Operation "Blue Flag" - 24/7 PvP Campaign - ROUND 9

[Coxy_99]

No not promoting Nescafe. It has been my game name for the past 15 years and im not about to change it. I started the name Nescafe as i am a bit Touring car Racing fan and they used to sponsor a team. And whats with the name jejsus? I hope you are not promoting anything religious? :doh:

 

 

 

Off topic was renault alan menu and plato? I think good old racing anyway back on topic.

[Tricky11]

Off topic was renault alan menu and plato? I think good old racing anyway back on topic.

 

Certainly was Coxy. :thumbup:

And thanks for the rep guys lol :thumbup:

[Oceandar]

Great picture but you draw a totally opposite conclusions:

1. BLUE gets the F-15, star-fighter missile truck with uber radar, which can just spam opposition with missiles without a need to manage systems whatsoever. First thing that only blue can bring to the table.

2. Su-27 and 27R can only eat chaffs. Generally the Su-27 is close to being useless at the moment. So a big minues for RED.

3. Red could get the ET. It is after all a real thing that would be used in a real scenario. But no, for a sake of gaming balancing lets remove it. First example when distinctive feature is removed from red to make it easier for blue.

4. Blue gets the A-10 which obviously is extremely capable striker. Su-25T is good but A-10C it's just better especially that it comes with a full systems modeling

5. Su-25T distinctive feature is that it can do a DEAD. Hold on - it has a distinctive feature - it can't be red only then, blue needs to get it. Please spare comments that Georgia has it. First Georgia has as much as 11 of Su-25 where actually 6 are upgraded. This doesn't matter anyway as a real usage is something that BF takes into consideration on the bottom of the priority list.

6. Transport helicopters - At least the Mi-8 is fast and can deliver final punch to the airport when AA defenses are gone. Wait.. did I just write that its a bit better in BF application then Huey, no it has to be on both sides then. Again, red can't get even a slightest advantage. Yes the Mi-8 serves generally everywhere but again at least for BF it could be a red distinctive to give this 0,1% of something better.

7. Ok then, the Ka-50, now this one is red only and actually can deliver a punch that blue don't have a counterpart for. Can't be this way, lets give Gazelle ability to transport troops and spam call the bombers! Yeap, another red distinctive feature obliterated in a spectacular way. Now its "fair" as blue has a platform that can take a whole AB on its own!. Take mortar squad, call bombers, drop mortar and kill remaining things. Ka-50 in good hands can deal a lot of damage but come on, it's not able to capture a target on its own.

And then coming back to point no 1 - try to go higher than 5-8 meters above the ground in Ka-50 = missile from F-15 to your face.

8. MiG-21 vs F-5 - the second at least has a working RWR which makes a big difference when flying in a sky full of modern jets. MiG-21 can use radar to lock targets, but hell yea - turn your radar on = missile from F-15 to your face.

9. Red has the M2kC and Viggen but the only reason for it was to bring people to the other side, not to give any advantage.

10. Eastern block generally has more and better air defenses in terms of SAM systems. Nope, both sides have to have the same.

 

Sorry but the complains about red having an advantages are just ridiculous. Blue gets a higher numbers, better and actually working equipment while all distinctive features that red would have in real scenario are either just disabled or mitigated buy giving them also to blue. On the other blue keeps the advantages only for their side.

 

Don't get me wrong, I'm not some red fanatic. When I play BF I generally switch between teams for different rounds. But the complains that blue is in a disadvantage compared to red team is just absolutely crazy.

 

Aside of everything above. DCS should be about a simulation after all, which in reality will always have an asymmetry. All of this gaming balancing is just hurting the experience. It still has to be reasonable so that both sides have chances (that is again not a exactly given by default in real word) but it doesn't mean that it has to be purely just gaming balancing that brings the DCS closer to the Battlefield than simulation.

 

I'll rep you when I browse from my desktop

[-Painter-]

Crash report:

DCS crashes in 8 out of 10 cases when I got killed or when I click on "back to spectators".

[Mustang]

Crash report:

DCS crashes in 8 out of 10 cases when I got killed or when I click on "back to spectators".

 

This might help if you use Tacview

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3048020&postcount=29

[-Painter-]

This might help if you use Tacview

 

https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3048020&postcount=29

Many thanks! Will try! First quick try is a success.

[-Painter-]

http://gadget.buddyspike.net/ ...is hanging.

[D4n]

define "hanging". I see 14 pilots online, 34 minutes uptime...

[-Painter-]

I see 14 pilots online, 34 minutes uptime...

...and this is just wrong. Compare it to the desktop-app, what shows the correct data.

[bn880]

Hey, first off I want to say great tech there for this kind of persistent mission. Kudos.

 

I wanted to just report a typo on the coords of Pak2 in the web app:

It is listed as

 

Pak 2 Comms chapaeskove

GK40

N 44 16.818

E 042 6.006

 

should be

E 042 06.006

 

 

Also I am pretty new to the server and am not super experienced with it yet. But I do say that I agree with some of the feedback given in the posts above, that for example the Gazelle features are not so great for gameplay. (especially calling bombers, but even carrying large cargo)

 

I remember I was clearing a town once for a gazelle to drop troops (which already is bad enough as we have the UH), and in the middle of my efforts a virtual bomber opened a portal and eliminated them all. Please, that should not be in this kind of sim. :)

 

Thanks for listening (oh and please don't ban me for having opinions :D )

[IASGATG]

In the missile data debate we're having about a page back. Where we talk about max range? What do you mean by max range? We aren't fudging the numbers a little Frostie are we? I know that high Mach number high altitude AIM-7 shots still result in a <M1 speed after about 25 seconds. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the R-27R is any better. I'm just saying that "max" range is a bit misleading if the missile has been a subsonic glider for the past 20km.

 

The more useful data is how long the missile is above Mach 1 and distance it travels from launch to Mach 1.

 

I'm sure it'll still support your argument, but it gives a much more accurate portrayal.

Edited March 21, 2017 by IASGATG

[Frostie]

In the missile data debate we're having about a page back. Where we talk about max range? What do you mean by max range? We aren't fudging the numbers a little Frostie are we? I know that high Mach number high altitude AIM-7 shots still result in a <M1 speed after about 25 seconds. Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying the R-27R is any better. I'm just saying that "max" range is a bit misleading if the missile has been a subsonic glider for the past 20km.

 

The more useful data is how long the missile is above Mach 1 and distance it travels from launch to Mach 1.

 

I'm sure it'll still support your argument, but it gives a much more accurate portrayal.

 

Max range means the difference between hitting the target and dropping below it. This just highlights how drag affects the R27 as opposed to the AIM-7. I'm under no illusion that the AIM-7 is in anyway comparable to the ER for effective max range but there is a huge gulf in how drag behaves between the two.

[IASGATG]

Max range means the difference between hitting the target and dropping below it. This just highlights how drag affects the R27 as opposed to the AIM-7. I'm under no illusion that the AIM-7 is in anyway comparable to the ER for effective max range but there is a huge gulf in how drag behaves between the two.

 

In a test vacuum sure, but in reality is meaningless. One missile might have a 30km max range and one has 35km max range. But if missile b has been subsonic for 20km of those 35 and missile a is subsonic for 3km, the missile a is a far more combat effective weapon. It's really important!

[Frostie]

In a test vacuum sure, but in reality is meaningless. One missile might have a 30km max range and one has 35km max range. But if missile b has been subsonic for 20km of those 35 and missile a is subsonic for 3km, the missile a is a far more combat effective weapon. It's really important!

 

All missile hits were made against a cranking target, the fact is there is a higher degree of energy loss on R27 missiles compared to AIM-7. After 16 seconds ER was 3000kph, AIM-7 2600kph and R at 1900kph. I've already stated that these ranges are not effective but have highlighted some more effective ranges based on missile energy.

[Leutnant_Artur]

Why is AAA so weak ? I mean TOR sucks and OSA sucks even more. There's no challenge in ground attacks. :(

Edited March 22, 2017 by Leutnant_Artur

[Cisco]

You want S-300 and Patriot? hahaha

[Fedduk]

You want S-300 and Patriot? hahaha

 

As missiles in DCS are stupid you can easily take down S-300 even with guns.

[Bad Idea Hat]

I feel like the short range missiles and guns are more difficult than the long range stuff.

(Warning; Viggen perspective)

The long range stuff is easily spoofed and avoided, as long as you stay low. Eventually, they run out of missiles, and you can just go burn them with your engine. Or sit on them.

 

The small stuff really just kind of pops up out of the terrain, when you least expect it. Tunguska is exceptionally worrisome, and the assortment of IR missiles only slightly less so. If you can weasel your way into a guns kill on a 300, you're bound to trip over one of its friends eventually.

 

The best SAM kill is a waiting kill, when the 300 expends itself, and you can Maverick it out of existence. Let the A-10 kill the rest, because it's good at that.

[microvax]

would be super cool if we could disable the 10minute delay on tacviews, as long as exports are off.

 

With exports on I totally get that, but I do not see the motivation with exports of.

 

Someone enlight me if I am blind on something here.

[roccoo]

Server's down :cry:

[Yuya6104]

Server took a bomb shell :(

[BSS_Sniper]

Server seems to have been down for a while now

[xcom]

Server's up!

[M460]

Why is AAA so weak ? I mean TOR sucks and OSA sucks even more. There's no challenge in ground attacks. :(

 

We ain't got no TOR's...I wish we had some to put out on the field. :smilewink:

[Nero.ger]

We ain't got no TOR's...I wish we had some to put out on the field. :smilewink:

 

if you can sprinkel them on the map like Iglas/manpads you could REALY ruin someones day :-D