CobaltUK

Nice weather in korea today. On a different topic will VG be still able to host BMS once the requirement to install original falcon 4 arrives with next release ? 4.33.1 is imminent.

As you know they can exist side by side so nothing to stop the conversion process if you can make enough time for both.

I was still getting jumped by migs during my last mission yesterday whilst bombing targets that fired back.

I get the same even with several hours until TOT

A good tool to check port status can be found here

http://portforward.com/help/portcheck.htm (portforward.com)

I have also been having LGB failures for quite a while now (originally it was ok in 433). The laser simply does not fire. I suspect my attempt to activate manual lasing in the keyfile has somehow messed it up (i only just this moment thought of that possibility).

Last mission my a.i wingman was doing the up down power settings thing.

!st onto the restarted server just now but the A.I issue was too much. Also missiles flying crazy paths no doubt same issue. If there were some way to monitor data flow from server to look for glitches in the feed.
No doubt it will straighten out as it usually does :)


Re joined a couple of hours later and no issues. Again solo

Logged in fine and joined in flight mission out of seosan since some hq flights already tasked. Wingman rolling.

Ive a new theory about this. I think we know there is specific code that controls how the A.I formate and generally move around. I believe this code was altered and enhanced for 433. Would not be the 1st example of specific areas of code being corrupted whilst main programme continues as normal. So maybe there is some corruption and only a re install of bms from verified installer files will fix this A.I behaviour. Just a theory.

When the A.I are released from the `formate` code by being given the check six or rtb command etc they fly normally again. This code controls them on the ground as well as in the air.

A quote from the bms forums

"UP speed for client is not as much as important than for the host side. What is very important for the client side is the DOWN speed and with bms 4.33 in campaign mode, the clients need to set at least bw 1024 just to be sure to have enough DOWN speed to receive every mp packets sent by the host and by the other clients "

This ties in exactly with what I wrote a few posts above. Namely that the BW relates to what the client is willing to DOWNLOAD from the host. That being my perception I will next try 2048 which I certainly can not actually provide as an upload but which I can as download rate.

My guess is the problem is with the local network to which server is connected. Just a gut feeling based on nothing really.

Has the `dubious connection` check been turned on yet ? Would be interesting to see if there were any change in the issues.

On the subject of ip banning if this is actually possible with a falcon server then it will naturally only work for those having a fixed or at least rarely changing ip. As ive noticed the same person at least twice recently running a 2nd campaign Next time i will see if his ip is same each time.

My memory of a BW topic on a falcon forum predates 433 and maybe 432 I do not remember. My memory of the topic/discussion where help/info was being given by a dev (or at least someone who understood the subject) is that the purpose of the BW setting (then and maybe not now) was not to indicate an upload speed from the client but to set a MAXIMUM acceptable speed of data coming from the server to that client so that buffers or whatever on the falcon client would not be swamped. If this is still the actual case then its not what we are currently chasing. Someone such as Minrah would easily meet actual requirements.
Could the meaning of the BW really have done a complete reversal or was what I read back then just wrong (and unchallenged by anyone incidentally).

Today I am getting the Kevin pending messege despite having successful flights 24hrs ago and prior to that.

For me, ctd at mission exit has returned after being absent a good while.
A 2nd campaign has just started. Made a note of 5 names 2 of which are registered at bms forum. Will send by pm as more appropriate.

Day 1 two flights made starting 1030. Excellent sam activity. Dodged 3 sa4 and 7 sa2 before being hit by an eighth because I did not get low soon enough. 2nd package 3 migs and a bomber downed plus 2 sam radar.
No issues with wingmen.

Considering day 1 there was no wall of migs so yet to think challenge too high. Its to be expected that there will be most AA and SA activity in 1st 2 days. More relaxed strike missions later on in the war. Reinstating HQ to more bases likely to be essential but Osan could provide one human squadron of block 40 for weapon variety and base location.

The danger of a harder challenge is running out of aircraft if only 1 non HQ

Are we talking about the same Israel theatre ?
http://www.bmsforum.org/forum/showthread.php?23621-Israeli-Theater-for-BMS-4-33-v1-0


Regarding bridges I USED to give them some priority but when you see vehicles crossing in the water even before bridges are hit there doesn't seem too much benefit.

Anyone else noticed day after day of low cloud despite the briefing saying otherwise ?

I think 6-7 days max allows for those that want to see their efforts compounded to good effect and those wanting more AA action back. Possibly moving from cadet to veteran/ace will prolong the AA action ?

I don't expect it to happen but even if only a 1 day test I would like to see the 433 Israel theatre run because I feel it is a much ligter load on a server (could well be wrong in that) and if there were a total absence of issues on a busy w/e day that just might mean something.

Would it be possible at the next re start to up the challenge from Cadet to Ace or at least veteran ? Thanks.

A.I wingman issues still showing up. The ground circling, airborne fast rolling and another I am seeing now. When viewed in external view he is constantly changing power settings in distinct steps between 70 and full AB and back to 70. Perhaps 12 steps in all. This can both be heard and seen in the infobar. As with the other stuff it goes away once he is un tied from flight lead by a RTB command. Human wingmen do not warp or show other signs of connection issues so why the A.I do is odd.

Ive started to notice some players who do not display the `correct` 2935 connected port though they do display P2P. How significant this is I do not know. Most players DO display 2935 including myself (ive asked others to tell me).

The quite small crash text (<50k) might have some indications

Just now had a server crash. Do I remember correctly ? that the client connected ports as displayed in the chat screen are the bms ports as forwarded ? Noticed a player whose connected port showed as 6625 though displaying the P2P `ok` connection. I do not think that's relevant to the crash as he was there for at least 20 mins prior.

It was very soon after another client joined that it crashed but nothing to say that was the cause.

I cant help but think the increased frequency of server crashes is not related to any BW issues and speaking of BW it does seem excessive to multiply the old 432 settings x12 (regardless of any `formula`).

Average number of simultaneous clients is low (very low compared to the FO server) so there is ample bw at any time. Reports of these sort of issues in game when only 1or2 clients, both using 1024 then really adds to the mystery. As does successful no issue flights with 500 bw sharing server with 500 and 1024 players in camp.

Personally at 500 (and probably 300) I have no missing textures other than maybe 1 in 20 flights. What I do have is noticeably frequent A.I wingman spinning on ground or in the air. This can be with other humans on server or none at all. Ive seen spinning A.I on ground whilst humans on ground are positioned correctly and report on radio they see the spinning A.I but that my jet is viewed fine and normal as is theirs to me. Whilst in flight and with a stable A.I wingman ive heard radio chat from players still on ground that they are suffering spinning wingmen.

Ive only seen 1 example of visible lag (jets moving sharply backwards) since 433. Do not know if that is a sign of good data flow to clients for the most part.

For the most part I do not suffer more frequent in flight problems than in 4.32 but there do seem to be more server crashes.

Is the server in Kansas ? I do not get a great data flow on the FO Kansas based server.

I very much doubt that the multiple use of Viper name is any factor since that's been the case since ever. However ive seen it confuse newcomers to falcon multi play sp why not use `HOST` for better distinction.

I assume the crash logs are examined though probably need some translation by devs

To the best of my recollection the need for a physical AWACS in flight is ON by default. Ive always deselected that since 432. In a big red/blue air war such FO run then destroying the oppositions awacs would be part of the plan but I do not consider it a cheat in the basic campaign where I think they are very safe especially day 2 onwards