Server Issues? Questions? Tips for 4.33.1?

[Minrah]

I think it crashed again=/

[=VG= SemlerPDX]

Rough morning, bit of a late response here - It had indeed crashed to desktop. I restarted it to Day 7.
Let me know if it happens again, I will keep this website open and will check often today.
!cheers

[Minrah]

server crashed again tired to log in and no go =(

[=VG= SemlerPDX]

Restarted to last autosave

[Brain]

I noticed a lot of people declare ground targets.
Simply put a steerpoint line (right click -> STPT Lines -> add STPT in line X) close to friendly troops. Your HSD will then display the frontline, making selection of targets via FCR easy.
For more information visit BMS-Manual.pdf 6-74 and 6-75

[Sinu]

Played on the 18th and noticed that both Osan and Seosan are out of action. In addition, the F16 Squadrons running out of Osan are completely out of stores (this may be due to the runway being out of commission - hence no resupply flights). I didn't feel like flying all the way out of some remote airbase to get to the FLOT today so I can't attest to performance.

Just something for everyone else to be aware of.

[Brain]

AFAIK squadrons on the same airbase share supplies. MAVs and GBU-12 usually run out first, especially when the A10s at Osan are getting busy. A destroyed runway (as well as certain infrastructures) will delay resupplies.

Loadouts are currently bugged as hell. Rejoining a flight will refuel and rearm the plane in question. Other players also appear as fully loaded even though they are not.
Seems to be a bug in BMS as I've seen it happen in a vid a couple of days ago.

One step forward, 2 steps back

[=VG= SemlerPDX]

Okay - spent this morning tweaking the Day 1 save file for the campaign. We're gonna start at the opposite end of the spectrum and work backwards -- by this, I mean, I've made Seosan the ONLY airbase with no HQ fragging. Kunsan and Osan are once again fully AI/HQ fragged. Players should still be able to snag a flight out of those bases when aircraft are available, but we need to try a more 'default' war for now in 4.33.1 to see how it goes.

(edit - added clarification:) As we try to balance it, we may delete HQ fragging of one or more squadrons at one or both of these bases, but let's do it one at a time, as needed - instead of me turning them off outright as I did earlier, which let the DPRK roll straight over our bases like it did.

I've also tweaked the difficulty level and weight of troops on either side. BLUFOR should have slightly better air defenses now, ground and naval forces are still weighted to DPRK, as are the air forces - but as we've slightly increased the air defense and re-activated 2 airbases, it should balance out.

Input is very much appreciated, and I thank you all for your patience! I've been busy with projects around the house, so I'm still using my laptop (not able to run BMS yet). I expect to get my PC back up and running this week, got the new cooler in a box, and a new tube of Arctic Silver ready to go.


For those of you who see warping planes, I'd like to see you try upping your bandwidth to 2048 - just for a test. I doubt it will help, I'm pretty certain a sync issue like that is linked to latency from players who'd have a higher ping to Kansas USA, but I could be wrong. I'd like to narrow it down if possible, and I'd like to test trying that higher bandwidth for players farther from the server, and for multi-player flights with international players from all over.

Server is back up now - I'll be in TS3 here and there, and you can poke me or message me with issues. I'll also keep an eye on this thread, and we have a chat bar at the bottom of this site where you can get a message to me almost instantly (if I am at my desk, it beeps almost annoyingly loud).

I'm happy to quickly restart and change the server if you find something I've done here to be too severe or 'game breaking' for you to fly here. Thanks again for your patience!
!hi

[CobaltUK]

Regarding some trying 2048. The way I read the bandwidth usage section in the new manuals it seems to be saying that the server will take the lowest BW connected client and limit all the rest to that same figure.

Finding planes rearmed after re-joining (not ALWAYS) goes way back in time not a new thing. The same goes for the annoying flight taking off again on same mission after landing and shutting it down before exit to lobby.

[Sinu]

I have taken the liberty of modifying a campaign save in hopes the server will run it (even as a test). The save starts at 05:00 Day as normal.

Here is a list of the changes:

The USS Carl Vinson is present from day 1 of the campaign

Added a player squadron of FA-18Cs from the Vinson (the 666th FS)

Added a player squadron of F16C BLK52s based at Seosan (the 998th FS)

Link: http://puu.sh/opjag/a28fb01566.cam
(right click, hit "save as" -> .cam)

[=VG= SemlerPDX]

A question: Added a "third" squadron to Seosan? In addition to the 2 squadrons already there?

Also - regarding the Vinson, does it normally arrive at some random date in the beginning of the war? Will it not adversely effect the AI war by bringing it in sooner?

The reason I had tried to turn off HQ fragging at Osan and Kunsan was so players could use the Block 40's as well as having a slightly closer airbase to take off from. Would you be able to add a squadron of 40's to Kunsan and Osan that could have HQ fragging turned off (but keep the current squadrons at those airbases HQ fragged so as to not affect the AI war)?

I would be most willing to change out the server save file for one you create if these things can be added and/or addressed.

[Brain]

Had a flight with Kaos and IVC would not transmit anything (neither 2d or 3d). We both had a solo flight before so IVC was still running after the BMS restart. Restarting the IVC client as well seemed to have solved it.

The campaign is going well for BLUFOR. Not even 24 hours into the war there are no SAMs left around the FLOT. In comparison I was still doing SEAD and OCA around day 4 or 5 last time.

I think the balance last time worked out reasonably well. Usually by day 4 the AI already destroyed everything of value, leaving players with a choice between CAS or deep strikes. Both are not very engaging if you can spend 90% of your flight time in autopilot.
Sure, we lost Osan at least twice but that's because the AI didn't have the means to keep AFBs out of commission and their bombers on the ground. That's where the players come into play. A 2-ship package armed with HARMs and JDAMs can take out almost any AFB no problem. Feeling bold or just no wingman available? Try a NOE attack with Durandals or do a mixed loadout ...
BLUFOR really relied on player actions and that's what I think the dynamic campaign should be about. Not letting the AI doing all the work and then basically flying training missions until the next reset.

There don't appear to be many regulars online so a balance like this might not be possible at the moment.
You're certainly going to do some changes in the next few days and if so consider taking some F-15s out of the equation. It may reduce the amount of Strike missions flown. Another way of balancing would be editing the day 1 save in mission commander and tweaking the AI priorities to make both sides more defensive. Given how many variables there are it would potentially be a rather extensive project.


AI (obviously) is still laggy as hell. They seem to jump about every .5 seconds. Doing several speed tests I ended up with a ping about 150ms. Not great, but usually sufficient for playing any game. I haven't talked to any US players lately but with .33 they were having the same issue. It makes me wonder if connection is really the issue here. We know BMS has some memory leaks and the server will eventually reach critical CPU loads.

If somebody from the US with a good connection and PC could host a campaign just for testing that would be great. If it works fine a CPU benchmark and speedtest running in the background would influence BW and CPU load, hopefully helping narrowing down the problem.

[Sinu]

In conversation with Selmer this is the new edited campaign:

Features:


Added F16 BLK 40s to Kusan and Osan (not fragged)

Added American F16 BLK 52s to Seosan (not fragged)

Added an AV-8B squadron to Chungju (not fragged)

Added the Carrier Vinson on day 1 with its associated AI sqdns

Added two squadrons of F18Cs to Vinson (not fragged)

Link: http://puu.sh/opCQI/3d1f4540a4.cam
(right click -> save as .cam)

I do anticipate quite some changes in the way the campaign is fought with the addition of the carrier so early in the war but we can always change and adapt the save as we see issues occurring.

[=VG= SemlerPDX]

Server is live with the above changes now. Thanks Sinu! !thx

[Brain]

I really appreciate the effort of trying to balance things out using mission commander. As said previously it's a huge project.
What I don't undestand is how adding 4 Hornet squadrons without compensation for DPRK is supposed to help balance. They break the balance even on day "X" when DPRK get reinforced as well. The campaign has pretty much always been one-sided and this is not going to help it.

I shared these concerns with Sinu already. Part of the intention is to introduce some of the new planes (for now Harrier & Hornet) from the start. The Hornet is a pretty cool plane to fly in BMS, it just got an updated flight model in 33.1 and the Harrier is just something different and isn't part of the stock KTO. That's a really cool idea; I approve!
It will certainly break the balance but if Sinu is as dedicated as he seems that will be fixed at some point. I expect a few more restarts in the future to implement balancing changes but on the plus side it means we're more likely to get shot at. As I said earlier I really missed launch warnings,

However, apparently Semler proposed turning down the AI difficulty as well. He had some projects going on, preventing him to get into BMS again and therefor didn't participate in any of the campaigns lately. There wasn't any public discussion about the difficulty either so I assume he has no idea how the campaign actually feels.
To sum things up for you: unless you're forced bellow 12.000 feet into MANPAD/SA-13 territory, a split-s is all you need to evade 90% of the missiles fired at you, which are almost exclusively SA-2s and SA-5s. Usually you won't encounter these past day 3 thanks to the AI doing all the work. Even in laggy dogfights the AI isn't particularly smart. Just by waiting for a 4-8 o'clock shot I got an estimated 80% hit rating.
TLDR: toning down the AI difficulty is not necessary at all.

I get the idea of a server "accessible to everyone" but if BASIC flight maneuvers are too much to ask for we are approaching PR coop levels here: everybody with limited kits sitting on rooftops and camping the AI spawn points. Further, if we have a vote 2 weeks into the campaign when there is basically nothing more to do than waiting for BLUFOR to finally reach Pyongyang, why not have one regarding the difficulty?

I really like the idea but not how it has been handled. I don't like the first iteration of changes either (as they will totally ruin balance) but if Sinu want's to collect data for further improvements that's fine by me.

EDIT to clarify:
Harries, Hornets and additional Vipers have been added WITHOUT AI fragging. They are entirely new squadrons intended as additional player squadrons.

[=VG= SemlerPDX]

That was going to be my first question: Did you know that there is no AI/HQ fragging for any of the new added squadrons?
**I have similar concerns tho about the carrier being present so early, but lets take it in stride and change it as necessary. If we get through this now, we can play for years in a very cool world we all like.

Also - the difficulty I set for the previous campaign is the same as the one set for this one - I literally shared a screenshot with Sinu.

Finally, I will be happy to increase rather than decrease the difficulty as you mentioned, it's too easy right now. No problem with that at all. Only in that I need to include Sinu in the process, but he's USA timezone so I anticipate little issue with the 'feeling out' process to get us a Master Day 1 save we can reuse for years and years like the old days.

I did write above that I wanted to go to the other end of the spectrum a few posts back, in terms of balance - rather make it a little easier and work up to the correct "hard/veteran" setting than have it too weighted to DPRK and get reports of an unplayable campaign due to bombed out player airbases and missing these reports for hours until I get to my desk - avoiding such downtime is my goal as we work up here to the "best" Day 1 save for the server.

And if we find that any of these added squadrons create an OP or terribly weighted problem for the server, we'll revert them as needed. I cannot apologize enough for having to go through all this again so soon, but it is true that I don't have the ability to feel it out first hand and I rely on all of you regular pilots' input. And I thank you for choosing this place to fly - there are certainly more organized, more populated and more knowledgeable BMS groups - we're indeed a casual place to fly with no crazy rules, "just come fly".

Cheers for all the very helpful in-depth reports, don't worry at all EVER about that - keep them coming. We'll mold this thing into something we all enjoy!
!cp

[=VG= SemlerPDX]

Brain LAN_WROTE ...
We know BMS has some memory leaks and the server will eventually reach critical CPU loads.

The server CPU is dated - it's an Intel Core 2 @2.13GHz. There is no way to run BMS off of our dedicated server in Germany, we are only able to offer this server run on the machine it is currently running on (for the time being).

[=VG= SemlerPDX]

I am wondering how the weekend went -- it's time to increase the difficulty level and it's a great time to address any other issues.

How do you all feel about the USS Vinson being on scene so early?

Were there sufficient targets? Or had the BLUFOR AI overwhelmed them?

How are the BLUFOR Anti-Air Defenses? Do they need to be decreased or increased?

How are the DPRK Anti-Air Defenses? Do they need to be decreased or increased?

How does the ground war look? Does it need to be re-balanced to either side?

How does the air war look? Enough enemies in the air? Too many? Too few friendlies?



I realize the campaign has been going for less than five days with the new settings, but if there is something that needs to be adjusted, I don't want it to wait too long - I don't want you all having to "put up" with poor settings on the server.

Please advise. !hi

[Derk]

Thanks for offering for feedback on the recent changes. I?ve found them positive, though I only flew shortly Fri and Sun. morning and not enough time to really evaluate all of your questions.
I enjoyed being able to frag an F18 early on from the carrier, though it seemed like a long flight until I got over land and found some Mig 29?s to tangle with. (They lost btw ? maybe since I had 10 AIM120?s loaded and was not sparing them?) I did mention to Sinu that the tower comms were not working from the 667th at the carrier. We were not sure why, but I was able to make the ?Remove chocks? call and get launched. So it didn?t interfere with the overall mission.
On other flights I found the ground was highly immersive, with an element of surprise from lacking of Recon targets being detected on the 2D map. So a planned high alt JDAM run was met with unplanned AAA to give an interesting element to the flight. Not much activity with SAM?s at that time, but the 4.33.1 updates to smaller AD units seems more challenging now.
The air to air activity was seemed a bit quiet on those flights, but the Sunday flight was at night and typically quiet. I?ve not seen anything one-sided enough to call to your attention, so the changes seemed well for the weekend flights when I was in. Thanks for keeping it interesting and for your support.

[Sinu]

I have been mostly flying the FA-18C Hornet in the wee morning hours and it has been very enjoyable.

I do agree and share Brain's that the Hornet squadrons, although present on day 3 or 4, quite literally bomb the ever-living **** out of the DPRK in the early part of the war. Specifically, they go to town on the enemy AD and aircraft.

I feel that this is primarily responsible because of the Super Hornet squadrons and that aircraft's ability to carry 6 HARMs, 12 JSOWs, or 12 AMRAAMs. It's just a ridiculous ordinance load. On an OCA strike a single aircraft can take 6 of the 2,000 lb penetrating JDAMs.

I think a first step towards "semi-balance" might be to disable all the carrier based until day 3 or whenever the carrier usually enters the war. I am not at all knowledgeable about how to set that up, though.

--

The primary influence on the ground war certainly seems to be human pilots flying missions. The US/ROK ground unit experience changes from "regulars" to "veterans" after I fly a "successful" mission rating, their morale goes up as well -- it doesn't matter what the mission was, either. AI aircraft seems to get a buff as well. After a few hours that buff goes away and the AI reverts to their original state of average experience and morale.

If there's long stretches of time where human pilots are not flying missions the ground war will not advance. With the testing I've hastily done, I really don't think that destroying that 1 tank battalion of 16 units is what will influence the war -- its the human pilots giving the AI the experience and morale buff they need to destroy the enemy.

[Brain]

"Never look a gift horse in the mouth" ... even if it breaks down 3 months later and only by luck didn't take any other horses down with it. Another mainboard gone but a replacement was found.

ROK crushed DPRK air defenses around the FLOT in 18 hours. That's a new record and it was 100% predictable. Looking at the force levels it seems pretty much the same happened to any enemy airfield and aircraft were almost entirely wiped out very early.
So, basically no opposition on day 2 except IR SAMs/MANPADS (AAA guns are a joke and you shouldn't go down into ZSU range ever). I can't imagine anything more one-sided. You might get 'lucky' sometimes but as a regular I tell you AWACS will mostly call out vectors to helicopters.

Unless players really kick into high gear with CAS/Interdiction they don't have a huge direct impact on the ground war. You're not going to like it but secretly I disabled the Hogs at Osan some campaigns ago. They are the main reason DPRK isn't simply flooding into South Korea with everything they got.
Currently they are sitting at around 2300 a2g kills which is estimated 35% of all vehicle kills so far. Previously they would go over 9000 (literally, stop the memes) but since so many aircraft are available and pretty much nothing else needs to be done it's distributed across all squadrons who fly CAS...which is pretty much the entire ROKAF/USAF.

Anyways, this kind of balancing isn't going to work. The server is inadequate as it is and 100+ more active aircraft is not going to make it any better. So, here is a suggestion (starting from our old KTO day 1 save):

Deactivate fragging for at least 3 Vipers (Seosan, Osan, Kunsan), remember to clear their schedule or they will fly missions fragged seconds after launching the campaign!
Spawn the Vinson, including the Hawkeyes, 1 Super Hornet (AI), 1 Hornet (player controlled*)
Spawn the ???th Viper squadron at Kangnung
Leave all other reinforcements untouched (should be the remaining Hornets + a few Vipers + maybe supports)
Add Harriers at your own discretion (**)

Except the Harriers all these squadrons would arrive eventually during the campaign so it shouldn't overload the server as much IF the campaign makes it past day 7, when all reinforcements have arrived.

Now for the 'tricky' part:
Every squadron has a list of priorities attached. DCA, OCA, SEAD...you name it. This way you can set up squadrons to only fly CAP /Escort to secure friendly airspace/high value targets. Set up 2 Vipers (thinking of Kangnung and either Seosan or Kunsan) + the Super Hornets (biased towards CAP/Intercept) to do just that. Friendly SEAD and OCA Strikes should be less frequent but the increased CAP should make up for that and keep bombers away.

I just got around installing BMS just to see how things are going. Once everything is set up I can have a look at MC to see how to do certain things if needed. I know the options are somewhere but that isn't very helpful I suppose :D

* The Super Hornet has too many hardpoints to fit on the SMS page and it is completely overpowered against DPRK forces unless you find a package consisting mainly of Flankers, which will only happen after China and Russia enter the war around day 7. That's why I propose the F/A-18C as player controlled.
** The Harrier lacks a proper RWR, the hover physics feel very arcady and the payload is a joke. There also seems to be a bug with the rudder kicking right. Compensating manually and then recentering the joystick (default Alt+C, J) is a workaround. Can still be fun in small doses but an F-16 is just far more effective in every way.
Also, do we have proper carriers for those (Tarawa Class or similar)? If it doesn't conflict with the Vinson that would be a nice touch.

OOOOOOR:

we could try porting a Strong DPRK day 1 save and see how it goes from there. I doubt there is a difference in the AC data so it should be compatible. However, that's easily tested locally by copying a save to KTO and see if anything breaks. It would introduce some more threads to spice things up a bit as currently AMRAAMs and HARMs pretty much outrange everything DPRK can muster when you're at 30.000 feet. IIRC the Vinson is also present from day 1 so your Hornets are already accounted for.

Since the opposition is stronger we might be able to get away with less units in general and thus reducing the server load. We haven't got very far with the balancing attempts so far so it wouldn't be a huge loss either.

[=VG= SemlerPDX]

Okay - all of this is great feedback.

@Sinu - contact me when you are online and we'll kick out a revised Day 1 Master Save file.


CobaltUK also flys here often, not sure if he has any points to add, or if it's all been said already.


Next Proposed Changes:
-Difficulty needs to be increased a fair amount
-Disable AI Squadrons on Vinson until Day 3 (turn off HQ fragging at least, remove Vinson on Day 1 at most)
-Disable A-10 Warthogs at Osan
-Add Viper Squadron at Kangnung ?? (AI/HQ Fragged I assume is what Brain meant)
-Harriers only for humans, and only for fun (aircraft has issues as noted by Brain)


--*Consider "Strong DPRK" as an option, feedback and discussion would help on this point.



I'd like to get a new campaign with several of these proposed changes active before Saturday (tomorrow) morning if possible. If you read this, Sinu, see if you can do these things or contact me when able.

[Brain]

This was one hell of a post ... literally. So I scrapped most of it. I'll go into MC, export the map and litter it with annotations. It should be easier than explaining everything.

Having trouble with my CPU overheating but was able to look at MC today:

AI fragging priorities can be found under "Teams - Bonus/Priority" (has to be set for US and ROK individually). However, this means you can't exactly tweak individual squadrons as I intended (unless the speciality makes a difference, which can be set in the squadron details window).
This is a mandatory change no matter how tedious or convoluted it seems. If this isn't changed, AI will keep fragging offensive missions and at best we're only delaying the inevitable: DPRK seal clubbing.
Ideally the same should be done for DPRK, but I suggest seeing how well the AI adapts to the situation. It's possible the AI doesn't adjust at all and basically flies suicide missions all day long. If that's the case adjustments need to be made here as well.

It's self explanatory and by default ROK/US is set to be very aggressive. With a ~10% priority for CAP/DCA it's no wonder DPRK has such an easy time making it into South Korea.
Increasing tanker priority slightly seems like a good idea as well. Especially with heavy a2g loads and center line tanks they are really helpful but rarely there is one on station past day 2 or 3

For every human squadron I recommend clearing the schedule. This can be done easily under "Units", double-clicking the squad in question and hitting "Clear" on the far right side.


Feedback on Strong DPRK would be needed rather sooner than later. If it is decided DPRK is a joke no matter how well it is balanced (which is pretty much my point of view) we've to start all over again.

[Sinu]

I am in the process of editing a savegame with the above changes in Semler's post - should be available in a couple of hours after this post.

I think it is important to note that no matter what changes we make to balance the campaign the actually outcome of it rests with the amount of human sorties. One well executed human flight against a very active DPRK airbase can change the entire "balance" that we may think we have setup. This is excluding the obvious buffs the AI receives for successful missions (which do, /dramatically/ influence the air and ground war for several hours, I am certain about that.)

As far as air defenses are concerned, there are only a finite number of strategic SAMs that the DPRK fields. It may take a few days, but no matter what changes we make AI DEAD/SEAD flights with HARMs will render those sites inoperative after some time period. It's just a matter of how long that takes.

Edit: http://puu.sh/oAAEB/d417748c33.cam
That's the updated save - list of changes since last campaign:

Made all (except the EA-18G squadron) AI squadrons on the Vinson inactive, they should join the fight at their usual assigned time. The player squadrons are still there and the carrier is physically still there.

Removed AI fragging for the Osan A-10s (this kinda makes me sad but we'll see how the ground war does without them)

Edited difficulty settings as per Semler's request - ADA and Pilot skill is Veteran

[=VG= SemlerPDX]

New version is now live, see above posts for details.

Thanks again, Sinu! !cheers