Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
Let's get the testing started :) I hate spending time with my family ;) and kind of in a wierd way miss roccoo (^>^)

:lol:

I don't think I'll be there for testing, got a lot of stuff to do these days! :(

  • Replies 621
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

technical Question:

What is the View-Range of the "AI-Auto-JTAC"?

the default 2500m? that might explain its "limited" usefullness

'controlling' the Ka50 feels like a discussion with the Autopilot and trim system about the flight direction.

Posted
Idea to swap blu and red territory? Just to try in one round...

 

Who agree?

 

I support as well.

I'd like to play from BLUE's side one time without having to switch to BLUEFOR

 

Mi-8, Su-25A, MiG-21, MiG-15 - RED side

 

Huey, A-10A, F-5, Sabre - BLUE side

 

 

SAM restricted to vietnam-ish era...

 

 

:noexpression:

 

 

I like the Sabre VS Mig idea, the only issue being that I don't have the Mig-15, so I won't be able to fight on the REDFOR if the Mig-21 gets removed.

Posted

I would love this! just switch the flankers out with eagles and visa versa in the other table- DONE.. I totally support this idea! :thumbup:

 

I have been trying to get them to do this since round 2 :D I have no idea why they never comment more on it

 

Idea to swap blu and red territory? Just to try in one round...

 

Who agree?

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Posted

A week ago: "Blue Pilots are taking a Nap after Round 6! No Amraam salt!"

 

Stats: "1000 more people connected to Round 7 and the player numbers in general were higher."

 

Interesting. Of course we don´t know how many of these are people who joined the server, and left again, but meh. I´ll take it.

 

Pretty much confirms 80ies loadout is more popular then full loadout.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

GCI: "Control to SEAD: Enemy SAM site 190 for 30, cleared to engage"

Striker: "Copy, say Altitude?"

GCI: "....Deck....it´s a SAM site..."

Striker: "Oh...."

Fighter: "Yeah, those pesky russian build, baloon based SAMs."

 

-Red-Lyfe

 

Best way to troll DCS community, make an F-16A, see how dedicated the fans really are :thumbup:

Posted

I believe that majority feels the 80's concept more competitive, and that it should be given more love generally.

Don't ask, here's the answer: 95% of my posts are edited because I have OCD.

Posted
A week ago: "Blue Pilots are taking a Nap after Round 6! No Amraam salt!"

 

Stats: "1000 more people connected to Round 7 and the player numbers in general were higher."

 

Interesting. Of course we don´t know how many of these are people who joined the server, and left again, but meh. I´ll take it.

 

Pretty much confirms 80ies loadout is more popular then full loadout.

 

 

I actually think, that if round 6 was the 80s and round 7 was the as new as it gets setup the numbers for round 7 were still higher. Simply because more people notice it after 2 weeks then directly at the start.

 

If we run a 80s first and a full out there after and the numbers are still higher for the first round I stay corrected but atm I see no clear evidence that round theme and player number is connected.

 

 

Really interesting stats would be playtime per pilot and how many IDs the TS saw in that timeframe. :))

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

*unexpected flight behaviour* Oh shiii*** ! What ? Why ? What is happening ?

Posted

Regardless of the setup I only demand: No LAG/SPIKING/DESYNC/SVRCRASH.

 

The challenge is always accepted. But the times I did not want to be a part of the team is only because of above. Or if ED made a patch that made MP even worse.

 

Can't wait to start testing round 8!

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Posted
A week ago: "Blue Pilots are taking a Nap after Round 6! No Amraam salt!"

 

Stats: "1000 more people connected to Round 7 and the player numbers in general were higher."

 

Interesting. Of course we don´t know how many of these are people who joined the server, and left again, but meh. I´ll take it.

 

Pretty much confirms 80ies loadout is more popular then full loadout.

 

Round 6 didn't last as long :)

Posted
Round 6 didn't last as long :)

 

Oh yeah we had kind of a steamroll accident. :D

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

*unexpected flight behaviour* Oh shiii*** ! What ? Why ? What is happening ?

Posted (edited)

Based off of round 7 stats some analysis was done to have a look at how team stack affected things.

 

cviJuP9.png

 

What this shows is a cumulative advantage shifting from team to team. The steeper the slope, the higher the team stack is for that time.

 

Anything below the 0 x-axis is a total hour benefit to Redfor and above is a total hour benefit to Bluefor. However, the inclination of the slopes is important. As stated above, when the slope rapidly slopes in one direction or the other, these are periods where one team has the numerical advantage.

 

What we can see is for the first 3/4 of the round, Red had an overall advantage, with some very steep advantages, especially around the 6th and 7th of June. THis was the period where Bluefor was down to just Tiblisi group. After the 7th Bluefor gains a strong advantage and is able to take back everything in the West and parts of the East.

 

This advantage was continue to be held and grow, but unfortunately was not enough to secure a victory in the end.

 

BU8YNUK.png

 

This graph shows the ratio difference between blue and red throughout the fight as well. I've had to cut the bluefor upper limit for readability, as some of the peeks hit 15 and 42. This is reflected well in the integral player hour diagram above.

 

 

This is what Round 6 looks like however, where Bluefor clearly had a strong advantage throughout.

 

YECfQxl.png

Edited by IASGATG
Posted

Even consistently out numbered the last 2 days Red was able to capture and push blue back. I can honestly say blue lost the battle for Nalchik and with it the war.

 

Good memories and heroic stories shall be told for generations to come.

#I've been dreaming about an unlicensed version of the MIG-31...

 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Posted

Mathematician IASGATG in da house... (lol)

DCS Wishlist: 2K11 Krug SA-4 Ganef SAM, VR-TrackIR icons next to player names in score-chart

PvP: 100+ manual player-kills with Stingers on a well known dynamic campaign server - 100+ VTOL FARP landings & 125+ hours AV-8B, F-14 crew, royal dutch airforce F-16C - PvP campaigns since 2013

DCS server-admins: please adhere to a common sense gaming industry policy as most server admins throughout the industry do. (After all there's enough hostility on the internet already which really doesn't help anyone. Thanks.)

Dell Visor VR headset, Ryzen 5 5600 (6C/12T), RTX 2060 - basic DCS-community rule-of-thumb: Don't believe bad things that a PvP pilot claims about another PvP pilot without having analyzed the existing evidence

Posted
Even consistently out numbered the last 2 days Red was able to capture and push blue back. I can honestly say blue lost the battle for Nalchik and with it the war.

 

Good memories and heroic stories shall be told for generations to come.

 

I agree as well. Red is more coordinated than Blue, don’t get me wrong we (Blue) can get our $hit together and we have good GCI’s but I think Red consistently is able to coordinate well and make strong gains because of it. The pressure that Zero 1 and friends were able to put on Sochi the beginning of the last day was tremendous.

 

JD

AKA_MattE

Posted (edited)

My personal recap.

 

The problem with round six, which was confirmed by IASGATG´s post was that alot of RedFor either sat out or switched to blue deliberately to end the campaign quicker to "get it over with", many advantages on blue side stacked with an entire squadron switching to blue made alot of red players not wanting to waste their time in a pointless struggle just to be cannon fodder...

This is not just my opinion either, this is an amalgamation of alot of discussion we had among red side. Some might not have shared this opinion, some might not care, but a large enough portion did care to end round 6 the way it has. Telling people they can leave if they don´t like it (while true) will tend to make people heed that advice...and the end result is round six, with one side simply folding because they´ve been told to stay away.

 

I was trying to bring this up, (badly due to mounting frustration) but after a stern talking from greg I shut up because I just assumed it was supposed to be that way and that was that.

 

I am sorry and hereby apologize for my actions prior to round six, but they were with best intentions having the campaign overall in mind. I never deminished or ignored the amount of work BS put in to make this campaign possible, however, ignoring an entire faction, making it seem they are relegated to the sidelines and are "supposed to lose" (which is what a bunch of red mainstays honestly thought was going on, what with the massive amount of bias towards blue in preparation for the round.)...I didn´t think it was what BS intended but I was told "We don´t make the campaign for you."...So I just took that and stayed put, fearing I´d be banned even if I carefully word my concerns. Honestly I was suprised round 6 even lasted THAT long. I thought it would be over in a couple days.

 

 

Red coordination...yeah<.<

 

You know how every side is complaining about randies that aren´t on Teamspeak, take slots and waste planes and aren´t that effective?

 

Well, we can´t talk to a large portion of our most active players even if they are on because they don´t speak a word of english.

Trying to coordinate with a group not able to communicate is very, very hard.

So generally they just do what they do amongst themselfs, very effectively, and we try to do something else in the meantime, and usually failing.

 

We do have a couple of dependable, and honestly very skilled individuals and squadrons (51st comes immediately to mind, among others), and they honestly do a very great job.

 

So thanks again to everyone involved, BuddySpike in general, and I just hope the right lessons will be learned and looking forward to what they have in store for us. I will remember the great Beslan defence.

 

After all, if I don´t agree, I can just wait for the next one XD

Edited by Chrinik

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

GCI: "Control to SEAD: Enemy SAM site 190 for 30, cleared to engage"

Striker: "Copy, say Altitude?"

GCI: "....Deck....it´s a SAM site..."

Striker: "Oh...."

Fighter: "Yeah, those pesky russian build, baloon based SAMs."

 

-Red-Lyfe

 

Best way to troll DCS community, make an F-16A, see how dedicated the fans really are :thumbup:

Posted
Based off of round 7 stats some analysis was done to have a look at how team stack affected things.

 

nice analysis man

Posted (edited)

Chrinik, round 6 would have lasted longer if it wasn't for the bug, but we would have probably lost anyway because of the terrible numbers, especially in the night time.

That's not 100% sure, because we managed to take back the east many times starting from Krasnodar, but we will never know.

Round 7 wasn't that much better: for example, look at the numbers of the last two days, we managed to keep pretty much everything and push forward, and were outnumbered 85% of the time.

Yes, we had our useless (and short) moment where we had 40 unorganized people online trying to take Tblisi, but then most of the job was up to our American teammates and the few crazy Europeans staying up till 5am trying to keep the blue hordes from retaking everything (which, eventually, they did after 3 nights of 5 to 1 or more ratio).

Again, in round 7 I've seen 5 to 1, 7 to 1, and even 8 to 1 ratio against.

But this time there were no bugs (so no 6am 9 to 1 a10s strafing AAA without getting shot at), and more importantly the toughest guys didn't get discouraged by the Tblisi failure, the negative numbers, and stayed till the end.

 

P.s. IASGATG I can't see the 3/4 of the round advantage on the red side (because it just does not exist). That curve does not represent the situation well, just look at the 3 to 6 June situation for example.

Edited by roccoo
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...