PDA

View Full Version : Battlefield1942 and EA's way of doing things...



XyZspineZyX
08-13-2003, 07:18 PM
I'm not trying to start stuff here but, I've got to say it. Anyone who has played BF1942 knows that we are up to our fouth patch. We have been given many extra maps (Free) and many additional installments. The game has been bettered in every way with installments coming very regularly. We have had to pay for some but, have been given new maps and vehicles (free). Heck, they have even provided us a early look at the new installment (Free). I am going to buy what ever they bring out simply for there dedication to the on-line players. They have even fixed some major issues with cheats. I am sure that Oleg and his team will try and get to this level but, as of yet I'm not impressed with current progress. I am aware that things take time. I hope that this is not a sign of things to come. This is a better game in terms of simulation but, as far as on-line play there is a long way to go. Oleg said it himself on-line players are only (5% or 10% not sure) of the whole. I think FM's are great but, until the net code can be fix to fly smooth nothing will really be fixed. Warping needs to stop and sound issues must be sorted out. I'm just saying that the whiners are not all wrong here... Please do not take this as a flame but, an obervation.

XyZspineZyX
08-13-2003, 07:18 PM
I'm not trying to start stuff here but, I've got to say it. Anyone who has played BF1942 knows that we are up to our fouth patch. We have been given many extra maps (Free) and many additional installments. The game has been bettered in every way with installments coming very regularly. We have had to pay for some but, have been given new maps and vehicles (free). Heck, they have even provided us a early look at the new installment (Free). I am going to buy what ever they bring out simply for there dedication to the on-line players. They have even fixed some major issues with cheats. I am sure that Oleg and his team will try and get to this level but, as of yet I'm not impressed with current progress. I am aware that things take time. I hope that this is not a sign of things to come. This is a better game in terms of simulation but, as far as on-line play there is a long way to go. Oleg said it himself on-line players are only (5% or 10% not sure) of the whole. I think FM's are great but, until the net code can be fix to fly smooth nothing will really be fixed. Warping needs to stop and sound issues must be sorted out. I'm just saying that the whiners are not all wrong here... Please do not take this as a flame but, an obervation.

XyZspineZyX
08-13-2003, 07:20 PM
Hey dude you can model planes and program stuff so it goes faster.

Also, EA is a huge company, and they can churn out way more than maddox can.

XyZspineZyX
08-13-2003, 07:21 PM
EA`s way of doing things? Did you see the Fiasco with the NEED for SPEED 4?. They ripped loyal PC users off big time!!





"Tis better to work towards an Impossible Good, rather than a Possible Evil."

SeaFireLIV.

XyZspineZyX
08-13-2003, 07:25 PM
I never liked the BF1942 game engine. It felt so dated even when the game was new.





<center>http://www.km011a0004.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/poser3.jpg <CENTER>
<center><b/><table style="filter:glow[color=#FF0000,strength=4)"><TD><font color="#1A0000"face="americanabt">A society flexible enough to stand for everything really stands for nothing<font></table></center>

XyZspineZyX
08-13-2003, 07:30 PM
Its a worthy comparison on the surface but under the hood EA and Battlefield isn't quite like Maddox/UBI and Forgotten Battles.

Although Battlefields netcode is definately impressive, their game is generally a resource hog and the physics model is meerly ok. On the other hand, FB has a complex physics model, realistic FB calculations, damage modeling (as opposed to hit point system) and a plethora of other important variables that are taken into consideration on an internet game.

Battlefield is a fantastic game, I'm not knocking it in any way...but development time on individual aircraft in Battlefield for instance is going to mostly be spent on the visuals (and it doesn't have to be 99% accurate like we have it in FB) and barely spent on any specific physics. A Zero flys the same as a Corsair flys the same as a Spitfire in that game.

So EA has a good model but I don't think it would work here exactly as it has for them.

http://freespace.volitionwatch.com/icefire/icefire_tempest.jpg
"Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so few." - Winston Churchill

XyZspineZyX
08-13-2003, 07:35 PM
I'm also amazed at the support of BF1942 is getting. Especially considering it's EA. It was buggy as hell when it first came out but now I don't think there's a single bug in it and we got new maps, weapons, effects all for free (and a payed add-on if you wanted it). After 6 months with FB, all we have gotten so far are some bug fixes, the introduction of a horrible sound problem, and problems with connecting to the game publishers own game service. I am, to say the least, extremely dissapointed. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif


http://home.grics.net/~donovan/lzsymbls.jpg
"Though the course may change sometimes, rivers always reach the sea."

XyZspineZyX
08-13-2003, 07:35 PM
Apples and oranges my friend.

XyZspineZyX
08-13-2003, 07:42 PM
I have not been clear with my point. I am not an EA rep or anything. What I am trying to say is that with some major issues with netcode. Oleg and team should been investing time into the real issues and not new aircraft or installments. I know that many of you would like the aircraft but, I would have rather have gotten what we have worked out first. As far as BF's engine it's as smooth as can be even with 64 ppl. I know it has a joke for FM and the games are very differnt but, I'm talking about direction. It has had it's problems as with version three there were issues with sound. I'm not debating with game is better just that I would like to see things with the patch going in a better direction. I think I have more fun with FB and will wait for what ever they come up with.

XyZspineZyX
08-13-2003, 07:50 PM
BF1942 is a arcadish shoot'em'up in WW2-enviroment.. some like it - some don't. I'm one of them.. total rubbish..

Why don't you try Operation Flashpoint for good tactical war sim /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif

____________________________________



Official Sig:



<center>http://koti.mbnet.fi/vipez/shots/Vipez4.jpg </center>

XyZspineZyX
08-13-2003, 07:57 PM
1942 and r2r, I disliked the game since day one the player movemment is horable, theres a ton of cheats out there like all EA games. Its to arcadish but the graphics are great. The do have updates and nice addons in the patchs like bob but the day the patch is released theres cheats that work for the newest patch version same day its released.


http://mysite.verizon.net/vze4jz7i/ls.gif

Good dogfighters bring ammo home, Great ones don't. (c) Leadspitter

Zayets
08-13-2003, 08:00 PM
BF1942 sucks as a whole game. One thing it has better than FB , online play. Wait for Oleg , just a bit until he will set new standards in online gaming as he did with the concept of simulation.


Zayets out

XyZspineZyX
08-13-2003, 08:09 PM
Let's hope the net code in Lock-On is as good as Flanker.

Buzz_25th
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------47|FC=-
<center>
http://www.vfa25.com/images/imglib/Vfa25.jpg

Zayets
08-13-2003, 08:10 PM
BuzzU wrote:
- Let's hope the net code in Lock-On is as good as
- Flanker.

I think is unchanged. Never change the working stuff /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif
Does that mean , Buzz , that I can hunt you in my MIG?




Zayets out

XyZspineZyX
08-13-2003, 08:11 PM
Off subject. You want to talk cheats ...look at some of RBJ's post and tell me bout it. I was frozen by what this guy posts. I mean really. Yes BF has cheats but, with the pure settings things are better. I love FB and will wait. That's why I'm so upset. Damn BF gets better support! Your right in saying that this sim is the best there is.. CFS just plain sucks ...it's like 4 years behind. I think my comparison may not be a fair one. As the games have clear differences but, I just want the major bugs worked out with the netcode...

XyZspineZyX
08-13-2003, 08:11 PM
Riiiight.

So basically you're saying that after 3 or 4 patches, BF1942 is about as good as FB was upon release, bug-wise.

Beyond that, there's pretty much nothing to BF1942. It pretty much has only 1 vehicle, they just modify how it handles slightly and reskin it.

Planes, tanks, boats and jeeps are all the exact same thing, they just turn at different rates and have different top speeds.

When there's nothing to the game but maybe 4 or 5 unique base models and a bunch of different skins it's pretty easy to kick out additional "content".

There's nothing wrong with the way Oleg is doing things, in fact that's a big part of why I like IL-2 and FB so much.

Sure, there were and are a few very minor problems here and there, but overall both sims could have been taken from the box, installed with the original retail version and then never touched again, and they wouldn't have suffered much because of it.

It's definitely one of the most stable sims I've ever seen, FB has crashed on me once. That's it. IL-2 has never crashed.

Jane's F-15 at release? Pretty good, but still crashed a couple of times.

Jane's F-18? Way buggy the first time out.

Falcon 4? Count yourself lucky if the release version even ran.

Gunship!? That one just flat out sucked in addition to having serious bugs. It looked pretty though.

Janes WWII Fighters? Also not without its problems, especially in the system requirements department.

Going beyond all that, none of those sims have even come close to touching IL-2 and FB in scope, detail and stability. The quality of Oleg's work is far and above anything EA has spit out in the last 14 years.

So yeah, I agree, 1C doesn't do things like EA, and all I can say is thank God for that.

XyZspineZyX
08-13-2003, 08:28 PM
As a veteran of thousands of Battlefield games and an Il2er since the original, here are my thoughts if ya care:

Yes, BF1942 has gotten some very good support.

Yes, both the Sound and Netcode of FB need some serious tweaking.

However, you HAVE to look at the differences between the games. The "physics" model, "damage" model, etc.... of Battlefield is a joke. You have to take all this in to consideration because this speeds up the game. It also has some really wierd AI. EA is also about a gagillion times larger than Maddox Games, and has probably dozens more people working on all those patches and add ons than Maddox does.

The usualy server that a Battlefield game is running on is also much faster as well. They have dozens of official servers running the fastest connections and comps they can get their hands on. As far as I know, FB has not a single official server. Every game you play is another fan of the game using their own hardware to run the game. With the exception of maybe the GR server, none of these comes close to the setups used on Battlefield 1942.

lets compare FB to another game. Americas Army v1.9.

The reason I would like to do this is because AA has many of things that FB does, and its a first person shooter. It has very good physics, damage modeling, player movement and controls, "realism", cutting edge graphics(Much better than BF once you factor in everything), blah blah. AA also benefits from official servers with lots of bandwith to spare. The netcode for that game is on par with BF1942, and most of the people that play that game are using broadband. However, it is hard to go above 20 players in there, becuase of the added physics, etc... The game engine has something to do with it, but the arcadishness of Battlefield allows for so many people to be on at once with little or no lag.

Fish itchy

XyZspineZyX
08-13-2003, 08:30 PM
Do the planes in BF1942 still have reverse? /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-tongue.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

Cheers,

<CENTER>http://home1.gte.net/vze23gyt/files/p51_jaws.jpg</CENTER><CENTER><font size="+1"><div style="width:500;color:#FF2211;fontsize:11pt;filter:shado w Blur[color=red,strength=2)">73h /\/\u$7@/\/6 |*\/\//\/-/_ j00</div></center></font><FONT color="#59626B">[b]

XyZspineZyX
08-13-2003, 08:31 PM
People really do have a short memory. Anybody remember how many patches, new features, planes we got after the original IL-2 release, which by itself was the best flight sim on the market. Now Oleg and co. have to worry about making another(excellent) game, they can't spend all their time working on patches for FB. It looks to me that they decided to make one big patch for FB instead of 2 or 3 smaller ones.

XyZspineZyX
08-13-2003, 08:40 PM
And.... we still have several more additions coming for FB. At least 2 add ons and probably 2 or 3 patches left to go. I am sure they will get things pretty much sorted out in the next pattch/add on.


On last thing....

As some people have already mentioned, the added content of both the free maps and the pay for add ons for BF were really not terribly hard to do. The new maps are really no bigee, all they had to do was place objects, nothing really new.

The pay for addons are good, but all a BF-110 is in BF is a Dauntless with a different look. Same with the new vehicles, just new graphics really. They dont spend months tweaking weapons to act realistic, in fact they intentionally make them unrealistic. The fact that an infantry solider can survive near hits from a Tigers main gun is ridiculous, and everyone is running around with Automatic machine guns like Rambo during WW2 is laughable. Why did they make it WW2 if they didnt like the weapons they used back then? No M1 Rifle? Yeah, pooey.

Fish itchy

XyZspineZyX
08-13-2003, 08:48 PM
True the games have a vastly differnt player base. The FM is like your fling a roller coster.. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif I am just saying I would like to see On-line play as the main concern and installment as a secondary concern. I'm a damn ace in BF but, as far as FB I'm still running for my life (maybe 15 true kills as of yet.). I would have it no other way I'm here for the realism and challenge. FB is a better game no comparison.

Also, I really never thought UBI was so much smaller. I just did'nt realize that fact. I can see how it has taken so much time.

Message Edited on 08/13/0307:51PM by ExoSpeed

XyZspineZyX
08-13-2003, 08:58 PM
ExoSpeed wrote:
- True the games have a vastly differnt player base.
- The FM is like your fling a roller coster.. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-happy.gif I am
- just saying I would like to see On-line play as the
- main concern and installment as a secondary concern.
- I'm a damn ace in BF but, as far as FB I'm still
- running for my life (maybe 15 true kills as of
- yet.). I would have it no other way I'm here for the
- realism and challenge. FB is a better game no
- comparison.

Other than just lag, a better objective/scoring system needs to be added to FB before its really anyhting special for an online game. Something like Daemons script would have been nice to have out of the box.

- Also, I really never thought UBI was so much
- smaller. I just did'nt realize that fact. I can see
- how it has taken so much time.

Its not even just a matter of size, consider the difference in revenue between FB and BF1942. Millions and millions I am sure. Maddox games is working as hard as they can you can be sure of that, their dedication to their games is admirable.

Here is hoping they can fix these nasty sound bugs and rid us of this evil lag.

Fish itchy

XyZspineZyX
08-13-2003, 09:01 PM
EA does not make the game, DICE does. And for the record, coming from a dedicted BF1942 player EA blows! They don't know what their doing. They're charging extra money for some POS add-ons that only feature CRAPPY maps and veichles. It's pure bullsh!t. BF1942 is dying already (clan play that is).

XyZspineZyX
08-13-2003, 09:39 PM
I really enjoy the hell out of BF 1942. Great game, lot's of variety, you want planes? Jump in one, Jeeps? Jump in one, Tanks? jump in one, Battle cruisers? jump in one.
It offers a whole lotta FUN, WHO CARES if it isn't modeled to the T offering full sim aspects of every vehicle in it.
And to it's credit, there is at least a bare basics FM for each of the planes, it's bare, but it's there.
Looking forward to BF Vietnam too! http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

And it's funny, I don't recall spending one dime on Desert Combat...A full modern version of BF1942, done by the fans for the fans....

XyZspineZyX
08-13-2003, 09:43 PM
What's with all the comparisons between FB/Il2 and every game on the market. Apples and Oranges. Yeah, IL2 and FB are great, but if you have tunnel vision you miss some truly fun games that Maddox/Oleg/Il2/FB have nothing to do with.

THAT being said I am very happy with the online IL2 (haven't played FB yet) play (first online flight sim experience)

XyZspineZyX
08-13-2003, 10:33 PM
TaZ_Attack wrote:
- Do the planes in BF1942 still have reverse? <

I mapped my stick and throttle in BF1942, jumped in a corsair, and pulled the throttle back to what I thought was zero. WHOA! I'm going bass-ackwards! That was the first and last thing I did with that game . . . oh yeah . . . uninstall. /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif

http://www.cherokee.org/Culture/images/proctorZeke.jpg
"My ancestors didn't come over in the Mayflower--they met the boat."


http://www.theinformationminister.com/press.php?ID=612345111

XyZspineZyX
08-13-2003, 10:40 PM
Man, i am sorry but this comparassion is kinda funny. BF1942 is a kewl game for pure arcade fun. There is no FM/DM and other things that make IL2/FB a sim..and graphics and sound are rather a joke comparing to FB. Anything goes and nobody cares as long as it shoots and kills. I had BF1942 since day one and thought of something being wrong in that game never crossed my mind...because EVERYTHING is wrong in there /i/smilies/16x16_smiley-very-happy.gif But still fun game. I don`t play it too often...but never regret buying it.



Regards,
VFC*Crazyivan
http://www.rmutt.netfirms.com/ivan-reaper.gif

"No matter how good the violin may be, much depends on the violinist. I always felt respect for an enemy pilot whose plane I failed to down." Ivan Kozhedub


Message Edited on 08/13/0310:40PM by crazyivan1970

XyZspineZyX
08-13-2003, 10:41 PM
EA's way of doing things?? I've never seen a worse game than BF1942 when it was released, it was buggy as h... and not worth playing until the 1.25 patch, now with the 1.4 it actually performs quite well. In my opinion it was released undone only to profit from it in the hope that enough people would buy it to be able to make a patch. Any worse and noone would have bought it...

rgds

XyZspineZyX
08-13-2003, 10:50 PM
Question for you. Do you really want to see A-10's and F-117's flying around in WWII? Learn from CFS2's mistakes about an open-ended engine.

I am now accepting donations to help get the PBY flyable.

<center><form action="https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr" method="post">
<input type="hidden" name="cmd" value="_xclick">
<input type="hidden" name="business" value="gibbage@lycos.com">
<input type="hidden" name="item_name" value="Gibbages IL2; FB PBY Catalina Fund">
<input type="hidden" name="no_note" value="1">
<input type="hidden" name="currency_code" value="USD">
<input type="hidden" name="tax" value="0">
<input type="image" src="http://gibbageart.havagame.com/donations.gif" border="0" name="submit" alt="Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure!">
</form></center>

XyZspineZyX
08-13-2003, 11:58 PM
hi
i d have to agree with smoke,on this 1 i traded mine in after the italian camp. came out it was still to arcadish.
now they have jetpacks???i d rather play dod or cs they are way better games,imho.

After it was refeuled i climbed in.With many manipulations the mechcanics started the turbines.I followed their actions with the greatest of interest.The first one started quite easily.the second caught fire.In no time the whole engine was on fire.Luckily as a fighter pilot i was used to getting quickly out of the cockpit.The fire was quickly put out.The second plane caused no trouble - Adolf Galland (first time in a ME262)

XyZspineZyX
08-14-2003, 12:50 AM
Battlefield 1942 is sweet. As far as i can see, all games need to be based around being able to take on any type of role on the battlefield. Anyone who doesnt think that game is fun...takes this stuff way too seriously.

XyZspineZyX
08-14-2003, 01:29 AM
I may be my Crap system , but IL2 FB is the only game that I can't ply online without turning the sound off (or game freezes for good). I don't have trouble with anything else (Janes, EA, MIcroProse, M$) online. I thought this patch would fix, but .... noooo. :-(

XyZspineZyX
08-14-2003, 01:55 AM
DICE is not that much bigger then Maddox Games is it?
But on the other hand... You don't need to know that much about anything to change a thing or tow in BF1942 but you need to be a bloody expert to do it in IL-2, right?

XyZspineZyX
08-14-2003, 02:55 AM
BF:1942 is my favorite game of all time. The graphics are amazing, the support is amazing, the longevity is amazing, and the scope of the theatres is amazing. This game consistantly gets additions and just keeps going and going.

This game never claimed to be a simulation so some of the comments I have read are unjustified. The graphics are superb and I don't see how anybody can say it seems dated or that player movements look bad. I think they look great and I have played a ton of games. As far as cheats I have seen someone cheat a grand total of 1 time and I have logged serious hours in BF:1942. On the other hand I played Vietcong and witnessed numerous cheats right away but this seems to have calmed down as well. Vietcong is one of my favorites as well.

I'm not arguing with anyone here, I respect everyone's opinion. I just had to write something in response to the "BF:1942 IS CRAP" type post. There is no denying that BF:1942 was/is ground-breaking and the longevity and support the game recieves is excellent. Its success over along period of time says alot.

Still I think comparing game companies is a bit unfair I guess. But I will say that I recieved excellent support from DICE and the community whenever I posted a problem, and they are very receptive to consumer input. Still, I feel sorry for Maddox/1C because of the nature of the flight sim community, who demand perfection that is unattainable because of conflicting data and viewpoints.

Finally, there are annoying people in the BF:1942 community, but no more than in the IL-2/FB community. The 1942 community can be immature at times but the FB community can be arrogant and whiney. Just like everything else, it depends where you go.

Like I said I respect everyone's opinions, I just wanted to throw my thoughts out there.

<center>
http://www.brooksart.com/Icewarriors.jpg

"Ice Warriors", by Nicolas Trudgian.

XyZspineZyX
08-14-2003, 03:05 AM
ground breaking i dont think so they stole the idea from codemasters ofp first game to hav air/sea/ground/troops but they took out the complicated menuing system to get in vechiles and made it alot quicker but they also took out the sense of realism ofp had.

bf1942 does look amazing and runs very smooth online but cheats killed that game look at the server list 15000 servers but 12000 are empty


You guys will love call of duty all the programmers and modelers who left EA went to activision




http://mysite.verizon.net/vze4jz7i/ls.gif

Good dogfighters bring ammo home, Great ones don't. (c) Leadspitter

XyZspineZyX
08-14-2003, 03:08 AM
BF1942 is a nice game, fun to play when you get into a good game. the game is great, but some of the people who play it... yikes...

XyZspineZyX
08-14-2003, 04:58 AM
I love Bf42 but I love FB too...both have their strong points and weak points...

Steaks
375th FS

Is it Pets Mart...or Pet Smart????

XyZspineZyX
08-14-2003, 05:54 AM
I played many games. And I use to love arcades like Battle Field, Medal of Honor, Need 4 Speed.

But now I found myself playing only two games. IL2FB and Americas Army. Why? Because of its realism. Both these games have excelent fisics, damage models, etc. U can study history, weapons and other stuff.

And one more thing. Did u think about how long it takes to creat a aircraft in BF1942 anf FB? In BF its just simple fisics model one for all plains. In FB u study documents first, talk to real WW2 pilots and try to make the aircraft in the game behave as close to reality as possible. And all this circl over and over again for every new aircraft.

For eample, basic flight model and grafics for P51 Mustang is ready and u can fight it in the game but not fly. Many gamers would be happy to fly it. What are the reasons why Oleg doesn't make it flieble? Because the model is still not good enough. This is not an issue for Battle Field because it arcada.

XyZspineZyX
08-14-2003, 06:11 AM
LS, OFP was a great game but online was brutal. I like games focused on realism alot also but I still think BF:1942 is ground breaking in the way it handles all of the theatres, has many many vehicles, good/easy interface, etc. I'm looking more at the overall product and it's implementation. Perhaps I should have given OFP more of a chance online but my experiences were so bad and confusing that I gave up. OFP was the forerunner but its failed implementation IMHO kept it from reaching even part of its potential. I play Vietcong alot now and that is somewhat more realistic. I'm still waiting for the game that will do it all.

BF:1942 with extreme attention to realism, now that would be amazing. BF:1942's perceived "arcadiness" is a little bit exaggerated in the sense that most people play it that way. I am a very good 1942 (the best I have ever been at any game), and I don't die that often so to me it doesn't seem as arcade like. Too many people run out hell bent on glory and end up attracting flies every two minutes. Once in awhile I will find a server with some guys that are pretty serious and the respawn times are extreme. It completely transforms the game as you value your life much more. It is a great experience as people work as a team/unit, snipers scouting for artillary strikes, people calling for shore bombardments, etc. It can be much more realistic and satisfying experience if played properly (which 99% of the time it is not).

Call of Duty should be sweet, can't wait to get more info about it. Didn't know that alot of guys went over to that project. That's definitely cool.

<center>
http://www.brooksart.com/Icewarriors.jpg

"Ice Warriors", by Nicolas Trudgian.

XyZspineZyX
08-14-2003, 07:06 AM
Hey, I like BF1942, and I dont think it is crap. Just three things really bothered me about that game and caused me to finally give it up in favor of Americas Army.

1) They really should have put historically accurate weapons in there. If infantry had rifles, instead of everyone running around with a BAR, you would see more tactics and teamwork. People would be taking cover and trying to be accurate with their shots. One guy would have a harder time of it alone and so this would encourage teamwork.

2) Vehicles. Grenades should not damage tanks. You should be able to see around you in the plane without having to use a mouse look, which is quirky and doesn't really work, especially with the low view distance. Tank projectiles should be more damaging to infantry units and should have a much flatter trajectory. Planes should not carry 15 bombs and 900 rounds of ammunition. Rather, they should make the bombs a little more deadly to both tanks and infantry, and increase armaments of planes to historic reality.

3) Spawn camping. Some say it is a "tactic". Its just stupid and pointless. Throwing grenades in a courtyard, standing next to an ammo box for 10 minutes is ridiculous. My main reason for not liking BF1942 anymore, I much prefer AAs way of doing things, even if it means more downtime.

Fish itchy

XyZspineZyX
08-14-2003, 07:08 AM
You do know there are plenty of mods for BF1942? Especially mods that have been able to fix quite a lot of the realism issues in the game. Mods that completly change the ENTIRE game to be something else!

Now, lets compare that to America's Army or Il-2. Any mods? Hmm, don't see any mods. I'm stuck with the same crappy game all the time...

And who said playing with 20+ more players in BF1942 is laggy? This is absolute nonsense. I have played with 60 players on a server without one bit of lag (Average 40 ping, no packetloss). Try that in IL-2.


Now as far as netcode goes, I find a lot of Il-2 players arrogant and ignorant on this fact. Explain to me how you play with a 1000 ping and expect others to not take notice of your incredibly warping plane that blows everyone out of the sky without the other guy not even seeing you anywhere on the map? Boy, that's A LOT of realism there! Don't whine (Like a lot of you do) if I kick and ban you for it! Waa waaa waa waaa, unfair, waaa waa!

I defiantly agree that IL-2 is an amazing game, but please, improve the netcode for us! Give us dedicated server support so we can actually put up servers without having to load up the entire game and wasting one entire good PC that can do something else in the mean time while hosting.

XyZspineZyX
08-14-2003, 07:15 AM
US Dosiere,

Spawn camping should be addressed, that is the most annoying thing in the game. Thank God only certain maps (Kursk for example) are more prone to it.

As far as rifles go on open maps I usually go engineer and their rifles are very accurate at long distances. I love nailing a guy between the peepers that was spraying at me with a machine gun from the next area code.

All of your points in suggestion number "2" are very good ones. That would certainly help immersion/realism. Grenades do significantly less damge to tanks though after second patch or so. It takes a good 6 grenades to destroy a tank. Tanks weapon trajectory should not droop so much. Panzer isn't bad but Tiger is horrible. It's funny how the panzer and Sherman are great against infantry but the Tiger and the American heavy tanks round's seem less effective. Definitely agree about the planes.

Oh and Helsy, I agree about the Lag part. BF:1942 handles lag better than any game I know. The maps are huge and I play games with easily 32 players and experience no lag whatsoever. Pure joy. http://ubbxforums.ubi.com/infopop/emoticons/icon_smile.gif



<center>
http://www.brooksart.com/Icewarriors.jpg

"Ice Warriors", by Nicolas Trudgian.

Message Edited on 08/14/0306:17AM by kyrule2