New Campaign - The Goths Ride East

:FI:Falcon · Post by **:FI:Falcon** » Mon Mar 12, 2007 5:41 pm

Hey!

I bombed a bridge too!

I think it was an "ace" bridge. I should get 28 points.

F

:FI:TacticalS! · Post by **:FI:TacticalS!** » Mon Mar 12, 2007 5:47 pm

:FI:Ardmore wrote:Heres an idea to help keep lag down to a minimum (taken from a post by Tact), and that is to have everyone download the FIS default skin for the aircraft we're flying and then I can set all the FIS default skins to each aircraft via QMT (a few seconds work), this way, most of the work the skinners have done will not be in vain, with the added bonus of next to no lag.

I haven't tested custom skin options. Been focusing on the sessions/campaigns but I am also hoping to take advantage of the custom skin library.

To recap this option -

(a) Everyone installs the generic custom skin for each flyable; and

(b) Everyone turns OFF skin download option.

Host/mission designer specifies the generic custom skin for each plane in the .mis file. I believe that it should work. I would be very interested in knowing. Performance wise it should be rock solid. The only issue might be markings overlapping skin insignia.

How did the change to your Netspeed go Ardmore? Did that help at all?

Regards,
TS!

:FI:Nellip · Post by **:FI:Nellip** » Mon Mar 12, 2007 8:51 pm

:FI:Ardmore wrote: A slight problem has arisen with the mission log reader, when it comes to recording a bridge destroyed it seems to award a lot of points to the destroyer..... Nellip and Genosse both destroyed a bridge and got 14 points each, anyone have any idea how to reward the destruction of a bridge fairly?

Questions? answers? lets have some input chaps.

Vin

I think I raised the issue of bridges a few pages back on this thread and response was it was compensation for us poor bomber pilots

Seriously 13 points for a bridge is a bit generous. If we rank them like a convoy or a group of 4 vehicles - say 4 points for 1 bridge - that would seem reasonable. They are usually defended by a lot of AAA so 4 points seems fair to me - but watch my points total fall - I think I have 4 bridges in my current tally!

:FI:Bluebell · Post by **:FI:Bluebell** » Mon Mar 12, 2007 8:54 pm

Hi Tact, the folk I've spoken to said that there was next to no lag, the odd moment here and there, but not in the same scale as before.

As for the skins, I use the QMT(quick mission tuner), its a handy little tool for il2, you dont have to touch your .mis files at all, as long as everyone has the default FI skin there should be no problem. I tried it with other skins in a coop mission I was making and it worked no problem.

Vin

Post by **:FI:Genosse** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 1:14 pm

:FI:Nellip wrote:
:FI:Ardmore wrote:A slight problem has arisen with the mission log reader, when it comes to recording a bridge destroyed it seems to award a lot of points to the destroyer..... Nellip and Genosse both destroyed a bridge and got 14 points each, anyone have any idea how to reward the destruction of a bridge fairly?
I think I raised the issue of bridges a few pages back on this thread and response was it was compensation for us poor bomber pilots

Seriously 13 points for a bridge is a bit generous. If we rank them like a convoy or a group of 4 vehicles - say 4 points for 1 bridge - that would seem reasonable. They are usually defended by a lot of AAA so 4 points seems fair to me - but watch my points total fall - I think I have 4 bridges in my current tally!

Well, folks!

Yes, I´ve to agree that too many fround targets were recorded for destroying a bridge.

As far as I know the different parts of each will be recognized by the IL2 Mission Log Reader (IL2MLR) for example as B_90, B_90, etc. But according to the briefing the bridges and not their different parts should be destroyed. Therefore I´d say we count each bridge for its own despite the fact how many parts of it were destroyed.

Every other ground target is counted as well as a single unit so why making a difference here now?

My 2 Euro cents

:FI:Nellip · Post by **:FI:Nellip** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 9:53 pm

Frank

On reflection I think you are right - lets make it consistent and score 1 point per bridge - but that takes around 48 from my ground target total

Post by **:FI:Genosse** » Tue Mar 13, 2007 10:24 pm

:FI:Nellip wrote:Frank

On reflection I think you are right - lets make it consistent and score 1 point per bridge - but that takes around 48 from my ground target total

I wouldn´t mind about that ... because we´re the Ground Weeners and we can get ´em all ... the bridges I mean!

:FI:Nellip · Post by **:FI:Nellip** » Wed Mar 14, 2007 2:15 pm

OK, this weekend we move to the fabulous new Kiev map.

I have 4 missions written so far for this map and should manage a couple more by the weekend. I don't have any missions yet with bridges as targets

Weiner pilots stick with single seat IL2's and the glory boys get LaGG3's this time. I am quite proud of missions 2 and 4 - lots of intense air to ground action - so don't miss them.

I think Ardmore and Falcon want to do something with the FI skin pack so watch this space for that.

:FI:Falcon · Post by **:FI:Falcon** » Wed Mar 14, 2007 4:53 pm

VVS_00_Skinpak_01 ready for d'l

I decided to put ALL "00" (default: only FI rounds, no pilot name or number) VVS (and the P-11c) ac into one 7zip'd folder.

If you already have these 00's d'l'd then you need not do anything. The IL-2 skin HAS been corrected and improved. Please re-copy that skin into the proper files. The readme file will show you what goes where.

If you have not d'l'd the skins and you plan on participating in the "Goths" east front co-ops on Sunday, please d'l this folder named:

VVS_00_skinpak.7z

located in the "VVS_00_skinpak_01" folder.

7zip files can be opened by rar and zip utilities.

Some "BLANK" (no markings at all) ac skins have been included ... cuz I felt like it.

The address for all these skin files is:

http://www.nerb.ca/fi_skins/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Questions?

da skinners

:FI:Bluebell · Post by **:FI:Bluebell** » Mon Mar 19, 2007 10:18 am

Stats are up for sundays (18/03/07) coops.

Murph and Scott are the new promotions, though we lost a few guys

.

Looks like the ground pounders are well organized and their comms are the same, which is more than can be said for the fighters, school girls on an outing would be the best description.
On the second mission I took the last fighter and what happened.........no one knew the target location or even where they where, to busy yakking and not enough paying attention to the brief.

For me its becoming a chore flying on Sundays. We should be leaving the silliness in Hyperlobby and start showing some kind of order when the game loads. As for teamwork... flying in pairs, etc, Hah! the only time you hear teamwork is when someones getting the snot blasted out of them and they are yelling for help, meanwhile everyone is off doing their own thing oblivious to whats happening in their own flight, no pointing fingers we're all to blame, we have got to get ourselves sorted out.

Now that I've calmed down, we move onto next Sunday, I will be working then, so if anyone can host the missions, could you drop Nellip a line and let him know, if not, I'll be ok for the following Sunday.

Vin

:FI:Nellip · Post by **:FI:Nellip** » Mon Mar 19, 2007 11:26 am

Vin

Thanks for hosting and doing the stats mate. My ground target total looks a bit grand with my multiple "bridge kills"

- can we knock it down to the right level - I think there are 4 bridges in there so taking around 48 ground kills away would be the right number I think.

Hear what you say about the organisation and it is something of a perennial FI problem - we have a liking for the lack of formal discipline which gives this squad such a fun feel but it becomes a problem when the missions start.

I think the wieners do have a better approach in that comms in mission tend just to be used for mission related talk, we agree vector out and vector back before setting off, and the flight leader accepts the responsibility for calling out heading changes, flight levels, engine settings and attack plans. I haven't flown fighters that often but when I have they didn't seem to have this basic organisation.

Maybe the answer is that the senior "alive" pilot takes the lead responsibility for each flight - one for fighter and one for bomber - the fact that the lead gets more targetted by the AI should means that this will rotate fairly regularly

We should also "pair up" with regular partners

in each element - I think some of us have done this before and it does improve survivability. The other thing we could have is 2 comms moderators - one for each flight (Leader?) - who mute people for the mission if they break comms discipline once the mission has started.

I know this goes away from the traditional laissez faire approach but I think we can still have fun with a few basic rules.

Just my two pence worth.

Neil

:FI:Bluebell · Post by **:FI:Bluebell** » Mon Mar 19, 2007 12:29 pm

Sorted your score Neil, now your only human

. Took the liberty of changing the other guys who had uber scores from the bridge busting mission also.

Good points regarding the lead slot and a comms mod. If anyone else has any suggestions regarding these two points, please feel free to chime in.

Vin

Post by **:FI:Mikester** » Mon Mar 19, 2007 5:06 pm

I got a dedicated server running in HL at the moment, I'ts still in development but I could put the coop on and give it a try. not sure what the connection will be like when we all join, would just have to give it a go, it's sitting on a 10mb connection but the dedicated server is on a Laptop, not sure how much pressure this would put on the little thing.

Anyhoo, The offer is here if a host if the prob. maybe we could give it a trial run on wednesday?

:FI:Falcon · Post by **:FI:Falcon** » Mon Mar 19, 2007 5:52 pm

:FI:Nellip wrote:... The other thing we could have is 2 comms moderators - one for each flight (Leader?) - who mute people for the mission if they break comms discipline once the mission has started. ...

I agree with both posts. Com mute seems a wee bit harsh though. Flight leader should only need say, "observe radio procedures" or "QUIET!" to get the discipline needed on the radio.

In RL when I was flyin' there were things called "critical phases of flight".

During take-off, climb to cruise altitude, descent, approach and landing were times when no non-standard conversation took place. During cruise casual chat about last night's conquest at the Holiday Inn and such was allowed.

I fink:

Mission designer, server or squadron leader should give a general brief of mission to all pilots before we chose ac, load and press "fly.

In mission BEFORE engine start the flight leader should brief his fighters or bombers about initial phases of mission and a very brief expectation of target area and return flight. Lead should give initial departure heading, planned cruise altitude and plans to co-ordinate with other flights.

All pilots should call to lead (in number order) that they are ready, lead should THEN roll.

All pilots call roll and "wheels up".

At cruise altitude in route lead can call, "discontinue/relax/end/whatever radio procedures".

An attempt to tighten flight formation and forming into element pairs should be made.

In route nearing target area lead should impleminte radio procedures again and re-brief on target area/type/formation/entry/exit/reformation and planned departure of target area.

During return flight communication may be casual but elements and vigilance should be maintained.

Now, that's as far as I think we should go at first on the realism thing.

Some mates might actually burst if they go any farther.

Thunks?

Falcon

:FI:TacticalS! · Post by **:FI:TacticalS!** » Mon Mar 19, 2007 6:17 pm

I think YOU guys are getting way too organized and serious. You chaps need to keep it loose man.