PDA

View Full Version : SEOW Kursk - General info



Pages : [1] 2

=VARP=Barracuda44
08-09-2014, 01:09
http://2ndvarp.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=3887&stc=1

Game server:
IL2.thorftp.tk:21000

TS =VARP=:
server: gec.servebeer.com:7777
password: pass

Backup TS 102nd-YU:
server: 161.53.204.25
password: vertikala

Mission start time:
20:30 Zulu / 21:30 CET

Expected start of the campaign:
October 19. 2014.

Requirements:

- HSFX v7.0.3


In JGSME:

Expert MOD
HSFX History Mod
4211




Any other MOD-s are optional but strongly discouraged cause it could lead to low FPS and LAG

Important!!!



Server doors WILL be closed at 19:30 Zulu. Make sure everyone joins the server at least 10 minutes before the start.
Mission Planer will be closed for planning on Saturdays midnight CET so make sure you finish all your planing before that. It will be open again on Mondays 9:00 Zulu latest.



Tips for new and some old SEOW players i've gathered from other threads:



in game .trk RECORDING ist VERBOTEN!!! If you do so, you will be SHOT!!! ......game it self will kick you out....... but you can do it with FRAPS or any other like that....
in game SCREENSHOTS are not prohibited but strongly discouraged, cause too frekvent use could lead to LAG. If you have to use it, do not press Print Screen more than once in two second. Use of FRAPS for same purpose is OK.
When you hit Fly do not scroll down the pilots list because there is a great possibility that pilots list will pop up in the middle of the screen during the flight and it is not possible to close it.
After spawning in the game, for the first 5 minutes don't call up the minimap, after that time is ok.
Every player who has landed or crash landed, do not press bail out but just disconnect. That is normal way to leave the game after both, land and crash land.
If you get killed for any reason you have 5-10min to leave the game. If you landed safe,you can stay in the cockpit, no problem, but in that case you risk to loose your "life" if base get under enemy attack, or other player crash in to you.
You don't have to taxi back to parking, but you can if you like, no problem.
All planes need to land before mission end and it needs to be landed on the airfield designated by the Brief. If the plane does not land as planed, the plane is unavailable for one more mission. If there is a plane in the air at the mission end, it will be considered crashed and the Pilot KIA.
If plane is heavily damaged, break and land on nearest base under our command. It is always better to have plane under penalty then destroyed one.
If u are all ready on the runway ready for takeoff and u see that something is wrong and u'll not be able to fly the mission, (let say trackir stopped working) u need to try to take of and land your plane back. if one spawns and disconnects with out taking off, the plane is lost and the pilot is KIA.
It would be good practice that you restart your DSL routers some time before 21:00 so you have brand new IP for next 24hrs.


Net settings: :
Open you conf.ini and check:

Code:
[NET]
speed=12000

Save the conf.ini




:salute:

=VARP=Thor
08-09-2014, 23:50
Rulez document: http://2ndvarp.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=3891&stc=1&thumb=1

Additional docs: 3892

Map MOD+Technics:4211

Object specification table:4213


***ADD ON rules:

- At least 30% of planned flights needs to be dedicated bomber/ground attacker type of planes. Fighters with bombs or rockets are not included. This applies for both sides.
- No ground strafe allowed for A20G. Penalty 2x destroyed units returned. Plane can defend it self in the air.

21.11.2014.
- I can see that there is a need for repairs of columns on both sides so this rules for repairs will be modified. All column types could be repaired in repair workshops. Price of repairs for any of them will be the same like it is for one tank. That means 2000 L for any German tank/column, and 3000L for any Russian tank/column. All of them will be available in no time except when repairing another repair column which will then have 1 mission delay. The rule which say that repair column can not repair itself is still valid because if it is withdrawn by itself,there would be no target to destroy on the ground.


17.03.2015.
None of the units can come closer than 400m to factory plate on their trip or be planned to stop closer than 400m from factory plate. From now on breaking this rule will result in removing the unit from the map and adding unit of the same type to opposite side nearest supply depot.










***Requests:
- Blue side asked for better FW190 versions and limitation of La5FN initial number - Approved
- Red side asked for remove of radar from north because of historical aspect. It's been put to south. -Approved

***Fixes:
- Fixed wrong version of PzIIIG. Switched to PzIIIJ
- Fixed armor for T34 from '41 to '42
- Fixed speed for Panther in technics.ini to be 24km/h like in OoB
- Removed photos capacity from all bombers
- StugIIIG were counted in total armor number for Blue, but were missing in rules book! Correct sentence is:
For Germany StugIIIG, PzIIIJ, PzIVF2, Panther, Tiger, Ferdinand (in total 357 tanks)



***Changes:
- Do217 and A20G are used for long ranges recon only.
- Added Yak9D 12 planes to red side supply.
18.02.2015.
- Howitzers on both sides will not become truck while driving. While on the move, they will become M7Priest, ISU152 and Hummel which can drive and shoot, but range will be lower than static deployed howitzers. Armor on all of them has been set so any plane can destroy them. Main idea is moving gun, not heavy armored gunship.
- Because ATG is way too effective and Reds don't have anything similar, SU 76 SPG gets the same gun used on ATG88 but will move slower and will have slightly shorter attack range. Armor on SU76 has been made slim, but is still a bit better than on Sdkfz6_37 which Blue use for moving ATG88. Anyhow both units can be destroyed from any plane with guns.
- Ba10 received the same settings like PzIIf recon tank to be little more effective against infantry.
- Small tweaks on flak guns.
- FW190 received their bombs back




http://s27.postimg.org/3z5hvo7qr/Frontline_3.jpg

II/JG77_RC
14-09-2014, 20:57
This is some very exciting stuff here guys !

Very Cool Poster, and killer custom MAP.

I cant wait to fly another one of your Campaigns ! VARP puts on the Best SEOW's in IL2 !

S!

LLv34_Untamo
20-09-2014, 20:40
S!

The finns are most interested! I think the pilots are getting back from their summer activities and are ready for some SEOW :) ... I guesstimate we will have something like 6-10 pilots per mission available. We prefer axis, but if need be, there can be compromises :)

=VARP=Thor
20-09-2014, 22:18
Slot reservations....
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1R9iLz91zQYbStGHSOYJaoO0uJIIlioqylUbOt6Uy5gU/edit?usp=docslist_api

I/JG7_Killerfliege
21-09-2014, 21:18
I/JG7 is reporting for duty. We would like to fly on Blue side with 4-7 pilots.

I am really looking forward to fly with you again!

[DBS]T}{OR
22-09-2014, 09:24
DBS reporting for duty. We currently have 9 active pilots, out of which probably 6-7 can attend on a regular basis. The list of active pilots can be seen here:

http://www.battle-fields.com/commscentre/group.php?discussionid=28&do=discuss


Place us where you need us. Any side is fine.

[DBS]T}{OR
22-09-2014, 19:42
I see we have been placed on the RED side. Which is fine and in line of what we want. :)

Guys are asking about the plane set. Any info you can share?

=VARP=Thor
22-09-2014, 20:25
T}{OR;24689']I see we have been placed on the RED side. Which is fine and in line of what we want. :)

Guys are asking about the plane set. Any info you can share?

http://thorftp.tk/seow/MP4public/Scripts/MP-Checkpoint.php?Sector_DB=BattleofKursk&Status=new

MP is still in mode without units and open for both sides who can login with admin/password.Then go on Cost page inside MP and you'll see OoB. It will be fine tuned soon so don't look at the ground speed and ranges at this moment....but for planes, 99% will stay as you can see it. Also,small factory plates areas will be used and almost all fuel will be produced in fuel industrial areas not imported from off map. So,plenty of targets for bomber guys like you.
You have been placed on red side just to make some balance with blue squads.VARP will most likely fly RED also because other squads have better interest in BLUE. It is not official order yet because i still waitning SUP,310,311 and JG26 to report in with numbers. For those of you who have contact with Letka please inform them to join. I'll send mail to JaVA guys and few others tonight. I am hoping to get someone from 102nd on RED side,but first i want to populate the pool with squads/individuals from last campaign like i promissed.

7/SchG2_BuRNeR
24-09-2014, 02:00
Hello Kameraden,

I want to register the 7./Schlachtgeschwader 2 with 4 - 6 pilots for the blue side.

with best regards

7./Sch.G.2 BuRNeR

edit: maybe we have some additional pilots available if needed

II/JG77_RC
24-09-2014, 03:16
JG77 will be 6 to 8 pilots per mission.

Check the spread sheet.

JG7 has been entered as a second JG77, we keep telling them they should join our group, but, they insist on keeping only 1 "I" and only 1 "7". Poor guys.

:o):

=VARP=Thor
24-09-2014, 12:45
JG7 has been entered as a second JG77, we keep telling them they should join our group, but, they insist on keeping only 1 "I" and only 1 "7". Poor guys.

:o):

What to say,I've tried to recruit them for you:) Thanks,corrected:)

I/JG7_Killerfliege
24-09-2014, 13:52
Haha :) RC won't give up :*

7/SchG2_SirAthlon
24-09-2014, 15:40
Thank you for the invitation. :salute:


two questions
1 what is the name of the Battle of Kursk in il2 Editor (HSFX 7.02)


2 there will be a special mod?

=VARP=Thor
24-09-2014, 17:08
Welcome aboard all!
For those of you who have not yet downloaded the map,here it is.
Map is not yet in Hsfx and is lunched from Jgsme. Just extract as is in your Jgsme,add Battle of Kursk Map after expert and that is it.You'll find it on the top of FMB.
Until next monday I think,technics for the campaign will be finished so everyone can see what is changed.3875
Cheers

7/SchG2_BuRNeR
24-09-2014, 18:37
Thanks Thor,
but we had some problems to get the map in the editor.
SirAthlon fixed the problem for us.
I will tell the solution for other if they have the same problem:
First go to the IL-2_HSFX folder, then to jsgmemods folder. There you have to create the a new folder with the name "Battle of Kursk Map". In this folder you make another folder with the name "files" (all foldernames without "").
Here you can extract the maps folder of the zip (the path of the zip is:Battle of Kursk Map.rar\Battle of Kursk Map\MODS\MAPMODS\).
Then just enable the Battle of Kursk Map in the JSGME tool behind expert mod like Thor told us before and it works now.
Here is the path of my hsfx with the map for example: H:\IL-2 Sturmovik 1946 - HSFX\jsgmemods\Battle of Kursk Map\files\maps

Thor, I have a question to you. Are we allowed to post your picture of the campaingn and the map at our homepage ?
We want to make a public news of it. But if not we will make an internal news.

=VARP=Thor
24-09-2014, 19:02
Yep,that was the problem for my initial posting of the map ten days ago because i forgot to rar all folders.This one here have that up level directory. Sure,why not,post it.It is free for everyone who want it.

=VARP=Thor
25-09-2014, 11:44
I would say that we have more blue that german had in real battle:pilot_cool:

[DBS]Hycel
27-09-2014, 18:06
Any templates of map available for us to download?

=VARP=Thor
27-09-2014, 18:43
You have map available for download,but template will not be published.Neither side will see enemy positions except what they gain with their recons in the campaign.Sorry
I hope that I'll have enough time to finish all works and open MP for planning at Monday night.

[DBS]El_Marta
27-09-2014, 19:47
Thank you for putting this up.

=LG=Blakhart
29-09-2014, 23:07
Devil of Ploesti is now waiting for train to OstFront with other LG`s... :D
Warm trendy, aviation leather jacket with TopGun Aviatiors and bag full of whiskey&vodka.
"19" is just a begining...

Huuh ;) So many friendly nicknames ;]

S! to hosts VARP team
S! to allies, JG77 & JG7 & 7SchG
S! to great bombing crew DBS which I had pleasure to meet thx to my native, DBS Hycel
S! to all those who we will meet in the virtual skies hopefuly soon!

Looks almost good for me at the moment.
LG was waiting all the summer long for this event.

1 small question
Who is the JG26 ? I have some bad memories... I hope its not connected with "this" JG26...

7/SchG2_SirAthlon
30-09-2014, 04:37
HSFX 7.0.3 is appeared, Kursk with HSFX 7.0.3 :pilot_cool: ???

=VARP=Thor
30-09-2014, 10:12
HSFX 7.0.3 is appeared, Kursk with HSFX 7.0.3 :pilot_cool: ???

Yep, it's the one we waited for. Catsy's triggers are implemented in,and when i test can it be used for minefields, we are good to go.

I/JG7_Killerfliege
01-10-2014, 13:26
OK sounds great!

Salute Devil of Ploesti with crew :D

When do I get access to the axis sub forum part?

=VARP=Thor
01-10-2014, 13:43
When do I get access to the axis sub forum part?

Jack has been put to a group leader for Blue side.He will need to accept you on the blue side. Will he lead the war or not it is up to you on the blue side to be decided,bur for administrative purposes he's the boss in blue group. We can not do that because our access is granted only for red side.

Cheers!

P.S. in a day or two I'll send to Jack users and password for blue MP.

=VARP=Thor
01-10-2014, 13:53
Devil of Ploesti is now waiting for train to OstFront with other LG`s... :D
Warm trendy, aviation leather jacket with TopGun Aviatiors and bag full of whiskey&vodka.
"19" is just a begining...

Huuh ;) So many friendly nicknames ;]

S! to hosts VARP team
S! to allies, JG77 & JG7 & 7SchG
S! to great bombing crew DBS which I had pleasure to meet thx to my native, DBS Hycel
S! to all those who we will meet in the virtual skies hopefuly soon!

Looks almost good for me at the moment.
LG was waiting all the summer long for this event.

1 small question
Who is the JG26 ? I have some bad memories... I hope its not connected with "this" JG26...

Welcome back m8!

I hope we'll all have fun in this war;)

About JG26, they are our friends from Czech Republic,and like all other squads/individuals are guests here. Any past "bad blood" or something will need to be put a side,because we don't have time to loose it on arguing. At the end, yes, we are playing, but we are all grown up.
Cheers

102nd-YU-Uross
01-10-2014, 16:42
Hello everyone,

102nd-YU is very happy to join the campaign.

S!

=VARP=Kaso
01-10-2014, 17:37
Hello everyone,

102nd-YU is very happy to join the campaign.

S!

Welcome 102nd-YU

=VARP=Thor
01-10-2014, 23:10
OK gents, red slots are more or less sold out.Few left on blue side. It is hard to say what will be the real attendance number but we could try to push a little bit towards 40/40....the slot reservation post #5 was made with 36/36. I would like to invite you all to server test which will be this Sunday 5.10. at CET 21:30. In the test we'll use planned mission (with all moves air/ground). Your job will be to take off,make a 15-20min flight in your airspace and RTB or disconnect. That is the perfect scenario if everything works. Manually, this built mission will be edited to crash both sides ground units into each other so we can have the worst possible scenario.
There will be no stats,or anything and database will be reverted back to original state. You will than post here how it was,fps,lag,something else etc. If there will be no major problems lunch date is 12.10.2014.
Will really try to finish rules before Sunday.:matrix:

Cheers...

=VARP=Vjeran
01-10-2014, 23:53
wait wait...
We (JG77) dont even know who will be leading our side in the end and who will fly with us :(

=VARP=Thor
02-10-2014, 00:00
wait wait...
We (JG77) dont even know who will be leading our side in the end and who will fly with us :(

Post #5 Jack...it's there from the beginning,and it's online doc so i don't need to put pictures every time i change something.

And have no fear my friend,you have on your side half of probably the best what IL2 community have at this moment......the other half is on red side i hope:pilot_lol:

=LG=Blakhart
02-10-2014, 10:04
If this JG26 is from Czech Republic so its good :) We even probably flew together in Mist of War so i know they have some experience :)

(p.s.
...because on front line sometimes its better to kill 1 own allie before the main attack instead of loosing 100 because of his weakness...
No mercy on OstFront.
That`s why platoon commanders have to be like brothers on a war if they want to live longer than 2 weeks of course...)

If slots are bigger I would like to invite my friends from 335thGR so +2 to main LG slot number.

They will have probably 2-4 active players and we ( LG ) 4-8.

=VARP=Vjeran
02-10-2014, 13:24
Thanks Thor.
I have to say that JG77 officers will have a meeting on sunday earlier then test mission and there we will decide if we want to plan for the campaign and in what "size".

Personally I feel we will be up for planning the air-operations while ground stuff we will leave to someone else like SchG,Sup or JG26

[DBS]Tx_Tip
02-10-2014, 14:50
=VARP_Thor=
I would like to invite you all to server test which will be this Sunday 5.10. at CET 21:30.With HSFX v7.03 and the Kursk Map enabled I presume or will there be a comprehensive download for the Campaign before Sundays test?

=VARP=Thor
02-10-2014, 15:29
If slots are bigger I would like to invite my friends from 335thGR so +2 to main LG slot number.

They will have probably 2-4 active players and we ( LG ) 4-8.

Done!

=VARP=Thor
02-10-2014, 15:37
Tx_Tip;24778']=VARP_Thor=With HSFX v7.03 and the Kursk Map enabled I presume or will there be a comprehensive download for the Campaign before Sundays test?

All players should update their game to HSFX 7.0.3
Technics is done. Need to double check,and will be available for download in next day or two. I'll make all in one package for jsgme,and order will be:-History
-Expert mode
-Battle of Kursk Files

**after this you can add your mods for bombing or whatever you use.

102nd-YU-Zeka
02-10-2014, 20:17
Hi, to You all.

2/JG26_Krak
02-10-2014, 23:18
Hello boys. We looking forward for Battle of Kursk.
Blakhart, no worries, we are good ones :friends:

I/JG7_Killerfliege
02-10-2014, 23:30
I would like to increase our max number to 9...so two addidional...just in case that everybody from us wants to fly :D

=LG=Blakhart
03-10-2014, 09:37
1 main thing, where is the planeset, link please.

I need to take a look on it.

=VARP=Thor
03-10-2014, 10:21
1 main thing, where is the planeset, link please.

I need to take a look on it.
Please go to thorftp.tk login with admin password and take a look at the cost link.

=LG=Blakhart
03-10-2014, 15:56
Pardon me but I forgot password :S

DD_Dizzy
03-10-2014, 15:57
I would like to apply for red side thank you!

=VARP=Gec
03-10-2014, 16:48
Hi Dizzy.

Welcome to VARP forum.

Please click the link in the How to apply for a side (http://2ndvarp.net/showthread.php?3752-How-to-apply-for-a-side&p=24760&viewfull=1#post24760) Thread and pick a side there.

thx

=VARP=Vjeran
03-10-2014, 17:04
Blak, here you go my friend:

Allied Planes:

DB7 Boston
Pe-8 Peshka
IL-2 Type 3
IL-2 Type 3M
Pe-2 Series 110 Peshka

P-39D-2 Airacobra
La-5 Lavka
La-5FN Lavka
Yak-1B Yasha
Yak-7B Yasha
Yak-9T Yasha

Polikarpov R-5
Lisunov Li-2

Axis Planes:

Do 217 K-2
He-111H-2
Hs-129B-2 Panzerknacker
Ju-87D-5 Stuka
Ju-87G-1 big gun Stuka
Ju-88A-4

Ju-88C-6 fighter bomber version with cannons and MG's in nose
Bf-110G-2

FW-190A-2
FW-190A-4
FW-190A-5
FW-190F-2
Bf-109G-4
Bf-109G-6

Fi-156 Storch
FW-189A-2 Uhu
Ju-52 3MG4E

=VARP=Kroat
03-10-2014, 19:35
Hi all, so varp flys red or blue???

=VARP=Thor
03-10-2014, 20:18
Hi all, so varp flys red or blue???

:) Hey m8...long time no see

Red this time;)

2/JG26_Achileus
04-10-2014, 10:10
Hello everyone !
How Krak said we R good and we look forward for orders !!

S!

=VARP=Kroat
04-10-2014, 13:43
of topic but jsgme mods off when updating???????

=VARP=Gec
04-10-2014, 14:05
If u Run the HSFX automated updater it will disable all the mods automatically

=VARP=Thor
04-10-2014, 14:21
Hello everyone !
How Krak said we R good and we look forward for orders !!

S!

Welcome Achileus!
This time opposite side!
:salute:

=VARP=Nage
04-10-2014, 14:31
of topic but jsgme mods off when updating???????


I do that, but i think Barracuda told me that program does this automatically anyway........ i think i don`t trust machine to do it for me ever since i watched terminator :P

2/JG26_Achileus
04-10-2014, 23:45
so don't be scared just double click a forget :)

=VARP=Barracuda44
05-10-2014, 00:49
Attention/Achtung!!!!!

First post has been updated.
Tonight (Sunday 05. 2014) at 20:30 ZULU, we plan to make the test server.
=VARP= Squad invites you.





Thanks in advance.

LLv34_Untamo
05-10-2014, 13:05
S!

Where can I find download link for the Kursk map mod?

=VARP=Barracuda44
05-10-2014, 14:19
Here is Kursk_Map (http://2ndvarp.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=3875&d=1411571090)

[DBS]Hycel
05-10-2014, 14:34
Will there be a RADAR available during tonight's mission?
Can we have a new login details to MP for the allied side? Because it looks like they have changed.
Post them in Allied Subforum of course.

=VARP=Kaso
05-10-2014, 15:12
We are still waiting for the rules, a little patience please

[DBS]El_Marta
05-10-2014, 19:19
Mission start time:
20:30 Zulu / 21:30 CET

I guess as long as we have summertime you mean 19:30 utc / 21:30 CEST? Otherwise today's testing would start at 22:30 CEST/ 21:30 CET.

=VARP=Thor
05-10-2014, 19:53
Rules are out....sorry for delay,but had no time.

Please see second post.

Cheers...

[DBS]El_Marta
05-10-2014, 20:20
So we have new flightmodels?

=VARP=Thor
05-10-2014, 20:29
El_Marta;24822']So we have new flightmodels?

What do you mean?

[DBS]El_Marta
05-10-2014, 20:54
We spotted a new buttons file, but as I heard from Monguse it is just the regular expert mode.

=VARP=Kroat
05-10-2014, 21:11
Ts password??

=VARP=Kroat
05-10-2014, 21:13
Ts password??

pogodio

LLv34_Untamo
06-10-2014, 07:34
S!

In last nights test everything went fine for me and jequ, but Katze had some problems with his fps jumping between 2fps and 40 :) .. He has about the same computer as I do, so that was a bit weird.

=VARP=Thor
06-10-2014, 11:03
S!

In last nights test everything went fine for me and jequ, but Katze had some problems with his fps jumping between 2fps and 40 :) .. He has about the same computer as I do, so that was a bit weird.

Hi,
I'll make 1.1 version of the package to clean all the mess caused by my uploading of the map missing one folder than good one, then technics altogether with expert files etc.It's a mess and probably some people could have peoblems.Sorry.
For Katze and anyone else who wants to test,let's do test again tomorrow at 21:00 CET.
Different airports could have different fps demands.
BTW,last night test was done with 80 planes, 83 ground moves (60% columns and trains), ~20 triggers and 50 barrages. Was planning to do another with 45/45 flights,but because ~40 people present it would not make much difference. Also i am thinking to lower ground moves to 35/35 for first 4-5 missions to reduce pressure on server hust a little bit more.

=LG=Blakhart
06-10-2014, 12:00
According to our night discussion.

Few options about planeset idea.
It can be:
a) historical ( strictly!)
b) fictional
c) balanced
d) semi historical (with soft changes due to plane performance in game & IL-2 gameplay issues, like extremely good visibility, tough-all-the-time-8G-manouvering-pilots and so on)

At this moment I don`t know how it looks in numbers but I can definitly say it`s not the historical one.

I asked some guys from russian community about details. ---> check it, use google translate ie.
http://adw.the-war.org/forum/index.php?topic=327.msg1853#new

Checked also some article about Operation Zitadelle ( sorry its in my native language only as far as i know ;/ ) :
http://sindar-model.home.pl/pl/p/Technika-Wojskowa-Historia-62010/2192

English:
http://books.google.pl/books?id=i34OBAAAQBAJ&dq=yak+9t+over+kursk&hl=pl&source=gbs_navlinks_s

http://books.google.pl/books?id=i34OBAAAQBAJ&pg=PA30&lpg=PA30&dq=yak+9t+over+kursk&source=bl&ots=T0W0UMWEOR&sig=5PYh7Q7jIn1dKcOuZBSVVvS_xOE&hl=pl&sa=X&ei=CGQyVJaWGeHRywPF64LwDQ&ved=0CGwQ6AEwCA#v=onepage&q=yak%209t%20over%20kursk&f=false

And seek some info on different forums. ie.
http://simhq.net/forum/ubbthreads.php/topics/1948695/1.html

Few soft conclusions.
-P39 N not D version in use.
-Yak 1b PF, Yak7B PF & early La-5&La-5F as the main planes, really small number of La-5FN. ( not the 50 aircrafts like now... )
-Plus some Yak-9 planes 3% of total Soviet planes so in conclusion really small number of Yak-9T.
-Main strike plane Il-2 with gunner & 23 mm guns, really small number* of IL-2 3M with 37mm, they started duty in August ( !!! ) so theoreticaly they shouldnt be in usage in "Operation Zitadelle" which started 5 July 1943 and finished 16 July 1943.
*But I will agree they should be in few numbers to balance Ju87 G-1 abilities.
-And the same thing with FW-190 A-6 because it started duty about last days of July...
So the only plane which can balance FN abilities is FW-190 A-5 1.65 ata (without wing cannons ).
-The main planes for blue side would be A-4 , A-5 and the mighty flying brick G-6 , didnt heard about A-2 in duty over Kursk maybe some few used as a strike planes...
Probably there was 2 squadrons of Hungarian Air Force equiped with F-4 but I didn`t confirmed it at this moment.

And the main thing... Germans didnt had too much fighters in Kursk campaign.
OKL ( OberKommando der Luftwaffe )had 612 on the whole OstFront and concentrate about 55% of the forces on Kursk.
It was about 339 fighters & ~900 bombers , so about ~1300 "ready for duty" planes.

On the soviet side there was a massive number of more than 6000 "ready for duty" planes (~6126 ), ~2300 fighters, ~1800 strike planes, 850 bombers...

So...
Hmm I think it should be one of the campaign advantages for red side.
They should have 7 x more planes for use than blue and dont care about own looses.



We need total plane numbers for both sides.

II/JG77_Kemp
06-10-2014, 12:40
Every player who has landed or crash landed, do not press bail out but just disconnect. That is normal way to leave the game after both, land and crash land. Does this apply also if you crash land on a field and not on airbase? In different SEOW's I have seen both situations where crash landing on ground has listed pilot as killed and situations where pilot is listed as landed. Do I assume correctly that crash landing on friendly territory means that pilot is landed and plane is lost and landing on enemy territory means that there is a probability for pilot being captured/landed and plane is lost?

=VARP=Vjeran
06-10-2014, 13:03
Thanks for information Blakhart!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

=VARP=Kaso
06-10-2014, 13:22
Thanks for Campaign Thor!

Sent from my desktop PC

=VARP=Gec
06-10-2014, 14:42
:sign5:

Yes Thor. Thanks for the months of hard work u put in this campaign so we can enjoy flying it!

:salute:

=VARP=Thor
06-10-2014, 15:24
Hello Blackhart,
Thank you for your effort to try to find the exact planeset of Citadel. I needed that 4 month ago. I already saw most of the stuff publicly available to make my decision. When you read all those books and documents you will notice that they are different. They are not even equal on numbers of hardware used. About types and casultys don't even bother your self. When you read my rules posted above in post #two you will noticed that I call this Battle of Kursk.This battle was not lasting only 18 days and it became all front push towards Orel, Belgorod and finally Ukraine.
Also you will noticed that I said that i tried to design it as historical as possible within game limitation. Also said that i am sorry that game can not handle more. Perfect scenario for me would be that we could put 6000+ tanks, 35 000 guns and 4000 planes in it and completely have no factory production. We would play that monster probably a year. And i would love it.
In IL2 reality things are just a matter of balance. Balance which primarily need to work. You can put 5 different version of the same aircraft and when you add all the types you need for campaign, you have perfect historical dogfight mission. Coops/seow that include huge ground force are something different. Who ever say that he did something completely historical in IL2 and which is not fight for one village,well,he is lying. Many units are not even included in the game etc. I've started this with Nashorns, Hummels, Katjushas and many others who actually were at Kursk, but were cut out. Damn server didn't even want to start.
That being said, i am perfectly fine with semi historical term!

I am not gonna give you guys 186 planes against reds who can took 900 regardless your quality.
They also not gonna get 6000 tanks against your 2000. Scales has been made to have playability. If in any point game stops because of too many something,I'll scale both sides down according the rules scale. Period.


However, I do agree with you that, even documents said he was the best at that given time, LA5FN is a little bit UFO. Planned number was 53. It will be lowered down to 32, they will have additional refuel time,which means not available for 2 missions, and production cost will be raised to 500.


Blue side will stay with A4s ATA. I will also switch F2s (have some docs that they were in Orel but who can be sure) to became A5s in the same number of 32, the same cost and the same refuel time as LA5FN.


That will simulate low present during the battle.


About Yak9T, it already is on 3% total russian.

For P39 i have no problem to switch it to N1. D2 seems to me as a good parity to clumsy G6.


IL2 3M really is a monster. When you take a look at any video taken from Kursk front you will notice 3M version. It is more expensive than 23, and it should be.


World of tanks is some other game. Primarily we are flyers here,and i would like to satisfy both sides to some level. Nothing against argumented critic from any side.

What can i say,I've tried to explain why something is like it is,but if you still are going to be unhappy about the planes, and with my decision about this, well, we can switch sides at once if you want. I am sure that red side will have nothing against.


P.S. Have some work to do now,but I promise that total number of planes for both sides,their arrival times to supply's,and also ground units document will be published today in this topis second post.


Cheers,

=LG=Blakhart
06-10-2014, 19:26
I understand. :D
But if I would knew the details I wouldnt ask questions.
I`m far away from critic and respect your work but like in real life when I`m approaching to any kind of situation/problem/challenge I try to understand base and logic, not only shouting: Hooraaay! LETS DO THIS AT ALL COST NO MATTER WHAT!!!
After few years in IL-2 I just dont need to prove that I will win no matter what. It needs to bring fun, not frustration. And frustration always come when 1 side have Bf-109 F-4 2nd Hurricane IIb, 1 side have Spit IXc 25lbs 2nd have 109G-6, 1 side have La5FN and so on...so on... We all know about it :D :D


You missunderstand my main point, in first of all I`m asking for details about plane numbers, cost and so on to adjust it to the campaign conditions.
Its your campaign not mine, but all in all if I will see all the rules and dont agree on it, I can just leave the project with LG before the start and we all avoid situation when blues would have to fly without 6-8 pilots and need to seek new one very fast.
No one will cry :) No one will be unhappy right ? :)
Situation would be easier if red ranks would be full of beginners. In such case you could take only FN and I even would say a word against it :) And I will meet in this campaign many good or even great fighters so I need to be caerfull before I enter the "cage".

Marriage is good only when both sides agree on each condition :) ( and I prefer to be sexually active nor passive :DD )

Thats why I need to know details before I`ll involve in this project.
And to be honest 2 months ago I was asking Jack all the time about campaign and was ready for any kind of cooperation. Not yours nor my fault.


Thx for limits for FN but if red side will have FN it would be good for balance for FW190 A-5 1.65 ata or FW190A-6 (which was also used in Kursk ) of cours on same fair conditions and high cost like FN so we wont use it due the economy and other limits in game like the red side of coz... :)
Plus FW190 A2 is still an ghost plane here.

Of course Jack is C/O so I just said what I wanted from my personal private point to avoid any kind of forum conflict because its definitly not needed before the game and for discussion about planeset I`m sure Jack will present whole spectrum of blue opinion.

S!


Sent from Nokia 3310 which gonna be droped from 8000 meters on Soviet HQ soon...

=VARP=Thor
06-10-2014, 20:00
And to be honest 2 months ago I was asking Jack all the time about campaign and was ready for any kind of cooperation. Not yours nor my fault.


Thx for limits for FN but if red side will have FN it would be good for balance for FW190 A-5 1.65 ata or FW190A-6 (which was also used in Kursk ) of cours on same fair conditions and high cost like FN so we wont use it due the economy and other limits in game like the red side of coz... :)
Plus FW190 A2 is still an ghost plane here.



Oh Jack, I'll come to Rijeka one time and I'll find you!;)

Roger, if the fish goes,pan can go to. A5 1.65 it is....never cared about il2 compare anyway:)

BTW, it was never ment to be A2 but F2! This was error in object spec table.

=VARP=Vjeran
06-10-2014, 20:03
There is no conflict, just work together with Thor and rest to create balanced plane sets template.
What Blakhart says is excellent because his experience helps provide an balanced situation.

I am not sure in what way I was mentioned that you asked me for 2 months, but I just have to say that yesterday I only "found out" that I will actually be more then guest here.

Please make sure that you use the topic just like you do now to give your informations and suggestions.
Like already agreed, we will have a meeting with both side officers + Thor where we will finally decide how we want to do this.

Personally I think that if we want to have LA5Fn then Fw190A6 need to be counterpart. If we have to delete La5fn then we only have La5f with counterpart of Fw190A4ata...
Other then that I agree with everything Blak said

=VARP=Vjeran
06-10-2014, 20:06
Oh Jack, I'll come to Rijeka one time and I'll find you!;)

Roger, if the fish goes,pan can go to. A5 1.65 it is....never cared about il2 compare anyway:)

BTW, it was never ment to be A2 but F2! This was error in object spec table.

I still insist that we meet at least once after your rules are out finally and also to defenetly agree on plane sets!

=VARP=Thor
06-10-2014, 22:04
Second post updated....

II/JG77_RC
06-10-2014, 22:40
I am liking most of the suggestions being talked about here.

One thing no one from our side has seen yet is a list of the actual plane set and the number of planes that will be available at the start of the campaign.

That would be very help-full in making this decision.

This is the list I put together when we could look in the planner many weeks ago.

In previous campaigns there has always been a list with numbers of each.

Allied Planes:

DB7 Boston
Pe-8 Peshka
IL-2 Type 3
IL-2 Type 3M
Pe-2 Series 110 Peshka

P-39D-2 Airacobra
La-5 Lavka
La-5FN Lavka
Yak-1B Yasha
Yak-7B Yasha
Yak-9T Yasha

Polikarpov R-5
Lisunov Li-2

Axis Planes:

Do 217 K-2
He-111H-2
Hs-129B-2 Panzerknacker
Ju-87D-5 Stuka
Ju-87G-1 big gun Stuka
Ju-88A-4

Ju-88C-6 fighter bomber version with cannons and MG's in nose
Bf-110G-2

FW-190A-2
FW-190A-4 (hopefully the 1.42 ata version not the de-rated)
FW-190A-5 (would be nice to have 1.65ata version)
FW-190F-2
Bf-109G-4
Bf-109G-6 (would be nice to switch this to G6 late so we can at least see our 6's in a 109 once and a while)

Fi-156 Storch
FW-189A-2 Uhu
Ju-52 3MG4E

=VARP=Thor
06-10-2014, 22:46
I am liking most of the suggestions being talked about here.

One thing no one from our side has seen yet is a list of the actual plane set and the number of planes that will be available at the start of the campaign.

That would be very help-full in making this decision.

This is the list I put together when we could look in the planner many weeks ago.

In previous campaigns there has always been a list with numbers of each.

Allied Planes:

DB7 Boston
Pe-8 Peshka
IL-2 Type 3
IL-2 Type 3M
Pe-2 Series 110 Peshka

P-39D-2 Airacobra
La-5 Lavka
La-5FN Lavka
Yak-1B Yasha
Yak-7B Yasha
Yak-9T Yasha

Polikarpov R-5
Lisunov Li-2

Axis Planes:

Do 217 K-2
He-111H-2
Hs-129B-2 Panzerknacker
Ju-87D-5 Stuka
Ju-87G-1 big gun Stuka
Ju-88A-4

Ju-88C-6 fighter bomber version with cannons and MG's in nose
Bf-110G-2

FW-190A-2
FW-190A-4 (hopefully the 1.42 ata version not the de-rated)
FW-190A-5 (would be nice to have 1.65ata version)
FW-190F-2
Bf-109G-4
Bf-109G-6 (would be nice to switch this to G6 late so we can at least see our 6's in a 109 once and a while)

Fi-156 Storch
FW-189A-2 Uhu
Ju-52 3MG4E

Take a look at the second post....

II/JG77_RC
07-10-2014, 00:32
Forgive me, but, I do not see anything regarding aircraft numbers there . .

=VARP=Vjeran
07-10-2014, 00:33
He is talking about suggestions and that our suggestion for La5fn - fw190 models has been aproved. Its there, take a look.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

II/JG77_RC
07-10-2014, 00:34
ohh I see in this one spread sheet there are more pages. I see it now.

any chance to switch the G6 to G6 late ? ? . . . so we have the panzer glass instead of the armor plate, at least then we can see the La when its shooting our tail off . . . .

According to IL2 compare:

G6 late performance is almost exactly the same as G4/ G6 and is still pretty even with La5F, but, La5F still slightly outperforms it in several aspects.

The LA5FN heavily outperforms it in every aspect.

Visibility is excellent in all the Russian fighters. where all our 109's right now have blind 6 o clocks because of the armor plate. Being able to see a bit more in half our 109's would help even things out some. The only real difference between G6 and G6 late is the panzer glass in the back of the cockpit.

=VARP=Thor
07-10-2014, 10:16
G6 late performance is almost exactly the same as G4/ G6 and is still pretty even with La5F, but, La5F still slightly outperforms it in several aspects.



Hi RC,
That was my first pick four month ago to go with "Late"...then I saw this:

Bf 109 G-6 "LATE" (G-6/U2 with GM-1, G-6/U3 with MW-50 and G-6/U4 with Mk 108, 30 mm nose cannon):
From August 1943 some G-6s were equipped with either GM-1 or MW-50 boost systems, Galland-Panzer and Erla Haube cockpits, 30 mm cannon and with the option to use the WGr 21 under-wing rockets. (Prien & Rodeike, H. Valtonen) The boost systems were rather rare, but the cockpit and weapons modifications were wide spread and factory made.
Squadron Service Entry-date: August 1943 (limited numbers)
"Full deployment": November 1943
The (GM-1/)MW-50 equipped birds in quite limited numbers till around late 1944.

That would lead to more unnecessary limitations. We would need to go trough all planes and take pros and cons to each which could end up who knows where,and I really don't have time for this. List was online in MP at least for a month. Everybody had access. Blue side already got 2 requested changes of planes and we will stop here. Don't want to enter the stage where red could demand removing droptanks, gunpods etc. Sorry m8!

Cheers,

102nd-YU-Uross
07-10-2014, 10:20
Will Red side get P-39N or we stay with D version?

=VARP=Thor
07-10-2014, 11:32
Will Red side get P-39N or we stay with D version?
It will be N.

102nd-YU-Uross
07-10-2014, 11:44
It will be N.

Let there be light. :-D

Btw, you can post pass for102nd TS in first post (vertikala).

=VARP=Thor
07-10-2014, 12:16
Let there be light. :-D

Btw, you can post pass for102nd TS in first post (vertikala).

No problem....we just didn't want to compromise your TS security...that's why it was not published

7/SchG2_SirAthlon
07-10-2014, 12:43
What a fantastic work Thor, with the Kursk. :salute:




I've got a few questions:
The range of the ground forces dissent from the indications of the planning tool
"Supply Consumption and Freight parameter
Global Supply Consumption Multiplier: 1 times historical rate
Supply Unit Weight: 1 point = 1.00000 liters freight weight of supply
Aircraft Supply Idle Usage: 0.7% of capacity per hour.
Armour Idle Supply Usage: 3.7% of capacity per hour.
Artillery Idle Supply Usage: 4.5% of capacity per hour.
Engineer Idle Supply Usage: 3.5% of capacity per hour.
Shipping Idle Supply Usage: 0% of capacity per hour.
Vehicles / Rail Idle Supply Usage: 2% of capacity per hour.
Other Units Supply Usage: 3% of capacity per hour. "


I think the supply comsumption is too high, for example,
1 Mission 3 hrs x 3.7% = 11.10%!
Pz Panther Range 200km / 730L -11.10% = 80,73L lost Idle mode!




"Limit of Axis Platoons Moving by Mission = 40"
"Limit of Allied Platoons Moving by Mission = 40"
is that correct?

=VARP=Gec
07-10-2014, 13:16
i've edited the Zulu time in the first post. CET is still +2 until we switch back from summer to normal time.

=VARP=Vjeran
07-10-2014, 13:39
Would it be possible that sirathlon and myself are able to admin axis subforum part?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

=VARP=Gec
07-10-2014, 14:26
What do u need to admin?

=VARP=Vjeran
07-10-2014, 14:35
I need to make that axis divisions topic sticky + in few days I will need to edit the planeset topic


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

=VARP=Thor
07-10-2014, 16:40
What a fantastic work Thor, with the Kursk. :salute:




I've got a few questions:
The range of the ground forces dissent from the indications of the planning tool
"Supply Consumption and Freight parameter
Global Supply Consumption Multiplier: 1 times historical rate
Supply Unit Weight: 1 point = 1.00000 liters freight weight of supply
Aircraft Supply Idle Usage: 0.7% of capacity per hour.
Armour Idle Supply Usage: 3.7% of capacity per hour.
Artillery Idle Supply Usage: 4.5% of capacity per hour.
Engineer Idle Supply Usage: 3.5% of capacity per hour.
Shipping Idle Supply Usage: 0% of capacity per hour.
Vehicles / Rail Idle Supply Usage: 2% of capacity per hour.
Other Units Supply Usage: 3% of capacity per hour. "


I think the supply comsumption is too high, for example,
1 Mission 3 hrs x 3.7% = 11.10%!
Pz Panther Range 200km / 730L -11.10% = 80,73L lost Idle mode!




"Limit of Axis Platoons Moving by Mission = 40"
"Limit of Allied Platoons Moving by Mission = 40"
is that correct?

Thanks m8!

About supply,job is not done yet. Both sides agreed to postponed to 19.10,so I also took a break;) Playing Arma3 instead of working:)
Will do that after units rename. Maybe idle supply will even go up.Those numbers are just something I've putted there for test.Something which i could recall from previous campaigns. When I tell you that you can plan, you will have all the numbers like they will be for real.
But to save you from your concerns, my initial tests produced 30% fuel consumption on Tiger tank which was moving. For stationary Tiger the consumption was 11,1% like you said.
It is completely on the track what i want, cca 3 missions moving and shooting, then resupply....or 8 missions put,then resupply. Making them full of everything completely kill a need for logistic job....which is by the way, after good soldiers, the second best thing that one army can have. If not first.
Whole thing is designed to be "on the edge". You can make mistakes here and there, but repeat the too often it can cost you badly.
Factories however a different story and something is weird here. For them,like i said total will be 4000 production per side,but those values in settings page right now might not be true. It says production per mission (on wiki) and it looks to me that it is also per hour. Will check it.
Cheers,

=VARP=Nage
07-10-2014, 18:59
I don`t want to be tacky or anything here so i will have only one request since the red side is deprived of some planes and blue side gain additional ones.
My request is to set radar to 35 km radius.
Please, thank you. :)

=VARP=Vjeran
07-10-2014, 19:18
I don`t want to be tacky or anything here so i will have only one request since the red side is deprived of some planes and blue side gain additional ones.
My request is to set radar to 35 km radius.
Please, thank you. :)

The last thing I would like to start is argument. I dont want that.
I think that red side is not deprived of anything. The proposed planeset by thor was obviously unbalanced, that is why thor changed it. I am pretty sure that Thor would not change the planeset if he considered the planeset to be balanced.
It really doesnt matter which side has seen the un-balance, obviously that you will not tell anything about un-balance if its in your advantage.
Take a look at the planesets or compare the FN with anything blue side has... put yourself in thors position and say if it was balanced or not.. Everyone has opinions but fact is that in proposed planesets both p39D and La5fn by far outperform anything of the blue side, added to that, its already "normal" that red side has by far better CAS aircraft in IL-2... Would you want to fly the campaign when you have such a situation? :pilot_sad:

=VARP=Nage
07-10-2014, 20:13
Would you want to fly the campaign when you have such a situation? :pilot_sad:

I think we both been there Jack, just remember Stalingrad. And there i will stop cuz i do not want to be drawn into this kind of pissing contest .


From what i saw, Thor placed those planes upon some documents he read about this campaign. You never heard me crying about Panthers, Tigers and Ferdind panzers against reds obsolete KV-1, T-70, and more new T-34. So, i hope you see here that we all have some difficulties here. There is no upper hand here mate.

We have sort of parley here Jack and last few days we were listening to blue side problems with this campaign. So, this is what concerns us, especially when radar in game works far better than it was in real life if there was any operational not in statistic number (here i believe Thor on the matter). Plus it is definitely not fair if blue side has radar that overlooks 2/3 of the map. With 35 km and placed well, you still can observe more than you need to.


"Everyone has opinions but fact is that in proposed planesets both p39D and La5fn by far outperform anything of the blue side, added to that, its already "normal" that red side has by far better CAS aircraft in IL-2... Would you want to fly the campaign when you have such a situation? :pilot_sad:​"

You`ll have to address this to Hermann Goering :unknown:

=VARP=Vjeran
07-10-2014, 20:18
I agree with you Nage and every side has the right to ask or suggest something if you see something is not fair,balanced or working properly. That is why we have forum and other ways of communicating before the campaign starts.
I am pretty sure we did a very good move by postponing the start from this sunday to next sunday, it gives us so much time to iron out these things and make sure we start the campaign with everyone as happy as possible!

I will not talk to that fat pig in Berlin! Who is he to tell me what to do?? %)

=VARP=Nage
07-10-2014, 20:25
I`m glad we agree.
That`s why i`ve talked to Kaso (my secretary; i asked for blond Russian peasant girl but it`s war and we have shortage on everything) so we will speak to Thor to set us all a TS meeting (Admin plus commanders) prior to lunch of a campaign just to be sure we are all happy about ironing the campaign.

=VARP=Vjeran
07-10-2014, 20:31
I`m glad we agree.
That`s why i`ve talked to Kaso (my secretary; i asked for blond Russian peasant girl but it`s war and we have shortage on everything) so we will speak to Thor to set us all a TS meeting (Admin plus commanders) prior to lunch of a campaign just to be sure we are all happy about ironing the campaign.

That is important. I suggested that some days ago, so I think we need to do this for sure.. :biggrin:

102nd-YU-Uross
07-10-2014, 20:50
Both sides agreed to postponed to 19.10,

This is a good thing since we will have a chance to do a proper Test mission. If we don't have all slots taken by human pilots (or at least 90% ), then the first real Test will be the first mission in the campaign.

=VARP=Thor
07-10-2014, 22:36
The proposed planeset by thor was obviously unbalanced, that is why thor changed it. I am pretty sure that Thor would not change the planeset if he considered the planeset to be balanced.


You are very wrong here my friend. It is not really my fault that people tend to be very scared when someone say LA5FN. Plane has been changed on blue side request and i, so to speak as a host, just wanted to please you guys. Don't twist it. Plane set was up with very very small change on bombers the whole summer. That's way i am surprised. The biggest error from you was that you first picked a side first, assemble the group and than start bargaining. It is not a market. When someone invite me to dinner, I never order him what to cook. But never mind, I forgive you 'cause you are not evil and just want your team best starting positions.
Campaign was made to be served in a good will, without investing anyone's free time except mine (and CountZero's help with map building). I really really hoped that VARP would have space to fly blue side,but there was not. Maybe I am stupid because i like harder conditions,but it's just me. There is always a way.

One or two uber planes or tanks never won any war nor they will this. It's not a nuke for God's sake.
They say "It's not a plane, it's pilot and the plane". Knowing you Jack,you can fly a glider and still win the fight.


@Nage

No. Radar stays for blue. It's meant to protect their rear with limited penetration in red territory ~20km. It's more awareness feature than huge help for German side. It is long range radar with its good and bad sides and it's hard coded in the game. If you don't want them there,sorry. You just need to find them and destroy them. I have no idea how to re code IL2 game. Shorter range radars (30km) would need to be much closer to front line, could be easily compromised because more recons in the area, it's a building hard to miss and there would be more complications about buying expensive ones than to use long range deep from friendly territory.


So from no on,technical discussion only please. For both sides. Let me know if something is missing from OoB,not working,working wrong way etc.

Thanks


@Uross

Yep,true...can force people to come....but it was also bad marketing from me because I assumed that peoples are reading this info and didn't send all the mails i should have.

=VARP=Vjeran
08-10-2014, 00:25
@Thor:

I am sorry. I had my view that that we (blue side) tried to make plane set balanced because it wasnt initially. Simply put I thought we work together to make it balanced.. You say it was our request to change planes, which is okay I can agree. Like I said I thought different...

You are the admin so its okay.
lets put an end to the little conversation we have here between several people.We are all friends and just tried to make the campaign better.

So lets make sure we are on same page now:
On the request from blue side, the planeset is changed so the blue side got low number of A5ATA.
The same number of A5ata there is that much La5fn there will be.
Also, P39 version was changed to reflect historical, because version in first list was wrong.

Have I got it right and everyone happy? :)

I/JG7_Killerfliege
08-10-2014, 01:37
What about stopping to discuss and starting to prepare and eventually fight?

It's never balanced and everybody has to cope with what he or she is given. There is never a corresponding match for another plane. Each plane is unique in its own way - advantages and disadvantages.

The Reds have the better performing planes but have you already considered ammunition and armament? A Yak1B e.g. has got around 170 shots per gun (only 2). Its pilot can't even give suppression fire with MGs. Just compare that with a Fw190 and a Bf109.

The harder it is, the more satisfying victory will be - a much sweeter taste :)

So please, stop that unneccessary discussion and let's start with preparation.

[DBS]El_Marta
08-10-2014, 07:24
If blue may loose fast, we could switch sides and have another run like we did last year with Stalingrad.

II/JG77_Kemp
08-10-2014, 08:23
After blue has taken care of business near Kursk fast, the war might as well go back to Stalingrad. And the gates of Moscow. Blue won't stop before reaching the Arkhangelsk-Astrakhan line this time.

=VARP=Vjeran
08-10-2014, 11:52
I love the tension build up before the campaign. I really love it as long as it doesnt start to be bad blood, which I think doesnt happen here...

@elmarta: Dear communist enemy, unlike in stalingrad, this time around there are some very different "blues" flying against you.
:murderer::biggrin:

=VARP=Kaso
08-10-2014, 11:55
Regarding Axis two long range radars (80km), one in the north and another in the south of the map.
They covering 160km in diameter and cover even 20 kilometers of territory which is under our control.

If Axis will have those two monsters I can say that they will have a huge advantage in the campaign and campaign then it is not balanced.

Especially, in the battle of Kursk, they didn't have it the radar near Orel.

So, can they be removed from the campaign (what I prefere), or you can find solution so there will not be so much influence of those two monsters.:bouncy:

S

=VARP=Thor
08-10-2014, 18:58
Hmm,you are now messin' with design...and you are the second one that complain about the radar.
So I guess that if i approved blue side whishes, it's ok that i approved yours also. I took some time to investigate your finding about no radar in north sector. It appears that you are right.There were two radars and they were in Belgorod and Kharkov.
So,I'll remove nothern one and will put it in south.sector.One will stay long and will be somewhere in Kharkov area well hidden,will not go more than 20km east in red positions.The other will be in Belgorod,short range type and also well hidden in some house.Blue will gain complete coveredge of air space from zero meters up in Belgorod area,but will loose awereness on the north.
I hope that this compromise will satisfy red side and that we are done with whishes for both sides!?!

Sup_Bigans
08-10-2014, 21:24
Hi guys,
ready to fight again!
See you next over Kursk's skies

=VARP=Thor
08-10-2014, 21:34
Hi Bigans, welcome!

7/SchG2_SirAthlon
08-10-2014, 22:38
Hello Thor,
The Pz IIIG was already outdated at the time, would only built until 1941.
It takes on the Kursk Map the Pz III J Pz III M or upgraded Pz IIIG H are to Pz III J-M.

The "technics.ini" would of taken JG54_Emil?

=VARP=Thor
09-10-2014, 00:18
Hello Thor,
The Pz IIIG was already outdated at the time, would only built until 1941.
It takes on the Kursk Map the Pz III J Pz III M or upgraded Pz IIIG H are to Pz III J-M.

The "technics.ini" would of taken JG54_Emil?

Ups,you are very right...my bad

Will switch them to J...a little bit better armor..but range will stay as i put it in this G. If you have some trust worthy book about tanks please see about T34/76 armor at the time of Kursk battle. I've put them here to 20-52mm which is number widely available on the net,but it is a '41 model. Model from'43 had 20-70mm thickness and 23 shell more.
Nope,Emil's technics is not good for massive fight even it has historical ranges. Tanks can not hit shit at distances more than ~800 m. Only lucky shots here and there. Test any tank in the game. This shooting only eat fps. But,ranges go down, if no excellent moral, and that's way you don't go with this more real ranges 400-500m for all units.

II/JG77_RC
09-10-2014, 01:34
I say Leave the Radar alone as it is historical, then, after we fly 20 missions, we switch sides and fly it all again. I have a feeling that this campaign is going to be way to much fun to just fly 1 time.

Then after the 2 rounds tally up the points and declare the winner. That way it will be about the team, and no one can complain about planes, radar, or anything.

8-) ;o):

=VARP=Thor
09-10-2014, 09:14
Ha, ha, ha born optimist RC:) Switching the sides happened only once in our case. You've also been part of that quickest victory ever in Stalingrad campaign. And repeated victory with red fraction. If that will happen here,for any side, then maybe but after 18-20 i don't think so. But who knows. Maybe we can end up fighting for Dniepar...or start retreating to Stalingrad like Kemp said:)

II/JG77_RC
09-10-2014, 09:19
Ha, ha, ha born optimist RC:) Switching the sides happened only once in our case. You've also been part of that quickest victory ever in Stalingrad campaign. And repeated victory with red fraction. If that will happen here,for any side, then maybe but after 18-20 i don't think so. But who knows. Maybe we can end up fighting for Dniepar...or start retreating to Stalingrad like Kemp said:)

I like Like the sound of all those Options :pilot_lol:

an on going alternate history campaign would be extremely cool.

Us crazy North American folk have been switching sides for every campaign we have flown in the last 2 years to end the "your plane's are better than mine" argument. I must say, its been extremely fun flying both sides.

=VARP=Nage
09-10-2014, 17:53
Thor, i did my homework also. And i seek for the red side rights for "historical" alignment of forces. Tho i will not be unfair to request scaling of red and blue forces to true scale numbers i must seek the request for historical units that were there. Since Katyushas are out for this campaign for FPS reason, red side should get other artillery type weapons.
As for tanks, in battle of Kursk there were:
-T-70 light tank what was left
-T-34/76 both versions were used early and 1942 type
-KV-1
-Su-122 since we don`t have them any type will do.
-Su-152 for Christ sake that thing was called Kursk "Animal slayer" (prolly cuz it killed lots of Elephant, Tigers and Panthers my guess :P )
-Su-76
-Churchill loan-lease Mk III and IV which were send to Russia and were included in battle of Kursk

This is what i got from sniffing books and web.

=VARP=Gec
09-10-2014, 18:07
it looks to me that the one that has more links to stuff, wins

so Nage, put more links to your post or we r doomed

=VARP=Nage
09-10-2014, 18:15
it looks to me that the one that has more links to stuff, wins

so Nage, put more links to your post or we r doomed


http://www.battleofkursk.org/Battle-of-Kursk-Tanks.html

There you go m8.

=VARP=Thor
09-10-2014, 18:35
Have you tried to log in to MP?

When you do that, you'll find that T70, T34/76, KV1, Su76,and Churchill IV are already there. They call it "Animal slayer" because of few units were lucky enough to kill few tanks and tank destroyers. About casulties Russians don't talk. In campaign it was supposed to be replacement for non existing entrenched T34, but in test was very un-efective. Stopping power much less than T34. So i replaced them all with AT bunkers with big arc which simulate rotating turret of 34. ISU-122 is missing because there isn't such a thing in game as you know. Instead ISU122,SU-85 is in. It was not in real battle. Many thing are just missing from the game. One example is mines and huge amount of anti tank rifles. So,what should i add to simulate this? More infantry? What number? We don't have SETI center here.Server is already on the edge.
About artillery,also please take a look MP and you'll see that there is a huge number of several types. No rockets because obvious reason. Germans also had rockets (even better than Katjusha) which were also excluded.

About tank T34, I also found today that '42 version was mostly used. Will add better armor in server technics. No armor can save T34 from Tiger. Not in real life,not in the game. But speed can. I won't teach you that because i know that you are aware of that. You are commander,and you do the tests. I am done testing OoB.
Cheers,

=VARP=Nage
09-10-2014, 19:04
Have you tried to log in to MP?

When you do that, you'll find that T70, T34/76, KV1, Su76,and Churchill IV are already there. They call it "Animal slayer" because of few units were lucky enough to kill few tanks and tank destroyers. About casulties Russians don't talk. In campaign it was supposed to be replacement for non existing entrenched T34, but in test was very un-efective. Stopping power much less than T34. So i replaced them all with AT bunkers with big arc which simulate rotating turret of 34. ISU-122 is missing because there isn't such a thing in game as you know. Instead ISU122,SU-85 is in. It was not in real battle. Many thing are just missing from the game. One example is mines and huge amount of anti tank rifles. So,what should i add to simulate this? More infantry? What number? We don't have SETI center here.Server is already on the edge.
About artillery,also please take a look MP and you'll see that there is a huge number of several types. No rockets because obvious reason. Germans also had rockets (even better than Katjusha) which were also excluded.

About tank T34, I also found today that '42 version was mostly used. Will add better armor in server technics. No armor can save T34 from Tiger. Not in real life,not in the game. But speed can. I won't teach you that because i know that you are aware of that. You are commander,and you do the tests. I am done testing OoB.
Cheers,

Sure mate, do as you feel like. Give blue side what ever they feel like. We`ll manage somehow. My intention here is to picture what red side lacks mostly and my posts are just reflecting posts of the blue side. First, planes were bad, then they wanted more planes, better planes, then they feel like they lack armor and so on....
So my post reflects needs on the red side to show we have no upper hand cuz strength ratio is near 1:1

So, just to quote someone who said to me yesterday: "Nage, we better start this campaign soon, before they end up with Leopard II and Tornado planes..."

7/SchG2_SirAthlon
09-10-2014, 19:12
Thanks Thor,
The info with the 122 SU> SU 85 is interesting.
Sry Thor,
I have to ask, is there a reason why the Ju 88A can not make Recon photo?
The Do 217 K-1, can only make 5 photo, it would be possible to increase it as the
IL-4= 10 Photos
Pe-8= 10 photos
Li-2= 10 photos
Thanks for your time Thor :salute:

=VARP=Thor
09-10-2014, 19:24
So, just to quote someone who said to me yesterday: "Nage, we better start this campaign soon, before they end up with Leopard II and Tornado planes..."
Ha ha ha:) I know the person damn it:) I know what was on your mind and why you posted it,but i am not expecting from varp to whine about anything.So far i saw that from both sides and i am really not sure why is that. Sure,to be a victor is delicious,but there can be hell of a fun even in the defeat!
And finaly,If i thought that you and Kaso can not do that, i would not put you in commander seats.
Cheers,

=VARP=Vjeran
09-10-2014, 19:38
I am really interested in friendly way, what did we really get more then it was in alpha sets?
We have got a better submodel of A5, like I explained to help contribute to balance.
We have changed the p39 model because it was an obvious mistake the first one.
Also same things apply for PanzerIII because the one which was there was a model already outdated at 41...

We have requested Bf109G6late, we have not got it, that is cool.
We have requested Fw190A6 as a option, we have not got it, which is cool.
We have requested La5Fn to be removed, it is not removed and its numbers are decreased so now you have same number of that plane with same number of our best plane..

I am sorry but how can you even think of that we get everything we want? :fool:

=VARP=Thor
09-10-2014, 20:18
Thanks Thor,
The info with the 122 SU> SU 85 is interesting.
Sry Thor,
I have to ask, is there a reason why the Ju 88A can not make Recon photo?
The Do 217 K-1, can only make 5 photo, it would be possible to increase it as the
IL-4= 10 Photos
Pe-8= 10 photos
Li-2= 10 photos
Thanks for your time Thor :salute:

No particular reason. Was default like that. Recon planes are FW189,Fi156,and R5 from Red side. Bot have the same capacity.
Will remove all photos from all bombers from both sides. Sure, manual picture taking from bomber bombsite is allowed.
Cheers m8,

=VARP=Vjeran
09-10-2014, 20:34
No particular reason. Was default like that. Recon planes are FW189,Fi156,and R5 from Red side. Bot have the same capacity.
Will remove all photos from all bombers from both sides. Sure, manual picture taking from bomber bombsite is allowed.
Cheers m8,

Just a quick one:
I think there is a small mistake with plane numbers.
I think the number of 110s is different in mp and spreadsheed, also bf109g6, we are short of 4 I think.

=VARP=Thor
09-10-2014, 22:21
Just a quick one:
I think there is a small mistake with plane numbers.
I think the number of 110s is different in mp and spreadsheed, also bf109g6, we are short of 4 I think.
There are 12 BF110s on bases, and MP is like it should be. It is missing in spreadsheet. Fixed 109 number.

=VARP=Vjeran
09-10-2014, 22:22
Thank you soo much :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

7/SchG2_SirAthlon
10-10-2014, 02:33
Hallo Thor,SEOW Bug Report:
Bug: MP freight load/unload operations not working properly.

Cause: incorrect CO reference in seowprompt

Fix: Corrected in MP4public v7.1.15, now available through MPAutoUpdater
(your side v7.1.13)

=LG=Blakhart
10-10-2014, 17:51
I saw the plane numbers for the campaign.
Thx!!!

Saw also some unnecessary comments... Not nice guys, not nice...

To the point & just to be sure.

Pe8 loadout will be limited.
No FAB 5000, 4x1000, 1XFAB2000 -2xFAB1000 ?


Reds have 232 fighters.
Yak9 was described in history books as a plane "rarely" used ( about 3% from overall fighters number )

I finished only 3 classes but maths is easy when you have calculator.

Yak9T is a tank killer and with about 30 rounds for 37mm cannon.
Let`s say that unskilled player need every 3 rounds for 1 tank.
So its about 10 tanks per sortie.

More or less it means that group of 4-8 planes lets say - 6 can do a lot.
Even lets count that 3 of them will be destroyed by AAA or enemy fighters.
Its still 3 fighters who can kill about 30(25-35 tanks).

Its still 3 fighters who can easily break from the enemy B&Z attack,easily hide or avoid dogfight due to high speed.

Add to this number tanks killed by il2 3M with 37mm cannons which shoot with "Oleg`s russian balistic" and guess what we will have ???

Well driven FW190 or even 109 G4 is out of range of yak or even La5FN due to preformance on high altitude.
Its a fact no reason to discuss it.
But fighters make movies, bombers win wars.

Maybe average blue pilot stats will look better, but red side at the start have more chances for that due to striking plane numbers boost.

32 Yak9T + 20 IL2 3M...
Please...

I can agree on il2 numbers but Yak9T number should be decreased to 8+2+2+2+2 max - 16 planes.
Yak9T dont need fighter cover, it can survive longer on battlefield, it can kill enemy fighter.
Its just a flexible tool for a smart commander.

3% from 200 is probably 6 so we can say 3% from 232 can be 7-8, but not the 32...

Like I said 8+2+2+2+2 as long we fight on campaign when the main task is to kill enemy tanks of course...

=VARP=Vjeran
10-10-2014, 18:29
What Blakhart said is what I agree.
Would you try please not to take this as "Request from blue side".
Why?

It is not a request because:




About Yak9T, it already is on 3% total russian.

3% of the total number of 232 russian fighters is 6.96 (So 7) not 32. :BangHead:


About Pe8:

Ju88 max loadout: 2x1000 2x500 =3k kg of bombs
Pe8 max loadout: 5k kg of bombs

Is it normal/fair in terms of damage output to factories to have such a big difference in damage?
Let us know that you had this in your mind when building the campaign Thor and I have no problem, plus the blues have less factories. :arrow:

=VARP=Nage
10-10-2014, 18:48
http://2ndvarp.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=3908&stc=1

=VARP=Thor
10-10-2014, 19:05
I can agree on il2 numbers but Yak9T number should be decreased to 8+2+2+2+2 max - 16 planes.
Yak9T dont need fighter cover, it can survive longer on battlefield, it can kill enemy fighter.
Its just a flexible tool for a smart commander.

3% from 200 is probably 6 so we can say 3% from 232 can be 8, but not the 32...

Like I said 8+2+2+2+2 as long we fight on campaign when the main task is to kill enemy tanks of course...

Hi m8,

Yep,no big bombs above 1000kg.

With all do respect, your math have some flaws. Or better to say it's what you would like it to be. The docs, you also tried to provide, says about around 3% total plane number. When it say total plane number,what does it mean to you? Anyway, is it 3,4%, 2,8%, for me it is not really important. And I also don't care. Nobody said it will be precise in decimal. Nor it can be.
Sure,for "real balance" i can take out all your droptanks, bombs from fighters, limit blue bomber capacity potential to Stukas mostly, take out half of Henschel 129 (were only 40 in all east front). Or to put you like you said on 196 fighters altogether, on whole eastern front. If that's the case I would say,ok, guys are pretty desperate and worries would be understandable.Asked twice do you want to switch sides. I just wonder what then would be a problem. Come on,don't be picky. I would really like that you invite me to your event of similar scale sometime.
I had a great opinion about =LG=. What happened? I know that you guys are great pilots,but please don't tell me that if there is any slim chance that things can go downside, you are start demanding!?!

Now when you have all the facts on the table,the only question is do you want to fly it or not?

=VARP=Thor
10-10-2014, 19:08
Jack, the question is also for you!

=VARP=Vjeran
10-10-2014, 19:15
We want to fly of course. I think that myself and Blak just pointed out because we thought you overlooked the things.
Same as with the bombs for Pe8 so its the same for Yak9t.
If you ask me its no problem to give even 14 or 16 but one thing is 3%=7 and another thing is 32. Its about 25 planes in difference and I think that is not picky is it?

II/JG77_Kemp
10-10-2014, 19:19
C'mon guys, let's take the fighting to Kursk and surrounding areas, away from the forums. I think Thor has created a wonderful campaign for all of us WWII aviation enthusiasts. No reason to ruin the experience by going after each other's throats on the forums.

I/JG7_Killerfliege
10-10-2014, 19:38
Well, then we have to shoot down more tank killers of theirs than they shoot down ours ;)

SUP_Astore
10-10-2014, 22:18
Well, then we have to shoot down more tank killers of theirs than they shoot down ours ;)I like your statement Killerflieger but as SUP are going to take on the CAS missions, I would appreciate that You fighters will not only shoot down enemy tank killers but also deny their fighters to shoot down us :)

=VARP=Vjeran
10-10-2014, 23:14
Hehe, good point Astore. Glad to have you bombers around and ready to fly!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

=VARP=Tvrdi
11-10-2014, 10:47
C'mon guys, let's take the fighting to Kursk and surrounding areas, away from the forums. I think Thor has created a wonderful campaign for all of us WWII aviation enthusiasts. No reason to ruin the experience by going after each other's throats on the forums.

Specially since your commander was one of our squad members. Some respect would be nice. Specially since in our squad there are older and experienced IL2 community members. This statement is my sole opinion and doesnt reflect the VARP`s overall stance.

=VARP=Vjeran
11-10-2014, 11:20
Specially since your commander was one of our squad members. Some respect would be nice. Specially since in our squad there are older and experienced IL2 community members. This statement is my sole opinion and doesnt reflect the VARP`s overall stance.

Respect your opinion. Everyone has one and that is awesome.But please dont make hasty comments simply because maybe you dont have complete picture that is all... Make sure to speak to Thor and Nage and you will be more up to date in friendly negotiations before start of campaign. You know that all Varp are my good friends and I see some of them in real life from time to time.Therefore there is no dissrespect (at least from my side).
You have to understand Tvrdi that its better to spend 3 weeks arguing before start of the campaign and then after 3 weeks when everyone is satisfied we start then to start without having both parties satisfied.
You are not involved in any kind of planning as far as I know so you dont really need to know (and probably dont want to know) on how things are developing but I can assure you my friend that both sides are doing their best to start soon and are speaking and contributing as a team together in a friendly way to make sure this turns out to be the best and most exciting campaign everyone has ever flown. :pilot_razz:

And I assure you I never forget that one year period when I was with you guys. Wonderful times indeed! :Rose:

=VARP=Thor
11-10-2014, 12:06
Just for the record, things are not like they sound here when you read them from "paper".
There are 3 sides here.Red,Blue and me. Each want to have good starting positions and i just want damn thing to work on hardware we have available. Also i would like to save my self from the job already done.
So don't read this conversation like we hate each other or something.
Yesterday on TS we came to stage where we don't have only take option, but we also have give option.
I hate barganing,but i guess i'll have to live with that here.
So far,both sides have strong points (one about yak9t and the other about actual numbers of Panther/Tigers).
I wanted to spare commanders from too many rules and limitations,but i guess it will most likely go in that direction where cutting from one side will also bring cutting to friendly side.

[DBS]Tx_Tip
11-10-2014, 15:27
Not sure why there would be a question as to the number of Panther/Tigers employed at Kursk. Those records are easily accessible and included in your .docs package as someone scanned the definitive "The Battle of Kursk" (Glantz, House 1999) Tables on this.....Knowing how well you enjoy percentages and already know this anyway Thor ;), that breaks down into this......Mk III 607/35%...Mk IV 675/39%...Mk V 200/11.50%...Mk VI 133/7.70%...Ferdinands 105/6.30%.....So your solution in giving the correct % in number of Tanks within the Campaign isn't really a compromise at all. But rather an adherence to known facts.======On the subject of the Yak-9T.....Referencing Christer Bergstrom's excellent "Kursk: The Air Battle" (2007)......These three units based in the Northern Sector with 16 VA, 6 IAk, 273rd Regt. had the Yak-9.......157 IAP (Yak-1, Yak-7B, Yak-9)......163 IAP (Yak-7B, Yak-9)......347 IAP (Yak-9)======Although quick "web" research found according to "Soviet Combat Aircraft of the Second World War Vol. 1", (Gordon, Khazanov). The 16 VA used 34 YaK-9T's during Operational Trials 5 June to 6 August. And goes on to list specific details of their Kill/Loss ratio....... Another link found states that it was the 240 IAD which used them, also with 16 VA.......I don't personally have the above book mentioned. Bergstroms', which I do own along with the Glantz, House Book, doesn't mention nor list the 240 IAD. ======That's all I have to say except:=======You and all involved with this have done an excellent job. Let's get ready to Rumble!!

=VARP=Thor
11-10-2014, 19:31
You know how it goes Tip, one wants something and than the other start splitting hairs. But we'll manage to find compromise in time.
I published total number of tanks before. Now there is spec in detail.

http://s30.postimg.org/giianzmn5/Tank_status.jpg

Also i found that StugIIIG somehow slipped away from tank counting rule. It should be:
For Germany StugIIIG,PzIIIJ,PzIVF2,Panther,Tiger,Ferdinand (in total 357 tanks)

Tigers and T34s in PZ HQ columns and Tank Armies are excluded from this counting.
Germans have 8 of these columns (16 tigers). Russians have 6 of these (12 T34).

I had fingers on Bergstrom's book just for few minutes before i started to do this. Unfortunately didn't remember all what i needed later:) If you could please see was it clear 9 or 9D version that would be great.
About YAK9T,and it's potential, it will be what commanders from both sides agree. I've put current numbers to correspond current German offensive potential. The same applies for Stuka's G1 and anything else. I won't stand them in a way regarding to this, but will not allow more ground stuff on the field.
Already added units types could be replaced on the same positions in no time.

=VARP=Nage
11-10-2014, 21:25
Guys, we are here in negotiations and there is no bad blood here, only flavored words that can go spicy or mild which is result of negotiators state of mind at the moment. None should be offended here. And we are actually progressing here.
i just want to reach at the level where both sides is gonna be satisfied to a point where neither one side can say they felt robbed or deprived of a fair game.

Now, here as Thor presented here is main thing i stated on part of a ground war. Seems here by the table list Thor posted is that Panthers and Tigers and Ferds were main battle force where in reality they just got from factories to front and they were in small numbers.

My staff will have meeting on the discussed issues we talked yesterday and will say what we concluded.






"And I assure you I never forget that one year period when I was with you guys. Wonderful times indeed! :Rose:"

Jack, to nije ruža već kur*ić od puža i taj je emoticon rezerviran za mene :P

[DBS]Tx_Tip
12-10-2014, 00:34
So...You are making me read both books again. Which is not neccessarily a bad thing :) ====== Looking within the text for 6 IAK, 273 IAD operations which I mentioned above, both 157 IAP and 163 IAP have Yak-9D's listed in action with 347 IAP having the Yak-9. ====== Of note the Yak-9T is listed as being in action (on Page 44 of the book) with 1 GIAD and mentions the AAR of Lt. Antokhin engaging and heavily damaging a He-111 of I./KG 100 on July 6th. So that looks to be the unit to which they were assigned. ====== To me it looks like an equitable call with regards to the STuG's. It's my understanding that they are put into the Assault Gun Columns within the Tables for a total of 669 of all versions for both fronts. 2/3 of which were with Model's 9th Army......Cheers All.

[DBS]Hycel
12-10-2014, 09:02
I will go a bit off topic here.
Is there any testing planned for tonight or during a week?
Had a bad fps during last testing, with is not unusual for my a bit old laptop, so hawe made some changes to conf.ini and would like to try out those new settings on a serwer if possible.

=VARP=Vjeran
12-10-2014, 22:31
For the initiative of friendly negotiations and agreements I on behalf of blue side take back our request considering Yak9t. Althrough a great machine we feel its in spirit of seow and kamaraderie to have challenges and I am sure red side has some planes from our side that consider "excellent"...

Thank you Nage and expecially Thor for big nerves but most importantly work you put in and we hope that this will be an exciting and long campaign to keep us with 46 for the next months to come!

Also, lets make sure to have a short meeting to make sure both sides commanders come into first mission with no problems so we can start with everyone happy. :friends:

=VARP=Nage
13-10-2014, 15:47
Sure thing Jack, no problem whatsoever if it helps to get to an agreement for both sides where we can be satisfied. Just to remind you all, CO and admin meeting for Friday evening lets say 20:00 Zulu so we can discuss further details about campaign.

We had some issues last night concerning server abilities where Thor can provide more data.

=VARP=Vjeran
13-10-2014, 15:52
Sounds excellent! Lets make sure to think about everything and then have a talk at friday.
What do you think, does this means we will postpone mission for next sunday or? Simply because we could agree on something which would be different then it is and maybe would be extra hard to plan and prepare for mission 2 days from meeting :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

=VARP=Nage
13-10-2014, 15:57
I think there will be no mission start till Thor fixes issues that occurred last night. And if it starts by any chance it starts from next week to plot and plan.

=VARP=Thor
13-10-2014, 16:37
Missions is already fixed. Tested with 36/36 air and 36/36 ground with heavy fighting and all seems fine.
Server fps 15-50. Last night was 1-12fps in first 3 tests.I have removed some of movements and air slots just to have that working margine more on the working side.If commanders agree I could rise it back to 40/40 when missions become light in time.

=VARP=Thor
13-10-2014, 16:44
I see no reason to pospone.I'll finish all renaming for reds max tomorrow night and loadouts will be done tonight.That means that both sides can plan air from tomorrow morning no problem.Ground from wednesday morning.

=VARP=Vjeran
13-10-2014, 17:57
Sounds alright. I am confident that there shouldnt be a need to postopone from my side. I will know for sure by today (monday) night after our regular commanders meeting :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

=VARP=Nage
13-10-2014, 18:22
Still i would like for us all to meet over TS just to be sure.

=VARP=Vjeran
13-10-2014, 18:24
For sure Nage. You suggested friday... However I cannot say for sure if I will be here on friday or not... I should be able to know by thursday


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

=VARP=Nage
13-10-2014, 18:31
For sure Nage. You suggested friday... However I cannot say for sure if I will be here on friday or not... I should be able to know by thursday


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not Friday. If we are to start this campaign this Sunday, we need to do it tomorrow. Agreed?

=VARP=Vjeran
13-10-2014, 19:14
I am probably going to be good for tomorrow.

=VARP=Vjeran
13-10-2014, 21:53
Fw190 loadout -> bombs are a must loadout for JaBo mission

Amarok
14-10-2014, 08:53
Moin comrades,

I am ready to fly on blue side.

Great work Thor!

=VARP=Thor
14-10-2014, 09:55
Thanks m8!
Please apply for blue subforum and Jack will add you to blue.
There will be 36 slots.If they all get occupied,commanders will probably rotate the crew from mission to mission.

Amarok
14-10-2014, 10:13
I have one question about the files.

In which folder I must copy the Folder "Files" and "MODS" or the complete Folder "Battle of Kursk Files 1.1"
from the archive "Battle of Kursk Files 1.1.rar"?

Thx in advance.

=VARP=Thor
14-10-2014, 11:09
I have one question about the files.

In which folder I must copy the Folder "Files" and "MODS" or the complete Folder "Battle of Kursk Files 1.1"
from the archive "Battle of Kursk Files 1.1.rar"?

Thx in advance.

Battle of Kursk 1.1 is all in one package.Just extract as is in Jgsme folder.In Jgsme enabler you will see that Battle of Kursk 1.1 and drag it after history and expert.

II/JG77_Kemp
14-10-2014, 14:59
Is there an updated "Object specification" file somewhere? Or the final plane list in some other format.

=VARP=Thor
14-10-2014, 16:25
Is there an updated "Object specification" file somewhere? Or the final plane list in some other format.
Will make updated version with numbers of planes that both sides will agree tonight. For now,look at the cost for plane changes.

[DBS]Tx_Tip
14-10-2014, 21:56
Mission start time: 19:30 Zulu / 21:30 CETNot that this is a problem for me but I was wondering with a now 3 hr time mission limit this becomes very late for you folks across the pond.......Is there a consensus to start at that time or is perhaps bumping this up and hour or so earlier not feasible?=======Just wondering?

=VARP=Thor
14-10-2014, 22:06
Tx_Tip;25056']Not that this is a problem for me but I was wondering with a now 3 hr time mission limit this becomes very late for you folks across the pond.......Is there a consensus to start at that time or is perhaps bumping this up and hour or so earlier not feasible?=======Just wondering?

Mission will last for 2hrs both for ground and air. These 3 hrs are just the time which is used for factories production,refuels,repairs and starting time of actual missions which are 6,9,12,15,and just maybe 18hrs so we have some night experience. Then clock advance to morning.

[DBS]Tx_Tip
14-10-2014, 22:14
=Varp=Thor
Originally Posted by [DBS]Tx_Tip Not that this is a problem for me but I was wondering with a now 3 hr time mission limit this becomes very late for you folks across the pond.......Is there a consensus to start at that time or is perhaps bumping this up and hour or so earlier not feasible?=======Just wondering?Mission will last for 2hrs both for ground and air. These 3 hrs are just the time which is used for factories production,refuels,repairs and starting time of actual missions which are 6,9,12,15,and just maybe 18hrs so we have some night experience. Then clock advance to morning. Okay thought with the much larger Map the Mission time was being lengthened.

[DBS]T}{OR
15-10-2014, 12:28
Tx_Tip;25056']Not that this is a problem for me but I was wondering with a now 3 hr time mission limit this becomes very late for you folks across the pond.......Is there a consensus to start at that time or is perhaps bumping this up and hour or so earlier not feasible?=======Just wondering?

Tailor in the occasional delayed starts and it is even more late. For me personally it is 2h too late. I get up early in the Monday mornings. But it is what it is and I will try to attend as much as possible.

=VARP=Thor
15-10-2014, 12:55
T}{OR;25082']Tailor in the occasional delayed starts and it is even more late. For me personally it is 2h too late. I get up early in the Monday mornings. But it is what it is and I will try to attend as much as possible.

We talked about that last night,and we agreed there will be no "Please 1min"...Server will be up at 21CET, 21.30CET door will be closed. Who is missing, it is his problem. Only waiting will be for transferring mission already in progress.
Everyone have half an hour space to connect,try to press fly to see if everything works, disconnect and connect again for real. We have people from different regions and it's getting late for some of them.
Stick to the schedule and all be fine. That way even in case of restart we loose 10 min not a half an hour.

Also, please disconnect your DSL routers from AC few hours/minutes before the mission!!!

That will save some of you from changing IP situations.

=VARP=Vjeran
15-10-2014, 16:20
Thor,Nage: it would be good idea to have a whisper with us 3 (+Kaso&Athlon if needed) so we can have a quck communication for various things including this server closing matter :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

=VARP=Nage
15-10-2014, 17:40
Thor,Nage: it would be good idea to have a whisper with us 3 (+Kaso&Athlon if needed) so we can have a quck communication for various things including this server closing matter :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not needed. For that we have in game chat. We will be stretched out with our on comms and whispers.

=VARP=Vjeran
15-10-2014, 17:47
Not needed. For that we have in game chat. We will be stretched out with our on comms and whispers.

I do not agree simply because ingame chat everyone can read and things can start to be a debate..
But it was just a suggestion...

Anyway I remembered something we need:
Please sort out teamspeak so RC,Axe,Kieran,SirAthlon,Valkyr and myself can see all channels and can move our pilots!

=VARP=Thor
17-10-2014, 11:06
About slots.....
At start,we will use 36/36.I am expecting that in a 3-4 missions we will be able to provide 40/40 slots. It is not a promise.
In post #5 of this topic you'll find slot reservations. I am asking both sides commanders not to make discrimination about this. I personaly invited 95% of squads and they are my/VARPs guests.
I don't care if some are better than the others or you like some better than others,they all need to be involved according their min/max slot reservations.However,if they don't check in, you have no obligations to them and you have open hands to sell their seats for that mission.

So if you have too many pilots checked in for some mission there are 2 solutions i can see.
In first please met their minimum slot reservation number according to post #5. Squadron members will decide among themselves who will skip which mission.
In second solution,rotate the whole squadron pool.That way the whole squads will miss every 5th or 6th mission.
It is up to you to decide this or make some other solutions.Personaly i think that solution one is fair enough for everyone.

Cheers,

Amarok
18-10-2014, 23:55
Squadron have always priority and others are second choice?

[DBS]T}{OR
19-10-2014, 15:45
We talked about that last night,and we agreed there will be no "Please 1min"...Server will be up at 21CET, 21.30CET door will be closed. Who is missing, it is his problem. Only waiting will be for transferring mission already in progress.
Everyone have half an hour space to connect,try to press fly to see if everything works, disconnect and connect again for real. We have people from different regions and it's getting late for some of them.
Stick to the schedule and all be fine. That way even in case of restart we loose 10 min not a half an hour.

Also, please disconnect your DSL routers from AC few hours/minutes before the mission!!!

That will save some of you from changing IP situations.

That doesn't change the fact this campaign starts an hour later than the last one - which was too late for me to begin with. I'll do my best to show up but can not promise as regular attendance as the last time. One DBS guy who flew on the last two skipped this one due to being so late.

=VARP=Thor
19-10-2014, 18:14
Hmm, I never started any of seow campaigns earlier than 21:30 CET...ever...so i am not sure that we are on the same page.Probably CET/ZULU conversion.
I always talk about CET and this is also your time zone.Others who are not in it, will make time conversion for them selves.

[DBS]T}{OR
19-10-2014, 19:18
Brain fart on my end. Disregard. :)

=VARP=Kaso
19-10-2014, 19:58
Before you enter in the game, check your name.

Pilots who fly on the blue side must have B_ before name/SQs

Pilots who fly on the red side must have R_ before name/SQs

[DBS]T}{OR
19-10-2014, 23:14
Started on time, and we didn't wait for anyone. Lets hope this is how all if not the majority of missions will look like. Organizational experience shows. :salute:

=VARP=Vjeran
19-10-2014, 23:15
Good job guys I am glad it started smoothly!

7/SchG2_SirAthlon
20-10-2014, 02:04
Hallo Thor,what kills him,not red ?


9 Independent Tank Corps
shot down
B-26
http://www.thorftp.tk/seow/MP4public/uniticons/Europe-Germany_small.gif
B_7/SchG2_Stublerone (http://www.thorftp.tk/seow/MP4public/Statistics/MP-PilotDetails.php?Pilot_Name=B_7%2FSchG2_Stublerone&Sector=BattleofKursk)
Junkers Ju-87D-5 Stuka
I. Gruppe des Stukageschwaders 1 St. 1, Schw. 1




:0.o:

LLv34_Untamo
20-10-2014, 09:13
S!

@VARP_Thor:
Looking at the stats, there seems to be quite many pilots that are not so humble... Most settle for dying just once, these guys demanded to die twice in one mission ;)

=VARP=Thor
20-10-2014, 10:40
Hallo Thor,what kills him,no red ?


9 Independent Tank Corps
shot down
B-26
http://www.thorftp.tk/seow/MP4public/uniticons/Europe-Germany_small.gif
B_7/SchG2_Stublerone (http://www.thorftp.tk/seow/MP4public/Statistics/MP-PilotDetails.php?Pilot_Name=B_7%2FSchG2_Stublerone&Sector=BattleofKursk)
Junkers Ju-87D-5 Stuka
I. Gruppe des Stukageschwaders 1 St. 1, Schw. 1




:0.o:

I saw that error in tests also. Maybe it is related with long name of the unit or (R) at the end of the name which is also not in the stats.
Will see what can be done with it.


About planning, both sides made moves (blue 4-5,red 1) which were directly against the rules,like planning units away from the bridges or marching trough the woods. All those moves were deleted for both sides before the build.

Server handling seems to be OK for this mission and for me fps was not less than 60.

I've noticed that 5-6 people had errors. The error was that in eventlog i have them as connected and disconnected, and even have their shooting details, but there is no line which plane they occupied. It is the same in server log and in my personal eventlog. That is why they are not registered by SEOW. Some of the names are: Wasp, Badger,Tripko...

Also there is error where people are counted to die twice or that they killed someone twice. I am not sure why is that. We'll see next mission.

MP planner also seems to be OK,and no sector is blocked by some error. As I am concerned,planning for #2 can begin.

~S~

=LG=Blakhart
20-10-2014, 10:59
So next mission 40/40 ?

Would be nice. This map is huge...

II/JG77_RC
20-10-2014, 11:46
@ Thor:

Talk with the 102nd Squad, we had similar problems with some things doubling in the stats when we flew the Ploesti campaign which they hosted, they may have the solution.

Regarding some guys stats not tracking properly. I wonder if any of them were running extra MOD's ? . . I know, and have seen instances where certain MOD's caused problems with SEOW's as well as on other severs. I am just guessing here, but, I thought maybe you had not thought of these things.

I have always been told No extra stuff should be getting used in SEOW, specially "non JSGME" Stuff.

Everyone should just be running HSFX--> Expert--> Kursk 1.1

Another thing I saw that was strange was I was able to see someone who was using a custom skin (on blue side). maybe disabling skin downloading will increase sever performance a bit more.

~S~

=VARP=Thor
20-10-2014, 11:46
So next mission 40/40 ?

Would be nice. This map is huge...

Probably not second but third or fourth maybe could be. It depends. Guys are heaving multiple new units to be placed on map for both sides and there were simply not enough killed on the ground yet. That means that next mission will be even bigger than the last one.

=VARP=Thor
20-10-2014, 11:48
@ Thor:

Talk with the 102nd Squad, we had similar problems with some things doubling in the stats when we flew the Ploesti campaign which they hosted, they may have the solution.



Thanks,will do that.

=VARP=Vjeran
20-10-2014, 15:03
hey.
I just note that from II/JG77, Con is missing from stats...

Also: Skin download needs to be OFF.
Please correct the stats errors if possible (at least the double figures).
thanks

I/JG7_Leo
20-10-2014, 15:18
Hey guys,

concerning skin dl: I personaly think it's a very nice thing and we should definitaly keep it. As far as I have noticed it didn't cause any lags and it makes the mission more individual and thus more exciting.

For example: What would the Red Baron be without the red skin?

=VARP=Thor
20-10-2014, 16:01
hey.
I just note that from II/JG77, Con is missing from stats...

Also: Skin download needs to be OFF.
Please correct the stats errors if possible (at least the double figures).
thanks
Check your eventlog and see does he has seat ocuppied. If no,then the same problem like some others.
I'll fix stats for first one manually only in case if cause is found. If no, i am not gonna do stats fixing every mission.

=VARP=Vjeran
20-10-2014, 17:07
I agree with you in some extent Leo. But the problem is having skins that do not resemble friendlies but more enemies.
Take the skin Wasp was using and compare with La5... Its sooo similar :(
I think its no problem to have own skins (its soo cool in my mind) just please try too have them as close in colour too other axis planes.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I/JG7_Leo
20-10-2014, 17:34
I can understand your argumentation, Jack. I for myself use historical skins / skins with historical colors only.
But seriously...:oD:
... does that in any way look like an La5 to you? :pilot_cool:

Riksen
20-10-2014, 17:36
Hi guys!

Nice to see such a well planned and developed SEOW campaign! How can one participate in it?

Thxs in advance

=VARP=Vjeran
20-10-2014, 17:38
Hehe :D I havent shot it down but it is very stange and the last thing you want from any pilot is to identify skins :D
But yes I agree with you, please make sure you keep it close too deafult 190/109 skin and problem solved.

The other thing is that skin download creates lagg so not sure if on next mission we have it ON or OFF.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

=VARP=Gec
20-10-2014, 17:49
Hi guys!

Nice to see such a well planned and developed SEOW campaign! How can one participate in it?

Thxs in advance

Hi Riksen and welcome to our humble home!

Check THIS Thread (http://2ndvarp.net/showthread.php?3752-How-to-apply-for-a-side&p=25267#post25267) on how to join a side on this SEOW.

[DBS]Tx_Tip
20-10-2014, 21:07
@ V_Thor......Just a reminder......Intitial joining in and briefing screen were blank.......Mission weather conditions with Wind velocity and direction along with what the clouds are set to is all that would be needed.....Thanks, Tip

II/JG77_RC
20-10-2014, 22:15
I can understand your argumentation, Jack. I for myself use historical skins / skins with historical colors only.
But seriously...:oD:
... does that in any way look like an La5 to you? :pilot_cool:

In the Heat of battle diving at 650 +KMH with no knowledge of personal skins being enabled, all the black on that skin made the plane shape look Weird (all I could see was the yellow, the black blended in with the ground) it did not look like a 109 at first glance, So I fired thinking it was a Russian skin I had not seen before. using the personal skins is not historical either.

Skins Should be off. There was a reason why in RL people used generic skins in combat. *to make ID-ing quick and easy* What if all of a sudden every pilot starts using custom skins ? it will make ID-ing aircraft very tough, and will be very obserd.

If you want to have fancy bright colored skins go fly Rise of Flight.

=VARP=Thor
21-10-2014, 12:49
Stats fixed...should be good in next missions...recon rised up...slots for ground set from 36 to 40....MP reopen.

Cheers

I/JG7_Leo
21-10-2014, 17:57
In the Heat of battle diving at 650 +KMH with no knowledge of personal skins being enabled, all the black on that skin made the plane shape look Weird (all I could see was the yellow, the black blended in with the ground) it did not look like a 109 at first glance, So I fired thinking it was a Russian skin I had not seen before. using the personal skins is not historical either.

Skins Should be off. There was a reason why in RL people used generic skins in combat. *to make ID-ing quick and easy* What if all of a sudden every pilot starts using custom skins ? it will make ID-ing aircraft very tough, and will be very obserd.

If you want to have fancy bright colored skins go fly Rise of Flight.

Hi RC,

didn't want to offend you in anyway. It was an accident and of course accidents happen. I for myself identify aircrafts by their shape (wings, tail, engines...) only and not by their color or skin. But of course there are different ways of identifying (or not) planes. :wink:

Riksen
24-10-2014, 16:22
Thanks Gec ...

I'll give my best in the missions. Although I'm new here, I think custom skins should be enabled as long as they at least look historical. Maybe just adding a symbol to the nose or something like that but not making something completely unrealistic. Please dont take it the wrong way Leo, but ur skin doesnt look historical at all. Note that I'm not saying it is a bad looking skin. It is clearly well made and it does look nice but it is just not my kind of skin. I prefer the historical ones ...

Just my humble opinion. Looking forward into my first mission w u guys (right now waiting for approval into the Axis subforum).

Regards

Riksen

=VARP=Thor
24-10-2014, 16:40
Skins will be off. They were ON only because of mistake. Nose art are already there, and only histirical squadrons names are in the campaign. There are maybe just 1-2 names which were not in the real battle but i needed more names for squadrons made of only 2 planes.

=VARP=Vjeran
24-10-2014, 16:51
Gec will surely not like you giving your best Riksen as it will in turn mean that he is burning in his plane :D
Anway welcome to the best side, the dark side :)


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

=VARP=Thor
25-10-2014, 10:54
Tomorrow morning at 3AM clocks in CET time zone are moving 1 hour backward.Most of us are in this time zone and will be in sync.For those who are not,please calculate your time. Mission stays at 21:30 CET

=VARP=Nage
25-10-2014, 13:19
Tomorrow morning at 3AM clocks in CET time zone are moving 1 hour backward.Most of us are in this time zone and will be in sync.For those who are not,please calculate your time. Mission stays at 21:30 CET


That is 20:30 Zulu, right Thor?

=VARP=Thor
25-10-2014, 13:35
That is 20:30 Zulu, right Thor?

I have no idea,and it's not on me to calculate for others.. I am using CET,and who need it,please use online time converter.

[DBS]El_Marta
25-10-2014, 18:24
20:30 UTC it is indeed.

II/JG77_RC
27-10-2014, 06:11
Do we have any idea what caused the massive Lag in the last mission ?

=VARP=Thor
27-10-2014, 09:55
Do we have any idea what caused the massive Lag in the last mission ?

I have no idea...it really would help if both sides would tell me what did they do around 41st minute in the game,were there some heavy AAA etc. I only know what was going on in my sector on the north. Everything was perfect on my side,no lag,targets destruction instant,confirmation also, and than it's stopped for 15sec!....it's bad when you are low level:)

=LG=Blakhart
27-10-2014, 10:09
No idea... :D

http://2ndvarp.net/attachment.php?attachmentid=3949&stc=1

II/JG77_Kemp
27-10-2014, 11:06
No idea what caused it, but to me it seemed that after Thor was killed and disconnected, the game went back to normal.
Of course at that time already lots of people were leaving, so could be due to that or the messages could have come delayed due to lag, but on my screen the red bars disappeared right after the message of Thor disconnecting.

=VARP=Vjeran
27-10-2014, 11:53
My personal opinion is that it is slightly unfair to count only first 40 minutes. Just because a big number of blue bombers havent arrived on target before the incident... while on the other hand the red yaks and il-2s did and caused big damage..
so I think: what would happen if there was 120minutes? would it be even worse for blue side or would we do more damage?
we will never know thats why I think personally having 40 minutes from 120 minutes is bull$hite :sad:

=VARP=Thor
27-10-2014, 12:45
No idea what caused it, but to me it seemed that after Thor was killed and disconnected, the game went back to normal.
Of course at that time already lots of people were leaving, so could be due to that or the messages could have come delayed due to lag, but on my screen the red bars disappeared right after the message of Thor disconnecting.

Yep,that looks like that,except the thing my death was caused by lag. After 6-8 blue guys disconnected it was good again. At that point I had to kill the server because it would not be fair to continue without them even everything was normal again.
At first i was thinking to play again the same mission,but because everyone have their eventlogs, it would simply not be the same mission. It would also not be good that all planners work last week go in trash. So i decided to analyze what was done until the lag time at (09:41:15).
*All kills and deaths until that are valid.
*All planes/ground targets destroyed after are deleted.
*All planes of disconnected pilots are at planned destination airfields and pilot status is landed.Planes are on refuel.
*All ground units are at planned end points whey they would be in two hours.
*Ju88 and P8 starting airfields will have their fuel returned.

I had no problems with this mission on "dry" run and it was played twice without players before actual event.
So,cause is unknown so far. We had 4197 game objects in first mission and 4204 game objects in second.
In the future we'll go like this:
*Temporarily disabling all signalers
*Do not create units from your resupply points if you really not plan to move that mission.
*Barrages, maximum 15 guns per side.
*Temporarily, no clouds
*Moves for the ground are rolling back to 36/36
*No human gunners

Once again,sorry for the mess.Both sides had great opportunities for numerous kills if mission didn't stop. And kills are what we need to make this missions lighter.
Stats are out,MP is open and you can continue.
~S~
Cheers,

=VARP=Thor
27-10-2014, 12:49
My personal opinion is that it is slightly unfair to count only first 40 minutes. Just because a big number of blue bombers havent arrived on target before the incident... while on the other hand the red yaks and il-2s did and caused big damage..
so I think: what would happen if there was 120minutes? would it be even worse for blue side or would we do more damage?
we will never know thats why I think personally having 40 minutes from 120 minutes is bull$hite :sad:

You have right on you personal opinion. But decision is mine.
Red bombers did not make it to targets also. IL2s were just heat up,and it is really unfortunate that we did not see this until the end.
For me, i would love to that both sides were killing at least one hundred units to make missions lighter.

=LG=Blakhart
27-10-2014, 12:49
My personal opinion is that it is slightly unfair to count only first 40 minutes.


What !!! ???
I checked stats because I saw Jack post.

Are you guys kidding me ?
I left the game with other LG`s only because a lot of players loosed connection and life because of the lag ,low fps problem.

We could kill more enemy planes, ground targets, we had more than 60 minutes to fly...

I expect that 2nd mission will be restarted with erasing 2nd mission stats and I`m really serious.

=VARP=Gec
27-10-2014, 13:02
Blakhart, you should really start working on your temper man.

=VARP=Vjeran
27-10-2014, 13:04
Blakhart, you should really start working on your temper man.

Very construct and helpful piece of advice or information Gec!
Thanks for solving this problem, now we can continue in piece. :bow:

=VARP=Thor
27-10-2014, 13:07
There is really no point in proving who can spit farther. Decision is mine, and if any one want to hate someone,start with me.

=VARP=Gec
27-10-2014, 13:09
Very construct and helpful piece of advice or information Gec!
Thanks for solving this problem, now we can continue in piece. :bow:

My first job here is to keep this forum in order. I'm not going to interfere in planning or administering this campaign.

LLv34_Untamo
27-10-2014, 13:17
Couple of observations:
LLv24_Savu had a lag spike at 16min into the mission (#2), while at 500m and crashed to the ground.

LLv34_Iced is missing in both mission #1 and #2 statistics although he participated in both. In first mission he bailed, and in second disconnected like the rest of us.

=VARP=Vjeran
27-10-2014, 13:18
I was just trying to say that it would mean more for everyone if you gave your opinion or some suggestion from your experience instead of what you wrote. pilot_:-|

II/JG77_Kemp
27-10-2014, 13:40
Yes, my point was mostly about figuring out what could have caused the lag.
To me it seemed that lag disappeared, when Thor disconnected, so maybe some unit that you were attacking had insane rate of fire that caused lag or something like that. Also from the stats I see that right before the lag started, two Ju-88's were shot down in quite odd circumstances, so maybe checking objects around that area could reveal some anomalities?
Just trying to take educated guesses about the reasons for this lag.

II/JG77_Kemp
27-10-2014, 13:42
Untamo, my (uneducated) guess is that Iced is running HSFX 7.0.2 not HSFX 7.0.3.
There are other people also that are missing from the stats.

LLv34_Untamo
27-10-2014, 14:21
Untamo, my (uneducated) guess is that Iced is running HSFX 7.0.2 not HSFX 7.0.3.
There are other people also that are missing from the stats.

Ok, thanks, I will ask him to run his autoupdater again.

=LG=Flogger
27-10-2014, 14:23
So guys... Are u crazy? Stats are ok? Come on! Not all pilots in stats, no all victories... For example me and =LG=Padre destroyed two planes before "LAG". One of them was La-5 from 3xx squadron...

"Decision in mine" - hahahah yeah my hero

Why u didnt come to all of us, made some briefing with all pilots from red and blue side and asked?:

"What is our opinion about that, what we should to do?"

U organize campaign - awesome - many thanks and respect for u but if u wanna made this type decisions with ur own head... U are not a fair man.

SPECIALLY that it was CONNECTION PROBLEM, not my wrong, not ur, not people that came and want to fight/fun FAIR PLAY.

I would like to fly this mission again, WITH FULL RESPECT FOR ALL PILOTS AND PLAY FAIR...

=VARP=Vjeran
27-10-2014, 14:48
Apart from the stats problems that are again on this mission which Flogger mentioned I have some more:

-> Halftracks that need 3 kills to be destroyed (mentioned to thor already)
-> AT bunkers destroyed and not showing as proper units..
-> howitzers destroyed but counting as other units like bunkers.. :crazy:
-> Pilots not showing up in stats again
-> red ? on top of friendly unit with only 11% recon..

this one I cannot confirm:
-> ju88s destroyed by phantom flak

=VARP=Thor
27-10-2014, 15:16
Not all pilots in stats, no all victories... For example me and =LG=Padre destroyed two planes before "LAG". One of them was La-5 from 3xx squadron...

Hmm, and how the hell I am suppose to know that? How game should know that? It just read eventlog. If you are not there,you don't exist for seow. Why some people for second time are missing from eventlog,well,you tell me because i don't know.

What i do know is that Padre who flown II_JG5_1003 in eventlog have only this:

09:45:56 1724_Static destroyed by II_JG5_1003 at 130169.0 97168.0

It is after threshold i am counting and it is not counted. The same is with his crash:

09:46:36 II_JG5_1003 damaged by 1521_Static at 109253.16 256250.48
09:46:37 II_JG5_1003 shot down by 1521_Static at 109190.22 256282.44

For you,there is no record of anything except connect/occupied/disconnect.

Server log,my log both says the same. Check your own eventlog and you will see that i am right.

=VARP=Thor
27-10-2014, 15:22
Apart from the stats problems that are again on this mission which Flogger mentioned I have some more:

-> Halftracks that need 3 kills to be destroyed (mentioned to thor already)
-> AT bunkers destroyed and not showing as proper units..
-> howitzers destroyed but counting as other units like bunkers.. :crazy:
-> Pilots not showing up in stats again
-> red ? on top of friendly unit with only 11% recon..

this one I cannot confirm:
-> ju88s destroyed by phantom flak

Jack,please be specific,tell me who attacked and killed howitzers which were counted as AT bunkers? And vice versa. And where? Have no record about AT or howitzers lost on red side this mission.

=VARP=Arg0n
27-10-2014, 15:29
@=LG=Flogger Those who want respect, give respect. I haven't seen one instance of it in your post.

The decision is completely rational, while some like Jack have their misgivings they at least have enough respect to honor the administrator's decision. The thing is a repeat of the mission would totally screw up the planners' ideas, because we know where you were supposed to strike and vice versa. It's unfortunate that your bombers didn't reach their targets, but guess what? We also had plans after the 45 minute mark, we're not too happy with the outcome either, our IL-2s still had plenty of ammo and plenty of targets and our bomber still had to reach theirs.

On your no kill problem: I had things like that happen to me all the time, in Malta the event log "stole" at least 5-6 kills from me, some were pretty obvious (torn off wings, sawed off tail, etc.) I asked the admin to double check the logs, he said he couldn't do anything about that, even though he didn't have to do shit for me he (coincidentally Thor again) did it anyways, so I thanked him and went on with my day. It's frustrating, sure, even infuriating but it's no reason to lash out at someone who did this on his own free time so we could all have fun.

I don't know why but you can't seem to look at things from any other perspective besides your own. And quite frankly your words of praise for Thor seem empty because the very next sentence you trample on them. Thor deserves better than that. Keep that in mind for next time.

=LG=Blakhart
27-10-2014, 16:12
Before you start to read have in mind that I`m calm and chilled and I`m not shouting.
Just telling you how it looks for me.

We can continue with democratic choices or you can stay alone with despotic decisions.

Guys if you talk about respect start to count disrespect from not asking everyone involved in project about 2nd mission future.

It`s just not polite to impose conditions.
We had 1 week to calculate everything, make an vote or just meet together on teamspeak and talk about it like normal people and the most important thing - decide about it together.

Server crashed.
It happens, nothing wrong with that, we should just make restart but rest of this which happened is just unfair and unacceptable.

=VARP=Gec
27-10-2014, 16:18
I understand your pain Blackhart but u r wrong in one krucial thing. This is not a demokracy . Thor as campaign designer and admin can hear what u say but final word is hes. Once u make your own campaign, u can make your own rules . If u speak with guys that are experienced in seow u will see that seow is not Perfect and not all errors can be corrected

=LG=Flogger
27-10-2014, 16:29
About mission:

So if we cant fly this mission again just fly next one without any stats fromm the second one and continue that campaign with the third one...

About personal:

"I don't know why but you can't seem to look at things from any other perspective besides your own. And quite frankly your words of praise for Thor seem empty because the very next sentence you trample on them. Thor deserves better than that. Keep that in mind for next time."

Hmmm i dont see any bad words about any body on my posts! Come on guys! I just said my opinion, no "noobs", no "idiots" in my comment why u send this type of private messages?
I please U Gec... READ the text with understand!

I said sth about respect but i think u dont see that so i help u: "U organize campaign - awesome - many thanks and respect for u"

The message on my private box is embarrassing...:

"Comments are welcome, but insulting other pilots can only bring you ban.

So please think before u post."

=VARP=Gec
27-10-2014, 16:34
So guys... Are u crazy? ...

How do u define this?

And posting PMs on publick forum.... No comment

=LG=Flogger
27-10-2014, 16:41
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NMNgbISmF4I

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k85mRPqvMbE

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bd2B6SjMh_w

I leave u with that alone...

=VARP=Thor
27-10-2014, 17:41
Thanks for defense guys,but I can defend my points alone.

The most important factor for doing this like i did is that both sides made 80+% logistic background moves. Only minimum offensive ground moves were made. And those ended just like both sides wished.
What was in the air or in air to ground was also not a big deal. Talking about could you or we destroy another 50 tank or howitzers is not important, because you or we did not. Scraping this mission and making another total the same mission where you will again spend 80+% moves on bringing stuff closer to front is from ever corner you look stupid.

No reason to waste your energy on done thing.

Where you could waste it, is to explain me what was the thing about AT bunkers and howitzers that Jack mentioned!?

I've found something which maybe can be what we are looking for but i am not sure. When we were over your HQ in K37 i saw it like it should be, 2xPzVIE,1xSdkfz251,1x6700A,1xfuel,1xmedic,and 2xdemagflak....all in all 8 vehicles
What i found in jgsmemod 1.1 chief.ini was that this column have 4xpzVIE,+1x radio and +1x MarderIII...total 12 vehicles.
I can't put my hand in fire that this can be a cause, but it just happened slightly after 102nd-YU_Mornar killed one of the vehicles in that column.
To make this right and to ensure that all of us have the same thing, please put BattleofKursk 1.2 in your jgsme,and remove 1.1 version.
Also,I will upload new game to server and would like to make a test during this week can everyone connect and do everyone have entries in eventlog after mission starts. I suggest Tuesday for that if that is good to majority.
Cheers,

=LG=Blakhart
27-10-2014, 17:50
I understand and fully accept your view Gec, but you are wrong in the one major thing.

1. There was no information about procedure in case of a bugged mission.

2. There was no information that admin is treated like a person who can dictate rules good only for 1 side in emergency situation.
( If I would knew that , LG would never participate in such unfair project. We flew too many missions/wars/campaigns to be smart enough to avoid such situation. When we was talking about planeset some time ago Thore mentioned:


I had a great opinion about =LG=. What happened? I know that you guys are great pilots,but please don't tell me that if there is any slim chance that things can go downside, you are start demanding!?!

Hmm. I just ignored it to dont put Jack in an ankward situation, but here is another situation when someone is trying to force me to accept something which is unfair, bad and unlogical to me and my team.
Now I can`t say: ok lets just play and forget about it.

You see I still dont think that VARP is an unfair team who think he can dictate someone his own rules so just dont try to ruin it.
:)

It`s not the pain mate. It`s logic supported with some experience from the past.
Since I`m participating in a different online projects I`v never had such situation.

About technical limits.
There is no problem with not reporting a mission.
There is no problem with restarting a mission.
There is no problem with flying the same mission again or flying new one as a "2nd".

We still wait for all opinions from blue teams so this is only my personal ( chilled ) opinion.
S!

=VARP=Gec
27-10-2014, 18:21
If you really think that Thor is working for a red side and not doing all he can to make this good for both sides, than you really should not fly this campaign. I know i would not if i would feel cheated.

=LG=Blakhart
27-10-2014, 18:53
You missed my strong arguments, logic and focused on bad interpretation suggesting something that I didnt said.

How cute :)

My last post connected with irrational reporting 2nd mission. ;*

=VARP=Vjeran
27-10-2014, 19:02
Simple:

I need to speak with my blue officers and I tell you what conclusion or feeling we have.
Until that point we are spending our time we could spend on sleeping or drinking instead of posting stuff here...

It might take a day or so until I see what my liaison guys say. I gave my personal opinion and I am yet not in position to give opinion from my whole team.

=VARP=Nage
27-10-2014, 19:50
To all, very immature acting on this thread.

1st. VARP went silent and waited for admin/Thor to rule this one out. No one knew what was the result back then, just min. after the mission when Thor said 2nd. mission will be included till the part when server snapped. After which i told Thor to prepare for hailstorm right in this thread as it did happen. Red side accepted the rule of admin yesterday after the mission no question asked.
2nd. Thor asked a question to Jack about AT bunkers, I know why, but Jack does not answer, we are still waiting for you (BLUE side) to come about but i must say here when we saw stats from 1st mission we let it go for peace sake.
3rd. I personally and VARP as well flew all sort of missions/wars/campaigns to know where this sort of thing is going. LG is not the only one. We lost also a lot with this lag thing.
4th. my personal opinion not the whole VARP is if you give them finger they will take your hand. I told this to Thor at our first discussions when campaign was introduced.
5th. referring to No.4 If you really think Thor is one sided come and see how my squads are ranting about our planes over Germans. Our thoughts are that Thor went completely on the hand of Blue side in his effort not to be bias and to be friendly host.

In conclusion totally not fair after all Thor did but then again this is probably admins curse.

310_Podrs
27-10-2014, 22:10
Doing an administrator in everything related to ol'IL2 seems to always be an ungrateful job (and I do know what I am talking about). One needs to endure much if he wants to get the job done ;)

Thanks Thor for the preparation and taking care of the administration things, looking forward to next mission..

I/JG7_Leo
28-10-2014, 00:12
I totally agree with =LG= pilots here.
And sorry... I had to laugh hard about that PM. Flogger was not insulting in any way. He was just presenting his opinion which I think is true. We should either restart or skip this mission.

...and what about this Thor=God stuff, cmon. Sure it does not have to be democratic.. but fair.

=VARP=Vjeran
28-10-2014, 00:16
Hehe I also admit it was funny to read the pm. I hope the sender was typing in funny way :D


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

=VARP=Thor
28-10-2014, 00:59
Jack, when will i get clarification about AT bunkers? If there is an error with them i need to know.

II/JG77_RC
28-10-2014, 05:18
I am happy with either option.

If we did keep the result till minute 43 Then we should fly another mission, that mission still being mission #2 (or technically #3) but now there will be 19 missions in the campaign, if you see what I mean. It would suck to lose over half a mission in the campaign because of this Laggy-ness.

One thing for anyone who is having stat tracking errors: be sure to run your Auto Updater becuase a tiny file somewhere inside your game could have got corrupted and could be causeing the stats error. These things happen from time to time, I recently had a game get corrupted and had to start over, it happens once or twice a year, but, in most cases the auto updater will fix the problem. Also if you are or have mod'd your game in the past with mods using the "MODS" folder method that could also be causeing problems.

SEOW requires a very clean game for all things to work properly. If none of these options solve the issue you may need to do a reinstall of IL2 with HSFX 7.03 and use it only for this campaign. 99% of the time the issue is most likely in Your Game and has nothing to do with the server.

Lets all relax for a minute and not blow our tops. Lets not forget this campaign is also using a MAP that was created from scratch, and it is HUGE with a shitload of units on the ground, plus the new signals thing. This campaign has us into some uncharted territory for SEOW, in reality more test missions probably should have been run, but it is impossible to get 72 pilots together to test server loading, with flak shooting, air to air going on, ground to ground, etc, etc.

We must be patient as really these first few missions are all sort of still "test missions" with the Admin and everybody crossing their fingers hoping everything runs as it should.

It is like Thor say's, sometimes strange error's happen and that is something we all have to look at with a clear head and accept. Lets remember the main objective of this campaign is to have fun, while recreating a battle that happened in WW2.

II/JG77_Kemp
28-10-2014, 07:47
Thor, about the AT bunker question.
On first mission Kieran destroyed some artillery pieces, but in the stats it says that he destroyed 3 AT fortifications (is it even possible to do that with Henschel?). On the other hand, SUP reported that they destroyed one bunker, but in the stats it is 76mm ZIS-3 Artillery.
Maybe that is a different issue, but I personally got a message in the game about enemy tank destroyed, but in the stats it is 122 mm howitzer.

In mission two we did not have time to do much, but Hippicow destroyed a bunker (visually confirmed by Jack), but in the stats it is again listed as 76mm ZIS-3 Artillery.

=VARP=Thor
28-10-2014, 10:49
Those two last posts were the only posts where i saw that someone from blue side actually is willing to help to fix the problems for both sides,not just one. Thank you RC and thank you Kemp.

RC, there is no problem for me to go even 30 missions. It will all be how both sides feel is it necessary or not. It is always if someone takes beating he want that God damn bell to ring. So i can't predict the future will this be status quo at mission 18 and both sides will want to continue or not. Limit of 18-20 is putted here just to have some margins what commanders need to do to hold on at least to this number of missions and it is margin where we can start to talk is it over or not. That's it. So if you ask me,we can fight as long as we have material to fight with. Your advices are good and I'll add the whole installed game for those who have problems.Just change the name,config and keys....and add new Battle of Kursk 1.2 to jgsme.

https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0Bz9LtTGjwxd3TnJvNGVCa2tyM1E&usp=sharing


Kemp,thanks for telling me this and confirming what i have suspected. I said to red guys,what a great guy Kieran, he found a way to kill 3 AT bunkers with 103 gun and i couldn't do one kill with it in my tests before the campaign. So I was in awe, until saw in mission two that Nage killed one 150mm howitzer and was credited with AT bunker. AT bunker which was in sector 80km away. I know exactly who killed what in my flight and knew 100% that there were no bunkers. I fixed that manually in stats,informed red side about that and we were 80% sure that this also happened to you guys in first mission. Jack mentioned that few hours later in post.

The question for blue side and Jack specific is why if something is good for you it can stay, and if something is not so good it must be corrected? Sure, AT bunker have bigger points value, they are better weapon, they cost red 600 crew instead of 24 which is directly connected to end score.
I will not fix this errors from mission one. You can have it. But please in the future talk to me,report wrong things. It's for the benefit of both sides.
So thanks Kemp to have guts to say what is/was wrong. I have already switched AT fortifications class for both sides to AAT instead of ART and will see in future will this help. They are both using CannonPaK43 which is AT gun and it is maybe related somehow.Yes,i know,it is not logical,but why not to try everything.
Cheers,

=VARP=Vjeran
28-10-2014, 12:04
Yeah just as Kemp said. I thought I said that by voice after mission 1.
Sorry if I was under wrong impression.

Crazy accusation really, like you said yourself 1xHS destroying several bunkers -> obvious bug or error... The problem is they are all mixed up and whatever we destroy on 1 mission shows up differently on MP or Stats and obviously in different places even...
Manually correcting all these problems is nice from your side but for us no acceptable if it carries on through the campaign.

=VARP=Vjeran
28-10-2014, 14:05
Thanks for constuctive posts.

I feel obligated to sum up the conclusions from talking wuth blue side. I am talking about liaisons from JG77,JG7,LG,SchG squadrons.

First of all, a big recognition to Thor for spending his time and rewarding us with a chance of flying maybe one of the most detailed campaigns to date. Lets try to come up with a solution for future missions and resuming of the campaign so everyone is happy.
Both my guys and red guys are competitive bunch of pilots and its normal to protect their respective sides in times of problems/bugs/errors. That is why in order to put these unwanted forum posts to minimum we need to ensure smooth running on this campaign.

Blue side agreed on following conclusions:
We would like to try out another time after all the changes and fixes are being applied so that on mission#3 we have another try and fly as if nothing happened. After mission#3 it will be clear if the errors in various areas persist or are generally removed.
II/JG77_Jack & SchG_Athlon,Valkyr agreed between ourselves that we will be hesitant to continue planning and leading blue side after mission#3 in case of problems continuing because we feel its better to stop after 3 weeks then let it carry on to 5,6 or 10 weeks. (Remember the campaign is organised so its 18 missions which means at least 22-24 weeks because of holidays and so on). The most stressful point and at the same time a point which we really cannot agree to is the eventlog/stats errors which requires admin on manually changing individual objects after each or almost every mission.

Blue side therefore has absolutely no problems in following:
-> Starting all over again from zero and with clean database to ensure smooth running and enjoyment and easier day to day routine for planners and admin.
-> Making sure that in this case we have minimum 1 test mission and further test missions in case things are not working.
-> Talking with other side commanders and thor about possible solutions to the matter and using SchG"s expertise in MP and ground war/seow to assist admin together with red side.
-> We together feel its better to make a move now then continue without changes in what currently is a error-riddled project.But project which has huge potential to make it 6-months of more involvement for for our JG7,77,LG and SchG pilots.

--Jack