germans. The tactical reasons for this was that when a German pilot bailed out he was captured and out of the war. When a RAF pilot bailed he could be back in the air within a couple of hours. The Luftwaffe actually complained that rescue sea planes with red crosses clearly painted were shot down by the British. The British excuse was they were reconnaissance aircraft.:confused:

No doubt most of us don't vulch, chute kill or attack AC's that have just taken off. For those that do, all's fair in love and war. Personally I like killing vulchers so bring it on.:-D

Well what kind of bone head does this anyway. He's going to be hated by just about everyone on the server. This kind of event sometimes happens like this. An enemy pilot shoots down 2 planes and no one can catch him. Finally he bails out after half the base is on his six blasting away. He's behind his own lines so in a "Take That" moment Mr. Bone Head blast him in his chute so he won't get the points.

All of that said it doesn't really matter because it hardly ever happens anymore. The last time it happened to me in Spits VS 109s was last April. I was in a G2 he was in a Spitfire Mk. IX We were skimming over the Mediterranean met head on and started going round in a circle. I started to out turn him he couldn't hold on and he stalled into the sea. He wasn't to accomplished in that Spitfire Mk. IX. He repawned. Coming home a P-38 buzzed me and I had to bail. As I hanged their Mr. unaccomplished comes along and blasts me in my chute. I think he knew who he was shooting at.

Another thing about Spits VS 109s. I'm sure they would have "Friday Night Bomber Nights"

in COD also.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cjWqnM-PAjI


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_CTJH...ure=grec_index

Hello all -

First of all I would like to state that Warbirds of Prey is very interested in CLOD. We had installed a server almost from the start. Unfortunatly no matter what we did, it would not show up on the available servers.

Creating missions in CLOD is really different than in IL2. So we would need another mission maker who could devote their time to CLOD missions for our server.

Managing the missions in CLOD is new. The old server managers we once used: FBD, IL2 SC, FBDj, etc do not work with CLOD. Stopping one mission and starting another is not that straight forward. Also there is no default mechanism for gathering player stats to post on a web site.

There were bugs related to online play that made it very difficult for new players to get started. I for one have a hell of a time selecting a home base with CLOD. It will not let me click on the highlighted base like you could on IL2 (Although you are supposed to !!!) I need to move my cursor around for some time until I get a popup saying which home base it is. That had not been fixed as of 2 weeks ago.

Finally we have been very busy with updates to IL2 and not had time to devote to CLOD yet !!!

As for the rules on Warbirds of Prey, we strive to have a fun environment for all, but we cannot please all the people all of the time.

RAF238thWildWillie
Warbirds of Prey







I have played the game offline and online on occasion and really love the sim.

Thanks for coming on Willie.

II./JG27_Rich

I don't understand why anyone would shoot parachutes. Those bullets cost money! I'd rather use those rounds against an enemy aircraft that might actually shoot back.

Back in 1997 when I started all of this I remember in "Warbirds" you actually had a 45 automatic that you could fire will hanging in your chute. They never did model a Luger, P-38 or Walther so we must have stolen ours :)

Deleted it