levanoga

Wrong, first combat sortie was in the 2nd Chechen war in 2000. It was introduced in 1995. But yeah that's in the 80's for you. :megalol::megalol::megalol:

It wasn't as it wasn't in service. I mean who would have piloted the thing? The test pilots over at the Kamov Design Bureau? You do realize what is happening when an aircraft goes into service right?

Are you telling me that a first flight is the same as being combat ready and put into service? Do you think that when a prototype makes its first flight it has all its weapons and sensors already ready for combat? Please stop you are killing me with your posts. :megalol::megalol::megalol:

Low is the only way as going higher usually means being detected by hostile GCI and fighters.

A-10C's are well within the SA-8 range when engaging with 65D's and in most cases the SAM will engage you before you have a solid lock with the seeker head.

When is BF taking place exactly? I know its in the 80's somewhere but the exact time. The Avenger is still considered an 80's vehicle unless BF takes place before 89. The bigger question is what are the KA-50, SU-25T and A-10C doing there...

When did the Avenger enter service?

How did you get a BMP-3 to appear in the 80's? Time traveling is OP.

DCS realistic? You are a funny man.:megalol::megalol::megalol:

We had CA enabled in the past but it was only used to hide units inside buildings to prevent airfield and FARP capture. People also drove for 2 hours just to get to the closest airfield and massacre everyone.

Disabled team and all chat, mandatory simple radio, brevity, final destination Does it simulate radio signal degradation? Will certain aircraft be able to configure their radios to act as relays? Channel scanning and cross band translation?

Back in the days you had to make a speedtest to the server in front of an admin to be able to prove that you can play without causing problems to other people. Now every second person is playing on wi-fi, on a very slow connection or on a bad PC and then causes problems for everyone else. Some even abuse this. It doesn't help that the netcode is bad as it is. A more organized/controlled approach in Blue Flag probably wouldn't hurt but the community is beyond saving at this point as they could not adapt.

Stop playing video games with potato netcode with potato internet connections and start sacrificing goats and virgins so ED makes a proper dedicated server.

Yes, all RED and BLUE AAA and SAM's were not functioning on the final push. And certain airfields did not repair over time. But this issue is also present in the current 7th round of Blue Flag so it has to be a bug. Sadly instead of testing we just started the round.

Very brutal fighting for Krasnodar Pashkovsky but in the end Blue won. There were also slight bugs you need to look into since no AAA and SAM units were active for both Blue and Red and certain airfields didn't repair the whole round.

ATEN-1 abusing screenshot spam to dodge missiles.

Sad to see this when multiple users claimed otherwise. But you are the boss so your word is final. Possible to share the name/group/side?

Both are classified as advanced trainers with light combat capabilities. Very light combat capabilities not suited for the type of conflict seen in Blue Flag. Do you think we need Hawks acting as aggressors on the Blue side for training when we have a dedicated RED team? Do we have Tornados on Blue Flag? We don't. The only thing the Hawk does on Blue Flag is crate lag as Fishnuts has said. Your argument for having trainers in an advanced combat scenario is very selfish. You want 50 other players to suffer lag spikes every time you join your special snowflake trainer because you want to fly it on Blue Flag. Its recon/bombing missions are also a joke but there is nothing else to do for them! Its like the Blue Flag creators needed to give them something or else they would be there just for training and formation flying. That is why you remove problematic aircraft and useless scripts to give the server a break. I want to see arguments for keeping the Hawk/L-39 on Blue Flag and not Wikipedia quotations on what they did in training and in conflicts which had no dedicated opposing air force and air defense.

Please remove the trainers and the recon/bombing script. The aircraft are not suitable for this type of engagement and mission. They are only giving the server more issues (looking at you Hawk). Instead give the CGI power to call in something. He could call in a bomber (once every 60 mins) at high altitudes (out of SA-3/SA-6 range) to bomb airfield targets and the fighters would have to escort him. He could call in an air tanker near the front or a cargo plane with troops to land and capture an airfield. There are so many options for this role. But these things could even cause more problems with the way DCS handles anything AI related.