MP and Mods - Balance vs Realism

[Vekkinho]

Very interesting poll, like many suggested it's probably triggered by Yoda's LEAVU progress. But if we're to comment on LEAVU there's a dedicated thread to do so!

 

I voted realism for two reasons. First one being the fact that realism is a huge matter for general immersion and it's making things a bit tricky for a weekend warrior. It asks for dedication, patience and tactics in overcoming certain obstacles that might and probably will appear. Some may think including realism could create MP disballance between Blue and Red but I still believe it should not. And let me elaborate why I stick to my beliefs:

-first there's more Red players, right? This kinda resembles the realism already, doesn' it?

-Red force chances aren't so bad when you look at it, Reds are back in business lately with same or similar technology available for implementation into Red war gear so certain mods mentioned above do the same thing, or better said help out both colors in conflict. So I wouldn't say realism equals no balance!

 

Secondly even if a ballance gets harmed, it's only because it happens IRL too!

 

After all MiG-29A is a guerilla's fighter, isn't it?!

[Vekkinho]

 

Instead of porking the SIM like that I suggest a ratio os 4 migs per F-15 instead, and we still have the same ratio of AMRAAM's per mig. ;)

 

Objection!

 

You're up for realism like I am, right?

 

Now, please explain where in the world did you find 4:1 Fulcrum:Eagle ratio?!

 

Let's look at the figures:

 

Fulcrums (from prototype thru -35):

So now we can again ask, what is the total number of MiG-29's produced? The following summary is presented that identifies over 1,500 total airframes of all types and functions produced by MAPO-MiG and the SOKOL Production Facility. Compared with MilTech's 1,216 number, it might be reasonable. After the first 18 aircraft order to Malaysia were delivered and their 18 additional aircraft were ordered, there appeared to be around 80 more potential deliveries to India and Iran with attrition spares for other customers. The debt-for-aircraft programs in Eastern Europe would be directed at stored aircraft first, then production if the money was there. In some of the transfer deals, Moldova gave aircraft to Yeman, the Belarus provided aircraft to Peru, and the Russian Air Force gave Slovakia 26 machines right off their flight lines.

 

F-15 (A thru C):

 

F-15ASingle-seat all-weather air-superiority fighter version, 384 built 1972-79.[/url]F-15BTwo-seat training version, formerly designated TF-15A, 61 built 1972-79.F-15CImproved single-seat all-weather air-superiority fighter version, 483 built 1979-85.F-15DTwo-seat training version, 92 built 1979-85.

F-15J

Single-seat all-weather air-superiority fighter version for the Japan Air Self-Defense Force 139 built under license in Japan by Mitsubishi 1981-97, 2 built in St. Louis.F-15DJTwo-seat training version for the Japan Air Self-Defence Force. 25 Built under license in Japan by Mitsubishi 1981-97, 12 built in St. Louis.F-15N Sea EagleThe F-15N was a carrier-capable variant proposed in the early 1970s to the U.S. Navy as an alternative to the heavier and, at the time, considered as "riskier" technology program: F-14 Tomcat. The F-15N-PHX was another proposed naval version capable of carrying the AIM-54 Phoenix missile. These featured folding wingtips, reinforced landing gear and a stronger tail hook for shipboard operation.F-15E Strike Eagle For F-15E, F-15I, F-15S, F-15K, F-15SG, F-15SE and other F-15E-based variants, see F-15E Strike Eagle and F-15SE Silent Eagle.

 

I'd say at least 1000 + Israeli and Saudi Eagles that are not listed here ;)

[Vekkinho]

So 4:1 Fulcrum-Eagle ratio is only realistic during MAKS airshow!

[wilbur81]

Realism

 

Realism over balance.

[Grimes]

Its not a fair question as balance is completely dependent on who is playing, how many are playing, and what aircraft they are flying. Mission design also plays a major factor in effecting balance but not as much as you might think. Balance it flight sims is quite difficult to achieve compared to FPS and RTS games, because there is a slight random and uncontrollable factor about it. This factor is missiles, you can increase its chances of hitting the target by firing in favorable conditions, but it is still a wild card scenario. Its kind of why Company of Heroes (RTS) hasn't hit it big as a competition play RTS game. The AI units you control can actually miss, and thus doesn't have a static DPS, causing the comp players who like to crunch the numbers to figure out their best mathematical advantage and unit composition to not like it as much. Unlike an RTS like Starcraft where the Zealot does x DPS by himself and Y DPS when used with uber-micro.

 

But a balanced game of LockOn MP is an asymmetrical balance. In the exact same 1v1 scenario the battle won't play out exactly the same way every time, the players tactics come into play. The actions and possibilities increase as more players and AI sam sites are added into the mix.

 

As a whole with mods and MP. Players need to know what they are joining, and what other players might be using while in server. It simply isn't fair to a player who joins a server and their teammates have a information advantage for the sake of realism and the player doesn't. And for the love of science don't bring up the argument that VOIP is basically the same thing. because its not, the key difference is that people CHOOSE to join a voip for their sake of realism. Not knowing about a "realism enhancing" mod or 3rd party app completely takes their choice away as they DONT know about it. Listing a link to download it isn't any good either. As the player must exit the game, set up the new app so it works, and then load back in. Its the same reason that while many squads list their IP info for a VOIP client, nobody joins. Even when I have it installed and setup. I don't join the 51st VOIP out of habit when I join their server, I join our VOIP.

 

We can't depend on "realistic" scenarios either. Even if the F-15 gets a boost in performance (missiles/other) in LockOn it wont win a 8-2 fight against Migs or any other Russian bird. Besides people, by instinct and given the choice, will almost always join the team that has fewer players. Its true at least in terms of A2A slots.

 

Bottom line.

If the server allows them, "realism enhancing mods" need to be declared on a player by player basis. So everyone else in the server knows which player is using them and which isn't. Furthermore server control needs to exist to be able to limit their capabilities. If a F-15 enters a fight with datalinking he should not be allowed to carry 8 Aim-120s. For the sake of mentioning, aesthetic mods for the most part are a non-issue. Only the mods that can enhance gameplay and information are an issue.

[Pilotasso]

Objection!

 

You're up for realism like I am, right?

 

Now, please explain where in the world did you find 4:1 Fulcrum:Eagle ratio?!

 

Let's look at the figures:

 

Fulcrums (from prototype thru -35):

 

 

F-15 (A thru C):

 

 

 

I'd say at least 1000 + Israeli and Saudi Eagles that are not listed here ;)

 

Doesnt realy matter the units ever manufactured because a localized conflict would see a totaly different mix of aircraft.

[X-man]

Doesnt realy matter the units ever manufactured because a localized conflict would see a totaly different mix of aircraft.

 

I think overall, Squadrons or wings get deployed as a whole, so I doubt we'll see just two F-15 at a certain front :) But like you said, in one area, MiGs might be deployed with a ratio of 2:1 but in another it might be the opposite... I think mission makers/server owners will take this into account and create fun, interesting and balanced missions so everyone can enjoy it! :thumbup:

[Case]

This is why I suggested to change aircraft type numbers on missions instead of just changing aircraft systems and weapons on 1 to 1 basis for balance. It just wont be believable.

For you it might be a simulator, but for many people flying on multiplayer servers LockOn is a game.

 

So if for the sake of your realism there are multiplayer servers with a 4:1 ratio of MiG vs F-15 and you want to fly F-15 but it is already taken, then what do you do?

 

Your comments about realism are very lopsided. On the one hand you want aircraft to be as realistic as possible, but on the other you are perfectly happy of flying lonewolf all the time without being on a Teamspeak or Ventrilo server to coordinate with others. If you really want realism, you should start working together with others, not complain that some things aren't modeled realistically.

[Grimes]

Even in an environment where realism and teamwork was the entire focus of the idea, LockOn's Red Flag events still featured a near 50/50 A2A ratio of players.

 

If ED even did make a "multiplayer balanced" variation or a "realism mode"... the multiplayer would just become a "balanced airquake" or a "realistic airquake"

[Pilotasso]

F-15 but it is already taken, then what do you do?

 

Easy, I fly mig ambush CAP, like I do when there arent any F-15's to go arround. Im versatile.

 

 

 

Your comments about realism are very lopsided. On the one hand you want aircraft to be as realistic as possible, but on the other you are perfectly happy of flying lonewolf all the time without being on a Teamspeak or Ventrilo server to coordinate with others. If you really want realism, you should start working together with others, not complain that some things aren't modeled realistically.

 

I might want to fly a SIM that is as realistic as possible, the plane itself. My tactics are my perrogative, I apply them as I see fit, whatever my mood is, whatever the circunstances it will change, the aircraft should not, it should remain as good as it can get. Never heard the argument a SIm should be arcade balanced because any given number of players wont want to cooperate, wich I do BTW just not everyday on ventrilo.

 

This is the essence of a mainstream Fighter simulator.

Edited December 5, 2009 by Pilotasso

[Vekkinho]

For you it might be a simulator, but for many people flying on multiplayer servers LockOn is a game.

 

So if for the sake of your realism there are multiplayer servers with a 4:1 ratio of MiG vs F-15 and you want to fly F-15 but it is already taken, then what do you do?

 

You stand in line, waiting patiently til someone quits ;)

 

Realistic, isn't it?

[VMFA117_Poko]

I would like someone to define the balance in this case. Write down exacly how it should look in LockOn 'cuz I just simply don't get it. Always when I think about it

This is where it can be done with rule 50/50.

 

If realism disturbs MP gameplay maybe whole multiplayer should be re-thought-out. One incoming game (not combat flight simulation) has similar problem but devs have found a solution to give players a wonderful MP gameplay experience. It's incoming "Alien vs Predator 3". Search and read about it. Unfortunatelly that solution can't be transfered to LockOn - I just want to show you that when we think deeply maybe we will find a fix to problem in other areas than messing with realism.

[Vault]

I vote for realism, any realistic modification to LO's aircraft regarding avionics, flight performance and weapons should be implemented into the code by the devs, all aircraft and their associated weapons and avionics should be modelled as accurately as reasonably practical, if that made Fighter/Bomber/Heli A better than B at A2A/A2G then so be it.

[Pilotasso]

Precisely...and note that we dont know what's next on DCS, could be Su-30MKI versus F-16 and I still would want it as real as it gets. :)

[Vekkinho]

What we've got here is a typical panic.

 

Players that keep flying RUSFOR planes in MP are afraid they'd be overwhelmed by superior systems - (read LEAVU help). I say it's just a panic.

 

But if this really happens lots of players will "deflect" - start turning into F-15C players. At least because they believe their chances are better with it!

 

Next you'll see 30 F-15C slots taken and noone in a MiG or Su to fight against!

 

They can start fighting eachother! This way you'll have Red Flag like events all over the HL with one team playing the aggressors and others trying to club them down.

[Panzertard]

Poko/Vault/Pilatasso, dumbing down the original game wasnt the question.

Neither if a mod was to do that.

 

Unfortunately what I tried to indiate through the followup-text wasnt percived correctly - this poll will look a bit odd. ;)

 

I rather wanted to see if it irrelevant to maintain balance - or if it's important enough to devote time & resources into it for the Mod-makers.

 

So in the that aspect - you can see that quite many people thinks balance is irrelevant. No time to devote time or consideration to it.

There seems to be 3 people that thinks it's worth using time and resources to keep preventing exploits / balance breaking mechanisms from reaching the MP when 3'rd party modders create new addons.

(I'm one of them ;) )

I think in that context more would "care" - so I think I've must have written it very badly in the start there somewhere :)

 

But the following posts are quite interesting any many aspects - because it discussed things I didnt originally intend. :)

Also I'm sure we'll see more and more "I want more real simulators from ED" which isnt the topic at all. :)

 

EDIT: PS: I suck at creating polls - it had to be said ;)

Edited December 5, 2009 by Panzertard

[Grimes]

If by balance you mean to limit 3rd party enhancements of gameplay that every player doesn't have access to, then yes, balance is vitally important. The same issue would be raised if we could easily and effeciently create 3rd party aircraft and fly them in the game without everyone in the server having a the same mod. It just isn't fair to the people who don't have it.

 

Since LEAVU is the elephant in the room, here is my stance on balance and LEAVU with regard to online gameplay balance.

 

Player with vanilla game enters vanilla game server = balanced

Player with LEAVU enters vanilla game server = UNbalanced

Player with vanilla game enters LEAVU compatible server = UNbalanced

Player with LEAVU enters LEAVU compatible server, where every aircraft is only an F-15 and LEAVU is required = balanced.

 

Unbalanced games are the result of a player missing out on the informational capabilities that they simply do not understand or have.

Balanced games feature everyone on the same playing field, whether it be the vanilla game, or a LEAVU enhanced game.

[3Sqn_Sven]

You won't see hoards of players running to the F-15 if it's given datalink. You'll just see the teams becoming unbalanced in servers in order to offset it's BVR capability. This happened a lot in 1.01. I specifically flew the Su more than the Eagle because it was more of a challenge. You had to work hard to survive to <10nm, once you had tally though it was generally all over for Mr Eagle. I specifically remember joining Red to fly a Flanker when the odds were already 4 blue vs 7 red and F-15 had amraam. This made it fair...after all, once you've got the realism, you've got to have a sporting chance to make it fun right?

 

Come 1.12, the Eagle was initially the tougher bird to fly IMO, especially vs the MiG. Squadron teamwork and tactics have shifted the advantage back to the Eagle in our case at 3sqn.

 

It's a fickle thing, and players will move teams in order to MAKE balance. As people have been pointing our here, balance doesn't have to mean 1:1 ratio.

[TheMoose]

I would prefer realism then nothing else, let the skills sort it out in DCS skies. Balance is for arcade players. If I would like balance, I would be playing Hawks, which I don’t...Bring back to life the F15C and all its "inclusive" glory;)

[Kuky]

^^^

then be a skillful player and fly less capable aircraft to fight more capable aircraft ;)

[RvEYoda]

In the RvE 80s server we had almost 2 migs per 1 F-15

This worked very well with payloads

4xAim7 and 4x9 vs 4x73 +2xR27

 

in the end we logged the results and I think blue won 2 games and red won 1

each game lasted for a few hours

[3Sqn_Sven]

In the RvE 80s server we had almost 2 migs per 1 F-15

This worked very well with payloads

4xAim7 and 4x9 vs 4x73 +2xR27

 

in the end we logged the results and I think blue won 2 games and red won 1

each game lasted for a few hours

 

Very much the same as the old 169th missions in the days of 1.01 and 1.02. They ran almost exclusively F-15's out of Sochi with 2xAim7 and 4xAim9 vs Su-27's and MiG-29's out of Maykop with 2xR-27R and 4x R73. Eagles did better BVR, ruskies did better WVR.

[RvEYoda]

Yeah once it got to Wvr we were in trouble!

[Vekkinho]

Very much the same as the old 169th missions in the days of 1.01 and 1.02. They ran almost exclusively F-15's out of Sochi with 2xAim7 and 4xAim9 vs Su-27's and MiG-29's out of Maykop with 2xR-27R and 4x R73. Eagles did better BVR, ruskies did better WVR.

 

And that's pretty realistic AFAIK!

[104th_Crunch]

Poko/Vault/Pilatasso, dumbing down the original game wasnt the question.

Neither if a mod was to do that.

 

Unfortunately what I tried to indiate through the followup-text wasnt percived correctly - this poll will look a bit odd. ;)

 

I rather wanted to see if it irrelevant to maintain balance - or if it's important enough to devote time & resources into it for the Mod-makers.

 

So in the that aspect - you can see that quite many people thinks balance is irrelevant. No time to devote time or consideration to it.

There seems to be 3 people that thinks it's worth using time and resources to keep preventing exploits / balance breaking mechanisms from reaching the MP when 3'rd party modders create new addons.

(I'm one of them ;) )

I think in that context more would "care" - so I think I've must have written it very badly in the start there somewhere :)

 

But the following posts are quite interesting any many aspects - because it discussed things I didnt originally intend. :)

Also I'm sure we'll see more and more "I want more real simulators from ED" which isnt the topic at all. :)

 

EDIT: PS: I suck at creating polls - it had to be said ;)

 

I think you explained it alright, but the actual poll questions are misleading.

 

Anyway, Grimes post is an excellent one IMO in terms of mods and balance.