Jump to content

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


gregzagk

Recommended Posts

Something i'd like to see in the future to give the Viggen an important role is capturable shipping lanes connected to ports. If resources were included these lanes could allow a small supply of weapons previously unavailable 120B, 77, 27ER, Kh58, Mav-H given every few hours, it would add a bit more variation, purpose and dynamic to the campaign as well as an element of planning for big pushes or strong defences.

"[51☭] FROSTIE" #55

51st PVO "BISONS"

Fastest MiG pilot in the world - TCR'10

https://100kiap.org

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've said it multiple times...this debate started when I watched someone face**** a missile in a direct head-on with zero attempt to beam until the very last second and exclaimed it was the missile's fault in chat.

 

What if 3 blue-only players came into this thread and said that EO and IR missiles are OP and in absolutely no way can be countered and that they wanted it removed or they wanted the AIM-120 added to compensate for the imbalance? Do you see the error in the logic here?

 

You've got it in your head that is when this debate started but the R vs 530D validity debate has been going since Razbam released the missile.

 

AIM-7 outranges R-27R, F-15s can fly high and co-ordinate to box off Flankers outrange them with AIM-7s or come into the merge and flare any IR to death. There is no bad position here you come in on a defensive Flanker and make him eat the M61 spray and pray cannon. Other than guns only this is as even as it gets in FC, there is no overriding debate to be had, results speak for themselves in this setup these two run each other very close in encounters.

Basically due to the closer range and speeds of the missiles whoever shoots first optimally usually has the advantage but ED does its best to not make this true.


Edited by Frostie

"[51☭] FROSTIE" #55

51st PVO "BISONS"

Fastest MiG pilot in the world - TCR'10

https://100kiap.org

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You've got it in your head that is when this debate started but the R vs 530D validity debate has been going since Razbam released the missile.

 

AIM-7 outranges R-27R, F-15s can fly high and co-ordinate to box off Flankers outrange them with AIM-7s or come into the merge and flare any IR to death. There is no bad position here you come in on a defensive Flanker and make him eat the M61 spray and pray cannon. Other than guns only this is as even as it gets in FC, there is no overriding debate to be had, results speak for themselves in this setup these two run each other very close in encounters.

Basically due to the closer range and speeds of the missiles whoever shoots first optimally usually has the advantage but ED does its best to not make this true.

 

530D was garbage when it was released.

 

If range was everything then the 120 would win in every single scenario in every server. It's this kind of hyperbole mentality that skews fun gameplay for both sides. You know the differences in ordnance, why aren't you playing to their strengths and weaknesses?

 

Don't make your presence known until you're within operating range of your tools, don't just fly CAP to go after fighters...fly to protect your attackers, use EO and terrain masking to get in close, use ground clutter to your advantage. You are correct, the results are speaking for themselves...red is winning every round by a landslide. Alpenwolf had 13 kills and 0 deaths in a Su27 days before DataLink was added while there was like 30 people on. You can't tell me it's not possible because it's an inferior airframe.

 

All of this debate aside, blue players clearly just aren't having fun anymore and/or red has something that is giving them the win every time. What do you suggest to fix this?


Edited by AbortedMan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Something i'd like to see in the future to give the Viggen an important role is capturable shipping lanes connected to ports. If resources were included these lanes could allow a small supply of weapons previously unavailable 120B, 77, 27ER, Kh58, Mav-H given every few hours, it would add a bit more variation, purpose and dynamic to the campaign as well as an element of planning for big pushes or strong defences.

+1

 

Skickat från min GT-S7275R via Tapatalk

__________________

Intel i7-7700K @ 5.1GHz, Gigabyte Z170XP SLI

32 GB Corsair Vengeance @ 2666 Mhz (Stock 2400 Mhz), Gigabyte GTX 1080 Windfoce OC , PSU 650W Seasonic

EK Watercooling (Open loop)

Windows 10 Pro x64

Thrustmaster HOTAS Warthog + MFG Crosswind + Thrustmaster MFD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

530D was garbage when it was released.

 

If range was everything then the 120 would win in every single scenario in every server. It's this kind of hyperbole mentality that skews fun gameplay for both sides. You know the differences in ordnance, why aren't you playing to their strengths and weaknesses?

 

Don't make your presence known until you're within operating range of your tools, don't just fly CAP to go after fighters...fly to protect your attackers, use EO and terrain masking to get in close. You are correct, the results are speaking for themselves...red is winning every round by a landslide. Alpenwolf had 13 kills and 0 deaths the other day in a Su27 while there was like 30 people on. You can't tell me it's not possible because it's an inferior airframe.

 

All of this debate aside, blue players clearly just aren't having fun anymore. What do you suggest to fix this?

530 was garbage when it was EDs missile.

 

And 120 does always win or are we talking airquake?

 

I'm part of the movement that created this whole notion that 80s scenario is Rvs7 back in the day when the ER was a 120km monster. In the PvP missions I've made I have championed the 80s scenario as a great alternate to full payload. I've probably reviewed more engagements between different platforms with all measure of DCS weapons than you've fired missiles. In the 13 years I've been doing so in this sim I reserve the right to judge what I deem a fair scenario don't you think rather than be told otherwise by someone who has a snow drop of experience in this whole PvP environment.

 

If you had an inkling of what is required to perform CAP for strikers you'd understand the biggest flaw with the Flanker in this scenario.

 

It really is quite simple if DL is not working, too OP then it will be reverted why are you so against change.


Edited by Frostie

"[51☭] FROSTIE" #55

51st PVO "BISONS"

Fastest MiG pilot in the world - TCR'10

https://100kiap.org

Link to comment
Share on other sites

530 was garbage when it was EDs missile.

 

And 120 does always win or are we talking airquake?

 

I'm part of the movement that created this whole notion that 80s scenario is Rvs7 back in the day when the ER was a 120km monster. In the PvP missions I've made I have championed the 80s scenario as a great alternate to full payload. I've probably reviewed more engagements between different platforms with all measure of DCS weapons than you've fired missiles. In the 13 years I've been doing so in this sim I reserve the right to judge what I deem a fair scenario don't you think rather than be told otherwise by someone who has a snow drop of experience in this whole PvP environment.

 

If you had an inkling of what is required to perform CAP for strikers you'd understand the biggest flaw with the Flanker in this scenario. Does not matter what it is, it's not helping the situation.

 

It really is quite simple if DL is not working, too OP then it will be reverted why are you so against change.

 

It doesn't take a surly, all-knowing, well-seasoned DCS mission-masterpiece-sculpting veteran with a veiny, raging, rock hard e-peen such as yourself to realize that there is an overarching disparity between teams in the current and recently past scenario.

 

You're not getting it past your thick air quaking skull that any buff to the Su27, or red team's kit in general, is exactly the opposite of what is needed to ensure quality gameplay for everyone right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No one is asking for change to win.

 

 

I know that you personally are not, but that sentence right there is a blatant lie. It's either that, or ignorance. I don't think you are that ignorant Frostie. I know of at least three people (Im not naming names) in this thread who are obviously asking for a buff to their favorite weapons delivery platform and using "balance" as an excuse. It's easy to make out who they are if you read the whole thread carefully.

 

There are probably more who do it, but are much more subtle in their disgusting trolling.


Edited by OnlyforDCS

Current specs: Windows 10 Home 64bit, i5-9600K @ 3.7 Ghz, 32GB DDR4 RAM, 1TB Samsung EVO 860 M.2 SSD, GAINWARD RTX2060 6GB, Oculus Rift S, MS FFB2 Sidewinder + Warthog Throttle Quadrant, Saitek Pro rudder pedals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, you should be licking every new player's bean bag and wishing for every bit of feedback from them...new players are the reason this whole thing is going to stay alive and well.

 

Unless you want to play DCS with the same 5 guys and only those same 5 guys, you should pull up your drawers, put that thing away and start being more amicable to the community's feedback.


Edited by AbortedMan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It doesn't take a surly, all-knowing, well-seasoned DCS mission-masterpiece-sculpting veteran with a veiny, raging, rock hard e-peen such as yourself to realize that there is an overarching disparity between teams in the current and recently past scenario.

 

You're not getting it past your thick air quaking skull that any buff to the Su27, or red team's kit in general, is exactly the opposite of what is needed to ensure quality gameplay for everyone right now.

 

I am just trying to convey that I give open minded opinions based on a lot of experience in creating fair and balanced scenarios. I don't see a need for same platform balance as I've only ever seen fit to create asymmetrical missions. Everything is down to the admins to decide what is right but what I bring to the table have no way in making one side superior to the other and every change is experimental so what harm is there in that during testing phase.

 

Your insults are noted but mostly ignored, thanks anyway.

"[51☭] FROSTIE" #55

51st PVO "BISONS"

Fastest MiG pilot in the world - TCR'10

https://100kiap.org

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am just trying to convey that I give open minded opinions based on a lot of experience in creating fair and balanced scenarios. I don't see a need for same platform balance as I've only ever seen fit to create asymmetrical missions. Everything is down to the admins to decide what is right but what I bring to the table have no way in making one side superior to the other and every change is experimental so what harm is there in that during testing phase.

 

Your insults are noted but mostly ignored, thanks anyway.

 

All that experience doesn't mean much when you're still lobbying for buffs to the team that is winning over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All that experience doesn't mean much when you're still lobbying for buffs to the team that is winning over, and over, and over, and over, and over, and over again.

 

If more Flankers are being flown then that is a victory for the scenario the fact red are still winning with or without it is insignificant don't you think. What was the issue before DL maybe that is what needs looking into. Destroying placed EWRs would stop the DL effectiveness.

"[51☭] FROSTIE" #55

51st PVO "BISONS"

Fastest MiG pilot in the world - TCR'10

https://100kiap.org

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So NOW you want to look at what the issue is before DL was added?? Why not ask this question before DL was added?? Where were you in that conversation with your expertise on "asymmetrical balance" of missions??


Edited by AbortedMan
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So NOW you want to look at what the issue is before DL was added?? Why not ask this question before DL was added?? Where were you in that conversation with your expertise on "asymmetrical balance" of missions??

 

"Asymmetrical balance" is an absolutely ****ing retarded term, by the way.

 

I never once mentioned "asymmetrical balance".

I'm leaving this now because it is going nowhere, currently we have DL for Flankers let's see how it goes, i'll even try Blue to get a feel for it. But like I've said before Red is very organised when the right players are in.

"[51☭] FROSTIE" #55

51st PVO "BISONS"

Fastest MiG pilot in the world - TCR'10

https://100kiap.org

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You've got it in your head that is when this debate started but the R vs 530D validity debate has been going since Razbam released the missile.

 

AIM-7 outranges R-27R, F-15s can fly high and co-ordinate to box off Flankers outrange them with AIM-7s or come into the merge and flare any IR to death. There is no bad position here you come in on a defensive Flanker and make him eat the M61 spray and pray cannon. Other than guns only this is as even as it gets in FC, there is no overriding debate to be had, results speak for themselves in this setup these two run each other very close in encounters.

Basically due to the closer range and speeds of the missiles whoever shoots first optimally usually has the advantage but ED does its best to not make this true.

 

I, and many others, see the 51st as the premier flanker-only squadron, probably the finest of the finest. But then we must read this what turns out to be your best-of of 'I hate the F-15 for what it is and everything on my Flanker is garbage' whine.

 

You have EOS, DL (with EWR only though, but still, you have DL), sneaky IR missiles with longer range than AIM-9 or MagicII, SRMs that turn on a dime and off-boresight capability and you're better in a turn fight. (did I just mention everything that favors close range engagements?)

 

Eagle drivers have the better radar and radar warning receiver, that's it.

 

Oh, and talking about flares: lol...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll be honest. I switched from red to blue this time. Red have more of the same players on all the time. Red is much more of a team. Red is willing to talk people through issues without sounding like know it alls. And the players that consistently play on red are pretty damn good.

 

Blue on the other hand. Besides the TWB guys (who have now flipped to red) and Crash/Raptors group, there isn't a whole lot of consistency. And there are a lot of newbs. And honestly since blue uses only SR, you loose some of the fun about talking non combat stuff during server reboots, deaths etc.

 

If Blue wants to win, I wouldn't blame tactics or machinery. I'd start building some of the camaraderie that Red has.

 

TJ

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll be honest. I switched from red to blue this time. Red have more of the same players on all the time. Red is much more of a team. Red is willing to talk people through issues without sounding like know it alls. And the players that consistently play on red are pretty damn good.

 

Blue on the other hand. Besides the TWB guys (who have now flipped to red) and Crash/Raptors group, there isn't a whole lot of consistency. And there are a lot of newbs. And honestly since blue uses only SR, you loose some of the fun about talking non combat stuff during server reboots, deaths etc.

 

If Blue wants to win, I wouldn't blame tactics or machinery. I'd start building some of the camaraderie that Red has.

 

TJ

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Blue communication and teamwork is top-notch when people are on. This is something I've never experienced on red team and it's the only thing pushing me and my group to join blue at all. Sitting in teamspeak with 20 other people spewing stream of consciousness word vomit while someone with an extremely heavy accent in the GCI slot whispers into their mic BRA for a pop-up bandit to God knows who is all I've ever heard from sitting in the red teamspeak channel. It's agony.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The memes are stronk with this thread sometimes.

 

A capable M2K pilot can take on a Su27 head on even with ERs and ETs obviously one has to do a lot more then "press trigger button to vaporize flanker" but its still very much doable and if done correctly the Flanker is again pretty much helpless. Although it pretty much only works 1v1.

 

And just that blue looses doesn't mean that red cant have something less outclassed. ;D

 

DL is not going to give the Flanker an edge over the m2k. I cant judge F15 vs su27 but based on missile ranges I doubt the Flanker would have the edge there either, and even if it has, who cares. It would be a minimal edge for el Flanker for once.

 

Anyway Abortedman is probably going to meme this again so yeah. Just here to express my agreement with the statement that the su27 is outclassed. If datalink enabling RWRs can be brought in thats great already. The Idea of ports and convoys bringing small quantities of stronker armament is pretty legid.

 

Overall I really like the way the new setup is shaping up. Amazing work @ciribob [and the rest of the buddyspike team as well ofc !]. I hope you don't get demotivated to much by the muh balance discussion in this thread.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nobody complained about not being able to win without the DL, if you failed to follow the conversation it was about making the Flanker an option not a game changer.

 

Give us 100% fuel is buffing, now you're making stuff up, this is asking for parity with fighter turnaround be it full fuel or no fuel make it across the board.

 

 

All of this.

 

I'll continue to whine (over teamspeak) about how I hate to loose against the 530d. It sucks that it's so fast. But I'm not asking for change. It's what gives the mirage a unique edge over other platforms. That (in my mind) makes folks want to play it and keeps it from being stale.

 

All I want is for the fighters to have the same fuel. I'd prefer 100% for all because I can't stand sitting on the ground for so long. But I understand the air quake comments and would continue to play with all fighters at 0%.

 

I still don't understand why the mirage has 100% fuel and others have 0%. (Frostie can you explain? You've been here probably the longest.)

 

TJ

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[...]

I'd prefer 100% for all because I can't stand sitting on the ground for so long.

[...]

TJ

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Please, don't. If every aircraft starts with full fuel the depots will get drained even faster. The casual player will take off with 3 bags, fly 60NM, die, repeat twice and then disconnect. I would grab 20% fuel, fly to a nearby airfield that has pleeeenty of fuel and get my stuff there. Now tell me what is better for fuel economy and thus better for the team?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please, don't. If every aircraft starts with full fuel the depots will get drained even faster. The casual player will take off with 3 bags, fly 60NM, die, repeat twice and then disconnect. I would grab 20% fuel, fly to a nearby airfield that has pleeeenty of fuel and get my stuff there. Now tell me what is better for fuel economy and thus better for the team?

The answer to this is to develop a system that helps the casual player understand the mission and guide them down that path. Not force all players to wait seven mins to fuel for every sortie.

 

I'm almost wondering if a per player per airframe per base fuel allotment (while very unrealistic) would help augment the lives and fuel setup. It would force a player who dies so quickly out of the CAP role and into a helo, a CAS or a cargo mission.

 

General idea would be TJ has 3 CAP lives and at Vody has 1.5 planes worth of fuel. Once he takes off a timer counts down until his now .5 planes worth of fuel would refill up to 1.5. If he crashes shortly after takeoff, he can either get back in the air with .5 fuel at Vody or he can move to KP where he has 1.5. If he exhausts all of his fuel at Vody he can fly another mission or move to another base.

 

TJ

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The answer to this is to develop a system that helps the casual player understand the mission and guide them down that path. Not force all players to wait seven mins to fuel for every sortie.

 

I'm almost wondering if a per player per airframe per base fuel allotment (while very unrealistic) would help augment the lives and fuel setup. It would force a player who dies so quickly out of the CAP role and into a helo, a CAS or a cargo mission.

 

General idea would be TJ has 3 CAP lives and at Vody has 1.5 planes worth of fuel. Once he takes off a timer counts down until his now .5 planes worth of fuel would refill up to 1.5. If he crashes shortly after takeoff, he can either get back in the air with .5 fuel at Vody or he can move to KP where he has 1.5. If he exhausts all of his fuel at Vody he can fly another mission or move to another base.

 

TJ

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

If how I am interpreting this in my head is correct, this sounds like the epitome of a bad idea... People would just airfield hop until they've expended all their fighters and once they're done with 1 cycle they'd start back from square one, never getting into a chopper...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From the way you are all going on...

 

- BF is the worst and most unbalanced thing ever!?!

 

- Why BuddySpike do you make such an awful and pointless thing !?!

 

- Why do you let noobs in? Noobs suck! Ban them!

 

^ This is my summary of the last 20 pages or so.... :P

 

In other news - Mirage is not supposed to have 100% fuel, its now not classed as an interceptor in lives (mig21, f5e) - we just didnt get round to reducing fuel & sorting skins for it :)

 

In all seriousness - We do really appreciate feedback, and try to keep it civil towards one another. :)

 

Think we're just on the edge of civil! :P

Scripts: Complete Transport And Logistics Deployment - CTLD / CTLD Examples - Lots of example of how to use CTLD

CSAR Script - Downed Pilot Rescue / Dedicated Server Script - Automatically launch DCS Multiplayer server at startup

Range Scoring Script - Get scores and counts hits on targets for gunnery or bombs / SimpleSlotBlock - Multiplayer dynamic Slot Blocking Script

 

Projects: DCS-SimpleRadio Standalone - DCS Radio Integration for All Aircraft - NO TeamSpeak Required! :)

DCS-SimpleRadio Troubleshooting Post / DCS-SimpleRadio Free Support Channel on Discord

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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