SoWC:BoB Multisquad Campaign Starting

[David198502]

shot down three hurricanes yesterday....killed two pilots, and i shot off the left wing of the third hurricane, and the pilot bailed...yet i didnt get the credit for even one kill...no points whatsoever.

normally when playing online, i dont even look at the stats, but here in the campaign, i recognized, that you guys made a really really nice and detailed stats page, just like it was on warbirdsofprey server in 1946...so its a shambles that its not working correctly.
if i looked at the stats of the pilots i killed, there it was recognized that i killed them actually, but still, i dont get any credit for it...well, it was fun yesterday, but i think it was not that much fun for the red side.my impression was, that the amount of blue pilots was higher than on the red side.furthermore, the majority of red pilots were in hurricanes, which is a sitting duck,....maybe they need more targets(bombers) to have as much fun as the blue side.

[5./JG27.Farber]

Thats because it IS the WoP stats generator by WW. The server admin is looking into the problem. The important thing is we have the raw database! So we should be able to establish everything, its just how the its being interpretated isnt quite right at the moment.

We'd love to give the reds more bombers to shoot at but we cant as it would make their game a power point presentation. Weve scaled it back from what we originally intended to use.

We would have also have liked to have more clouds

[David198502]

personally i wouldnt recommend clouds,..on atag, we get many lags through to them and besides, have a look at this:
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=33140

[macro]

personally i wouldnt recommend clouds,..on atag, we get many lags through to them and besides, have a look at this:
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=33140

clouds are a no go from the link above, i suspected this a few days ago when someone i was flying with went straight through the cloud for no reason, dismissed it though didnt even think he didnt see it. another doh! from devs.

Originally Posted by 5./JG27.Farber

We'd love to give the reds more bombers to shoot at but we cant as it would make their game a power point presentation. Weve scaled it back from what we originally intended to use.

We would have also have liked to have more clouds

engine limits atm are a pain in the arse. i cant wait for radar picking up raids of 100+ comming in with the fighter escort in a campaign. FM wont matter much in that chaos

[5./JG27.Farber]

Originally Posted by macro

i cant wait for radar picking up raids of 100+ comming in with the fighter escort in a campaign. FM wont matter much in that chaos

Those will be the days!

[klem]

I had a long chat with Farber about our concerns which fell into two areas:

Aircraft Performance
Radar function

The Hurricane Mk I and Spitfire MkIa (100 octane) aircraft are seriously underperforming:
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpos...35&postcount=1
http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showpos...84&postcount=1

I have asked if we can have 87 Octane Spitfires 1a for Hurricanes 100 octane and 87 octane Spitfire MkIIa for Spitfire MkIa 100 octane

Perhaps more important is our ability to interpret what is going on. Trying to lead a Squadron with navigation, formation control, lookout etc and then operating as a Radar Controller too is impossible to do properly. Its not even practical for a wingman. Also not being able to update the radar information for five minutes is unrealistic. I know that the data should be 4 minutes out of date and so has to be delayed to simulate that but Radar Controllers had that late information coming in continuously or could call for it any time. Then the Sector stations had to consider the whole picture and direct their forces as necessary.

What we lack is the opportunity to create and interpret the overall picture which was a vital and fundamental aspect of the success of the radar system and the Battle. It was a weapon in itself not just a handy addon. SLs are currently doing it in isolation and only when it is practical (I was only able to use the radar three times because so much else was going on). What we need are radar controllers, guys willing to sit in a cockpit on the ground where they can operate the radar commands, have time to read/capture and assess the text returns (which don't stay long), talk to eachother and direct Squads as necessary. That's not flying but its not as boring as some people might think. I'd be happy to do it but if we are allowed that we should be allowed extra non-flying personnel to do it to keep our flying numbers the same.

I have asked if we can have that.

I am really grateful for the guys putting this campaign together and in parts we have been able to enjoy it while some parts are frustrating for the above reasons. We don't expect to sweep through victorious skies just because we happen to know the RAF won (or didn't lose) the Battle, we know it was hard and frustrating but for the historical reasons. 56 will certainly continue to take part but I think a few changes need to be made for more realistic possibilities and for improved gameplay.

[5./JG27.Farber]

Right I only see two things worth addressing here:

1.RADAR

Originally Posted by Osprey

4 minutes delay
This 4 minutes delay for response is interesting since information cannot be absolutely up to date. I'm trying to find out the delay between RDF station and reporting to the squadrons. 4 mins seems a long time, you could cross the Channel in that time. An alternative suggestion is that the flight leaders have a time delay between plot requests of a few minutes, so once they request and get feedback they cannot select again until that time has expired - this would add in the random factor for LW course changes and human error until visual confirmation, it would stop a flight leader from just hammering the button!

Originally Posted by Osprey

About the 4 minutes delay. It appears to be bang on because the RDF data went through a filter station (where people examined the plotted information) before being passed to the FC bunker - this website is definitely worth a read.

http://www.ventnorradar.co.uk/CH.htm

"The edited data was assembled as markers on a large plotting table and this showed the situation as it had been something like four minutes previously : since then the bombers would have flown about another fifteen miles"

This is interesting too. Vector was only confirmed with the second reading.
"Repeated plots became the direction of travel (vector) with the height and estimated number of aircraft repeatedly confirmed"

CH was blind past the coast and then the OC was used. But was the delay resolved for the BoB???
"With the separate raids thus identified, the information was passed to an Operations room staff who could then make the tactical decisions regarding the deployment and vectoring of the defending aircraft, either those already in the air or presently on the ground, towards their ever moving targets. It was found that those best equipped to calculate the required courses were recuperating experienced pilots as they were able to better visulise the everchanging relationships between defending and attacking aircraft. However, once the enemy aircraft had crossed the coast the CH RDF could no longer detect them and then the Royal Observer Corps reports to the Filter Room became the sole means of tracking the enemy."

"The system of having to use correction charts before reporting plots to the Filter Room contributed to the four minute delay and and sometimes of course the human factor introduced errors. This problem was solved by 'The Calculator'. Designed and installed by the Post Office ( which later constructed the Colossi computers for Bletchley Park) and using relays and uniselectors, this little known and uncelebrated early form of computer automatically added the correction factors to the input plots and displayed the results visually as the grid reference. The machine could also correct heights in the same way and a mechanically linked teleprinter could send the data by telephone line to the remote Filter Room. Ventnor was equipped with its first calculator in June 1940 and received its second in April 1941."

All of which can be found here:

http://forum.1cpublishing.eu/showthread.php?t=30979


OK, so we can see that with help from the community, especially Kodiak and Osprey that we did our best to make the most realistic radar system possible within limits.

I cant currently find the part where WE (the community) decided a 1 min delay for requesting needed to be added to a 4 min delay in the message - essentially making it a 5 min lock out! However, it was agreed the Squadron Leader should not be able to "spam" it.

With this consideration I see no reason why the request lock out should not be 1 min (the time it would proberbly take to get through and talk with control) and that the information delay should not be 4 min with the estimated course as per normal.

EDIT1: I will have to double check this is indeed the mechanics of the script and that this is possible but Im pretty sure this is how it works and is possible.

SO FOR EXAMPLE:
SL (SL means tail number 1 or "A") connects to a single radar station. Requests information. waits 1 min, requests again. waits 1 min, requests again. waits 1 min, requests again. waits 1 min, requests again. Now he recieves the Estimated Plotted course from the position that is 4 mins old and gets a new Estimated Plotted course that is four mins old every min for the next 3 mins or as long as he kept requesting.

HOWEVER this does have certain draw backs. using this method the report will not track the same contact only reveal the closet applicable target. So you might find you are on wild goose chase as two targets are kneck and kneck in range but in two totally different sides of the radar. Just a thought


AIRCRAFT:

I dont think anyone would mind if the Spit IIa was used instead of the Spit Ia, we used it before and no one complained, however if anyone seriously does mind can they please speak up. This would also mean ground starts for the Spits.

Spitfire Ia substitution for any Hurricane is NOT going to happen. This is a historical campaign and we dont want to make it "fair" we want to make it accurate. You cant have the BoB without the Hurricane! You may however have the 87 or 100 Octane - Red teams choice.

Please also see the OP in this thread and here:

http://sowc.forumotion.co.uk/t8-how-...ill-be-run-bob

S!

Ok official mode off:

MY OPPINION:

Im not going to tell the red team what to do but I would consider the overall team tactics you are using (which you are doing by considering having "ground control") and especially the altitude you guys fly at but what do I know?!

[macro]

sounds good. think this would encourage (as a must) for the spits to fly in regular contacts with hurri squads to get the to the bombers and protecting them against 109's. Did this really happen? spits taking on 109's tieing them up so the hurri's can attack the bombers? i seen it on a few programs but never actually read it in mission reports posted on this website.

i posted a link on SOW forums with info for radar. it says its range was 200 miles. if this is so we should see a build up of aircraft and where the would roughly be coming from but not where they would be going to until it had gone through the radar station to HQ etc.

i can imagin it hard for someone to fly and do this, as they had personnel full time all over the place relaying this info then HQ to tell all the SL where to go, not give them the info and leave it up to them where they go and have a discussion about it as well, wasting time.

maybe a commander (also on the ground) who is given this info (from players at each radar getting the info as per post above) then they make the call who goes where, kinda like the real radar process. no doodling about while they dropping bombs on us.

[Robo.]

Originally Posted by David198502

well, it was fun yesterday, but i think it was not that much fun for the red side.my impression was, that the amount of blue pilots was higher than on the red side.furthermore, the majority of red pilots were in hurricanes, which is a sitting duck,....maybe they need more targets(bombers) to have as much fun as the blue side.

Hey David, as a Hurricane pilot I'd like to say I am quite used to what we can do and what we can not do. There SHOULD be more Hurricanes than SPitfires. The way I see it this campaign is just starting and there are some teething problems. So far, it has not been a Battle of Britain at all, it was more like ATAG punchup minus the AI bombers. I don't know how many Stukas have attacked and how high they flew over the Channel as we were not involved in the defensive battle with the 87s, we have only seen a few 109, but it was alright for the 3rd mission only. I hope with the suggestions made there will be improvement (especially with the Radar). The other thing is that it's impossible to please everybody and I'd like to thank the creators for trying.

I strongly object against replacing Spitfire marks or Hurris for Spits - FMs are what they are, let's keep calm and carry on guys!

For myself personally I'd like to see more realistic (and usable) radar, some BofB raids with fighters in escort duties, more probable mix of Emil variants (e.g. more E-1s for this time of the year) and people flying with default (historical) loadouts.

Keep up the good work, see you next Sunday.

[5./JG27.Farber]

Originally Posted by Robo.

So far, it has not been a Battle of Britain at all, it was more like ATAG punchup minus the AI bombers.

Can you make any suggestions as to how it could be more like BoB? We are always open to suggestions.

There were 24 Stuka in Total. Spread over 4 targets. They broke up on the approach toward folkstone, 6 for each airfield and 3 for each radar.


The most important thing for me and my small team is that people ARE enjoying it and I think you will enjoy it more as it goes on, especially with some of the raids we have picked. When people give us thanks it makes it worth all the hours in FMB and scripting, forum stuff and general tedium. So thanks for the thanks!

S!