Jump to content

Current EC Bugs


51 minutes ago, przybysz86 said:

 

3. AAA is not accurate enough to kill jets. Well - not just jets. Anything flying above 750km/h is immune to AAA. In rank 5 and 6 games going 800 or even 1000km/h is not that big of a deal so most of the time enemy planes can just strafe AF and fly away. 

I agree with everything you say, including the deficiencies of airfield defenses. But idk how to feel about this^ statement.

I rarely get away from an airfield without taking damage, despite being supersonic. On the other hand,  jets continually strafe people on runways without getting shot down, so I know there's a real problem. Maybe I'm just unlucky..

  • Upvote 1
medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Basically this sums up what's has been spoken

I'm sorry if its unrelated but I need to get this out of my system.
 

1 till 4 and 6 I agree and we need a little promise that Gaijin will stop adding imba p2w completely broken vehicles to this game. Ju-288, Be-6, F89D, A2D-1 on tanks there was an IS-7 black Friday sale incident 2-3 years ago...I'd like to say that its just a rushed job without proper balance calculation and will be fixed shortly....
Its just one too many to think that. This looks intentional and also feels like spitting on the face of loyal player base. I mean why do I have to invest in talismans, winning the match, helping my team investing in premium account etc. if these guys just buy one plane and laugh at my face. T6 is just an abomination at this moment. Ridiculous turrets, air spawn, no crew luck, absurd rewards, Chinese sweat factory zomber players going up and down, and bugs like cherry on top....

I think this is the biggest bug in this game, this mentality, allowing this to happen.

Of course I'm up-voting this and you guys know how many bugs I have reported will keep reporting, I appreciate your dedication, good luck, sorry about feels but this is extremely frustrating.
 

medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, przybysz86 said:

3. AAA is not accurate enough to kill jets. Well - not just jets. Anything flying above 750km/h is immune to AAA.

 

Lies. You get damage of oil system like 50% of time you pass an AF even at 1100.
You are trying to promote your questionable suggestion to empower AAA like a bug-fix. Current AAA has only one bug - tracers often go in random direction. Power of AAA is not a question of bug-fix and it has no place in this thread. 


AF bots aren't bugged as well. They are ineffective, I would rather remove them totally, but this is again suggestion, not bug,

 

Battles ending fast in full sessions is also not a bug. I would add 100k more points to each side (once) if session reaches 10v10 people, but this is again not the subject of THIS topic.

 

Edited by NebeI
  • Thanks 1
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, NebeI said:

Lies. You get damage of oil system like 50% of time you pass an AF even at 1100.

I do not own jets myself yet but I've talked to people who confirmed this. I will leave it up to them to defend this point.  :)

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, przybysz86 said:

I do not own jets myself yet but I've talked to people who confirmed this. I will leave it up to them to defend this point.  :)

 

If you don't own jets, why do you even talk about jets? This statement came from you, and it is false.

Edited by NebeI
  • Thanks 1
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, NebeI said:

 

If you don't own jets, why do you even talk about jets? This statement came from you, and it is false.

That's because this list is combined list from various players put into one.

 

 

This was mentioned by them often and that's why I put it on this list

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To support przy here, 
A, Nebel no need to come on so strong, someone doesn't need to have first hand experience to have some knowledge.
B, I fly more jets then props and What Przy is saying is mostly right.  While the 'Imune to AAA' part isn't 100% correct, all the AAA Will do is get a lucky hit on you and hit your fuel or oil tank, which wont even matter cuz that oil tank is going to be fine for least a good 10 minutes.     If you're going 700km/h You can easily fly over, strafe an entire air squadron worth of peeps on the runway and get away again with just a little leak. 
I do hope you fly stuff that isn't called 'F84G' so forth otherwise I can see why you react so strongly against it :dry:

 

  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@przybysz86 

As @NebeI said, you will very often get oil leak when passing low over enemy runway on jet.

AAA almost never killing the pilot of jet fighter, or doing any other critical damage, but looks like AF AAA are now scripted to give you oil leak almost every time you flying over runway.

I don't have supersonic fighter yet, so can't say is it works for them the same way or not.

Edited by HOPPING_PONY
  • Thanks 1
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, przybysz86 said:

1. double tonnage bug - I know fix was announced but still not there. This have massive consequence as it give double reward to zombers (promoting bomber spam), makes games last much shorter and basically destroys whole economy of RP, SL and SP rewards for EC.

 

Apparently fixed in 1.93! Which is good news, but game mechanic changes should still be changed to incentivize returning to base and not making airfields the primary targets for heavy bombers.

 

22 hours ago, przybysz86 said:

2. AF guardians hopeless against enemy bombers. They either do not attack or do it so badly and so late that enemy is usually dead before they react of they get killed before they do anything. We also had reports of them ignoring bombers and focusing on fighters. Given that suicide bombers are biggest issue now, guardians should be more aggressive and focus on targets with largest bombload

 

Airfield guardians mostly get involved in stationary turning fights occurring over airfields. And yes, their pattern and reaction distance doesn't give them much effectiveness against bombers. I'm unsure as to what could be done about this, maybe they could be given better aircraft in Rank V and Rank VI, and maybe a specifically longer spotting and reaction range when it comes to bombers on a direct course towards a specific airfield.

 

On the other hand, bots in general are pretty annoying, and the regular bots can already "home in" on aircraft from the other side of the map, which is incredibly frustrating when you know how impossible that would be for a player. So I'm not too keen on making the airfield guardians stronger in this regard, even against bombers.

 

However, an early warning system of some kind could be very interesting in terms of co-ordinating bomber interception. On early tiers, there could be a network of visual spotters on your side of map, relaying messages to command. On higher tiers, and depending on map, there could be early radar systems, and then more advanced radar systems towards later tiers. Those messages could then be posted on the display similarly to the "Airfield X is being attacked" messages. For example, if the spotters or the radar system detects enemy bombers, the system would generate a message containing the approximate position, altitude, and heading of the bombers. Possibly even aircraft type, with accuracy depending on range. Destroying the spotting or radar stations would then give a significant advantage in terms of situational awarenes. Additionally, flying low would be a valid tactical choice, since it would give you an option to "fly under the radar" to avoid detection.

 

22 hours ago, przybysz86 said:


3. AAA is not accurate enough to kill jets. Well - not just jets. Anything flying above 750km/h is immune to AAA. In rank 5 and 6 games going 800 or even 1000km/h is not that big of a deal so most of the time enemy planes can just strafe AF and fly away. Maybe some radar guided AA for jet maps could help. And how about SAM manpads, etc?
It would also help if on all maps we get AAA ring say 200-500m way  the airfield to intercept incoming suicide bombers (they usually fly at less than 2km altitude). It would be historical - for example Germany built flak-alleys to cover Me-262 on final approach.

 

AAA issues seem to be due to lack of effective tracking on high speed aircraft.

 

If you approach an airfield completely straight, even if you're going Mach 1+, the AAA will usually get some light hits on your aircraft, but usually only enough to give you an oil leak or fuel leak.

 

Technically all AI guns are "radar guided" in the sense that they are computer controlled. Their limits come from traverse speed and possibly being limited to time delayed shells. I agree that airfield AAA does need to be much more effective, and giving them similar capabilities to radar-guided guns is certainly an option. However, I would propose the following: Keep the current static AAA emplacements, but add a perimeter of radar-guided SPAA vehicles around the airfields. And make sure these vehicles also respawn after a certain time, because otherwise people will just kill the AAA and then the airfield will be completely defenseless.

 

However, this would require aircraft to get their radar warning receivers so that people can know when a radar is lighting them up.

 

Secondly, I would strongly recommend that fixed-wing aircraft get some specific tools against radar AAA. Both defensive and offensive tools. Defensive countermeasures include chaff (and flares as well), and preferably also electronic countermeasure pods. Offensive tools include things like AGM-45 Shrikes or the eastern block equivalents.

 

In other words, radar AAA or SAMs would be a good thing to protect the airfields, but with current aircraft capabilities it would cause other issues.

 

22 hours ago, przybysz86 said:

4. strange economy reward calculation. For example using unguided rockets on airfield give lot of points (someone said that F89D can get 10 000 air superiority points in one flight if he dumps all rockets on enemy AF) even if those rockets does little damage (low tonnage). Not to mention all actions against AFs and bases give much, much more reward than any other task and often people attacking AFs get 1-2 million SL per battle while fighters for 30+ (yup) kills get at best 500k with premium account.

 

Yes, the rocket damage needs to be re-assessed, it should by no means result in greater rewards than bombing does.

 

That said I think it would be best if bombers had dedicated, strategic area targets available for delivering their bombs. Airfield attacks could be relegated to a tactical role - instead of aiming to "destroy" an airfield, it could lose functionality with the destroyed modules and be temporarily knocked out of commission.

 

The strategic targets would be the ones that determine how fast the airfields can be repaired, so it would be crucial to have bombers attacking the strategic targets and attackers making attacks on airfields to have the best effect on the enemy's ability to conduct battle against you.

 

 

22 hours ago, przybysz86 said:

Also - air superiority points are awarded too fast. Often games that are well populated ends in 1-1,5hrs not because bases losts etc but one team reach 150 000 pts.

 

I think this is largely because bomber points are included in the "air superiority" points which acts as a "reverse ticket counter" of sorts.

 

I have long been of the opinion that bombers need to have a separate, "strategic ticket counter", while the rest of the game functions on the "tactical ticket counter" like it currently does. Attacking the strategic targets mentioned above would result in points on the strategic counter. Attacking anything else, like other aircraft or ground targets or even airfields, would result in points on the tactical counter.

 

The mission should not end until both counters are depleted on one side, or one side reaches the maximum value first. This would mean that mission victories would be divided into strategic and tactical victories, though of course you could get both for a complete victory.

 

This way, bombers alone would be very unlikely to steamroll maps quickly.

 

 

 

22 hours ago, przybysz86 said:

5. spawn points awarded at the end of battle are sometimes at random re-set. Normally when I go to next battle i have up to 200SP from last one but from time to time I get 0SP. Some people said it can be connected to flying in squad or when I for example play tank RB battle and then get back to SB EC I will get 0SP. It's unconfirmed but they might be onto something.

 

Huh, I haven't observed this but it might be because I don't play RB Ground.

 

22 hours ago, przybysz86 said:

6. most abused bombers still get air-spawn. It's great to see planes like B-29 or Ju-288 to get AF spawn but I am pretty sure that Me-264 with minimum fuel load can easily take off even with heaviest payload. No need to change anything. This plane on WEP have enough power to take off with runway to spare. And there is also issue of things like Be-6. I know you mentioned option to give them backup air-spawn on map edge - any news on this idea?

 

In all honesty I think strategic bomber gameplay should be based on formations spawning on edge of map, flying their way to strategic targets, dropping their bombs, and then flying back to an exit point where they would despawn, and player aircraft in the formation would get a complete sortie out of that.

 

For planes like Ju 288 or other similar aircraft that act more like strike bombers, airfield spawn is more sensible.

 

22 hours ago, przybysz86 said:

7. EC mission seem to sometimes be too heavy for servers. When there is a lot of AAA or air-2-air missile is fired server sometimes lose synchronisation and "rubber banding" occurs. Sometimes also tracers from AA and bomber gunners are not displayed. Not sure if related with mission design or not but something to look into for sure. Dying from invisible bomber fire is at best annoying.

 

Yes, there are the instances of rubber banding which seems to be tied to some aircraft or ground units being destroyed, and then there's the "jumpy" behaviour at Mach 0.96-0.97 where the plane's nose twitches up and down, which feels a lot like a momentary de-synchronization between the client and server FM.

 

The rubber banding feels like the server not being able to handle the load, so the simulation slows down for a moment, and the client/server synchronization enforces the server status on clients every few seconds. When the server load decreases, it becomes able to do the calculations in real time again, and the game continues normally.

 

The twitching at transonic speeds might be a different issue.

 

22 hours ago, przybysz86 said:

8. when player-created room is set up and you put same nation in both teams (say US vs US) game will join people only to one team. This allows games of 29 vs 1 to be created that are used to exploit the super-high bomber rewards and basically get super fast grind. This I think is more problem for GJ than players. Normal players stay away from such rooms but you are loosing money - why would anyone buy premium account if they can exploit very unbalanced economy and buggy match  making to get into game with no enemy in it?

 

Nothing to say here - it shouldn't be possible to make a nation fight against itself.

 

22 hours ago, przybysz86 said:

9. sometimes when played die and re-spawn in the same plane again, he can't select AF. Well - he can select but game will still spawn him on AF he used previously even though the plane he used was lost and not landed.

 

I think this may be connected to the battle rating. If you're flying a plane that's lower BR than the minimum BR of the battle, this issue of being "stuck" on an airfield and not being able to change it seems to happen.

 

Airfields have other, more serious issues though. There's the bug of spawning "underground" on some airfield locations on Afghanistan and English Channel maps, and on some airfields, the terrain can poke through the runway, causing sharp elevation changes that can wreck your plane on take-off or landing.

Edited by Herra_Tohtori
  • Like 3
  • Upvote 3
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, HOPPING_PONY said:

@przybysz86 

As @NebeI said, you will very often get oil leak when passing low over enemy runway on jet.

AAA almost never killing the pilot of jet fighter, or doing any other critical damage, but looks like AF AAA are now scripted to give you oil leak almost every time you flying over runway.

I don't have supersonic fighter yet, so can't say is it works for them the same way or not.

 

If you come at 750 km/h - this is slow, and you will get hit around 50% of time. If you come at around 1000, like I try to do on valuable aircrafts, hit probability is maybe 20-30%. Anyway, oil leak forces you to depart sooner or later. I often strafe and you won't believe how much I get hit even while flying 1/2 square from AF  at 1 km alt and at 1000 km/h.
Again, all this AAA debate has no place in this topic about BUGS.
AAA is only bugged in terms of tracers. All other aspects are balance questions.

 

 

Edited by NebeI
  • Like 1
medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Herra_Tohtori said:

 

 

However, an early warning system of some kind could be very interesting in terms of co-ordinating bomber interception. On early tiers, there could be a network of visual spotters on your side of map, relaying messages to command. On higher tiers, and depending on map, there could be early radar systems, and then more advanced radar systems towards later tiers. Those messages could then be posted on the display similarly to the "Airfield X is being attacked" messages. For example, if the spotters or the radar system detects enemy bombers, the system would generate a message containing the approximate position, altitude, and heading of the bombers. Possibly even aircraft type, with accuracy depending on range. Destroying the spotting or radar stations would then give a significant advantage in terms of situational awarenes. Additionally, flying low would be a valid tactical choice, since it would give you an option to "fly under the radar" to avoid detection.

 

I really like this, very very much! :yes_yes_yes:

 

37 minutes ago, NebeI said:

 

If you come at 750 km/h - this is slow, and you will get hit around 50% of time. If you come at around 1000, like I try to do on valuable aircrafts, hit probability is maybe 20-30%. Anyway, oil leak forces you to depart sooner or later. I often strafe and you won't believe how much I get hit even while flying 1/2 square from AF  at 1 km alt and at 1000 km/h.
Again, all this AAA debate has no place in this topic about BUGS.
AAA is only bugged in terms of tracers. All other aspects are balance questions.

 

 

 

Every time I fly above or near enemy fields I get hit by AAA no matter at what speed, i would say a good 80% chance of being hit, not in a deadly way, but of course leaking oil, fuel. 

I found more deadly the AAA's placed along the river on Stalingrad. I don't know if it's just me having a bad luck, but most of the times, if passing there, i end up being on fire

  • Thanks 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Increasing long-range AAA effectiveness can make things worse, because maps are too small for post-war jets, and almost all dogfights will end up by pursued plane running to AAA for protection. And I'm not a big a fan of AI fighters either, because of their unrealistic behavior.

I think adding small-caliber close range guns with clearly visible tracers (.50 cals or 20mm) to runway protection can be a good fix.

Edited by HOPPING_PONY
  • Upvote 1
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok guys. So what's the conclusion? Shall I remove the AA point from the list? It's there based on your inputs of jet games being all about constant AF strafing and AA being unable to deter enemy.

 

48 minutes ago, NebeI said:

Again, all this AAA debate has no place in this topic about BUGS.

 

Take it easy man. AAA was only one point. I didn't want to create whole new post just for it.

 

 

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, przybysz86 said:

Ok guys. So what's the conclusion? Shall I remove the AA point from the list? It's there based on your inputs of jet games being all about constant AF strafing and AA being unable to deter enemy.

 

AAA effectiveness is very complex topic to simply call it a "bug".

Yes, a lot of jet EC (5, 6) players want more protection on runways. But this issue can be viewed from very different perspectives.

It's more about mission design choices, so, I'd exclude It from this particular list.

Edited by HOPPING_PONY
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the point about AAA can stay because clearly it is dysfunctional at Rank 5-6 battles against fast jets.

 

The way to address this is, I think, making the airfield AAA more effective - radar SPAA would be an obvious way to do it - but at the same time the maps need to be larger so that players can't just turn tail and run into their airfields the moment things get difficult. At the moment, the frontline is like one minute away from airfields. It's ridiculously easy to end up over an airfield completely by accident.

 

Not to mention that planes like the Phantom or the MiG-21 are not even capable of reaching their advertised top speed in the current maps because when they reach map border, they bounce back at 600 km/h, and they can't accelerate fast enough to reach their top speed in the space available to them...

 

Before radar AAA or SAMs make their way into EC, though, aircraft absolutely need some tools to have some chance against those threats.

Edited by Herra_Tohtori
  • Upvote 3
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok. I've edited my post. For now I've removed things that seem to be fixed like double tonnage and rocket-spam super-rewards. If someone have proof they are still a thing we can always put them back on the list

 

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, HOPPING_PONY said:

I don't have supersonic fighter yet, so can't say is it works for them the same way or not.

It is the same with supersonic jets. You almost never make it away from an airfield without an oil leak and random damage all over. Injured pilot happens sometimes too. 

1 hour ago, LostF0X said:

 

I really like this, very very much! :yes_yes_yes:

I also think it's a great idea.

1 hour ago, LostF0X said:

Every time I fly above or near enemy fields I get hit by AAA no matter at what speed, i would say a good 80% chance of being hit, not in a deadly way, but of course leaking oil, fuel. 

Exactly right. It's nearly impossible to be near an enemy AF and not get tagged by rng or whatever. But ther runway staffers are a real problem, so idk what the solution is. 

medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Developer
On 28/10/2019 at 18:34, przybysz86 said:

@lastGrayAngel


2. AF guardians hopeless against enemy bombers. They either do not attack or do it so badly and so late that enemy is usually dead before they react of they get killed before they do anything. We also had reports of them ignoring bombers and focusing on fighters. Given that suicide bombers are biggest issue now, guardians should be more aggressive and focus on targets with largest bombload

 

i removed aif fighters from sentinnels targets. it may help. but cause there is no any priority list for sentinnels it will no much help.

On 28/10/2019 at 18:34, przybysz86 said:

@lastGrayAngel
 

4.5 a bug when destroying enemy convoy give air superiority points to the enemy. Basically when we finish the task they get +10k pts

 

fixed

 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, lastGrayAngel said:

 

i removed aif fighters from sentinnels targets. it may help. but cause there is no any priority list for sentinnels it will no much help.

thank you. I will observe and let you know.

medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Developer
On 28/10/2019 at 18:34, przybysz86 said:

@lastGrayAngel

7. EC mission seem to sometimes be too heavy for servers. When there is a lot of AAA or air-2-air missile is fired server sometimes lose synchronisation and "rubber banding" occurs. Sometimes also tracers from AA and bomber gunners are not displayed. Not sure if related with mission design or not but something to look into for sure. Dying from invisible bomber fire is at best annoying.

 

i lowered small aaa spawn weight. so it may help

14 minutes ago, przybysz86 said:

thank you. I will observe and let you know.

it's not at live servers yet. just made this fix and merged it to 93 thread

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Developer
On 31/10/2019 at 12:21, lastGrayAngel said:

i lowered small aaa spawn weight. so it may help

this one not at live servers yet. my fault - fixed default values before, but forgot that every mission have own spawn weight settings

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The bug of disappearing spawn points is still on. I had it with different nations in the last 3 days, joined some matches and my reserve of sp was 0

  • Sad 1
  • Upvote 1
medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, LostF0X said:

The bug of disappearing spawn points is still on. I had it with different nations in the last 3 days, joined some matches and my reserve of sp was 0

Yes, me too. Last few days all nations seem to have been set to zero at some point.

  • Upvote 1
medal

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...