Brain

I agree with Cobalt, 500 should be solid for clients. 4 players basically in one bubble around the FLOT didn't seem to cause any issues...even with moving mud and tons of artillery fire going on.
Anybody still missing objects regularly (airfields technically only consist of many objects btw) should do a speed test. A bad connection to the host can't be improved by changing numbers in BMS. It sure sucks for those affected but we can't do anything about it unless we spend millions on improving the network infrastructure in certain parts of the world...needless to say not really an option.

Broken AI seems to be a totally different, server side issue that occurs over time. I didn't keep track but can somebody confirm crashes happen more often on weekends? If so the total amount of TEs being played is suspicious. There must be a reason why FO doen't allow hosting of any TEs.

I'm in GER and never had problems with US based servers (unless some intermediate server fails ofc). Connection is also pretty beefy.

This game is driving me nuts...as soon as you start noticing a pattern and post observations, something happens that doesn't fit in...Broken Mess Simulator 4.33 :D

I noticed there are times when quiet a lot of TEs are going on. Just a few hours ago there were like 5 games with 2+ players each but I didn't encounter any problems. However, it makes me think about "restart BMS to prevent possible memory leaks". What if those TEs don't get "closed" properly and eventually lead to a memory overflow? It's weekend and it's possible there were some TEs going on.
Just some more food for thought.

And just to get it out there: I don't actually know stuff as some might think. I just craft theories based on observations and my basic knowledge about game logic in general. I call it "video game forensics" although I usually prefer really bad games ;)

I personally hate advice like "get a new rig then" but if BMS 4.32 is already to much I don't know what else to tell you. Sorry!

If it's any help: I'm running BMS 4.33 on a shitty 2.5 ghz quad - 4GB Ram - HD57?? and had to do some tweaking. It's suboptimal for sure but sufficient and mostly playable. All of it is REALLY outdated so you should be able to find something even better for just a few bucks.
My knowledge about hardware ends there as I lost interest in those things (f...ing gaming industry) so I can't give you any advice on what to look for.

Sadly it's all I have to offer for now assuming you tried tweaking everything already. If you love F4 consider upgrading .. playing with just a few people online is so much fun ... IF the server behaves itself ... everybody is working on it ;)

I don't know why you're hoarding all those files and what you're thinking of doing with them.
Unless FF 6.0 broke something it should have made FF 5.5 obsolete. Also this branch of F4 mods has been discontinued since 2013 and unless there is some dedicated community left to play it you're pretty much on your own.
I never played FF so I can't judge it but with BMS still in development and dedicated websites like Falcon-Online it looks like the better way to go. If there is something about FF you like more it's worth reevaluating and possibly switching to BMS.
In the end both are very similar in that they are based on F4 with focus on the F-16 so focusing on one of them seems like a good idea.

Transferring shouldn't be an issue. In the end it's an old game and old tricks might just work.
Use regedit to export the whole Free Falcon branch in .../SOFTWARE/ (exact location may vary depending on OS, just search for falcon or something until you find it).
Import the .key file on your new PC, enter regedit there as well and find the FF branch again. Look through all the "subfolders" and see if there is a path to the game somewhere. If there is edit this value and make sure it matches the actual location of the game.

No guarantee it will work with FF but it does with BMS.

I think anybody can confirm the AI will do such things. I had F15s chasing a Frogfoot forever at stall speed, using their ABs just to keep airborne and tanks reenacting Tokyo Drift. Interestingly the lead plane (when not engaged) will always behave just fine (AFAIK) but any wingman would be going crazy just to stay in formation.
Shortly after the last restart (Day 1 - about 5:30) I didn't notice any kind of odd behavior at first but soon some MiG-23s (was just observing them, no factor) would start glitching all over the place ....

I dug through a lot of plain text files later, originally looking for a way to change the package composition for AWACS. No luck so far but found something interesting in "atc.ini"! Quote:
This is the amount of time in minutes the player has from the time he enters the sim to get off the ground or get bumped back to the UI (...)
PlayerBumpTime = 50

If this isn't an inactive left over piece of code Viper would be back to UI just 50 minutes after entering 3D. Now that we know 2D hosting isn't supported it might explain why the AI (or BMS in general) will behave so strange after some time:
In 2D you will always see just a flight lead, never any of his wingman no matter how far they stray off...they are counted but don't exist if that makes any sense. When a flight enters a player's bubble the server will still compute the lead plane but struggles with wingman AI as they don't physically exist in 2D. In combat things get worse because the leader isn't simply following his flightplan anymore and combat AI doesn't work properly.

I think we're getting closer to making this server great and stable ;)

I did some testing on AWACS and I found the issue. Offline I created a new campaign and set up different scenarios. The final result is kind of hilarious.

The moment you create your flight and the waypoints show up on the map you are assigned the earliest fragged AWACS plane in the ATO, landing any time after your take-off. It's not his earliest take-off time but literally the order in which the packages were created determines it.
As long as this plane shows up in the squadrons frag order you will have AWACS support, even if the flight will depart 2 hours in the future. It's a small oversight you normally wouldn't notice.
So, as long as the campaign AI keeps fragging at least one of these flights there should be continuous AWACS support ... which leads to the problem: It doesn't!

See...4.33 changed the composition of AWACS packages to include about 6 fighters. Since the majority of F-16s are no longer set to HQ there simply aren't enough planes available to put these packages together!

If I understand Semler correctly he has disabled "AWACS required" and the ultimate question is why it doesn't make a difference. It's a client, not a server setting. AWACS should work 24/7 for everybody who has it unticked in his/her launcher. I obviously had it ticked and spent the better part of the day looking for a bug ... it was kind of fun though :)

@Sinu:
Try recording an ACMI during your attack run. In my case TacViewer showed my weapons only damage some targets but they would blow up just a moment later. Not getting credited for it sure sucks but you're still doing the damage you'd expect and in the end a mission well done is a mission well done!

If a flight gets cancelled the client gets the "end flight" window. Considering Viper is online 24/7 an attached timer would automatically cause him to go back to 2D. It's a far stretch but BMS doesn't have a separate EXE for 3D that could CTD like in DCS so it's my only guess.
Why this happens is another question. Usually it's because a flight fails to take off withing a certain time frame, mostly because of a destroyed runway. Unless some troll bombs Kadena every once in a while I have no idea.
Addition: If a player needs to reconnect for some reason, hurries and by accident joins Kadena there is a chance he/she will hijack Viper's plane by accident, as joining a flight through the ATO doesn't change the plane you're sitting in. Since tankers are winchester by default, ending the flight might automatically cause it to be canceled after the player leaves it. We had a similar incident once and it did NOT screw up the original pilot but with BMS you never know.
I was thinking about a separate squadron just for hosting purposes but I think joining a server always defaults to the host's squad anyways.

Lack of AWACS support is not caused by a server bug. Looking at the ATO only one E-3 was actually tasked with AWACS (now called EW/ABCCC, Early warning/Airborne communication command control) ... 2 hours in the future (TO 15:00 server time). The airborne search radars showing on the RWR are E-8 JSTAR planes.

I already thought about a modified Day 1 save to include some of the new toys Benchmark Sims gave us, but it's hard without "overdoing it" considering the most common threads are easy AI, low-tech MiGs with the occasional MiG-29s in the mix.
(NOE, 20nm north of the FLOT, got jumped by 3 MiG-23s at 16000+, less than 15 miles away, simply lofted AIM120s at them and won)
Harriers and Warthogs would work well for CAS but question is how many people would actually use them on a regular basis and therefor if it's worth it. Hornets appear to be too strong (just look at the possible loadouts) and I don't think anything else would fit into KTO.

We could switch to "strong DPRK", get more modern toys (IIRC including a carrier group with Hornets) and still have a fairly balanced campaign, but then: how many people are actually confident going up against Fulcrums and Flankers with AA-12s on a daily basis? I'm all for raising the bar but with the lack of interest in the forums (still people with 300BW) and communications in game (a few people never respond) it's hard to teach how to deal with the more hostile environment. Some would probably quit which isn't in anybodies interest I guess.

Seosan and Osan are close together so a mixed Blk40/52 package is already an option. Kunsan could be changed to have a squadron of each as back up in case the other ABs get knocked out...maybe even US Blk52 to make up for the longer travel time (nothing is free).

Anyways, I have to agree with Semler. We are still pretty much testing the server and should change as little as possible for the moment. Just thinking out loud here.

@Sinu:
KF-16C Blk52s come with an internal jammer, making space for a center line tank and allowing for more A2G ordnance. No "cool" weapons but extensive CAS with 6 Mavs and 6 MK20s is still kick-ass.
F-16C BLK40s get all the cool stuff but have a notably weaker engine.
Think it's a fair trade off given the current circumstances.

EDIT: MiG23s can't even shoot down a fully loaded A-10A (Osan) at 3000ft, 260kias. Calling it "Easy AI" is being extremely generous.

Just as BLUFOR was making a push north ... did you have a look if Seosan is (...was) still operational? Could have been the reason why.

The TS also still states VG is running 4.32 U7...somebody needs to update this and maybe add a link to this post or forum section.
We had a BW mix (2x300 + 1x500) and everything went smooth but I still remember issues with different BW settings back in the 4.32 days. Better safe than sorry IMO.

EDIT: also noticed the server info on the bottom still reads 4.32 and could use an update ... if people ever scroll that far down do find information :D

So, you actually connected and played successfully on the VG public campaign server using a BW setting of 1024? With several other players online at the same time?
I'd usually be mad about it because it caused problems in the past (I strongly remember some ruined flights in 4.32 u6 because of one client) but given we can pretty much rule out everything else ...

Well, bandwidth seems to be an issue and I can understand why. We don't need synced control surfaces and pilot head movements but "it's a cool new feature" and nothing we can do about it. Why it has priority over "loading" crucial objects is beyond me but what do I know about making a game.
Anyways, the minimum BW for a campaign appears to be 1024 or at the very least 768. If anybody wants to dig deeper into the BMS forums, please do so. I need a brake after reading some of the most unintelligent/useless posts ever.

How do you slew the radar cursor normally? Using DirectX keys or key combinations on the joystick?
In controls - axis mapping - avionics there are two axis for the MFD cursor. Set those to "keyboard" unless you are using a analogue micro-stick.

I'm getting "Kevin pending message" when attempting to connect to VG which probably means the server needs a restart ... again (has been done while I'm writing)

I've seen people committing multiple times, not deleting accidentally planned / obsolete packages and even got my flight deleted yesterday even though I already joined the plane in 2D (this shouldn't even be possible). Things like this happen all the time and guess what: it will eventually break stuff. Other communities running BMS have lengthy SOPs to ensure people don't mess things up for a reason!

You spend so much time learning about handling the F-16, why is it so hard to watch maybe one hour worth of tutorials to learn about how to properly plan, join and abort a flight? Or how about asking when things are unclear?
Either post all your questions here or feel free to ask when you see anybody on the server. BMS (as any other flight sim) is about teamwork so I'm sure people will be supportive if you just ask. Personally I'd rather have people asking questions all day long, preventing me of flying myself than having them crash the server every 24 hours.

If I see someone committing 4 times in a row, asking in chat if everything is alright and get NO response EVER there is nothing that can be done. It tells me "go way, I don't give a shit" every single time.
THAT is what brings my piss to a boil, NOT lack of experience with one of the most temperamental flight sims out there.

Finally, please ensure you connect with a BW of 300 only and restart BMS after each flight. There is an issue with desync (blue "paused" message when joining the pit, 2D map not updating) and this should take care of it.

Thank you very much for taking care of the server Semler :) :)

Haven't taken a look since the restart and not at home right now (buying an expensive kitchen doesn't mean it's well designed in terms of construction, luckily it's not mine) but will have at least a quick look later.

If everything fails we can still do "private campaigns" but share the save, as clients should be able to save online as well. It's not optimal but at least the campaign wouldn't advance so rapidly by itself. It would also account for people who prefer strong DPRK or just a different campaign setting ... we'll see.

I'll just be around and see what other people are up to ;)

Server is running smoothly and I didn't notice any loss of progress. It's like everything related to BMS: a pain to set up in the first place but once it runs, it runs beautifully ;)

Some feedback from other users might be nice however. With only 3 (!) active SAMs left and almost every airfield taken out there isn't much in terms of opposition except the occasional MIG-21s, which are usually torn apart by F4s as soon as they pop up. I overestimated the impact the 3 SQs at Kunsan make :(
I DON'T want to make it a hell hole for players but get somebody playing the campaign instead of hosting own games.

BMS seems to use the desktop resolution by default. There might be a command line parameter but couldn't find it.

Since all the squadrons are set up already and you remembered to do a day-1-save after doing so (you did, right?) I don't think it's really necessary to do a TV session.
Only thing left I can think of right now is activating the autosave in the server's Falcon BMS.cfg (g_nCampPeriodicSaveMinutes) which should be fine when set to 20 or 30 or something like this. We don't see large packages very often so I don't expect huge progress to be lost.

If I remember to do so I'll be on TS in the evening which should be around late morning / mid-day for you. Just poke me if necessary. The people in the BMS channel usually play CS and nobody on the BMS server cares to join TS so I haven't really bothered with it.

I already like the new look of the campaign. There are a lot of SEAD targets up north and the FLOT has more bandits to worry about, making flying feel less like a training mission :)

Speaking of training: Yesterday somebody left because he felt "useless in the air". Don't worry, I can employ almost everything and teach others how to do so. Only thing I ask for is you already set up your controls and have a basic understanding on how basic things work. Maybe we'll get the server growing this way ;)

Server back up for about 12 hours (looking at campaign time), 120th still fragging SEAD and CAP. DPRK already lost almost all AA on the FLOT and airpower is a joke, making these missions rather boring and pointless.
So, unless one cancels AI flights (which is forbidden) or plans a flight hours ahead of time there is no way a human package can be created.
Consider this: Set autosave and time in Falcon BMS.cfg, start a new campaign, set up squadrons for humans, save, restart as server, load, double check settings, done. All you got to do after a crash is reload the autosave.

I'd suggest setting all squadrons at Kunsan to humans instead of the 120th. It's 3 squadrons less to fly SEAD early in the campaign making things more interesting, US Block 40s are in the mix and there is less conflict with AI flights (which behave strangely sometimes).

@TAC: Performance isn't as good but adjusting in game and launcher settings as well as the tweak I posted earlier helps a bunch. Other than that I haven't seen much issues with 4.33.

Autosave might be a good idea especially since the server seems a bit unstable (aka. at the time of writing it's down again).

Yesterday I noticed two players flying for the 111th because there were unable to create their own flights. Nothing game breaking but I suspect there are more inexperienced players out there and I don't want to rule out the possibility of crashing the server by doing something very wrong.
For those people: https://youtu.be/ghy0wBWaQ-E?t=9m30s
It shows all necessary steps to create a flight/package. Until we get additional human F16s stick with KF-16 Block 52, 120th, Seosan airbase.
Also connect with a BW of 300. I've seen crazy numbers and it can cause crazy desyncs.

There seems to be an issue with ATI cards that will black out the screen when switching to the TGP. I'm getting a few frames of blackout occasionally but others reported it to be permanent. Alt+Tab fixes the issue only temporarily but I'm not aware of a proper solution yet.

For people with massive FPS drops after the update I suggest looking at "falcon BMS.cfg" and setting g_bDoubleRTTResolution to 0.

Cya in the air

Less AI Squadrons:
After campaign restart it took no 12 hours for BluFor to win the air war, making CAS around the FLOT rather trivial. DPRK airforces are just relatively weak. To balance things out I'd suggest maybe 2 more F-16 squadrons for players, one of them being F-16C Block 40 because those get some of the new A/G weapons.
When I joined just a few hours after server restart the 120th was still set to HQ and fragged with DEAD, please double check when starting a new campaign (just make a Day 1 save after all setup is complete for easy restarting).

Weather:
Unless one of you is really hardcore and wants to work with the new weather maps, setting weather to "probabilistic" would make use of the new weather effects. Clear sky gets old.

@derk_axelrod No, the campaign manager only assumes none of the planes at that AFB is available and creates different packages to make up for the "loss" of aircraft. There should be a set resupply you can look up in squadron information, i think it includes planes. However completely valid reason to have at least a second F16 squad.

Buddy lasing is awesome by the way so get online!