104th Phoenix Dedicated Server Info

[bn880]

;3072777']

 

My problem with what BN is saying is his apparent refusal to even bother trying to IFF and instead just saying these suggestions are 'idealistic'.

 

No I do try, but I 100% disagree with you on letting a fighter keep locking in a friendly TA, and having to wait till they fly past your head without firing.. And firing only when they fire at you. So there are new people who do the wrong thing, sometimes they will pay the price. That's just what should happen. I've really only had 1 friendly kill like this, but I would still do the same thing after checking for a buddyspike. (which would come up empty in that case no doubt)

 

If you want to be strict on it, I suggest putting down a basic list of requirements before firing on any aircraft on the briefings. Not generalized, but specific and clear. But it's up to you. Does everyone want to be on TS even?

[Falcon_S]

Guys, you can`t stop someone to lock other aircraft. Why discussion about that? Of course it annoys but... ignore.

[bn880]

Guys, you can`t stop someone to lock other aircraft. Why discussion about that? Of course it annoys but... ignore.

 

You can ignore it sometimes but not when they're locking you for a long time, coming head on within visual range, and you can't confirm that they're friend. It's a concern.

 

The main discussion really for me is:

 

A) Why not un-mix aircraft, and/or what is the timeline when this will happen?

B) Why not press ED for IFF that can fail or be turned off, and to make at least balanced aircraft to allow A above. (because I assume A/C mixing per side is because of the limited aircraft that don't overlap Red/Blue)

 

The thing with firing on numpties that insist on locking very clear friendlies is a side point to the two points above, and just a discussion on the rules.

[Falcon_S]

You can ignore it sometimes but not when they're locking you for a long time, ...

 

Sometimes for your soul TKill him. It help. (believe me :) )

[Frostie]

You can ignore it sometimes but not when they're locking you for a long time, coming head on within visual range, and you can't confirm that they're friend. It's a concern.

 

The main discussion really for me is:

 

A) Why not un-mix aircraft, and/or what is the timeline when this will happen?

B) Why not press ED for IFF that can fail or be turned off, and to make at least balanced aircraft to allow A above. (because I assume A/C mixing per side is because of the limited aircraft that don't overlap Red/Blue)

 

The thing with firing on numpties that insist on locking very clear friendlies is a side point to the two points above, and just a discussion on the rules.

 

IFF fail? F-15 TEWS and NCTR don't fail which are perfect ways of determing friend from foe in an unmixed scenario, so why bother making IFF fail only to hinder Russian fighters even more.

[bn880]

IFF fail? F-15 TEWS and NCTR don't fail which are perfect ways of determing friend from foe in an unmixed scenario, so why bother making IFF fail only to hinder Russian fighters even more.

Riiight, ok, that's not exactly what I said even in the quote, but even if it was you're wrong. Also do you always target just one liners from people's posts? :music_whistling:

[Frostie]

Riiight, ok, that's not exactly what I said even in the quote, but even if it was you're wrong. Also do you always target just one liners from people's posts? :music_whistling:

 

Correct me if i'm wrong but you asked for unmixed a/c and iff that fails or off and highlighted this as the main discussion for you. This is exactly what I responded to, if iff is off or fails in an unmixed scenario F-15s still won't have a problem with iff because of TEWS and NCTR. Capish?

[bn880]

Correct me if i'm wrong but you asked for unmixed a/c and iff that fails or off and highlighted this as the main discussion for you. This is exactly what I responded to, if iff is off or fails in an unmixed scenario F-15s still won't have a problem with iff because of TEWS and NCTR. Capish?

 

 

I did ask for unmixed A/C , which at least allows for VID by shape. Yes.

As for your other point no I really don't get what you are saying on the F15's radar/jammer. I am considering the IFF issue in case the aircraft remain mixed up too. But both would be best.

 

Edit: yeah ok you mean if they were sorted per type/side then the F15 could ID by shape. Sure, if that was the case. And it is a limited feature too though of the F15 radar. Its not going to just be as nice as the IFF you get in DCS now. More chances for a-g aircraft.

Edited March 9, 2017 by bn880

[Frostie]

I did ask for unmixed A/C , which at least allows for VID by shape. Yes.

As for your other point no I really don't get what you are saying on the F15's radar/jammer. I am considering the IFF issue in case the aircraft remain mixed up too. But both would be best.

 

So basically in a mixed scenario have no iff and make it a complete cluster. Ok good luck with your request, have a good day.

[bn880]

So basically in a mixed scenario have no iff and make it a complete cluster. Ok good luck with your request, have a good day.

Again a straw man argument.

 

No, not no IFF. Selective no friend confirmation if someone turns off their transponder. So bogeys.

 

The bigger point is still the mixing of A/C.

Currently IFF goes like this on 104th with current DCS, assuming downed AWACS and not everyone on TS:

A-G aircraft - Looking for a paint scheme, and for A/C shape (the detriment here is that it's difficult to check out a paint scheme in the sim/game at a distance)

A-A aircraft - pretty much perfect identification of foe, and A/C shape/type

 

That's not how it should be. You'd level it out a little by unmixing. And it would be even more interesting with people playing mouse with transponders, as well as transponder failures due to damage.

 

Really what I am saying is un cluster it a bit for A-G aircraft. And not unreasonably.

 

Maybe add to that some moving targets and CA and it would be even more amazing, but hey, it's not my server :)

[Magnanimous]

Simshaker jetseat

 

I've noticed that for the last couple of days my simshaker/jetseat has not been working on 104th. It does work in single player and other multiplayer servers. Is this intentional? I really enjoy the 104th crew but have grown quite fond of the added immersion provided by the Jetseat.

[Frostie]

Again a straw man argument.

 

No, not no IFF. Selective no friend confirmation if someone turns off their transponder. So bogeys.

 

The bigger point is still the mixing of A/C.

Currently IFF goes like this on 104th with current DCS, assuming downed AWACS and not everyone on TS:

A-G aircraft - Looking for a paint scheme, and for A/C shape (the detriment here is that it's difficult to check out a paint scheme in the sim/game at a distance)

A-A aircraft - pretty much perfect identification of foe, and A/C shape/type

 

That's not how it should be. You'd level it out a little by unmixing. And it would be even more interesting with people playing mouse with transponders, as well as transponder failures due to damage.

 

Really what I am saying is un cluster it a bit for A-G aircraft. And not unreasonably.

 

Maybe add to that some moving targets and CA and it would be even more amazing, but hey, it's not my server :)

 

I'm sorry but you're talking in riddles for me. One post you're saying this is for unmixed the next you're saying, no, no, it is for mixed.

 

I see this whole process to try and somehow level the playing field with strikers to fighters so as fighters can't efficiently IFF. Seems to me you have a desire to turn strikers into fighters as though this is a thing.

 

The problem is I don't see how this is going to fix the original problem of where this discussion stemed from of friendly fighters locking up strikers, with your proposal this is only going to get worse with everyone locking each other up and new guys shooting everybody down. Take a leaf out of that and read that new guys would shoot everybody down but more experienced would play it smart much like what you have to do in a striker now ie. a learned ability. During unmixed scenarios F-15s can easily id targets by type such as Su25 with NCTR and collect accurate information on radars they are facing through TEWS.

 

The big clue is in the role of ac, A2G and A2A, if you're flying A2G and have air nails then stop pounding the fish in a barrel and get to safety, hide, get cover or get ready to defend. If you don't know how to defend them you shouldn't be hanging around.

This is not the place to be discussing DCS features that don't exist, what is being advised to you, that you like to belittle, is how you can operate as a striker in the server, that is more appropriate to this thread.

 

There is a case for iff to be more realistic but it shouldn't be in the name of level the playing fields, disguised as realism by guys who fly totally unrealistically, solo or with one or two friends.

The simple thing to is be on comms with a fighter who can cover your airspace and let you know of the situation like a mini awacs. And you should also be on comms with fellow ground pounders to gang up on any fighter that may attack. Getting the first shot in against a fighter is never going to happen in a striker without good intel and that is how it should be.

Considering strikers get a TA with a known fact that only hostile units exist there and the TA being away from the A2A fight I think you've got it pretty easy. Now get back to learning how to be an effective and smart ground pounder like plenty have already done before instead of a trigger happy multirole hero.

Edited March 9, 2017 by Frostie

[Falcon_S]

Not related to the discussion...

 

Epic battle last night in Op. Liberty. The sky was on fire on all sides. I think that Bullseye is destroyed too. :D

[104th_Maverick]

Epic battle last night in Op. Liberty. The sky was on fire on all sides

 

Great to hear!

 

Look out for more missions getting AWACS added over the next few days! This should help keep the intensity up!

[microvax]

;3073716']Great to hear!

 

Look out for more missions getting AWACS added over the next few days! This should help keep the intensity up!

 

With forward observer slots for ABM/GCI or "just" AI a la radio menu ?

[104th_Maverick]

Just the AI for now, we will be testing CA slots for GCI in the next week or so again to see if there is any improvements from the last time we tested it.

[microvax]

;3073835']Just the AI for now' date=' we will be testing CA slots for GCI in the next week or so again to see if there is any improvements from the last time we tested it.[/quote']

 

Do CA slots actually impact server performance ?

 

Or do you mean if the view itself for forward observer, having ghost names of lost contacts all over the place, got any better ?

 

Anyhow, nice addition, even just a bogeydope is really helpfull ! :)

[bn880]

Well Forstie, it's really because there are multiple battles to be fought. One battle is to unmix aircraft, the other is to get a bit more depth on IFF. Sure, Fighters will always be fighters and pretty much own strikers.

 

I am not at all dismissing what is being said about proper IFF procedures with what is in place now. Don't get me wrong, its all valid, but it does not make my points invalid. So even if you SHOULD try and IFF via buddyspike calls, and situational awareness and whatever this is still true:

 

1) Locking a friendly for prolonged time and heading right into them, while having the Friendly identifier on your Radar is pretty much an engagement, and a big no no.

2) It is better to not have mixed aircraft for those people without radar, and is generally how things turn out IRL too, where you have (not always) usually the ability to ID by shape.

3) IFF transponders fail or can be turned off IRL, and there is electronic warfare going on there too.

 

 

I find your point applies to you more than myself. I am arguing for more realistic approaches than you are. You are saying no realistic IFF features and NO to realistic faction vehicle selections. As well you seem to be saying , alright, lock up those friendlies, they can eat it. Right?

 

But, yesterday after being on 104th again i decided to watch a replay of a gun run, and found out something very interesting. Most of the time there are approx 3 A-A missiles in the air on 104th at any one time. In terms of ground weapons, it is much less, about less than 1 weapon at a time.

 

So the rule here is, and why we see mixed aircraft, arguments against, static targets with strange placement, is that it's mostly Air Quake that is happening on the server. The Air-Ground operations seem kind of like an after thought and 2nd priority.

 

 

Mostly the people arguing here against unmixing or IFF realism are air-air combatants, not air-ground. (and also locking up friendly strikers)

 

I'm sorry but you're talking in riddles for me. One post you're saying this is for unmixed the next you're saying, no, no, it is for mixed.

 

I see this whole process to try and somehow level the playing field with strikers to fighters so as fighters can't efficiently IFF. Seems to me you have a desire to turn strikers into fighters as though this is a thing.

 

The problem is I don't see how this is going to fix the original problem of where this discussion stemed from of friendly fighters locking up strikers, with your proposal this is only going to get worse with everyone locking each other up and new guys shooting everybody down. Take a leaf out of that and read that new guys would shoot everybody down but more experienced would play it smart much like what you have to do in a striker now ie. a learned ability. During unmixed scenarios F-15s can easily id targets by type such as Su25 with NCTR and collect accurate information on radars they are facing through TEWS.

 

The big clue is in the role of ac, A2G and A2A, if you're flying A2G and have air nails then stop pounding the fish in a barrel and get to safety, hide, get cover or get ready to defend. If you don't know how to defend them you shouldn't be hanging around.

This is not the place to be discussing DCS features that don't exist, what is being advised to you, that you like to belittle, is how you can operate as a striker in the server, that is more appropriate to this thread.

 

There is a case for iff to be more realistic but it shouldn't be in the name of level the playing fields, disguised as realism by guys who fly totally unrealistically, solo or with one or two friends.

The simple thing to is be on comms with a fighter who can cover your airspace and let you know of the situation like a mini awacs. And you should also be on comms with fellow ground pounders to gang up on any fighter that may attack. Getting the first shot in against a fighter is never going to happen in a striker without good intel and that is how it should be.

Considering strikers get a TA with a known fact that only hostile units exist there and the TA being away from the A2A fight I think you've got it pretty easy. Now get back to learning how to be an effective and smart ground pounder like plenty have already done before instead of a trigger happy multirole hero.

Edited March 10, 2017 by BIGNEWY
1.1 profanity

[bn880]

;3073716']Great to hear!

 

Look out for more missions getting AWACS added over the next few days! This should help keep the intensity up!

 

Thanks for that and working on the skin/briefing thing which I think you mentioned before. Much appreciated to see improvements in those areas. (CA too is mentioned, would be amazing)

 

(even if you hate me now ;) )

[SDsc0rch]

view issue on OpAbleArcher

 

--- error - OpAbleArcher

 

--- correct - OpBackfire

 

i've seen this happen before - there's some setting somewhere on the server that has to be set, not sure what

 

thx

 

(ps.. sorry for the mic problems - it cuts in and out - i know about it, don't know how to fix it)

[winchesterdelta1]

Wouldn't it be a nice idea to have skins for veteran 104th server pilots in your skin pack? or does that require a slot to be reserved like the 104th squadron slots already in the mission.

Otherwise it would be a nice idea for ED to maybe make it possible to assign skins by player ID or Player name.

 

Example:

- 104th admins decide to add personal skins for regular pilots in their pack.

- They add a line into the mission files/scripts. WinchesterDelta1 Joined > Add skin "USA_0001"

- I choose a plane from the list and will automatically have that skin.

 

(The bogus code is totally made up)

Edited March 10, 2017 by winchesterdelta1

[bn880]

Wow, I just experienced something extremely bizarre on 104th.

 

I am flying around in Armageddon happily avoiding SA15 at Bravo, still very heavy and slow, checking out TGP for next Sa15 location. I then eventually notice some message about entering target area charlie and getting blown up in 15 seconds if I don't turn around :D (the most absurd thing EVER). So immediately I yank on the stick and down to turn around , but I knew i couldn't do it in 15s (I'm not in an Air Quake F15). So.. BOOM., the mission destroyed me, for playing like you're supposed to around sams and doing A-G work.

 

Lovely.

 

Maybe rethink that a bit eh? You know, check the SAM ranges and TA placements or remove the shitty script? There has to be something more sensible than this kind of extreme/childish thing. (how about even fewer targets, moving and all up at the same time even, you know, like real life) :p hehe

 

Regards

[104th_Maverick]

 

SARH Sunday returns for tomorrow the 12th of March.

 

No AMRAAMS or R-77 all day across all our missions!

[al531246]

Muh AMRAAM's!

[D4n]

Pls also place mistral gazelle in team red, as it's the only A2A capable heli currently in DCS. Also, how to get reply from AWACS with Gazelle?