Virtual angagement between squads?

[504MrWolf]

504 v Jabog-169th-161VFS......who ever we have played with is strictly a A2A matches for our Fight Wing. No A2G no targets to kill etc.

 

Now the Bomber Wing is a different matter ;)

 

We also run a cross squad training school with the 44th Watchers where we do fly missions for A2A and A2G with ground targets to guard and kill, A2A packages keep the air clear for the A2G to claim their target. Though this is not a match more of a collabration of our two squads.

 

Also a new campaign similar to CAW is brewing at the minute.........tensions are high in Russia and something is going to snap soon resulting in who knows what !

 

To get in on this action requires an application to our squad, these are the things you miss out on not being in a V-squadron.

 

After this is running i will look to doing a mini-campaign for the open community like the A2A matches we have but with A2G targets to be had as your suggestions.

 

I apologize if i read your original post wrong but i assure i wasnt the only one who did.

[Pilotasso]

Su-25's are slow, in my suggested mission type you could go in a Su33 with bombs and drop them on the main target without being harrassed by multiple S-300's and the likes. If you passed through it because the other team failed to cover that ground or catch you in time. Of course you could make yourself accompained by escorts to either devide enemy defending fighters or to actualy take them out.

[GGTharos]

Su-33s, Su-27's and MiG-29's are air to air combat aircraft, and further the SFM does not hinder/punish them for carrying these heavy loads save for speed. We therefore do not use them in an A2G role.

[Pilotasso]

Thats right but if your not going to make very sofisticated AG enviroments you dont need sofisticated specialized AG planes anyway.

 

For example the Su-25 and A-10 are always used as sead aircraft in complex SAM enviroments in online mission though you know perfectly well those arent the best aircraft for those tasks.

 

The objective here is to have something specific to do and give differetiated tasks for different aircraft in your squadron. Otherwise there is no "cause" for your AA actions so to speak.

[GGTharos]

I'm not going to argue with you, we both have our points ... we'll not be using the A2A planes in A2G until realistic penalties for doing so are implemented is all :)

[Frostie]

Mmmmm specific tasks for different a/c you mean like using Su25 and A10 to engage ground targets ,while A-A aircraft keep air superiority to clear a path?

[Pilotasso]

yes, but if you want to make the mission last for less time you can use Su and mig for that. No AG complex scenarios, but few elemenatry defenses arround base and goal target.

[Frostie]

But then BW guys would get the hump and start whining that AA guys are shooting all their turkeys ,then they'd stop speaking to us in their chilled out ,laid back tones and always be on whisper mode in TS.

Nice of you to think outside the box for us but were totally made up with what we got its more than enough and some.

[Laud]

@ Pilotasso: With my (on-topic) offer depending on the TacView-files I meant this thread-opening-post! ;)

 

There has a been an engagement between VVS504th vs JaBoG3... squads?

It is posible that there is a video about it?

 

And to let this discussion run a bit of gas, I would say all squads do alot to keep LOMAC alive and fun for its virtual pilots, so we should let all of them do what they like most themselfes. For sure the idea of creating missions/competitions including tasks next to kill everyone you see is not that new. New ideas are always highly appriciated in all squads and the whole community, but keep it away from saying "what you guys do there is dumb bullsh**". Laud out. ;)

 

I wonder if this thread will ever come back on topic again??

[HRZ]

I wonder if this thread will ever come back on topic again??

 

I officially announce this thread back on topic!

There you go!

[golfsierra2]

I think the purpose of my thread was missunderstood: I just wanted to know if such engagements had taken place, because I saw a link in some place but requested a passwd, and I just was interested in watching the fight. I wasn´t my intention to cxreate a discusion (not a bad one at least) about how this engagement should be.

 

Watching an online fight would mean that you would have to login as spectator and I don't think that there are many squads around who like to have additional spectators joining their host servers, because it further increases load on the host system and maybe slows down the whole show. All the online data still would have to be sent to your machine, even if you don't fly an own aircraft.

[Laud]

External views are off in a squad-match. So theres not much to see for a spectator. But viewing the match using TacView gives you a quite nice overview of things happening there.

 

A vid would be possible by use and edit recorded tracks but as you see just one plane at one moment (not many close combats in BVR) its a bit boring I think. Just planes flying around and firing missiles. A vid of a 3v3 gunzo would be nice maybe.

[504MrWolf]

For instance the campaign we are starting now is set in 1985 where a lot of the weapons and aircraft in Lockon are not even built or operational. Will will stick by these and lose 2 airframes and active missiles to keep it real.

[Pilotasso]

wrong. LOMAC timeline is an interval, not a specific date. ;)

[504MrWolf]

right. but 1985 was real and we are using LOCKON to emulate it :P

[brewber19]

@ Pilotasso - You need to pay attention and not just post a knee-jerk "your wrong" reply.

 

Wolfie wrote:

 

"For instance the campaign we are starting now is set in 1985 where..."

 

Nothing to do with the supposed timeframe of lomac, its the timeframe he is choosing to base his campaign.

 

wrong. LOMAC timeline is an interval, not a specific date. ;)

[504MrWolf]

cheers "Brewb Ya' Newb" ;) :D