Open Conflict - Server Information

[acdelta57]

You mean ghost out other players? Spectator is way different than being a GCI with proper radar

[Mirknir]

No way to do GCI anymore :(

 

Yea seeing everything with perfect vision and accuracy on F10 map and using this godly information to guide interceptors is closer to cheating than proper CGI :)

[cypc]

With an E3 set up at 32k ft the only things that would not be displayed by a proper GCI set up are aircraft in their hangar, and that's certainly not used to lead an intercept ...

 

With that gone, could be nice to have lotATC set up.

[acdelta57]

With an E3 set up at 32k ft the only things that would not be displayed by a proper GCI set up are aircraft in their hangar, and that's certainly not used to lead an intercept ...

 

With that gone, could be nice to have lotATC set up.

 

With the terrain on the southern side of the map and the locations of the AWACS placed in OC that couldn't be further from the truth

[cosmicdoubloon]

With an E3 set up at 32k ft the only things that would not be displayed by a proper GCI set up are aircraft in their hangar, and that's certainly not used to lead an intercept ...

 

With that gone, could be nice to have lotATC set up.

 

The AWACS for both teams is placed strategically so that their effectivess varies. They're near the edge of their radar's effective range so that contacts near your safe zone are detected easily, but the effectiveness of AWACS drops off the closer to the enemy safe zone you get. This is deliberate and is a little bit of balancing done by Mirknir. That being said, fly low enough and you can fly almost anywhere in the conflict zone and avoid detection!

[Gianthobopixie]

First of all thanks for all the hard work you put into the server have spent the last year and bit on it and it's great. Really enjoying the implementation of having to travel to get the 120s.

 

Just wondering if this was intentional the red team get r77 at Sochi where the mig 29s spawn however the blue team the mig29s don't get this option and have to fly to the other base ? Have I missed something ??

 

Cheers for all the hard work

[Rex854Warrior]

Would be nice to set up some kind of GCI, the in game AWACS is among the worst things to acquire SA that i've seen so far.

 

That or a script that does a far better job at it, like this one https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=158076

Edited July 10, 2017 by Rex854Warrior
Added the Script suggestion

[Mirknir]

First of all thanks for all the hard work you put into the server have spent the last year and bit on it and it's great. Really enjoying the implementation of having to travel to get the 120s.

 

Just wondering if this was intentional the red team get r77 at Sochi where the mig 29s spawn however the blue team the mig29s don't get this option and have to fly to the other base ? Have I missed something ??

 

Cheers for all the hard work

 

Thanks for the feedback ; I appreciate it.

 

Design wise, the fox3 and such should just be available in limited quantity on forward airports so Sochi for red and Kras + Gel for blue.

This is intended so that you can't spawn and directly get these weapons and maybe more try to come back alive and land on a forward airport.

It's not a perfect solution but it decreases a bit the airquake.

 

The exception to the rule is the MiG29 that is lower range that other fighters and has some playable slots on the forward airports so red Mig29 at Sochi and blue Mig29 at Kras should have access to R77 on spawn.

 

Also, to be noted that the warehouse system (to limit what an airport has in stock) is an old feature with which I found a lot of problems and I am still trying to fix some.

It's temporary solution that I don't want to use in the next Open Conflict.

[acdelta57]

WTF man i beg to differ!

 

 

helo party in progress, more to follow

[Mirknir]

Would be nice to set up some kind of GCI, the in game AWACS is among the worst things to acquire SA that i've seen so far.

That or a script that does a far better job at it, like this one https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=158076

 

I don't think the current map requires more ways to finding targets or acquiring more situational awareness and that's already why the AWACS are flying so far from the conflict.

 

The conflict zone is rather small and the landscape is not that much hilly so I don't feel like finding targets or having good SA is so hard that more assistance is required.

On the contrary, OC used to have better AWACS coverage and it mainly helped fighters to kill lower threat targets such as transport helicopters.

 

In the next Open Conflict, I plan to do a bigger map and have some kind of Fog Of War so having a more meaningful CGI system is in the work.

However, it will also be designed to give better information to weaker aircrafts to blur a bit more the line between who is the predator and who is the prey.

[Rex854Warrior]

I don't think the current map requires more ways to finding targets or acquiring more situational awareness and that's already why the AWACS are flying so far from the conflict.

 

The conflict zone is rather small and the landscape is not that much hilly so I don't feel like finding targets or having good SA is so hard that more assistance is required.

On the contrary, OC used to have better AWACS coverage and it mainly helped fighters to kill lower threat targets such as transport helicopters.

 

In the next Open Conflict, I plan to do a bigger map and have some kind of Fog Of War so having a more meaningful CGI system is in the work.

However, it will also be designed to give better information to weaker aircrafts to blur a bit more the line between who is the predator and who is the prey.

 

Well the real problem with the AWACS is not what sees (even if i feel it's very restricted), but it's the way it announces it, i mean i don't need to know there is a contact 140 miles away from me when i'm furball with an ennemi, i would like the AWACS to give names on groups so you know what people are going for when they ask a bogey dope and you also don't get confused when you ask for one, and hell, don't tell me furball without saying where the contact is because half of the time, it's been so terrible at giving me a target that i don't see it until i'm 5 miles away.

The point of a GCI is to make you understand what's around you, he has absolute authority, and the point is to help you find targets and avoid death, not flood you with useless information.

[acdelta57]

Chevy 1-1, MERGED:punk:

[cosmicdoubloon]

Well the real problem with the AWACS is not what sees (even if i feel it's very restricted), but it's the way it announces it, i mean i don't need to know there is a contact 140 miles away from me when i'm furball with an ennemi, i would like the AWACS to give names on groups so you know what people are going for when they ask a bogey dope and you also don't get confused when you ask for one, and hell, don't tell me furball without saying where the contact is because half of the time, it's been so terrible at giving me a target that i don't see it until i'm 5 miles away.

The point of a GCI is to make you understand what's around you, he has absolute authority, and the point is to help you find targets and avoid death, not flood you with useless information.

 

But it's not a GCI, it's the AI AWACS and its terribad performance is the same for everyone so you're not at any disadvantage. If you don't trust the AWACS to find targets for you, then use your own radar and your wingmen, and don't be so headstrong as to burn at mach 1.5 to the bullseye at 35000ft just to have someone hit you with an IR missile from below. You're far more useful to the team anyway if you hang back a bit, loiter, and protect friendly A10s/SU-25s and any other non-fighters instead of flying for 5 minutes, scoring a kill then dying because you pushed too far!

[Rex854Warrior]

But it's not a GCI, it's the AI AWACS and its terribad performance is the same for everyone so you're not at any disadvantage. If you don't trust the AWACS to find targets for you, then use your own radar and your wingmen, and don't be so headstrong as to burn at mach 1.5 to the bullseye at 35000ft just to have someone hit you with an IR missile from below. You're far more useful to the team anyway if you hang back a bit, loiter, and protect friendly A10s/SU-25s and any other non-fighters instead of flying for 5 minutes, scoring a kill then dying because you pushed too far!

 

Well yes, but that's what the AWACS is supposed to do, and actually you are at a disadvantage from the 27s and 33s wich have a datalink and don't have to bother with all the AWACS crappy comms.

While i appreciate your suggestions, they don't work in a realistic scenario, when you're over or further in the direction on the objective then the assets protecting the area from AD, if the AWACS announces a leaker to late, or just says "furball", then what are you going to do ? The leakers are unlikely to get detected by you, since they will do everything to stay away from your radar cone.

And i'm sorry to tell you that, no, i'm not the kind of player to push afterburner and go at 35k feet over the bulls, and die because of a nose cold interceptor :).

Edited July 11, 2017 by Rex854Warrior

[cosmicdoubloon]

Well yes, but that's what the AWACS is supposed to do, and actually you are at a disadvantage from the 27s and 33s wich have a datalink and don't have to bother with all the AWACS crappy comms.

While i appreciate your suggestions, they don't work in a realistic scenario, when you're over or further in the direction on the objective then the assets protecting the area from AD, if the AWACS announces a leaker to late, or just says "furball", then what are you going to do ? The leakers are unlikely to get detected by you, since they will do everything to stay away from your radar cone.

And i'm sorry to tell you that, no, i'm not the kind of player to push afterburner and go at 35k feet over the bulls, and die because of a nose cold interceptor :).

 

Well that's not how AWACS works in DCS, everyone is on the level playing field with the somewhat crappy AWACS. Trust me, the datalink only works for things the AWACS can see. If someone is not visible to AWACS, they aren't on the datalink. Besides if your SA is that bad that you're relying that heavily on the AWACS and not your/your wingman's radar, then you probably want to re-evaluate your tactics. AWACS compliments and enhances your SA, it shouldn't be your only source.

 

But getting back to the original point, having the all-seeing spectator 'GCI' is cheating and provides an incredibly unfair advantage. It's gone for good and rightly so. Even using Combined Arms GCI your intel is limited to what aircraft and groundborne can detect which is far less potent than using a bug to see every single unit on both teams in real time. Sorry to disappoint but that slot isn't coming back.

[Rex854Warrior]

Well that's not how AWACS works in DCS, everyone is on the level playing field with the somewhat crappy AWACS

 

Yes, indeed, but that's unrealistic as all hell.

 

Trust me, the datalink only works for things the AWACS can see. If someone is not visible to AWACS, they aren't on the datalink.

 

Never said they saw everything, i said that they don't have to go trought the comms with the AWACS.

 

Besides if your SA is that bad that you're relying that heavily on the AWACS and not your/your wingman's radar, then you probably want to re-evaluate your tactics. AWACS compliments and enhances your SA, it shouldn't be your only source.

 

It's not, and my SA usualy isn't bad, the point is that you can do more and dedicate more time to your engagement with a proper GCI, that will warn you of the threats and also get quicker answers to things that matter, like a bogey dope, whereas the DCS comms are very polite, when the AWACS is announcing a contact 150 miles away, you will wait until he's done to get a bogey dope for the contact 3 miles in front of you :).

 

But getting back to the original point, having the all-seeing spectator 'GCI' is cheating and provides an incredibly unfair advantage. It's gone for good and rightly so. Even using Combined Arms GCI your intel is limited to what aircraft and groundborne can detect which is far less potent than using a bug to see every single unit on both teams in real time. Sorry to disappoint but that slot isn't coming back.

 

Well you've misunderstood me since the beginning of the conversation, everyone agrees that the specator view should be gone, what i'm asking for is a commander slot, LotATC and/or a script that provides a picture.

[cosmicdoubloon]

Yes, indeed, but that's unrealistic as all hell.

 

 

 

Never said they saw everything, i said that they don't have to go trought the comms with the AWACS.

 

 

 

It's not, and my SA usualy isn't bad, the point is that you can do more and dedicate more time to your engagement with a proper GCI, that will warn you of the threats and also get quicker answers to things that matter, like a bogey dope, whereas the DCS comms are very polite, when the AWACS is announcing a contact 150 miles away, you will wait until he's done to get a bogey dope for the contact 3 miles in front of you :).

 

 

 

Well you've misunderstood me since the beginning of the conversation, everyone agrees that the specator view should be gone, what i'm asking for is a commander slot, LotATC and/or a script that provides a picture.

 

I didn't say your original point, just 'the' original point, which way made by a member of your squadron in that we have no more way to do GCI. It's likely to stay that way until the next version of Skynet drops with the next full version of the Open Conflict server. There will probably not be any CA assets placed because they're simply too easy to exploit and abuse as Mirknir has stated on multiple occasions. I also have to absolutely disagree with implementation of LotATC. Whilst in itself an amazing asset you cannot expect every player who wants to play on the server (a primarily beginners/training server I might add) to shell out for a client licence to have access to GCI/AWACS, it also appears to rely on having that human in the loop to be the ATC/GCI, again meaning a licence is required.

 

Sorry but I don't see any way around the PITA which is the AI AWACS callouts, you're just gonna have to wait for Open Conflict 2.0 for revamped GCI/AWACS

[Rex854Warrior]

I didn't say your original point, just 'the' original point, which way made by a member of your squadron in that we have no more way to do GCI. It's likely to stay that way until the next version of Skynet drops with the next full version of the Open Conflict server. There will probably not be any CA assets placed because they're simply too easy to exploit and abuse as Mirknir has stated on multiple occasions. I also have to absolutely disagree with implementation of LotATC. Whilst in itself an amazing asset you cannot expect every player who wants to play on the server (a primarily beginners/training server I might add) to shell out for a client licence to have access to GCI/AWACS, it also appears to rely on having that human in the loop to be the ATC/GCI, again meaning a licence is required.

 

Sorry but I don't see any way around the PITA which is the AI AWACS callouts, you're just gonna have to wait for Open Conflict 2.0 for revamped GCI/AWACS

 

Might have misunderstood your point but LotATC is free (well not really, but you can use the demo version, you just have to be very patient i guess ^^, it's possible with a 100% dedicated GCI, wich there should be), there are no possible exploits with it, it's, you don't have an all seing eye, and yes there is a human in the loop, not the best, i agree.

But if all that bothers you then why not use a script, that will provide a much better and much faster picture then the AWACS, like this one https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=158076. Of course if everything has to be coded from ground up without using a thrid party script then it's gonna be more complicated but still.

 

And the exploits with the commander slots, on blueflag they don't have a problem with it, works fine, i don't see any exploits being used on it, it's the way you implement it that makes exploits possible.

You don't want to see the ways around the AWACS ^^.

Edited July 11, 2017 by Rex854Warrior

[cosmicdoubloon]

Might have misunderstood your point but LotATC is free (well not really, but you can use the demo version, you just have to be very patient i guess ^^, it's possible with a 100% dedicated GCI, wich there should be), there are no possible exploits with it, it's, you don't have an all seing eye, and yes there is a human in the loop, but if all that bothers you then why not use a script, that will provide a much better and much faster picture then the AWACS, like this one https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=158076. Of course if everything has to be coded from ground up without using a thrid party script then it's gonna be more complicated but still.

 

And the exploits with the commander slots, on blueflag they don't have a problem with it, works fine, i don't see any exploits being used on it, it's the way you implement it that makes exploits possible.

You don't want to see the ways around the AWACS ^^.

 

AFAIK Mirknir doesn't want to use other scripting which is precisely why he's rebuilding his scripting tool Skynet with it's own version of a GCI script, not dissimilar to the one you linked. Just be patient and wait for OC 2.0

 

I'm sure Mirknir might be able to chime in here and give you a more formal answer but I can't imagine it'll be much different from what I've said unfortunately, just hang tight and make do.

[Rex854Warrior]

AFAIK Mirknir doesn't want to use other scripting which is precisely why he's rebuilding his scripting tool Skynet with it's own version of a GCI script, not dissimilar to the one you linked. Just be patient and wait for OC 2.0

 

I'm sure Mirknir might be able to chime in here and give you a more formal answer but I can't imagine it'll be much different from what I've said unfortunately, just hang tight and make do.

 

I guess so, but options are out there. :)

[Rex854Warrior]

@Mirknir, just a quick question, will we get landing waypoints for the Mirage ?

[Mirknir]

Might have misunderstood your point but LotATC is free (well not really, but you can use the demo version, you just have to be very patient i guess ^^, it's possible with a 100% dedicated GCI, wich there should be), there are no possible exploits with it, it's, you don't have an all seing eye, and yes there is a human in the loop, not the best, i agree.

But if all that bothers you then why not use a script, that will provide a much better and much faster picture then the AWACS, like this one https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=158076. Of course if everything has to be coded from ground up without using a thrid party script then it's gonna be more complicated but still.

 

And the exploits with the commander slots, on blueflag they don't have a problem with it, works fine, i don't see any exploits being used on it, it's the way you implement it that makes exploits possible.

You don't want to see the ways around the AWACS ^^.

 

I see a lot of assumptions here so I am going to explain some stuff and choices I made.

 

OpenConflict:

First off, it's very important to understand that I am trying to do my own server, not copy others or do a server that does everything.

Also, I am trying to make a consistent and fun experience and yea, I started by stitching in different scripts...

Then it quickly became difficult to implement my own OC concepts like protected zone, medics, rescues and have all this independent scripts know and handle these concepts well...

...so I created Skynet and do a more all in one handling.

It's to get a more consistent and controlled experience that I did Skynet not for pride or something like that.

 

CGI/AWACS:

For the same reason, I want to include CGI/AWACS in the next Skynet (ReGenesis) because, for example, DCS' AWACS will still dispatch players to enemy protected zone to get rekt or 5 players in F15s to kill a MEDIC helicopter just because DCS Awacs doesn't know these OC concepts.

Again... going for a more contained and consistent experience.

 

LotATC:

I checked very briefly LotATC but didnt want to invest money or time on it.

I am doing OC solo ; I don't have unlimited time or money so I have to choose my battles.

I am also wary of having different players having different OC experience depending on whether they bought or not the client.

 

Combined Arms:

If you go as far as my signature, you will get your answer.

It's not about really about exploits as it is about being able to track what CA players are doing and make them responsible if they troll others.

Without being able to implement a scripted police, servers will have their admins monitors the situation, handle troll and kick them.

I didn't want to impose that on my admins and I didn't want to "lose" player slots to non flying aircrafts.

In the future, if I manage to open more player slots, I may activate some CA and allow "trusted" players to join them at first but I will be honest, it's not my priority right now (again, choosing my battles)

 

I hope this will clarify stuff.

Edited July 11, 2017 by Mirknir

[JDarksword]

I'd like to chime in and say I support a bluflag style, man in the loop GCI in addition to the skynet GCI. Main reason for this is allowing proper use of the MiG-21bis. I'm sure your GCI would be adequate but having a man in the loop system allows GCI to give complicated vectors that will maneuver you around threats, etc. and vector you directly to the target as the Soviets used to do it.

[acdelta57]

You gotta remember Mirknir is trying to please everyone here with a standardization of simplicity and complexity. Bring fun for everyone on "equal" (as possible ) playing fields. He is not going for a level d simulation of realism. Why else would we have Mig21s fighting f15s su27 Sabres etc. if you want a realistic style of server there are multiple to choose from. Just my two cents.

[Rex854Warrior]

You gotta remember Mirknir is trying to please everyone here with a standardization of simplicity and complexity. Bring fun for everyone on "equal" (as possible ) playing fields. He is not going for a level d simulation of realism. Why else would we have Mig21s fighting f15s su27 Sabres etc. if you want a realistic style of server there are multiple to choose from. Just my two cents.

 

Without a proper GCI It's quite hard in an F-5 or in a Mig-21 espcialy in the Mig to do Air-Air without dying, you need SA, wich you can't get with tour own radar because It's crap in both cases, and the AWACS is terrible as i said before.