Jump to content


Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

SYNDICATE full realism server


  • Please log in to reply
2184 replies to this topic

#41 SYN_Vander

SYN_Vander
  • Tester
  • Posts: 4709

Posted 18 January 2011 - 07:51

All good points about the AAA, but with the current tools & limitations we just can't make it happen. I think this calls for a feature request: Random AAA bursts that can hit you with say a X% chance of succes if you fly between Y-Z meters and the same for machine gun fire (from 0-Y meters).
You shoold be able to define AAA zones, just as the MCU that controls what is Allied/Central territory. We could also dispense with the random flak over the lines that is just a cosmetic effect.
  • 0

#42 gavagai

gavagai
  • Posts: 15541

Posted 18 January 2011 - 16:22

If you've ever flown PW Campaign Generator missions, there's an option to have mg's spaced out along the front, with the default spacing at 1000m. The gunners are not super accurate, but they can tear you up a bit if you ignore their presence.

Yeah, a feature request sounds like the necessary step Vander. I mean, with the new career mode coming out, if there is no AAA over no man's land, then it is not WW1.
  • 0

#43 BroadSide

BroadSide
  • Posts: 2057

Posted 18 January 2011 - 17:19

Sounds good Vander. Perhaps it would be good to post a thread on it in the Beta Forum.
I didnt know that about the campaign generator.

So, Vander, you cant set accuracy for specific AAA? IOW, if the AAA by an airfield is set at ace level, does that mean that ALL AAA in the map are ace level (including the random trucks in the middle of no where)?

If so, (IMO) then it's better to go back to inaccurate AAA (including around airfields). Perhaps placing more AAA at the airfields would at least deter the vulching.
  • 0

#44 O_Taipan

O_Taipan
  • Posts: 2291

Posted 19 January 2011 - 06:52

Hi Guys,

Can you please roll to the next map, I think everyone has been playing the same map for 8 hours now it's stuck on it as the score isn't working.

Some people must have 60 kills :)

Cheers
  • 0

#45 Jax_on

Jax_on
  • Posts: 541

Posted 19 January 2011 - 09:23

Yesterday flew a mission syn frontlines early war, planeset it is the same as in the syn frontlines turnabouts. Its normal? Big request - please add more missions with the bombers, our squad and many friends waiting for 3-4 hours for the mission with the bombers but often server restarts and the missions again start with the first - syn frontlines turnabouts… and we have again and again arcadish dogfights… Want the "old" Syndicate with realistic missions, long flights, planning, orientation on the map, want the feeling of ww1 war period which was previously and now unfortunately not.
  • 0

#46 SYN_Blackrat

SYN_Blackrat
  • Posts: 293

Posted 19 January 2011 - 09:32

Seems the master browser dropped out of the Syndicate server last night as scoring stopped. When that happens I think the cycle stalls and it needs a reset to get it going again, looks like the reset may have started it from the beginning of the map list again.

Bear with us for a bit, only a few people can access the server and two are away from home ATM so admins are a bit sparse on the ground temporarily. I dunno, some people want bombers, some don't, maps are too big, maps are too small damned if we do, damned if we don't :)
  • 0

#47 SYN_Vander

SYN_Vander
  • Tester
  • Posts: 4709

Posted 19 January 2011 - 10:32

I just restarted the server. Should be okay now, including server name/description.
  • 0

#48 A.S.Pushkin

A.S.Pushkin
  • Posts: 291

Posted 19 January 2011 - 11:05

Yesterday I shot down a bot on DR1. What the …? I can fly and offline! I am very disappointed!
  • 0

#49 =FB=Vaal

=FB=Vaal
  • Developer
  • Posts: 2849

Posted 19 January 2011 - 11:07

+1 Why bots fighters?
  • 0

#50 ImPeRaToR

ImPeRaToR
  • Posts: 7902

Posted 19 January 2011 - 11:28

I think they are ment to protect airfields but I have met the one or other on the wrong side of the lines, they seem to wander off. Alzsheimer perhaps? :)
  • 0

#51 A.S.Pushkin

A.S.Pushkin
  • Posts: 291

Posted 19 January 2011 - 11:38

Absurd fear vulch, produces monsters
  • 0

#52 hq_Reflected

hq_Reflected
  • Posts: 4711

Posted 19 January 2011 - 12:10

Considering the fact that it was 22 vs 16 in favor of the Entente I guess we could use their help, but generally, I agree: MP is for human players.
  • 0

#53 Flashy

Flashy
  • Posts: 1086
  • LocationSouth Africa

Posted 19 January 2011 - 12:33

Vander, does the level of AI skill affect the resources it uses? Could we, for example, have 200 low-skill AI instead of 50 Ace skill? If so, we could have lots of low skill AA and machine guns along the front and it wouldn't kill performance..
  • 0

Just because I can give multiple orgasms to the furniture just by sitting on it, doesn't mean that I'm not sick of this damn war: the blood, the noise, the endless poetry...


#54 A.S.Pushkin

A.S.Pushkin
  • Posts: 291

Posted 19 January 2011 - 13:44

22 vs 16 is not a problem, because even in this situation, the war experienced pilots is a 2 vs 3, or 3 vs 4, 2 vs 1. If the pilot is on the smaller side and is afraid to fly then surely he mistook the server address.

sry google translate
  • 0

#55 gavagai

gavagai
  • Posts: 15541

Posted 23 January 2011 - 04:35

What happened to the original HS Reims mission? It used to feature the Spad XII and N28 vs the D.VII(F), D.XII and D.Va (maybe the D.VIII, too), but now I see the Dr1, Camel, and SE5 have been added. Why was the mission changed to be a-historical? At the very least, get rid of the Dr1, as that type wasn't even in service anymore.

This mission use to feature a lot of high altitude action; now the fights are swirling dr1/camel love ins 50ft above the shell-holes of no man's land.

Can we please return to the original mission settings?

P.S. Have the recon aircraft fly higher, too. :)
  • 0

#56 gavagai

gavagai
  • Posts: 15541

Posted 27 January 2011 - 21:43

Server had dumped twice in 10 minutes.
  • 0

#57 SYN_Vander

SYN_Vander
  • Tester
  • Posts: 4709

Posted 27 January 2011 - 22:14

What happened to the original HS Reims mission? It used to feature the Spad XII and N28 vs the D.VII(F), D.XII and D.Va (maybe the D.VIII, too), but now I see the Dr1, Camel, and SE5 have been added. Why was the mission changed to be a-historical? At the very least, get rid of the Dr1, as that type wasn't even in service anymore.

This mission use to feature a lot of high altitude action; now the fights are swirling dr1/camel love ins 50ft above the shell-holes of no man's land.

Can we please return to the original mission settings?

P.S. Have the recon aircraft fly higher, too. :)

Weird, I'll see if I can find the original mission again.
  • 0

#58 gavagai

gavagai
  • Posts: 15541

Posted 27 January 2011 - 23:05

Cool. Another mission you might want to look at is "turnabout." Vonhuetz said its creator deserves to be shot. :?

Fyi, one of the above dumps was a Syndicate squad member resetting the server to skip the "turnabout" mission.
  • 0

#59 SYN_Jedders

SYN_Jedders
  • Posts: 766

Posted 28 January 2011 - 10:59

I Dont think we need to get personal about mission makers, gavagai. They are at least doing the one thing that you arent and that is having a go and subitting work. Its easy to sit on the sidelines and snipe, now, isnt it?.

fyi we did indeed remove a couple of missions. so that would be the reason for the drops….sorry folks
  • 0

#60 SYN_Vander

SYN_Vander
  • Tester
  • Posts: 4709

Posted 28 January 2011 - 12:39

We need better mission 'moderating', that is pretty obvious. I don't know most of these missions as I have almost no time to fly online on weekdays. Missions that start with HS_ or VM_ are mine (unless they have been altered as in the Reims mission). We'll talk discuss this in the Syndicate group and hopefully we'll find someone to do the job :).
  • 0

#61 gavagai

gavagai
  • Posts: 15541

Posted 28 January 2011 - 13:53

Yes, I see your point Jedders. But a good wine critic need not be a vintner, a film critic need not be a director, and…a good multiplayer mission critic need not be great at making them. Bliss has always promoted the idea of objective based missions, so when I see a mission that is intended as nothing other than furballing on the deck in Dr1s, Pups, and Camels, I see incongruity. Mea culpa for pointing it out.
  • 0

#62 Parazaine

Parazaine
  • Posts: 1902

Posted 28 January 2011 - 15:59

I do have some sympathy with the mission designers (i have been vocal in the past about plane sets and I think some of the changes were at least an attempt to address issues brought up by players like myself)

However, there are missions with camels and dr1's with close airfields that descend into low furball vulch-fests.

There are others with some rather odd attempts at forcing players to high alt fighting (eg one with extreme turbulence at low level) and while i applaud the general intent, the execution has had no effect other than to have planes wallowing about uncontrollably at low level furballing.

There are other missions that appear to have a disparity of AAA between sides, tougher balloons for one side than another and other glaring (and might i suggest, possibly biased discrepancies)

I will not single out the authors but agree that some sort of quality control for missions is badly needed..at present they seem to be added to the rotation to test and just left there…perhaps i'm being unfair? but that is my personal interpretation.

As someone pointed out the other day, the turbulence that has been added to many missions wouldn't even be found in mountainous terrrain let alone northern france (i assume it's an attempt to combat the sniping problem…it doesn't work, please lower the turbulence to realistic levels…realism is (I thought) the number one priority for the server.

In late war missions featuring Camels and involving Entente bombing missions, I can understand that Dr1's should be severely limited (or totally absent) but please give Central low altitude fighters…it seems some people think that Camels means DVIIF's should be the only available plane (perhaps in a misguided attempt to balance things)

Please take these comments in the spirit of constructive criticism.
  • 0

#63 SYN_Jedders

SYN_Jedders
  • Posts: 766

Posted 28 January 2011 - 16:06

Dont get me wrong, gav, I agree with you 100% about that mission in particular and other similar missions in general. We found ourselves recently having to remove some "close action" missions (you will remember the issue) and we thought it best to produce (too quickly it turns out) some similar missions. In hindsight we now realise we didnt need these mission types any longer and are removing them. Other missions will arrive soon with the inclusion of the Gotha. To some extent it has been nearly impossible to create objective based missions for both sides without bombers on both sides….no excuses anymore, eh?…

We are looking now to creating a mission cycle that WE feel best suits the SYNDICATE server. This will take some time but we have a better feel now for what "most" people who fly on our server are looking for. New missions and new rotation will arrive very soon.
  • 0

#64 gavagai

gavagai
  • Posts: 15541

Posted 28 January 2011 - 17:21

That's great Jedders. I really do appreciate the effort. If I can point it out, one of the missions that has always worked well on your server, and which has an objective for both sides, is chill31's two-seaters mission. Granted, it has air starts, which makes it easier to reach the targets, but it delivers a very different experience compared to many other missions I have tried. A more recent mission that I highly enjoyed for similar reasons was Vander's Conflans. WW1 aviation really revolved around reconnaissance, and escorting and shooting down the DFW/Breguet at high altitude creates historical immersion.
  • 0

#65 SYN_Jedders

SYN_Jedders
  • Posts: 766

Posted 28 January 2011 - 17:42

WE are having a bit of a shuffle over at SYN with regards to the server. If you want any more info, anyone , you can register there:

http://www.thesyndicate.tk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">www.thesyndicate.tk

At the moment our servers are down to upgrade and tweak the missions…info at our forum.

P.S. information regarding our server will more often be posted at http://www.thesyndicate.tk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">www.thesyndicate.tk including new passwords for vintage nights etc…suggest anyone interested post feedback there as we may not pick it up here. Thanks!
  • 0

#66 O_Taipan

O_Taipan
  • Posts: 2291

Posted 15 February 2011 - 05:54

Hi Guys,

Some feedback re The VM - Vendin mission.

Pups vs Alby D2! I haven't researched the history but for gameplay reasons, is it possible to change the pups to tripes or the Albatros to D3 or both?

People keep leaving as they get cursed if they fly pup, and they get constantly killed if they fly alby.

Cheers
  • 0

#67 gavagai

gavagai
  • Posts: 15541

Posted 15 February 2011 - 14:41

Hi Guys,

Some feedback re The VM - Vendin mission.

Pups vs Alby D2! I haven't researched the history but for gameplay reasons, is it possible to change the pups to tripes or the Albatros to D3 or both?

People keep leaving as they get cursed if they fly pup, and they get constantly killed if they fly alby.

Cheers

The Pup is severely over-represented in that mission. There ought to be a majority of N17s with some DH2s and a limited number of Pups.

But too many of our aircraft for that mission are…questionable. The Pup is known to be a bit fast and climbs too well, according to chill31. The Albatros D.II rolls like a Fw 190 but can't fly faster than a carrier pigeon. And the N17 has a glacial roll rate and a poor sustained turn rate.

:?
  • 0

#68 SYN_Jedders

SYN_Jedders
  • Posts: 766

Posted 15 February 2011 - 16:35

Thanks for feedback, guys. It might be an idea to post on the specific mission thread over at http://www.thesyndicate.tk" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">www.thesyndicate.tk where im sure someone will pick it up.
  • 0

#69 Bilbo_Baggins

Bilbo_Baggins
  • Posts: 542

Posted 23 February 2011 - 18:40

What's up with the syndicate lately? It used to have less lag than most. I'm in the US, and now it wont even report the pings, or show me who's playing. Did you guys re-locate? I've been eating a lot of greasy fast food lately.
  • 0

#70 gavagai

gavagai
  • Posts: 15541

Posted 23 February 2011 - 19:15

Check your network settings in the launcher. Updates sometimes reset it to default.
  • 0

#71 Bilbo_Baggins

Bilbo_Baggins
  • Posts: 542

Posted 23 February 2011 - 19:39

Okay, that doesn't usually make much of a difference but I did do a speed test and changed my Incoming to 2 Mb/s. When I logged back on, the syndicate still pings too high to measure.Attached File  syndicatelag.jpg   168.1KB   592 downloads
Is it me, or does it seem like it's been slowly getting this way? Gavagai, you are in California right? You still have a good connection to syndicate?
  • 0

#72 hq_Jorri

hq_Jorri
  • Posts: 14143

Posted 23 February 2011 - 19:48

The time it takes for the ping to show up doesn't mean it's pinging high, so it might be worth waiting a bit. If it doesn't show up at all, though, that doesn't really go :(
  • 0

#73 Bilbo_Baggins

Bilbo_Baggins
  • Posts: 542

Posted 23 February 2011 - 20:06

The time it takes for the ping to show up doesn't mean it's pinging high, so it might be worth waiting a bit. If it doesn't show up at all, though, that doesn't really go :(
Not sure if I understand. I did give the servers time to update themselves before taking the screenshot, and have been seeing this for over a week now. I know no one's on now, but even when it tells how many are on, it wont show ping rate, or let me see who's playing.

I'm really mostly comparing it to when I first started flying multiplayer a lot (couple months ago?). It used to show one of the best ping rates out of all the servers and stayed fairly strong even when heavily populated. Then I started seeing more lag when it was populated, and now it shows as unreadable even when no ones there. Seems to have changed over time. Other servers have stayed consistent in their amount of lag (or so it seems). Not complaining, just love the server :)
  • 0

#74 hq_Jorri

hq_Jorri
  • Posts: 14143

Posted 23 February 2011 - 20:07

It might take 15 econds or so before all the pings show, so maybe you didn't wait long enough. Just guessing, I'm probably wrong, but who knows it might just help.
  • 0

#75 Bilbo_Baggins

Bilbo_Baggins
  • Posts: 542

Posted 23 February 2011 - 20:14

I give it more time than that, and then even try to update pings. Oh well.. I can still join, it's just a lot laggier than it was.
  • 0

#76 hq_Jorri

hq_Jorri
  • Posts: 14143

Posted 23 February 2011 - 20:21

OK, never mind me then :D
  • 0

#77 O_Taipan

O_Taipan
  • Posts: 2291

Posted 23 February 2011 - 21:57

Also for us Aussies the ping use to be around only 140. These days it's around 250.

IRFC in Canada even gives us a better ping now and that is much further!
J5 server is how Syn used to be in the old days pings only just over 100 so no problem on this side.

Anyone know if anything has changed? Are there multiple servers on the one box now?
  • 0

#78 SYN_Jedders

SYN_Jedders
  • Posts: 766

Posted 24 February 2011 - 11:47

According to the server itself everyone still has the same pings that they always did..nothing has changed at our end and i still get the same ping from UK (measured from inside server). Im wondering whether the RoF ping measurement is as accurate as it was?. Anyhoo…dont panic…
  • 0

#79 SYN_Kollwitz

SYN_Kollwitz
  • Posts: 298

Posted 24 February 2011 - 18:03

Last tuesday some higher pings were also seen by players in Germany, on the servers pings for these players were stable and low. Could of course be a little hiccup in the web somewhere, or it might just be a ping registration issue inside RoF…


Please keep posting if the problems persist, and we'll try to solve them,

Cheers,
SYN_Kollwitz
  • 0

#80 O_Taipan

O_Taipan
  • Posts: 2291

Posted 24 February 2011 - 21:50

Nah let's just panic it's more fun :)
  • 0


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users