"Buddy Spike" - DCS World Online Events

[QuiGon]

Put A-10C, KA50, and UH-1H on both sides, thoughts?

 

Pls don't. I prefer as many aircraft unique to one side as possible according to reality. A-10 is only beeing operated by the USA and the KA-50 is only beeing used by Russia.

[amazingme]

And no 'F10'... It would make things more interesting and closer to RL. I know, we ain't ready yet for real navigation, but we should give it a try.. it won't hurt anyone anyway.

 

 

P.S. Don't throw the rocks at me :)

[iLOVEwindmills]

Yes all vs all except the F15, Su27, MiG-29, F-5E, MiG-21, A10s, SU-25A, Mi-8, UH-1H, KA-50, Lz39 & Hawk :lol:

 

Greg

 

 

Well, as per the above it would be considering A10C/KA50 and both transport helis on both sides.

 

Sure there's still second line aircraft like Mig21/29/25A/10A/F5 and the 'trainers' but I consider these more flavour than any real unique capabilities for their sides. Since everything they can do is already done better by other machines on their side, especially with M2K available on both sides now.

 

Maybe it would be an idea to give Mig21/F5, Su25A/A10A lives from a separate pool or something? This would maybe give them some use.

 

 

I'd love to fly these things, but it's hard to justify when they are much more vulnerable + drain lives from the same pool as the 'better' machines.

 

If they become viable it would add uniqueness to the capabilities of each side.

Edited October 5, 2016 by iLOVEwindmills

[kobeshow]

Hey Greg,

 

you have an error on the web based map, the COMM Array in PAK 2 has wrong coordinates in the tooltip, the short version is GK40 but the detailed one is KQ 686 071, so something is wrong there (; cheers

[firmek]

How about instead of balancing the unbalance we actually try to go towards more "realism". For example, better SAM for Red (after all... they're on the home field).

This might have not been possible some time ago but at the moment there are enough modules and DCS has reached a critical mass where more realistic scenarios should be possible.

Actually this should not be so much difficult to achieve - just follow the historical unit assignments.

 

Put A-10C, KA50, and UH-1H on both sides, thoughts?

More dedicated aircrafts for each sides than better:

1. More accure historically - at least untill world leaders gather together to discuss "balancing" the conflicts. Yes, they could learn a lot from our discussions: Putin - "Obama stop being a noob, we need those 120C for both sides", Obama: "sure... how about banning your ET"....

2. More interesting and engaging - learn to levarage strenghts and adress weak points of the airplane

2. Limits RWR mess - That A10-C moments - "is that M-2000C friendly????"... hmmm... - "buddy spike, buddy spike" - splash... ok, this one wasn't...

3. There are already more then enough of "all vs all" airquake servers

[fixen]

And no 'F10'... It would make things more interesting and closer to RL. I know, we ain't ready yet for real navigation, but we should give it a try.. it won't hurt anyone anyway.

 

 

P.S. Don't throw the rocks at me :)

 

I would the idea of not seeing yourself on the f10 map If the f-15/su-27 had the ability to make custom waypoints, which is not the case.

[zaelu]

I would the idea of not seeing yourself on the f10 map If the f-15/su-27 had the ability to make custom waypoints, which is not the case.

 

You have all the airports "mapped". You can see quick distances and heading to them. With the F10 map available for reference checking and some hours of flight like this... becomes a non issue.

 

"Blind" Navigation is a game changer but for most is "scary" at first. I remember multiplayer games in IL-2 1946 with flights over the ocean. The map was a time one in your head. The battles were secondary :D .

[apocom]

 

More dedicated aircrafts for each sides than better:

1. More accure historically - at least untill world leaders gather together to discuss "balancing" the conflicts. Yes, they could learn a lot from our discussions: Putin - "Obama stop being a noob, we need those 120C for both sides", Obama: "sure... how about banning your ET"....

2. More interesting and engaging - learn to levarage strenghts and adress weak points of the airplane

2. Limits RWR mess - That A10-C moments - "is that M-2000C friendly????"... hmmm... - "buddy spike, buddy spike" - splash... ok, this one wasn't...

3. There are already more then enough of "all vs all" airquake servers

 

1. It's not about historically accurate. The F15 never engaged the SU27 IRL.

 

2. Good idea, how about a '90 scenario with ER, ET and without AMRAAMs?

 

3. There is a reason why NATO vs Russia Servers are empty. Not because of airquake, simply because the numbers are just ridiculous onesided. Like last blueflag.

[Zurich]

Current concept/changelog:

- Available modules:

Blue Side: F-15C, M2KC, F-5E, A-10C, A-10A, SU-25T, HAWK, Gazelle (3x versions), UH-1H

Red Side: SU-27, MiG-29S, M2KC, MiG-21, SU-25T, SU-25A, LZ-39, KA-50, Mi-8

 

- No AIM-120, R-77, R-27ER, R-27ET available

- No cluster bombs available

- M2KC available for both sides

- SU-25T available for both sides

- Phantasmagoria & KH-25MPU available again for SEAD missions

- KA-50 can't call bombers anymore

- SA-3, SA-8, SA-13 SAM on airbases

- F-16s replaced the F-4s AI Intercepts for Blue Side. Red side uses MiG-29As

- Red FARPs now should refuel (replaced the trucks)

- Supporting the latest Ciribob's Simple Radio versions (there will be updates shortly along with new frequency lists)

 

Sounds good! Looking forward to the next round! However, is it possible to get an even split of Mig29S to Mig29A's (Same number of Migs overall, just a split of A's and S's at each airfield)? I know a lot of us would only take the Mig29S only because of the R-77, which isn't allowed (ECM or otherwise). The Mig29A is just much better looking with the new model, a shame we can't fly it.

[RAZBAM_ELMO]

I'm still curious as to why there is a 120 restriction yet the ET is still allowed. Just to make it clear I'm not an eagle driver and I'm not crying about it as I'm going to fly my 21. But shouldn't it be fair to restrict all extended range missiles for all aircraft?

 

Second, I was hoping that this round was going to be a 21 v f5 match up and I'm slightly disappointed that this is now not the case.

 

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

[Zurich]

I'm still curious as to why there is a 120 restriction yet the ET is still allowed. Just to make it clear I'm not an eagle driver and I'm not crying about it as I'm going to fly my 21. But shouldn't it be fair to restrict all extended range missiles for all aircraft?

 

Second, I was hoping that this round was going to be a 21 v f5 match up and I'm slightly disappointed that this is now not the case.

 

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

 

The wording in his post is weird, but I think he means that No ETs, ERs, or AMRAAMS are available.

[RAZBAM_ELMO]

The wording in his post is weird, but I think he means that No ETs, ERs, or AMRAAMS are available.

Sorry. I had read that there was restrictions on all E and 120s. My apologies for that. I stand corrected. Carry on. Nothing to see here lol

 

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

[BodyOrgan]

Greg,

 

I request server messages be turned off. I don't need to see who took off where etc... Would also be different if kill messages could be turned off putting the onus on the pilot to figure out if they got the kill or not.

[RAZBAM_ELMO]

+1

 

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

[M0ltar]

+2

[T_A]

Greg,

 

I request server messages be turned off. I don't need to see who took off where etc... Would also be different if kill messages could be turned off putting the onus on the pilot to figure out if they got the kill or not.

 

They said in the past they cant remove it since the script system depends on these messages in order to work.

[BodyOrgan]

They said in the past they cant remove it since the script system depends on these messages in order to work.

I believe there was a bug in DCS preventing to collection of the player GUID without the printing of the server messages. This has since been corrected as proven by the Kaucasus Offensive not displaying these messages, and also using the GUID to track lives. I believe even proven by Blue Flag in its current state as you don't receive messages about what the other team is doing anymore.

 

Edit: Nope, looks like Blue Flag still shows what the other team is doing.

Edited October 5, 2016 by BodyOrgan

[QuiGon]

And no 'F10'... It would make things more interesting and closer to RL. I know, we ain't ready yet for real navigation, but we should give it a try.. it won't hurt anyone anyway.

 

 

P.S. Don't throw the rocks at me :)

 

Oh yes pls! I'm still waiting for this to happen! :thumbup:

[Zurich]

Sorry. I had read that there was restrictions on all E and 120s. My apologies for that. I stand corrected. Carry on. Nothing to see here lol

 

Sent from my SM-G900W8 using Tapatalk

 

I did too at first. Had to double read it

[mia389]

Greg,

 

I request server messages be turned off. I don't need to see who took off where etc... Would also be different if kill messages could be turned off putting the onus on the pilot to figure out if they got the kill or not.

 

Been stated multiple times they need the messages for their scripts

 

 

Edit: Somone beat me to it. It would be awesome if they could figure a way without them

[D4n]

GL/HF with that pre-merge fight.

 

RIP MiG-29S, ~1990-2016. :megalol: :smilewink:

 

What do you mean? F-15 won't get R-27 ET audio warning plus R-77 is as good as AIM-120B... :)

 

 

Please Greg, give us R-77! It's such a pretty missile! (If not also ok, at least no 120 for F-15s! xD )

 

And have tests, as presumed, already revealed that we can have 1st person player playable Tor/Osa SAM? :) (no lag anymore since last patches)

 

And yes, make helicopters available for both sides (so people only having Module A can play on the team they want to!)

 

disable F10 map YESSS!!!

 

And yes BF team has to talk to ED about the server messages thing...

[Sweep]

What do you mean? F-15 won't get R-27 ET audio warning plus R-77 is as good as AIM-120B... :)

 

ETs? They're a joke *if* I know you're out there. With GCI, yeah, that *if* can get quite iffy.

 

R-77s? Meh, they're kinda equal-ish I think, the -120B has a slight advantage at range where the Adder is the king super close (or they're about even - Platform agility plays a roll here as well!).

 

IMHO, the Eagle can do a "certain defensive maneuver" a LOT better than the Adder (and Alamo) platform and that makes a huge difference.

 

;)

 

Anyway, this Round ought to be quite fun, regardless of the AAMs used! :thumbup:

[Pronin]

The MiG-29 is also capable of the famous mach 1.5 9G spiral towards the enemy that avoids 99% of missiles.

[Nirvi]

Looking forward to round 9 :thumbup:

[gregzagk]

red side needs M460 back, can you put some private Hueys/Gazelles just for him ??? (;

 

I better see a Greg in there and his 373rdon red throughout the Round or im not flying

 

Ok, here comes my whine. lol It's not really a whine, just my 2 cents. Although I have had "thoughts" on things before, in the end I'm always fine with how things are set up in Blueflag, although I will admittedly always prefer realism over fantasy setups. That being said, I HATE not being able to fly my Huey on the red side. Just wanted someone to know, carry on. Looking forward to the next round, whenever it starts.

 

Will we have 1 year of BlueFlag Campaigns -Event ?

 

There are plenty MI8 Operators on NATO also Gazelle and UH1 operators on REDs like Ecuador and Venezuela. That would be my 2 cent on realism.

 

Can I suggest adding the A10C to the Red side as well? If you don't Blue will have a pretty high advantage in the time it takes to clear an airfield.

 

How about instead of balancing the unbalance we actually try to go towards more "realism". For example, better SAM for Red (after all... they're on the home field).

 

Put A-10C, KA50, and UH-1H on both sides, thoughts?

 

And no 'F10'... It would make things more interesting and closer to RL. I know, we ain't ready yet for real navigation, but we should give it a try.. it won't hurt anyone anyway.

 

Please Greg, give us R-77!

And have tests, as presumed, already revealed that we can have 1st person player playable Tor/Osa SAM? (no lag anymore since last patches)

And yes, make helicopters available for both sides (so people only having Module A can play on the team they want to!)

disable F10 map YESSS!!!

And yes BF team has to talk to ED about the server messages thing...