Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Introducing "Vintage Missions"


  • Please log in to reply
196 replies to this topic

#41 HotTom

HotTom
  • Posts: 8177

Posted 08 June 2010 - 07:08

Sounds great! Wish I could have made it. I'm 11 hours behind you (We are 3 hours behind PST in Hawaii), so your missions run at 8am to 10am for me :shock:
I am willing to get up early before work and fly…5pm your time would be 6am my time.
Weekends might work quite well….especially for later in the am (12 noon, would be 11pm your time…just when all the kids go to sleep and the REAL pilots come out! :D )
I'll try to keep an eye on the calendar.

BTW, thanks for putting this together Vanderstok! I'm looking forward to flying with the vintage crew!

Barn, when I lived on Kauai I was in a British squad in both Dawn of Aces and IL2. Worked great on weekends. When they flew Sat and Sun evenings it was morning in Hawaii. I think it's 12 hours diff in summer, 11 hrs otherwise (cause Hawaii doesn't have DST).

You might have to go to late Mass.. :lol:

HT
  • 0

#42 ThomasH

ThomasH
  • Posts: 151

Posted 08 June 2010 - 07:57

I really enjoyed flying with you guys last night. To make the missions even better, why not limit the available aircraft to three per side and two spots for each type? By doing that you'd always have a wingman flying the same type of aircraft as you.
  • 0

#43 J2_squid

J2_squid
  • Posts: 3815

Posted 08 June 2010 - 08:14

So then, just some suggestions.

I think we need teamspeak. This would allow us to form up easier, and coordinate etc. In my experiance, TS doesnt help once the dogfighting starts, but it will allow us to communicate a lot easier. (Is it just me or doesnt Teamchat work at the moment).

Also what could help is some messages like (Spotters seen in sector D12) so that we know where we are going etc.

We also had some uneven teams, not a biggy as people can switch, but perhaps a mention in the breifing to join the side with the least people when loggin in?

I do think it was a landmark in my ROF participation though. Reminded me of the very early days on T&T. It was great patrolling with Para von Ricthofen in his red DR1. An awesome dogfight with Pierrot. The allies were definately more coordinated than the germans and we paid the price. Just goes to show that proper tactics will win out every time.

Anyhoo thanks again guys, hopefully next time Ill have a smoother ride connection wise. Cant wait! :D
  • 0

#44 Miggins

Miggins
  • Posts: 3115

Posted 08 June 2010 - 10:41

For the immersion factor a ground take-off and spiral climb over the field for the recons would probably look better.

Having a couple of fields worked well, they are not too far apart that you can't meet up with a flight from the other field, though if there are a matched pair of fields a little further back from the front for the CP it might be nicer. Not way back, but maybe just double the distance, as most times the Entente were easily over enemy territory during thse air battles rather than fighting directly over the trench line where most of my contact situations occured last night.

I'm not saying there were not incursions by CP over to the Entente side of the lines, but didn't most aerial combat take place over CP held territory (and we want to get that kind of effect here), so pushing the CP fields a little further back would help with this I think, not only giving the CP players more time to form up, but also more time for the Ent players to sally forward somewhat to attempt interceptions over CP territory a little more.

Is there a random element to the height and route the recons try to take? Thinking that this would entail the defenders needing to create multi layer defense flights as well as spreading along the front.

Admittedly you would need to add some "Recons spotted near <wherever>" to the on screen messages killing a little immersion, but with possibly only small numbers taking part a little help might lead to a few more contact situations.
  • 0

#45 SYN_Vander

SYN_Vander
  • Tester
  • Posts: 4710

Posted 08 June 2010 - 11:00

…I think we need teamspeak. This would allow us to form up easier, and coordinate etc…

Agree, Anyone would like to set it up? :) We could put the server details per mission in the Calender. I prefer Ventrilo because it allows me to use a joystick button to talk, but it's just a detail…

…Also what could help is some messages like (Spotters seen in sector D12) so that we know where we are going etc…
They are already in, but only visible to the allied side as they were the ones under attack. I use messages like "Intel report: Enemy two-seater crossing the lines just south east of <village name>, grid reference 12-6c"

… I'm not saying there were not incursions by CP over to the Entente side of the lines, but didn't most aerial combat take place over CP held territory…

True, The Germans had the "luxury" of defence for most of the war, but this particular mission took place in early april 1918, with the German Spring Offensive in full swing. The Germans were creating local air superiority by concentrating their jastas in certain sectors. At this time they did venture over the lines and into enemy territory as they had to take the initiative. That's why MvR ended up dead on the wrong side of the lines…

…Is there a random element to the height and route the recons try to take? …

Not really ,but I did the best I could. They do fly several different pre-defined paths, to make it harder to predict where they will be.

Admittedly you would need to add some "Recons spotted near <wherever>" to the on screen messages killing a little immersion, but with possibly only small numbers taking part a little help might lead to a few more contact situations.

See above, it's already in. I guess you two flew German side only! :)
  • 0

#46 SYN_Vander

SYN_Vander
  • Tester
  • Posts: 4710

Posted 08 June 2010 - 11:05

I really enjoyed flying with you guys last night. To make the missions even better, why not limit the available aircraft to three per side and two spots for each type? By doing that you'd always have a wingman flying the same type of aircraft as you.

Yes, I'll limit the number of airfields and aircraft. This will also (hopefully) have the added benefit of less rof.exe errors. Simpler is usually better isn't it?
Better to have several missions with limited aircraft types per mission than lots of different types in one mission…

Ofcourse the downside is that you can't always fly your favourite type, but I don't think that is really a problem?
  • 0

#47 Miggins

Miggins
  • Posts: 3115

Posted 08 June 2010 - 12:32

With first iteration being quite successful, though how many actually got the errors? Only Squid?

I'm thinking that adding another field (should numbers of participants require it) would be easy to add? The idea being we get to add stuff until we hit unreliability, thus ending up with the most "bang for our CPU" as possible.

Chill's mission started out with lots of stuff and has had to be cut down in stages, at least for stability on Hussars (the bigger missions seemed to work better on SYN's box).

The kind of thing I have trying to fiddle a bit with in the ME is getting small self contained AI units that can be dropped into any specific mission on demand (and it's harder for me than I thought it would be too, I'm not getting anywhere fast).

If these elements get added sequentially mission test by mission test we can pinpoint exactly what bits result in the instability and step back a pace, but we should then have the "busyiest" mission but still retain stability. I have noticed that some missions that look (apparently to me at least) very similar, have significantly higher CPU usage to each other when sitting at idle in Hussars server.

For example, the recon cover by CP and the Entente intercept would happen with (possibly) troop movement towards the front, a couple of CAPs by CP and Entente AI units unrelated to the recon flight directly, possible artillery barrage for either side. Players then can't be sure if the flight they are approaching is player controlled or not.

Provided none of the elements push the mission specs over the limits previously stated in the Wiki, adding small self contained elements should work maybe?

Would that work or is it too simplistic of me to think it should be that "easy" to build up the mission like that? I have no experience on making missions in any game, this is the first one that has interested me enough to even attempt to begin learning.

If something like this is feasable we then have a number of elements that we know will work together that cam be mixed and matched so the players can have a great number of missions that, though containing many elements they have seen in other missions, the combination of particular elements in any given mission should make them unique and very hard to learn what to expect.
  • 0

#48 SYN_Vander

SYN_Vander
  • Tester
  • Posts: 4710

Posted 08 June 2010 - 12:50

With first iteration being quite successful, though how many actually got the errors? Only Squid?

No: At least squid, Vati, Faz, Parazaine had problems so we can't ignore this I'm afraid.

I'm thinking that adding another field (should numbers of participants require it) would be easy to add? The idea being we get to add stuff until we hit unreliability, thus ending up with the most "bang for our CPU" as possible.

Oh yes, adding airfields (or actuallly activating them) is done in 5 mins. I think we need to versions of each mission. One for up to 16 players (for people like me that host on their PC) and one with up to 36 or more players.

The kind of thing I have trying to fiddle a bit with in the ME is getting small self contained AI units that can be dropped into any specific mission on demand (and it's harder for me than I thought it would be too, I'm not getting anywhere fast).

Yes, I do that myself. The two-seater routine I now use is pretty self supporting. You could paste in as many as you like without much effort. In due time I will share some of these routines on the website.

If these elements get added sequentially mission test by mission test we can pinpoint exactly what bits result in the instability and step back a pace, but we should then have the "busyiest" mission but still retain stability. I have noticed that some missions that look (apparently to me at least) very similar, have significantly higher CPU usage to each other when sitting at idle in Hussars server.

Seems like a good approach. I remember that the Reims mission I made. It is basically just a copy of the Somme mission, but I moved all the units to the Reims location. Then I heard that it gave a lot of problems online. I have absolutely no idea why. Is it just because the city of Reims with all its objects is included?
  • 0

#49 WWIEAF-Puff

WWIEAF-Puff
  • Posts: 673

Posted 08 June 2010 - 14:51

Damn, missed the event, popped on but the server was full with 12 out of 12. Will catch you lot next time :)

On the subject of TS, using it is fine but why not a gentlemans agreement not to use TS when

a) in combat to warn others of attacks
b) to pass info of where enemy aircraft have been seen

Utilising the flares, wing waggling and pilot signals would be more in line with history..because, any flyers who fly and use TS as part of a Sqn will usually win out in combat using TS to direct the teamwork…..only a though :)
  • 0

#50 J2_squid

J2_squid
  • Posts: 3815

Posted 08 June 2010 - 15:09

Good Idea, the way to make sure it stays a gentlemans agreement is for all players to be on the same channel.

That way you keep in contact but wont pass anything of tactical value. Also makes silent signals a nessesity.
  • 0

#51 WWIEAF-Puff

WWIEAF-Puff
  • Posts: 673

Posted 08 June 2010 - 15:19

All on the one channel would be a great idea , in my opinion..this would mean meeting and talking to like minded simmers and get to know each other better, leading to better understandings and missions etc
  • 0

#52 Parazaine

Parazaine
  • Posts: 1902

Posted 08 June 2010 - 15:27

All on the one channel would be a great idea , in my opinion..this would mean meeting and talking to like minded simmers and get to know each other better, leading to better understandings and missions etc

I have been doing that for a long time on ToW. Each side can set up a whisper list for talking to their side only if they wish and everyone is still able to be socially on the same channel.
  • 0

#53 J2_squid

J2_squid
  • Posts: 3815

Posted 08 June 2010 - 15:28

In my experiance it quickly devolves into taking the piss out of eachother.

Still plenty of fun though :D
  • 0

#54 HotTom

HotTom
  • Posts: 8177

Posted 08 June 2010 - 16:26

All on the one channel would be a great idea , in my opinion..this would mean meeting and talking to like minded simmers and get to know each other better, leading to better understandings and missions etc

I have been doing that for a long time on ToW. Each side can set up a whisper list for talking to their side only if they wish and everyone is still able to be socially on the same channel.

Sorry but I disagree.

The whisper function has to be set up before you start the mission and how do you know who is going to join? What it often results in is hearing a lot of half-conversations that make no sense.

I would prohibit whisper. In ToW TS whisper is annoying and confusing IMO (who the hell is he talking to? :roll: ).

When everyone is on the same channel, I agree it adds to the social part and that's great, but as a tactical tool it becomes pretty useless because some folks (like Darling and Comet :lol: ) have zero commo discipline and babble on endlessly, tying up the channel.

I think TS (or Ventrilo, just as good) would be a very welcome addition. I personally hate texting and lose all SA while I am doing so.

But having everyone on the same channel defeats the whole point of a "realistic" server.

I'd save the inter-team chatter for the chat bar.

There is nothing realistic about hearing your opponents. If I call out a contact I usually provide a landmark ("half a grid east of Warfusee at 7 thousand") and that invites unwanted company.

Socialize?

Turn off your computer, walk out the door and introduce yourself to the real world. I do it at least once a month :lol:

Just my opinion.

Vander, did you ever get that link to work?

That map is linked to an amazingly complete interactive data base of airfields, units and dates. I've never seen anything nearly as good.

If you can't get it to work, let me know.

S!

HT
  • 0

#55 J2_squid

J2_squid
  • Posts: 3815

Posted 08 June 2010 - 17:44

Yeh we probably dont need whisper, but its good for stuff like, okay guys just logged on, ill wait at the Airfield for you and stuff like that.

In my experiance in combat its useless. Besides having shared comms means we have a prior agreement not to use it to direct rather as a tool to communicate about game issues ect.

Anyway, im sure whatever we decide will be fun.
  • 0

#56 SYN_Vander

SYN_Vander
  • Tester
  • Posts: 4710

Posted 08 June 2010 - 19:08

…Vander, did you ever get that link to work?

Nope, I sent you a PM on this forum.
  • 0

#57 Miggins

Miggins
  • Posts: 3115

Posted 09 June 2010 - 00:16

Things might be looking up somewhat on the server front.

Tonight I ran for a few hours in the afternoon and a couple more after the master server came back. This time I had a good look at what else was going on inside the dedi-box and made sure dserver was utilising all 4 cores.

I couldn't get the missions I intended to run tonight to work at all, so instead I booted with some of the current HS missions with the AI planes (the ones that I had marginal performance with first time). 5th Ypres, Douai '18, and Somme '18, I left out the Reims one. We had 21 players inside the game at one point too ad those in TS3 with me all reported smooth gamplay and no instances of lag or rubber banding. HT was on for a while and I think US to UK link was acceptable too.

Locked skins is a bit of a bugger, but I'll try again after the next patch.

Very few errors were reported and it seemed very smooth with no noticable lag. So providing the Vintage Missions are around this level of complexity we should be able to get them onto Hussar/Hellequin EU based dserver on occassion.

Still limited to only being ablt to run a couple of weekday evenings and the occassional Sunday though, but for planned events I suppose that's good enough.
  • 0

#58 HotTom

HotTom
  • Posts: 8177

Posted 09 June 2010 - 00:28

Miggs,

Was very smooth!

Thx for hosting!

I had to drop out twice because of controls problems (pedals decided they weren't calibrated) but the missions themselves were fine!

Lacked the teamwork of the ones Vander ran but I had fun lone wolfing.

S!

HT
  • 0

#59 SYN_Vander

SYN_Vander
  • Tester
  • Posts: 4710

Posted 09 June 2010 - 05:53

Good to hear Miggins. I now have two missions almost "Vintage ready", meaning I have made the changes as suggested in this thread. Hope to post them this week.
  • 0

#60 catchov

catchov
  • Posts: 4091
  • LocationQld, Australia

Posted 09 June 2010 - 06:39

Still limited to only being ablt to run a couple of weekday evenings and the occassional Sunday though, but for planned events I suppose that's good enough.

In the future, are you considering any Sat/Sun morning/midday sessions Miggins (European time)? Being in Australia I could make those :P

Evenings sessions on any day (Europe time) is not on for me I'm afraid due to the time difference.

It was suggested as an alternative that Aussies could use an Aussie server but I know nothing about missions and setting up servers to play and my PC is mid-range (I guess :? ) at best so I don't think it would hold up too good …. even if I knew what I was doing :lol:

But perhaps there are AUSSIES out there prepared to host ?
  • 0

#61 WWIEAF-Puff

WWIEAF-Puff
  • Posts: 673

Posted 09 June 2010 - 07:15

Miggins,I was on the server but when it changed to the next mission i was flying , then the server connection lost error came up, afterwards I couldn't get logged back onto the master server for authenication till after 10pm. While I was on there was no lag or stutter for me
  • 0

#62 SYN_Vander

SYN_Vander
  • Tester
  • Posts: 4710

Posted 09 June 2010 - 12:03


It was suggested as an alternative that Aussies could use an Aussie server but I know nothing about missions and setting up servers to play and my PC is mid-range (I guess :? ) at best so I don't think it would hold up too good …. even if I knew what I was doing :lol:

But perhaps there are AUSSIES out there prepared to host ?

That's the idea. Creating a multiplayer game on your own machine is very easy. I have proved this monday that if you have a decent internet connection and PC you can easily host up to 12 players. Gameplay was smooth and no lag that I could see. On the Vintage Missions website you'll see screenshots what settings to use…

My PC configuration could perhaps be viewed as a minimal configuration to host these missions?

Intel Q9550 quad core -not overclocked (yet!), 4GB of memory. My graphics card is an ATI HD 4870 1GB, but I don't think that is a bottle neck for game hosting.
My internet connection is 10 Mb/s and 4 Mb/s upload. Note this is as measured on speedtest.net, not what my provider tells me! You need to set the correct network settings in RoF, see here: http://wiki.riseoffl...etwork_Settings">http://wiki.riseofflight.com/index.php? … k_Settings

Surely there is an Aussie with a similar setup? :)
  • 0

#63 hq_Reflected

hq_Reflected
  • Posts: 4711

Posted 09 June 2010 - 12:04

Hi Vanderstock,
We tried one of your missions yesterday. I love the idea of historical stuff but having a Dr1 and a DVIIF in the same mission is not very historical… :?
  • 0

#64 SYN_Vander

SYN_Vander
  • Tester
  • Posts: 4710

Posted 09 June 2010 - 12:17

Oh yes it is. I think you're talking about the Ypres mission?
I looked it up and during that time Josef Jacobs was flying there in Jasta 7. He kept a Dr1 at his disposal well into the fall of 1918. You will find that there is only 1 dr1 in the game available?

This from wikipedia (but it's also in one of my books)

"From early 1918 onwards, Jacobs started flying the Fokker Dr.I triplane with Jasta 7, and had his aircraft finished in a distinctive black scheme. The Dr I was his favoured mount until October 1918 and he used its manouevibility to his advantage, becoming the triplane's highest scoring ace, with over 30 confirmed victories."

See, there's always the exception to the rule - :)
  • 0

#65 SYN_Vander

SYN_Vander
  • Tester
  • Posts: 4710

Posted 09 June 2010 - 12:27

Updated the calender on the Vintage Missions website. Added this Thursday and next Monday evening as new event.

Anyone care to setup a teamspeak/ventrilo server? Please let me know the details so I can put them in the Calender appointment.

Miggins, could you claim your server for one evening a week for Vintage Missions? I can put it in the calendar, hopefully attracting more like minded players.. :)
  • 0

#66 ImPeRaToR

ImPeRaToR
  • Posts: 7902

Posted 09 June 2010 - 15:35

Both missions with loads of ground targets for the Breguets are impossible for the central pilots, the breguets outfly them and bomb everything to bits while other entente fighters bomb targets on their own without anything you can do about it since the germans have to split up to cover as many targets as posible. Entente won with central having 0 points at the end. And if you are lucky you have to face a bunch of Camels outnumbering your Albatros D.Va since they don't have to split up.
If you want to do historical missions put the recons to 4 or 5km altitude.
  • 0

#67 SYN_Vander

SYN_Vander
  • Tester
  • Posts: 4710

Posted 09 June 2010 - 16:24

Yeah, I have been making some changes in that Douai mission. It is now a more simple protect/attack the two seater recon mission. Notifications are sent so people will know when they take off (for friendlies) and when they cross the lines (for the enemies). No more bombing or attacking ground targets, that only works when there are 60 players or more I'm afraid. There is simply too much sky!

I'll see if I can make the Brequets slower… I have often said it and will say it again:
WE NEED MORE TWO-SEATERS!!!! :)
  • 0

#68 WW1EAF_Ming

WW1EAF_Ming
  • Posts: 2565

Posted 09 June 2010 - 16:33

WE NEED MORE TWO-SEATERS!!!!

Or one flyable even better yes <drums fingers> :)

Ming
  • 0

#69 SYN_Vander

SYN_Vander
  • Tester
  • Posts: 4710

Posted 09 June 2010 - 16:34

Oh nononono, I rather have a couple of AI two-seaters than 1 flyable! ;)
  • 0

#70 HotTom

HotTom
  • Posts: 8177

Posted 09 June 2010 - 19:14

Several months ago I ran missions when TOW crashed. Worked very well for 10 players.

Several others tried but couldn't because of their routers (I don't know why that was a problem but it was).

I'm hard-wired, have a very fast connection (which I'm considering updating even more) and had no problems at all. I'm not sure how many players I can handle, though, but can experiment.

If I have the missions, I can put them up and can schedule times.

That at least will give you a server in North America time zone.

Would need some instructions on settings.

Let me know when you would prefer.

HT
  • 0

#71 ImPeRaToR

ImPeRaToR
  • Posts: 7902

Posted 09 June 2010 - 19:37

Oh nononono, I rather have a couple of AI two-seaters than 1 flyable! ;)

I am quite torn between both, let's hope the SDK comes around soon so people can start working on some of those.
  • 0

#72 Miggins

Miggins
  • Posts: 3115

Posted 09 June 2010 - 21:08

I could put the vintage missions up on occassion for sure, and sometimes a Sunday morning might be possible too, though we would have to see whether an Aus or NZ player would be able to get a decent experience out of them, if all they get is a lag-fest it rather defeats the object.

I know I did have some fun on the RAF server down that way with few problems, but I think those times there was only a very few players on it, we'd have to test it at the very least I suppose.

Available timeslots I can run the server are Tuesday and Friday evenings 19:00 to 22:30 and some Sundays, though Tuesday's are currently for hq to practice stuff (or just have fun together) so the mission types for these events

I won't actually commit to specific slots as yet, I want to make sure the rest of the Hussars, 7DR and the Hellequins are OK with me using the dserver for this (the dedi-box is shared and has quite a few other duties).
  • 0

#73 SYN_Vander

SYN_Vander
  • Tester
  • Posts: 4710

Posted 09 June 2010 - 21:16

… I'm not sure how many players I can handle, though, but can experiment.

If I have the missions, I can put them up and can schedule times.

That at least will give you a server in North America time zone.

That's the stuff! HT, see the Vintage Mission website for settings: http://sites.google....issions/servers">http://sites.google....issions/servers

and here for RoF settings: http://wiki.riseoffl...etwork_Settings">http://wiki.riseofflight.com/index.php? … k_Settings

I have now two missions "Vintage Missions ready", see here: http://sites.google....sions/directory">http://sites.google....sions/directory

I hope more mission builders can add to this list!


Available timeslots I can run the server are Tuesday and Friday evenings 19:00 to 22:30 and some Sundays, though Tuesday's are currently for hq to practice stuff (or just have fun together) so the mission types for these events

I won't actually commit to specific slots as yet, I want to make sure the rest of the Hussars, 7DR and the Hellequins are OK with me using the dserver for this (the dedi-box is shared and has quite a few other duties)…

If you could get a slot on tuesday or friday from 19.00-22.30 that would be excellent. Let us know how you fare!
  • 0

#74 HotTom

HotTom
  • Posts: 8177

Posted 09 June 2010 - 22:38

I'm putting in a better modem and getting hooked up (they claim 50 mb per sec :shock: but we'll see) on Saturday.

Tuesdays should be good.

That early Friday isn't good for me (bunch of old Vietnam era Army buddies – geezers for sure but still good shots :lol: – and I go to the rifle range every Friday from about 1900 to 2100 your time) but we'll see about other times.

I'll put it up after the ISP guy hooks me up with the "improved" service. Will announce it here.

S!

HT
  • 0

#75 catchov

catchov
  • Posts: 4091
  • LocationQld, Australia

Posted 10 June 2010 - 05:23

I could put the vintage missions up on occassion for sure, and sometimes a Sunday morning might be possible too, though we would have to see whether an Aus or NZ player would be able to get a decent experience out of them, if all they get is a lag-fest it rather defeats the object.

Miggins, I'm happy to check out the Aussie connection for a Sunday test run if you like. When you're ready (no rush) send me the time, date and server details via PM or here.

I don't seem to get any noticeable lag on the servers I've tried to date …. newbie, syndicate, cocos and perhaps a few others.
  • 0

#76 ImPeRaToR

ImPeRaToR
  • Posts: 7902

Posted 10 June 2010 - 09:43

Newbie is in germany and cocos is in russia so miggins uk server should work but I guess you can never be sure :)
  • 0

#77 Miggins

Miggins
  • Posts: 3115

Posted 10 June 2010 - 18:40

Currently checking with the other users of the dedi-box if I'm OK to boot up RoF on some Sunday mornings for a few hours.

Weeksay evenings (UK) are not so much of a problem, with Thursday currently being the only one I definately cannot use, but there are a number of other things that don't have specific nights assigned to them.

Grabbed the two VM downloads currently there, and I have Chill's latest available too, so providing I get the all clear I should be able to run a test VM session this coming Sunday.
  • 0

#78 J2_squid

J2_squid
  • Posts: 3815

Posted 10 June 2010 - 18:42

Great stuff miggins old bean! Really appreciate the work your putting into this

S!
  • 0

#79 SYN_Vander

SYN_Vander
  • Tester
  • Posts: 4710

Posted 10 June 2010 - 21:52

Wonderful! We have been flying on Hornet Squadron server again tonight and it seems the Douai mission needs some further tweaking: players just couldn't find the (high flying) two -seaters.

Here's the dilemma: We would like to have fights at altitude, so we send up some two-seaters to escort/attack. But then no-one can find them anymore! I escorted a Brequet in my camel all the way into enemy territory, flew right over their airfield and made it back to our own lines, unchallenged! All the while flak was all around us, but when you sit on the airfield you can't see the flak bursts! I hope neoqb will increase the visibilty distance of these flak clouds.

My solution will be to mark the point of interest where the two-seater will fly to. Not very realistic, but hopefully the opposing flights will actually meet….
  • 0

#80 ImPeRaToR

ImPeRaToR
  • Posts: 7902

Posted 10 June 2010 - 22:10

You have to consider that the german planes have abysmal climb rates in comparision to the entente. They might just be reluctant to climb high enough or take too long.
  • 0


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users