the need for a concensus?

[sitting_duck 3]

sundays game got off to a tardy start, which considering we are trying some new things out, is in itself is not a problem.

 

Just wanted to get everyones thoughts on finding a compromise between two equally important items,,,Getting the games up timely, and accomodating pilots who want to play.

 

We have all shown in the past our willingness to wait for pilots who need files,,,need to reboot, etc etc, and I feel comfortable saying none of want to tell anyone we cant wait any longer, we have to start the game. And im sure pilots who run into problems feel just as bad, and would rather they do not hold up the rest of us.

 

So, maybe we can develope a standard,,or whatever you want to call it, that determines when a scheduled game goes up. In addition to reducing delays, it will take any "personal" factor out of a decision to start without pilots...

 

I have also added a section to the mp tuturial. It lists the currnt files that the majority of mp pilots are playing with. While probably not the best place for this info, might be a good idea to figure out a convient place where pilots wanting to join a game can verify they have the latest patch, damage model, madmats installer, and anything else needed.

[Axgrinder 0]

sundays game got off to a tardy start, which considering we are trying some new things out, is in itself is not a problem.

 

Just wanted to get everyones thoughts on finding a compromise between two equally important items,,,Getting the games up timely, and accomodating pilots who want to play.

 

We have all shown in the past our willingness to wait for pilots who need files,,,need to reboot, etc etc, and I feel comfortable saying none of want to tell anyone we cant wait any longer, we have to start the game. And im sure pilots who run into problems feel just as bad, and would rather they do not hold up the rest of us.

 

So, maybe we can develope a standard,,or whatever you want to call it, that determines when a scheduled game goes up. In addition to reducing delays, it will take any "personal" factor out of a decision to start without pilots...

 

I have also added a section to the mp tuturial. It lists the currnt files that the majority of mp pilots are playing with. While probably not the best place for this info, might be a good idea to figure out a convient place where pilots wanting to join a game can verify they have the latest patch, damage model, madmats installer, and anything else needed.

 

I don't want to be a jerk about it but there are enough posts in this forum to get people up and running in MP. Except for the few exceptions we have been successful in getting many pilots online with us! I think that if you have not downloaded Teamspeak do not attempt to play in scheduled flights. If you are having trouble with TS join one of the tutorial sessions for help instead. If you don't keep up with the downloads and patches don't use scheduled flights to find that out. Again, join a tutorial session or do your homework on the forum - Ask questions in the forum or PM the host BEFORE the scheduled flight.

 

As far as online etiquite I think 30 minutes to get a game up and running is to long. If multiple pilots are having problems with a game that is being hosted end the game and start a new one. Let's not spend half the session trouble shooting missions. Run Mission testing sessions for that.

[von Baur 54]

My two cents.

 

I believe that part, if not most, of the problem is the variety of patches and mods out there coupled with a desire to 'have the latest'. Not everyone wants the latest. Does that mean that those who don't aren't worthy of having fun with the rest of us? I certainly wouldn't want to be on either the giving or receiving end of that attitude. But I think we're getting dangerously close to exactly that. As I mentioned Sunday (for those of you who weren't there), I think there's a danger in having too many incompatible mods available.

 

'Incompatible mods'?

 

In Red Baron people like Rabu and Capt. Winters and, most notably, Kess created upgrades to the scenery and ground objects to make them more real looking. Then Baron von Helton and Charles deThielt started working on the planes themselves and they stopped giving the feel of WWI aircraft and started to look like the warbirds they were supposed to be. All of these mods were strictly up to the individual player to use or not, depending on his level of comfort with changing files and the ability of his computer to handle them. I could have CdT's planes and Kess's Promised Land graphics while someone else might be using von Helton's Revenge of the Jastas planes and Rabu's terrains and a third person might be flying strictly stock and all of us could be online together with no problems.

 

Later various people started adding aircraft that weren't available in the stock game..planes that Sierra/Dynamix had ignored, flyable two-seaters with working AI gunners. Then some very talented and well-intentioned people started 'fixing' bugs in the flight/damage models...the 'uber' effect in afm, the lack of gun jams and g-force effects in nfm, whole new intermediate fm's. Since these were outside of Sierra's original parameters the standard security checks (woefully inadequate as they were) would reject them, making passworded servers necessary to ensure everyone was flying the same fm, which in turn led to fewer people in any given server at any given time. And some of them you couldn't even get the password to unless you were a member of a squad. In OFF you can't even get into the game if your files don't match, which will at least keep the hackussations down. But it leads to the frustrations that sitting duck is talking about.

 

Another offshoot of these changes were that people developed their favorite flight models and wanted everyone to fly the one that they liked. This led to fractionilization and factionilization of the community to the point that there was as much forum space devoted to bickering over which one was better or more 'accurate' as there was to level-headed discussion and fun. And I'd hate to see that happen here.

 

I've also played Richtofen's Skies, Target Ware's WWI offering. Like OFF, the system checks your files against what's supposed to be there and won't let you into the server if they don't match. Unlike OFF you can't just put up a new plane or fm for everyone to try out. Anything has to be run through the dev team and if they like it they include it in the next update, thus keeping everyone on the same page. There was no "I like this fm over that one" because there was only one at any given time. I don't want to discourage anyone's trying to improve things that they feel could use improving, I just think that they need to run it by the devs to see if it should be included in an 'official' patch.

[Winston DoRight 3]

It's nice if someones mod is so great that it's incorporated (by the devs) into a patch for the official game. In fact it's wonderful that they notice and listen, but who's going to improve multiplayer? I fear we're stuck with a level of "broken-ness" and it's not getting addressed. What we have is what we have to make due with and IMHO that's pretty weak right now. So much of our MP flying time now is used in finding bugs, trying to get everyone connected, and experiencing unpleasant things happening. We are not going to attract new MP flyers if this doesn't improve. Many people want to play a quality WW1 combat sim, and some have recently come over from ROF, and they are very disappointed.

 

Multiplayers only hope is that a programmer will take the time and interest and look into the problems we've reported. If this doesn't happen MP in OFF will probably degenerate into an unplayable condition and eventually interest will die out. In time other MP games will steal us over to their side.

[themightysrc 5]

Having tried to join in on MP on Sunday (but with the wrong IP address for the MP server), and having previously fallen foul of having the correct files in place - my fault, as I'll readily concede - I would fully support a section that states clearly and unambiguously what files/patches are needed for MP, although this info could be made explicit for each session prior to it happening. That would remove some of the problems surely, meaning that the only remaining issues would be familiarity in logging in and actually sodding well flying. I've never done any MP for any game AT ALL, and so I appreciate that my learning curve may well be steeper than people who've been MPing for ages, but I would have thought that it would be in the interests of all of us interested in MP to be guided through as painlessly as possible (for all concerned), and thus I have to strongly disagree with Ax about there being enough information - you really can't have too much information when you're stepping into the unknown. I know it may be a little tiresome to old hands, eager to get stuck into the awaiting Bosche/Tommies, but for those of us unsure as to protocols, settings et al, there can't be enough handholding in the early stages, and I'm very thankful that there are enough generous people around to enable me to make the baby steps necessary to get into and enjoy MP.

 

My 2d.

[Vasco 3]

Guys,

 

Things should get a lot easier after the next patch when the files used for campaign and multiplayer are maintained seperately. If Madmatt's autoinstaller can be updated with an agreed 'standard' set of files for the new directory format it will greatly reduce the amount of tinkering we need to do getting new players up and running.

 

In both cases the problems we had on Sunday came from two players with non-standard installations (one had installed his OBD directory outside of the default settings and the other forgot he was running the beta patch). Until such time as MP files are standardised I believe we have to insist that players wishing to join us for the first time on Sundays have their MP installations tested prior to the session; Sitting Duck and I spend a lot of time logged into TS just for this purpose.

 

I know we all want to be helpful and encourage new players to try MP at the earliest opportunity but we have to draw the line somewhere.

 

Vasco

 

P.S. Sorry we couldn't help you identify the problem at the time SRC, but it had taken us nearly an hour to sort out other people and we really wanted to fly.

Edited July 28, 2009 by Vasco

[themightysrc 5]

Hi Vasco,

 

"Sorry we couldn't help you identify the problem at the time SRC, but it had taken us nearly an hour to sort out other people and we really wanted to fly."

 

No apology needed - I actually assumed that I'd cocked it up somewhere down the line, and then my t'interweb connection went phut, so I couldn't get back to anyone anyway.

 

I'll try to get onto TS this or tomorrow evening to check everything out. AFAIK, I'm on the latest patch and the 1.1 DM required for last Sunday's bash, otherwise I'm vanilla in terms of setup, so with any luck it should be a doddle.

 

To me honest, I'm more concerned with my missus wandering in to find out why I'm talking to myself and then giggling at me for wearing a silly hat with antennae and a set of headphones. Thank God I decided against the Biggles scarf.

[sitting_duck 3]

Have to agree with van baur to some extent. It appears that improvments to dm's are coming out at a pretty fast clip, and if we try and keep up with them in mp we are going to be having the same problems over and over. And while i dont particularly like saying to ppl this is what you have to have in order to play, unfortunatly its out of our control....we all have to be the same.

 

As far as " enough posts already", i agree with that too. Definatley gotta get rid of some redundant stickies. But these posts are not for pilots that already know what needs to be done. These are for pilots just entering mp, and pilots that have not played for a while and are getting back into a game. and have to find an easy place where pilots can find out at minimum, the latest patch, dm, and whatever to avoid mismatches.

 

but ax was the only one that gave any answer to my original question...("half hour is too much") can we agree on a format that determines when we start scheduled games....

If we can,,the host wont have to feel bad about starting when pilots are not ready, and pilots left out will (or should) understand that this is the format, and when they get squared away, they can always join a game in progress.

 

I think i made my position clear sunday, i would prefer to see everyone get into the game, but its only my position, and i admitt its unrealistic...the delays are just getting too long.

 

Dont want to get this off on a tangent, but BigJim did have one valid point,,,we where getting hammered sunday by the ai...anyones thoughts on maybe toning down the skill level of the ai?

This is just a question.......not a suggestion..

[themightysrc 5]

"ax was the only one that gave any answer to my original question...("half hour is too much") can we agree on a format that determines when we start scheduled games..."

 

Obviously, you must have a set start time. I think that people who have already figured out how to set themselves up and join games will have no problem with turning up at the alloted time, and off you go.

 

I would strongly recommend that any new MPers - such as me - be requested to turn up 15-30 minutes earlier to ensure that their setup is correct and that everything is in place. If any issues can't be resolved in time for the start time, then they will have to sit out the session. Of course, if they're interested and on TS, they can always listen in! And to soothe themselves there's always the option of bobbing off and playing SP - which is what I ended up doing on Sunday night. Another dead pilot, dammit...

[Axgrinder 0]

I would strongly recommend that any new MPers - such as me - be requested to turn up 15-30 minutes earlier to ensure that their setup is correct and that everything is in place. If any issues can't be resolved in time for the start time, then they will have to sit out the session.

 

 

This is why I suggest tuning into turtorial missions. They are there to discover and weed out problems before scheduled flights.

[von Baur 54]

Sorry if I went off on a tangent or a rant or whatever, duck. As to your question, I think it's the responsibility of each and every player to have his files ready to go at the the designated start time. In all honesty, anything less is rude and inconsiderate to every person who has taken the time and responsibility to prepare. This can, and in fairness must, be facilitated by the organizer/host getting out the word well in advance. IMO, the four days Winston posted should have been enough and he did offer to be available before the session to help people prepare. I don't know if anyone took him up on it. I didn't, but my problems weren't because of the patch. To be honest, I still don't have any idea what caused the 'disappearing planes' I experienced. I've run the same installation in sp and not had a recurrance.

 

I don't want to turn anyone off to multiplayer. Quite the contrary, I came from Red Baron and in its heyday (of which I caught pretty much the tail end) it wasn't uncommon to find a couple dozen people online at any given time and you could almost always find a server with at least a half dozen or so people. And I would love to see that happen with OFF. But a big obstacle to that is the abundance of patches and the frequency of their release. I certainly don't want to discourage anyone's efforts to enhance the gameplay for all of us, but the decline in numbers in Red Baron (as I remember it, anyway) more or less coincided with the beginnings of 3rd party flight models. And if a person has to change his install every week or two to stay up to speed it makes it less attractive and less likely he'll give it the time it takes to get proficient in multiplayer. And less face it, going up against people is a lot different that taking on AI.

[themightysrc 5]

"This is why I suggest tuning into turtorial missions. They are there to discover and weed out problems before scheduled flights."

 

A great idea, so long as these are well signposted to newbies and that someone is willing to give up the time to do this during the week or whenever. The reason I suggested 15-30 prior to the main session is that the host is already committing time at that point and wouldn't have to put aside time elsewhere. But, I'm agnostic about when it happens, so long as it does, and that clear instructions are included prior to sessions (as I was rambling about above).

[sitting_duck 3]

I think the 15 minute "pre game warmup".. is a great idea..

 

Nor do i think a pilot having a problem and holding up things should be construed as them being rude, stupid, inconsiderate, or anything else.. There isnt a single one of us that hasnt held up things at one point in time.....

 

I think the phrase im looking for is "s**t happens"

[Axgrinder 0]

I think the 15 minute "pre game warmup".. is a great idea..

 

Nor do i think a pilot having a problem and holding up things should be construed as them being rude, stupid, inconsiderate, or anything else.. There isnt a single one of us that hasnt held up things at one point in time.....

 

I think the phrase im looking for is "s**t happens"

 

If the person hosting the missions is OK with it then go for it! Also what about going to a separate TS channel for major connection/MP problems someone might have trying to get into a game after a flight has started.

[BigJim 0]

If the person hosting the missions is OK with it then go for it! Also what about going to a separate TS channel for major connection/MP problems someone might have trying to get into a game after a flight has started.

 

I think you should setup a "tune up" day prior to your Sunday meet, for all the newbie's to get on an up to speed, THEN post the game name, ip number to be used on Sunday and a start time, with the understanding that you should arrive 15 minutes PRIOR to start, at start time you start (after all this preparation there is no excuse for not being there at the start)

 

My experience on Sunday was jaded by a couple of facts: one I had been awake for 24 hours (not the games fault), and two all the DM changes back and forth plus the lockups (a lockup for me is a hard reboot with about 3 or 4 programs that must be reset AFTER the computer boots) couple that with some other guys having problems, a sorti that had many ACE type AI and it made for a long afternoon.

 

I probably should not have been as harsh as I was, because you guys did alot to get me going and I appreciated it, but if gets some of the "programmer" types looking a problems and we gamers looking for ways to make it happen better than it was worth the raised eyebrows I got.

 

First impressions are important to "grow" the online community, and when it results in long delays, and immediate shootdowns by the "uber" AI ( cause it was set that way) it may not leave the impression you want?

 

Also I think some axis v allies (all humans) might prove to bring a bunch over to fly, I know most of you like the coop style but I think a mix might work well.

[themightysrc 5]

"Also I think some axis v allies (all humans) might prove to bring a bunch over to fly, I know most of you like the coop style but I think a mix might work well."

 

I'd guess that this would probably be contingent upon having sufficient numbers - unless some sacrificial lamb would care to show a bunch of OFFers in DVIIs what he can do in an RE8!

[BigJim 0]

"Also I think some axis v allies (all humans) might prove to bring a bunch over to fly, I know most of you like the coop style but I think a mix might work well."

 

I'd guess that this would probably be contingent upon having sufficient numbers - unless some sacrificial lamb would care to show a bunch of OFFers in DVIIs what he can do in an RE8!

 

Well last sunday we had around 8 guys I think, 4 v 4 might have been a blast

[Winston DoRight 3]

....... last sunday we had around 8 guys I think, 4 v 4 might have been a blast......

 

In team dogfight you'll see that every Axis flyer will choose the DVII, therefore the game is skewed from the very start.

[Vasco 3]

Winston,

 

We could break up into 2 teams of 4 with seperate TS channels and fly campaign missions as Allied and German squadrons. It's a doddle to do in the mission builder.

 

If that's what people would like to do, then that's no problem. It would be great if we could get a full 16 onto a server at once - now THAT would be something!

 

Vasco

[sitting_duck 3]

In team dogfight you'll see that every Axis flyer will choose the DVII, therefore the game is skewed from the very start.

 

Dont think ive seen a dvii yet in the campaign...almost all alblll....

 

And,,not sure why this should be any different,,but ive flown several of the campaigns my myself,,,(gotta be honest,,set weapons to umlimited,,), and ive only been shot down once so far...

[Burning Beard 14]

A campaign type mission where both sides could be flown would be the way to go, that way you can control the type of aircraft and have AI targets for both teams to go after.

 

Beard

[Winston DoRight 3]

Winston,

 

We could break up into 2 teams of 4 with seperate TS channels and fly campaign missions as Allied and German squadrons. It's a doddle to do in the mission builder.

 

If that's what people would like to do, then that's no problem. It would be great if we could get a full 16 onto a server at once - now THAT would be something!

 

Vasco

Now, that would be a hoot!

[Winston DoRight 3]

Dont think ive seen a dvii yet in the campaign...almost all alblll....

 

And,,not sure why this should be any different,,but ive flown several of the campaigns my myself,,,(gotta be honest,,set weapons to umlimited,,), and ive only been shot down once so far...

 

I'm in a campaign now with Jasta 11, and the thing is..... since receiving our DVII's, we've encountered only Spad 13's as scout opposition. I mean no other aircraft except a stray bomber here and there. I thought it would be fun to get to the DVII, but really it's quite boring now.

[FRO8769 0]

Gentlemen,

 

Sorry that I have been out of the loop and not flown, been busy over here mainly painting and building skins. I myself completely understand the waiting and the problems we face with OFF. I have been flying OFF since phase 1 and the problems that do occur is the main reason PD and the Boys of 60th got away from OFF. I think that a campaign with both sides is a good idea. That is something that me and Stump have talked about but have not implemented as yet or gone forward with. Depending on how many people show up is the main key in its success. Most people want to fly an aces plane while they are flying, or see the different schemes of their particular aerodrome or jasta. It is not as easy as IL-2, as we all know. Me and Stump did come up with a way to use the AC planes to see different schemes in the game, but that would mean the building of standalones(which is not a problem), a mission builders nightmare to create missions, and the swapping out of files depending on who you are flying with. I think that more people would fly, like you suggested, if we use both sides in a coop setting with different skins showing up for each ace. Stump had come up with an idea of a swap-out program so that you don't have to do any backups and swap out files manually, but alas it has not been put together as yet. I myself don't have the foggest idea of how to make such a program. If any of you guys can come up with a program to do such a thing that would be a plus for your MP games.

 

As far as mods or add-ons for the game, I have not yet implemented FB's DM in my game. I still need to talk to Stump and put our minds together to see what direction he wants to go with Dove and Hawks. Should we make a Dove and Hawks squadron using our own personalized planes like we did in the Boys of 60th using AC files to see each others planes? Do we need a different personalized and eye catching Dove and Hawks website for our members to go to and get the latest downloads and mods besides going to the CombatAce forum? If any of you guys have any ideas and want to share them, then by all means let us know so we can get more people to fly with us in MP.

[Axgrinder 0]

I made skins, both CP and Allied, that some of us use with the D&H logo on them some of us use them in MP and offline. I would love to see a D&H online squadron form to fly in MP missions. We have done it a little but everyone has to have the same A/C files in their game in order to see all the planes wearing the logo.