Online missions: but what is it that you want?

[Pilotasso]

The presence of Players has been inconsisten these past couple of months maybe due to Exams/vacations.

 

I have heard some coments of server owners wondering what kind of mission would be prefferred by virtual pilots of the comunity.

[NEODARK]

I personally like organized raids/missions.

 

Be it against AI, or human. Air Quake is rather boring after a while, but pulling these kinds of missions realistically outside of a clan environment is almost impossible.

 

I've had pretty decent turnout for my =COOP_SERV= in HL, but that was against AI, However, I've been too busy lately to keep it up on a regular basis.

 

Still, co-op against human is the best of both worlds, just really hard to actually get it to happen.

[ФрогФут]

And where is "А-А with 9A4172 only" answer?:D

[Guest Cali]

I made a few Su-33 carrier missions that me and a few others in my squad have been flying. It's against AI, but we have been having a blast. It's a nice change from the normal air quake/and other mission servers in hyperlobby. I just get tried so the same ole thing. And with these missions it's nice cause they are all different. Some of the servers say you can't shoot aircraft on the ground <----thats why ED made air defense, that is just plain dumb.

 

And I flew a couple of mission with te 199th BSR and they are a bunch of good guys. I have learned a lot from LOC and Rugg. Me and LOC did some bombimg practice the other day and I learned how to loft bomb in the 33. I have learned more from them then anyone else in lock on. It's to bad that they don't fly on-line to often.

 

Also it would be nice if sevrers had the carrier in more of their missions. That seemed to have been forgotten. Good thread by the way Pilotasso.

[S77th-konkussion]

"Air quake" is a phenomenon these days, not a designed mission. The maps are mostly air to ground orientated with plenty of fighters with CAP responsibilities. Sorry- but it happens. You all pick your own planes- if you pick fighters- well.... guess what? I can't tell you how many times I've started by myself in a ground pounder only to have a fighter show up on the other side. Maybe he wants some ego-soothing kills, maybe that's the only plane he flies. No matter. If I am being attacked by a fast mover while mudding, and I can not defend myself, or escape, or use some other tactic to stay alive- (sams) I'm going to abort, grab a fighter and give him something to think about. :)

[S77th-konkussion]

FWIW we have a few alternative maps- carrier ops, refueling, etc. We can run them more often.. Now if only there was a cure for idiots that like to bomb the carrier in a carrier practice mission..

 

Can you lock loadouts?

[Pilotasso]

I voted answer 8. Not 9, we would need better sead aircraft for that. One that wouldnt be fodder for fighters, nor as slow as an A-10 or Su-25.

[Guest Cali]

FWIW we have a few alternative maps- carrier ops, refueling, etc. We can run them more often.. Now if only there was a cure for idiots that like to bomb the carrier in a carrier practice mission..

 

Can you lock loadouts?

 

LMAO, I don't think there is a cure for the idiots konkussion.

[S77th-konkussion]

Heheh true story. Caught him in the act. Wish I could remember the name..

[Guest Cali]

Air Quakes get old fast

[Shaman]

last option + mid air refueling

[bSr.LCsta]

IMO its hard to have a open mission with any sort of complexity. :(

Imagine on D-Day or any real-life mission for that matter if the policy was "show up when you have time, or feel like it". Thats why things turn into air quake.

Would be nice to have more co-ops or teams vs. that started at a specific time with goals for each side (like Crimea Air Wars), but my experience is, there is rarely enough accountability on-line and people never show up, or have tech probs or, etc.....

[Floyd]

IMO its hard to have a open mission with any sort of complexity. :(

Imagine on D-Day or any real-life mission for that matter if the policy was "show up when you have time, or feel like it". Thats why things turn into air quake.

Would be nice to have more co-ops or teams vs. that started at a specific time with goals for each side (like Crimea Air Wars), but my experience is, there is rarely enough accountability on-line and people never show up, or have tech probs or, etc.....

 

I've flown Falcon, F/A-18 and Lomac online for 8 years now and the best

missions i can remember had been coops vs the AI. What i consider to be

a good mission? Take off (from a carrier) with your teammates, fight your

way to the target (preferably in a multi role fighter) by shooting down clever

Ai planes (generated by dynamic campaign), destroy your target (usually

some ground movers or a static target) by deploying cluster or LGB munitions.

Fly back to your base, sometimes with refueling, and call it a day by having

a drink on the hot shot of the coop. Hwg, we really had FUN.

 

I do not criticise todays way/style of flying - may it be called air quake,

flatten the tower, a coop or plain old dogfight. One has to adapt or leave,

it's that simple. What we have to accept is that the game forces some sort

of gameplay, especially online. Some missions as i know them from Falcon

or F/A-18 are not possible and there's no workaround. We have to go for

it, because improvements of the mission editor are not in sight.

 

Sometimes i'm jealous of new pilots in Hyperlobby. They join some flights,

say 'Man, that sucks!' and can leave for some other games/genre. And i sit

there and think 'Damned, this is my hobby for so many years now and i can't

leave it because i KNOW what's possible, being addicted to flight sims and

hope for the next patch or addon!'

 

Make the best of it!

[GGTharos]

Actually, the 44th and 504th played on the 169th's server, fielding a total of some 16 aircraft, fighters and ground attack, to sink the Kuznetsov in the biggest operation we've flown. It was quite fun, things had to be timed, fuel had to be counted, aircraft flights had specific tasks and goals to accomplish, and so on.

 

 

Opposition was not formidable, but that's the breaks; not a lot of guys were on the red side. Ice later invited us to do it again while the 169th was around, but unfortunately turnout was again low.

 

Still, we hope to see something like this happen again.

 

EDIT: TO be clear, the second time aound turnout was low on our side this time around.

[169th_Crusty]

Actually, the 44th and 504th played on the 169th's server, fielding a total of some 16 aircraft, fighters and ground attack, to sink the Kuznetsov in the biggest operation we've flown. It was quite fun, things had to be timed, fuel had to be counted, aircraft flights had specific tasks and goals to accomplish, and so on.

 

 

Opposition was not formidable, but that's the breaks; not a lot of guys were on the red side. Ice later invited us to do it again while the 169th was around, but unfortunately turnout was again low.

 

Still, we hope to see something like this happen again.

 

When the heck was that? I always miss these things. Can you guys announce it somehow?

[51GRIZZLY]

Originally posted by Konkussion:

FWIW we have a few alternative maps- carrier ops, refueling, etc. We can run them more often.. Now if only there was a cure for idiots that like to bomb the carrier in a carrier practice mission..

 

There is a cure against attempts to sink the carryer ... that cure is called The Moscow Cruiser.

Place it near the carryer and it will give any hostile airframe a really hard time.

Only a well coordinated attac will be able to cope with its defence.:smilewink:

BTW I voted the last option :pilotfly:

[enigma6584]

I think the server administrators do a pretty good job with the missions I've been seeing up on Hyperlobby. The more realistic and complex, the better IMHO. I would like to add though that it would be nice to include aerial refueling tankers in the missions and other AI aircraft from time to time like Mig-25, F-16, Mig-23 etc. etc., tactical bombers would be nice as well. Since many servers run the missions 6+ hours at a time, one could space the spawning of those AI aircraft along the length of the mission.

 

That way, if you are conducting a fighter sweep with your bud and all of a sudden you get the "25" symbol on the TEWS, it adds a bit of diversity to the threat equation out there. Those AI aircraft could also act as decoys on behalf of the player/human element whose side they are on. Players would get one hell of a education in target sorting and designation.:)

[Guest Cali]

There is a cure against attempts to sink the carryer ... that cure is called The Moscow Cruiser.

Place it near the carryer and it will give any hostile airframe a really hard time.

Only a well coordinated attac will be able to cope with its defence.:smilewink:

BTW I voted the last option :pilotfly:

 

Friendlies were sinking it during the carrier practice mission.

[AJ.eightFive]

There is a cure against attempts to sink the carryer ... that cure is called The Moscow Cruiser.

Place it near the carryer and it will give any hostile airframe a really hard time.

Only a well coordinated attac will be able to cope with its defence.:smilewink:

BTW I voted the last option :pilotfly:

 

Yeah, we sunk that and about 12 other ships too :P.