Chrinik

Well...the campaign is over...the server is still running for funsies and to test stuff.

To add to that, it would have probably been more desirable to develop and build an entirely new airframe that already incorporates all of these new capabilities then to retrofit them onto an older airframe. IE: the F-18 would have probably been kicked into service regardless. So, really, pushing for an F-14 that carries a bogus loadout of "modern missles" just to stroke ones ego and spam more AMRAAMs because the Flaming Cliffs F-15C spoils f:helpsmilie:ing everyone in terms of combat performance, people forget that the Mig-21bis was also a specific variant modeled with a specific capability and wasn´t a 93, 97 or 2000 model that carries better RADAR, glass cockpit and R-77s. Honestly, I see this alot lately, people don´t seem to be content with the stuff they are actually getting and demand the latest and greatest. With the RAZBAM Mirage there were forum threats about how much it sucks that it isn´t a 2000-5 with MICA missles or Exocets and how boring and sh:helpsmilie:t a bog standard 2000C would be in comparison. If you want your damn fantasy loadouts, do them...it´s relatively easy to mod some lua files and get whatever loadout you want, but outright demanding people should simulate stuff that "might have been but never was" is hilarious. Especially considering that the only reason one would want Amraams on an older platform is so they feel "competitive" because they are used to them and don´t want to transition to a platform that doesn´t have them because they feel like less of a good pilot without the missle doing all of the work (obvious hyperbole). Anyone want a SU-47 module? Comanche Helicopter? Hey, maybe we could also get that Boeing Joint Strike Fighter attempt. They are not real, so making sh:helpsmilie:t up about them should be fairly easy.

Sometimes there are other factors at play. Just from the pictures alone I cannot determine what´s going on to replicate it.

Welcome to computerized flight, where the Pilot mearly suggests what the plane should do, and the avionics know better.

Lofting works with the KH-58 U, launching from a high altitude and pointing 20 degrees nose up, the missle will fly to an altitude anywhere between 20 and 30km and then simply falls towards it´s target. Enabeling you to hit targets 300km away no problem.

Yeah guys, that´s all fun and games and good explaination, but that was not the issue, considering one of the contacts shows up on the HDD and still doesn´t appear on the HUD. Something is going on there. I would say lower the display range, I never use 200 clicks for anything.

Uhm...The Mikoyan-Gurewitsch plants are all in russian territory, staffed by russians, and even the engines and almost all individual parts had been manufactured in russia. That Russia was Boss of the USSR doesn´t mean every soviet invention was a collective effort of the mighty people of USSR....:noexpression: It´s more russian then the M1 Abrams is american, who´s gun is german and who´s armor is british.

They know...there are other reasons involved and not just "Why don´t they make one, it will print money?"...they can´t "just" make an F-16 out of the goodness of their heart. Funny, people tend to direct newbies straight to the Youtube Channels to get directions on how to set up DCS. Then don´t launch from a carrier...and noone expects you to buy the F18 but what´s the point in telling us that you´d pay full price for an F-16? I´d pay 200 dollars for an SU-30MKI if someone made one, does that somehow change the odds of there ever being one? Nope... Uhm... Western Planned or released Modules: Sabre, Hawk, C101, F18, F14, Eurofighter, Viggen, Mirage 2000C, A10C, Huey, Harrier. Eastern: L39, KA-50, Mi-8, MiG-15, MiG-21, maybe MiG-23... Oh yeah...such heavy imbalance towards the Russians. Need moar NATO ASAP. In all honesty, that was an asspull. Everyone has their own favorite toy they want in DCS, that does not change the reality of it. So is the F-18 and everyone wait´s for that impatiently, did you even think before typing that? There is no resistance to the F-16 because it´s more capable, most stuff is more capable then the MiG-21, there is so much resistance because it´s "Just another NATO jet" and we are already getting enough of those. The capability of an F-16 is in no way different then the F-18 we will have soon, in other words, boring. Unless you want to fight other F-16s over Caucasus or just play singleplayer all day, you´d have no one to fight. There will probably be an F-16...noone actively want´s to prevent it. But given the current field of DCS and the current state of modules and what kind of modules we will be getting, the skies will be relatively empty on the Redfor side for quite a while, while NATO aircraft get announced left right and center. And most people are very interested in all of those western aircraft, don´t misunderstand. But people would probably like to get some kinda equal footing with the "Russkies"... I do not count FC3, that´s more of a game to me and the only reason we still use it is because it has the most capable fighters in it atm. That will change. But then it will be very one-sided.

These are all late-upgrades to the F-15. Nobody talks about those. The F15C we have in DCS is a weird, pre-MISP II but still kinda MISP II F15C that can carry Amraams somehow...Or it is just visually misrepresented. The APG-70 Radar and Color MFD were never mentioned anywhere in DCS. The MFD seems to only be used for stores display. In any way, we have a destinct time period F15 (ca. mid 90s) going up against destinct time period SU-27S´s (ca. 1980ish) and that is why people complain...10-15 years is alot of time in aviation tech and despite the fact that older SU-27s are still in russian service, so were older F15Cs at that time.

I was on the ramp in Tiblisi in a MiG-21 and an SU-25T while blue choppers who took off from there strafed us. We owned Tiblisi and spawned on it at the same time you guys did your chopper defences. If you truely recaptured it, it showed RED to us and we were allowed to spawn, and so was BLUE...this is the issue. We got the message we captured Tiblisi Aerodrome and of course that it was closed before...we still noticed choppers taking off for the entire duration of the assault.

Okay, after a day, here are my final thoughts on the campaign. First, let me again thank everyone on REDFOR for their outstanding job, personal gratitude goes out to the Chopper pilots who constantly did fuel runs. Or reduce the amount of fuel used per sortie, or do both. 1: The fuel system is good, but needs tweaking. Either increase the load carried for less trips, or reduce the distance of travel for Choppers. 2: Strategic Airbases in each PAK sector. There should be atleast one airbase that houses a couple fighters for each Team, scaled by distance from the main area. PAK 5 and 6 had little strategic value for REDFOR, as fighters had to fly 250km just to get there to defend. We rebased some fighters manually to Senaki Kholki and Kutaisi, but it´s still different when Blue caps PAK 3 and has 2 airbases within 100km that can launch into PAK 2, while if Redfor captures PAK 3 the airbases closest to PAK 5 is still 200km out. 3: Squadronslots...remove them. It is also hard to balance this factor as it creates a situation where a certain airbase could become overly important because instead of 2 F15s and 4 squadron locked F15s, if that Squadron gets online, a total of 6 can suddenly be launched. It also creates the inverse where airbases lose importance because the respective Squadrons are NOT online and the slots can´t be utilized. 4: more FARPs. I think it would help with the Choppers travel time and give more objectives. 5: Strategic objectives, such as factories, refineries or trainstations, that can be taken out for a slight and timelimited debuff of the respective side they belong too. 6: I noticed infantry moves towards airbases on their own when dropped near them, is this extendable to all objectives? I had a friend sign on and he loves the MI-8, and then I was shocked to hear he hates flying it in blueflag because he wants to support the troops he dropped CAS style. This would certainly give more of an incentive for choppers to just haul ground troops as they could drop them off of an objective, and the infantry would assault the objective for them (and capture it if they are done) and they can either RTB, do something else, or support those troops with direct fire. 7: MIG-21s should not cost lives. If we extend the logic of choppers, then this old, point defence fighter gains immediately more significance as a strategic tool for deepstrikes, airbase defence and interception. I would have flown a MIG more often had I not thought that my lives would be more usefully spent in a modern fighter or CAS plane. A shame really. There are other thoughts I have that can likely not be implemented or would be impractical. I guess both sides have to live with Randys who join, spawn, take up fuel, die, do not organize and then complain about it...

Yeah, I found myself in it...I´m the guy strafing the chopper on the ground at 4:15 (at 6 minutes he despawned crediting me XD) and around 13 minutes the giant missletrail that comes down from the sky was an ill launched R-27T which was my last missile and I was completely winchester everything and went home.

[ame] [/ame] It has been an honor fighting with you, thanks to everyone who participated. [ame] [/ame]

Fixed

He´s also running at 1440p resolution.

All of your problems could have been solved if you joined the TS, we usually have a GCI to give you a picture, tasking and can warn you of incoming friendlies (and sometimes enemies)... It would be a shame if you give up because you lone-wolfed without comms and didn´t know what to do...The battlefield is constantly evolving, there is no way you can be provided a static briefing that tells you what to do.

I also forgot to mention that because of the constant server crashes that night, the 60nmi Airbase was out of fuel and that also caused some minor but meassurable problems.

Yeeeahhh...That was actually kinda on me. We lost the ground troop choppers to enemy fire/accidents/pilot error and the replacement took a while to get there (60nmi is quite a ways for a huey) so since you guys were constantly spawning choppers, I had them supress the FARP as best as possible. I didn´t know choppers did not lose lives at that point, otherwise I would have pulled them off and reconverge later. When the Ground troops chopper finally arived you guys where still spawning choppers like crazy so he couldn´t approach at all and was finally found by a KA-50 and destroyed. After that I had to go to bed for work, gave the reigns to a replacement, next morning I saw we lost all of PAK2<.< I already know how to prevent this from happening again and do it better if I should ever be able to organize at the start of a session instead of joining a running server, still learning here. Was suprised to learn that choppers don´t lose lives...I even asked in chat "They should be out of lives by now, I saw IASGATG about 6 times already?" and noone seems to have known either. I honestly think some sort of disableing a FARP even if only for a short time should be possible? Bombing or something? If I want I can shut down an Airbase with anti-runway bombings, but if you guys have unlimited lives, nothing is stopping you from just spawning over and over the instance you die so enemy choppers can´t really approach close enough? Not blaming blue for that, it´s what I would have done. Or am I just too noob to know how to take a FARP? Could be that it´s way easier then I think it is and I just don´t know it.

Appreciated. Since this is my first BlueFlag, I won´t pretend I know how the dynamic plays out. I barely know half of the mechanics despite looking through the SOP five times. Let´s just say that even when getting rolled over during the main-hours US time, I had my fun. I especially had fun when I jumped into GCI yesterday, saw the situation, started throwing BRAs around and kicked Blue ass all the way back to MinVody XD The Server being down for multiple hours is annoying, but I know it´s nothing we can quickly fix. It´s as annoying for blue as it is for Red. I will make some suggestions to the staff tho and I will fight to the bitter end. It´s not over yet. Red Organization prior to BF5 seems to have been an issue, and I will try to work on that a bit. We can´t really change the location people live. I learned alot and will implement it in future rounds. Bluefor, expect a much better organised and working force next time....hopefully XD Thanks to everyone who worked on this and attended, it has been an honor so far. Hat´s off, blues, let´s see how this ends.

I don´t know if you are one of those guys that runs a beast of a machine, turns everything on and expects it to look amazing and sharp...because if you are one of those guys, there are a couple options in the grafics menue that result in the exact OPPOSITE happening. So you eat fps for a worse looking game. Since the grafics options menue seems to have a few options missing or I´m just not remembering them, try turning depth of field off. I know there was a setting that caused distant objects to blur like crazy.

Red Lonewolf Callsign: Chrinik Prefered Aircraft: SU-27/25T, MiG-21/29, M2kC

They typically carried an IR and a Radar version of each missle and used them in conjunction so that both had a higher chance of canceling countermeassures. In the "how to be able to do it in MiG-21" you fist need to accuire Radar Lock and be behind your target. Switch to your IR missle and wait for positive lock, fire, then switch to the Radar missle and fire it. I don´t know why it would be hard to do so in the MiG-21...unless of course you are trying to use salvo-fire...with different weapons equipped, Salvofire doesn´t work.

Uhm...similar class? At face value, the F-5Es only air-to-air armament is two (maybe four) Sidewinders and that´s it. While the plane may perform better, two heatseekers compared to a plane that carries both radar-guided and much more heatseekers. It will be interesting tho. The Viggen atleast can carry six sidewinders.

This is because the side aspect is not JUST the notch. What´s the point of a stealth fighter, that is frontally invisible, but can be tracked much easier then a conventional plane the more you cross the 45° line?

The Super Tucano is what people are talking about, and as a COIN aircraft, it is probably alot more practical then a plane designed to kill tanks in the cold war. Insurgents have little in the way of tanks. It´s compatible with targeting pods and carries Paveway IIs and Mavericks. But all possible replacements for the A-10 failed, that gun is just too useful and the A-10 is too cheap to operate so noone finds reason to replace it, because all options are more expensive and less capable.