Moving Dogfight Sever

[Bearcat]

Originally Posted by IceFire

To be fair the nuggets guide is massive

A 7 year labor of love...

Originally Posted by EJGr.Ost_Caspar

Would be strange for us to release some new feature in a patch, just to break it in the next patch, right?
Bearcat, what you describe regarding MDS combined with triggers sounds very reasonable and I think, thats what our programming guys had right in mind. I hope, the trigger stuff will soon make it (I personally don't know the status).
Have fun with the features!

Yeah that was what I was thinking but I was somehow under the impression that there was a falling out bet6ween TD & Zuti and Zuti split with his ball.. That is excellent..

[Fenice_1965]

Originally Posted by IceFire

Absolutely! We've found similar where most maps are now accessible. Do you guys have any maps that use NW Germany? We find that it's still not something we can use because despite the smaller size there are just too many objects on the map and players get stuttering and lag. Even my rig (Core i7, 4GB ram, etc.) has trouble online... it's likely the server causing the stutters but any scenario with that map is a problem.

Ships and vehicle convoys are no problem. Heavy bombers are more problematic while single engine fighters are ok in small numbers.

Icefire,
Dear Colleague
Do you mean Northwest europe or Berlin ?. Northwest europe has been out of rotation from long. We had problems with Berlin map with some lag problems and people autodisconnected. Also Bessarabia map itself caused lag on many computers.
I still need to make refinement tests with Berlin map, because the mission I'm referring to is with a lot of targets inside buildings (the scenario is Berlin bombing spring 1945). I tried to remove targets two times, restricting target areas, with no significative results. Then I suppose it is a problem of the map itself in dogfight scenarios.

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

Problems with these maps may be caused by the ground objects population. I case of Bessarabia I suggest to try one of the less heavier ones - Odessa or Iasi.

[IceFire]

Originally Posted by Fenice_1965

Icefire,
Dear Colleague
Do you mean Northwest europe or Berlin ?. Northwest europe has been out of rotation from long. We had problems with Berlin map with some lag problems and people autodisconnected. Also Bessarabia map itself caused lag on many computers.
I still need to make refinement tests with Berlin map, because the mission I'm referring to is with a lot of targets inside buildings (the scenario is Berlin bombing spring 1945). I tried to remove targets two times, restricting target areas, with no significative results. Then I suppose it is a problem of the map itself in dogfight scenarios.

Berlin is fine so long as you avoid the entire city of Berlin. Anything over the city will destroy any computer. We did it once years ago and it wasn't pretty

But the map itself is fine. We have three or four scenarios that use it and all have no problems.

NW Germany is another map altogether and it's too object dense.

[IceFire]

Originally Posted by EJGr.Ost_Caspar

Problems with these maps may be caused by the ground objects population. I case of Bessarabia I suggest to try one of the less heavier ones - Odessa or Iasi.

Definitely. Odessa and Iasi work perfectly!

How hard would it be for someone to go through the NW Germany map and remove all of the objects except for the major cities and towns on the map for an online specialized version? There are a lot of farm houses and other objects all over the map and I presume this is why there is such a high object count.

Is it a selection box option to remove all of these like the FMB or much more difficult? Hrmm... I should probably have a look at how to build maps sometime

[EJGr.Ost_Caspar]

Hm... its not so hard for us to remove all objects from area on the map. Most easiest way is to make it like on Iasi - to leave a populated box left. Thats made in seconds.

Your FMB idea sounds impossible to me. That would mean a dynamic objects file, delivered over network to each player.

[IceFire]

Originally Posted by EJGr.Ost_Caspar

Hm... its not so hard for us to remove all objects from area on the map. Most easiest way is to make it like on Iasi - to leave a populated box left. Thats made in seconds.

Your FMB idea sounds impossible to me. That would mean a dynamic objects file, delivered over network to each player.

Hi Caspar. Sorry, what I meant was if removing segments of objects was as easy in the map builder as it now is in the FMB. I didn't mean (although what I wrote was highly confusing ) editing map objects in the FMB.

If NW Germany map could have all countryside objects removed and all cities and airbases remaining that would be a great compromise I suspect. There's a farmhouse every few hundred meters in places and they add up. But it'd be nice to have the whole map accessible.

If not. Boxes would be great too. We're tuning into a problem where every multiplayer useful map has been used 5-6 times. New territory is always appreciated!

[IceFire]

Actually... on further thought, if it's possible to do the box thing with objects inside that box there... then some boxes on the Lenningrad map would be absolutely amazing. We can't use that map at all online but it's the site of so many battles.

A north box with Vyborg/Viipuri (Karelian Isthmus battles) and another box south and to the east of Leningrad would cover sites of some major battles.

Possible?

[Fenice_1965]

Agree,
Boxes are a great idea. The idea can be' extended to a lot of the actual maps.

[JtD]

I'd rather have the code optimized so that many objects no longer cause problems.

I used to play Il-2 with 256MB RAM, now I've got 4GB. Graphics memory's probably increased by the same margin, as well as processing power. I'd like to believe that this could help alleviate some of the notorious problems, and if it doesn't, there must be something that can be done in the code.

I really like the NW Europe map, because it is nicely populated. I'd rather have more maps like that than less.