Cold War 1947 - 1991

[carss]

On 8/1/2021 at 6:31 AM, Alpenwolf said:

 

My man, carss! Long time, mate.

 

And as you know, this has been discussed multiple times, mainly with you years ago

 

Check out FAQ number 9 here.

 

And again, sorry to disappoint you, but if ED or third parties don't care about (or maybe just can't for whatever reasons) making it a module then it's on them, despite the A-4 being one hell of a Cold War plane. Shame. Waiting on the F-4 too among many other modules.

Every module we get is either way too modern and probably hasn't seen battle in real life or way too old; WWll. anything in between seems forgotten or neglected. Take the MiG-21 for instance. Why the bis version?! Why not some good old MiG-21 version that actually saw war in Vietnam, Egypt, Syria, Iraq, etc.? Why not have the F-16A or B for instance? How about the AH-64A? F-15A? F-18A? Get the picture? It seems as if they always push towards the most modern version they can get their hands on, when older versions saw more wartime and quite often in many different regions across the globe.

 

... So they're working on the Eurofighter -__-

Again, some too modern aircraft with ZERO wartime (thank God for that). As a mission designer, you're always looking for assets and aircraft that can suit a certain era, and have them all included to either try and replicate an actual skirmish that once took place, or come up with a fictive scenario but still based on what was used back in the day. And as a player you'd appreciate that, I dare presume. Why? Because it's like you're reliving some epic battle you might've read or watched a movie about. Pretty much as it is in some other video games featuring WWll stuff or Vietnam, etc.

The focus here, however, seems to always be on modules, their textures, how realistic the cockpit looks like, how the systems work, etc. which is pretty good, don't get me wrong, but they seem to neglect the outside world, which is the world outside the "cockpit". The very ambience you fly in and everything dynamic in it. Or is it dynamic? So where does the Eurofighter fit in all this really? Or am I just some annoying DCS player who is very finicky about everything while the majority of players is not? Maybe I am... I think, I am

 

Hey Alpenwolf, yeah you're right and I do wholly understand your point of view. Now I did speak to (I can't exactly remember) was it Chizh or Nineline asked them if they would integrate the A-4 into DCS as an asset, they said they'd gladly do it and they just need the yes from the main creators and they'd work with them. Now on the off chance that this happens just out of curiosity? Would you then maybe consider including it? Because then it won't break integrity nor would people have to download it

[Lurker]

On 8/1/2021 at 1:31 PM, Alpenwolf said:

 

Take the MiG-21 for instance. Why the bis version?! Why not some good old MiG-21 version that actually saw war in Vietnam, Egypt, Syria, Iraq, etc.? Why not have the F-16A or B for instance? How about the AH-64A? F-15A? F-18A? Get the picture? It seems as if they always push towards the most modern version they can get their hands on, when older versions saw more wartime and quite often in many different regions across the globe.

 

 

I can answer this specific question. The Leatherneck lead developer at the time of the Mig21BIS development was an active duty Serbian fighter pilot. The MiGs he flew were of the Mig21 BIS variant, at the time he flew on that type they were already old and mostly obsolete but still in service since they were the most common fighter type that Yugoslavia operated and that Serbia and the other nations who formed after the breakup of Yugoslavia inherited. (I'm not sure about Serbia, but for example Croatia still operates a few BIS Migs that are operational) It's not always about what they want to develop, but what they have access to. 

Edited August 3, 2021 by Lurker

[Alpenwolf]

3 hours ago, carss said:

 

Hey Alpenwolf, yeah you're right and I do wholly understand your point of view. Now I did speak to (I can't exactly remember) was it Chizh or Nineline asked them if they would integrate the A-4 into DCS as an asset, they said they'd gladly do it and they just need the yes from the main creators and they'd work with them. Now on the off chance that this happens just out of curiosity? Would you then maybe consider including it? Because then it won't break integrity nor would people have to download it

 

In that case, yes! Everyone would have it by default and no additional constant monitoring of that mod is required.

 

1 hour ago, Lurker said:

 

I can answer this specific question. The Leatherneck lead developer at the time of the Mig21BIS development was an active duty Serbian fighter pilot. The MiGs he flew were of the Mig21 BIS variant, at the time he flew on that type they were already old and mostly obsolete but still in service since they were the most common fighter type that Yugoslavia operated and that Serbia and the other nations who formed after the breakup of Yugoslavia inherited. (I'm not sure about Serbia, but for example Croatia still operates a few BIS Migs that are operational) It's not always about what they want to develop, but what they have access to. 

 

 

Thanks for the explanation. Although, I do doubt it applies to all the other modules I mentioned as an example

[Lurker]

@Alpenwolf Please correct me if I'm wrong but TrueGrit's lead developer is (or was, not sure about that) an active duty German Airforce fighter pilot who flew on....you guessed it the Eurofighter Typhoon type

 

But I digress, I get where you're coming form and the fact of the matter is that most players will always want to get their hands on the latest and the best. It's understandable. I don't mind it, and I think that it's even skewed in our favor since we are still getting some great "oldies" in the pipeline. In fact most of the new modules in development are indeed cold war aircraft. The Mirage F1, the Mig23, Mig29A, the Crusader F-8, the A-7 Corsiar, the A-6 Intruder, etc. 

 

In fact I was extremely surprised that we are even getting a Typhoon, or that an AH64D is in development. If anything I would argue that these "newer" aircraft are the exception and not the rule where DCS is concerned. 

Edited August 3, 2021 by Lurker

[Alpenwolf]

2 minutes ago, Lurker said:

@Alpenwolf Please correct me if I'm wrong but TrueGrit's lead developer is (or was, not sure about that) an active duty German Airforce fighter pilot who flew on....you guessed it the Eurofighter Typhoon type

 

But I digress, I get where you're coming form and the fact of the matter is that most players will always want to get their hands on the latest and the best. It's understandable. I don't mind it, and I think that it's even skewed in our favor since we are still getting some great "oldies" in the pipeline. In fact most of the new modules in development are indeed cold war aircraft. The Mirage F1, the Mig23, Mig29A, the Crusader F-8, the A-7 Corsiar, the A-6 Intruder, etc. 

 

In fact I was extremely surprised that we are even getting a Typhoon, or that an AH64D is in development. If anything I would argue that these "newer" aircraft are the exception and not the rule where DCS is concerned. 

 

 

Yeah, you're right about TrueGrit. And maybe I exaggerated a bit. I told you, I'm finicky

[carss]

9 hours ago, Lurker said:

@Alpenwolf Please correct me if I'm wrong but TrueGrit's lead developer is (or was, not sure about that) an active duty German Airforce fighter pilot who flew on....you guessed it the Eurofighter Typhoon type

 

But I digress, I get where you're coming form and the fact of the matter is that most players will always want to get their hands on the latest and the best. It's understandable. I don't mind it, and I think that it's even skewed in our favor since we are still getting some great "oldies" in the pipeline. In fact most of the new modules in development are indeed cold war aircraft. The Mirage F1, the Mig23, Mig29A, the Crusader F-8, the A-7 Corsiar, the A-6 Intruder, etc. 

 

In fact I was extremely surprised that we are even getting a Typhoon, or that an AH64D is in development. If anything I would argue that these "newer" aircraft are the exception and not the rule where DCS is concerned. 

 

 

To answer your first part, yes the lead guy at Truegrit was a Luftwaffe weapons instructor who first flew German F-4 Phantoms (still hoping for a Phreaking Phantom!) and then the Typhoon

[rogorogo]

vor 1 Stunde schrieb carss:

 

To answer your first part, yes the lead guy at Truegrit was a Luftwaffe weapons instructor who first flew German F-4 Phantoms (still hoping for a Phreaking Phantom!) and then the Typhoon

"He" has also a name, Gero Fin(c)ke, and at the end of his service career was also a little more than "just" an instructor and pilot on both airframes.
He is also not the lead dev, but more the GM/rel equity holder - and he partnered as their PR project has seemingly gotten them some project(s)/contract(s) TrueGrit was gestated for and was after in the first place.

(Also would like to see and early Phantom, and looking forward to the a mid belly Lightning, not that it would matter but so I can utterly fail in more modules).

Edited August 3, 2021 by rogorogo

[rogorogo]

Am 1.8.2021 um 13:31 schrieb Alpenwolf:

 

My man, carss! Long time, mate.

 

And as you know, this has been discussed multiple times, mainly with you years ago

 

Check out FAQ number 9 here.

 

And again, sorry to disappoint you, but if ED or third parties don't care about (or maybe just can't for whatever reasons) making it a module then it's on them, despite the A-4 being one hell of a Cold War plane. Shame. Waiting on the F-4 too among many other modules.

Every module we get is either way too modern and probably hasn't seen battle in real life or way too old; WWll. anything in between seems forgotten or neglected. Take the MiG-21 for instance. Why the bis version?! Why not some good old MiG-21 version that actually saw war in Vietnam, Egypt, Syria, Iraq, etc.? Why not have the F-16A or B for instance? How about the AH-64A? F-15A? F-18A? Get the picture? It seems as if they always push towards the most modern version they can get their hands on, when older versions saw more wartime and quite often in many different regions across the globe.

 

... So they're working on the Eurofighter -__-

Again, some too modern aircraft with ZERO wartime (thank God for that). As a mission designer, you're always looking for assets and aircraft that can suit a certain era, and have them all included to either try and replicate an actual skirmish that once took place, or come up with a fictive scenario but still based on what was used back in the day. And as a player you'd appreciate that, I dare presume. Why? Because it's like you're reliving some epic battle you might've read or watched a movie about. Pretty much as it is in some other video games featuring WWll stuff or Vietnam, etc.

The focus here, however, seems to always be on modules, their textures, how realistic the cockpit looks like, how the systems work, etc. which is pretty good, don't get me wrong, but they seem to neglect the outside world, which is the world outside the "cockpit". The very ambience you fly in and everything dynamic in it. Or is it dynamic? So where does the Eurofighter fit in all this really? Or am I just some annoying DCS player who is very finicky about everything while the majority of players is not? Maybe I am... I think, I am

There is a lot of relevance in what was typed here, and a lot that would need to be typed as addendum...
But given what core Eagle's approach to CM is and how they implement it - and what in result the median outline of those still interacting in this forum is, it is better left hinted.
Otherwise it might just be lost to time, like vanishing in a black hole, without a hint of a trace.. or warning.

Moreso since the early CW era is the one most suitable for DCS MP given its current technical state, functionality and participants, while modern struggles even more to represent the integrated nature and focus of most modules due to chaotic (the systemic descriptive term) participation than it is already the case with some early CW era modules (GCI dependent interceptors fe).

But maybe we should notice that "some" cohesive padding effort in terrains and module mapping erawise seems to be given thought to, lately. 
As seems to be the case in for franchise/market production suitability.
And somewhat finally in global standardization (technical, outline, approach, codeconcept) franchisewise and some (very) rudimentary form of knowledge management.
It only took a decade, and a change in ownership (which in itself is more fleeting in its goals than most would assume due to its very own relevant factors and winds of change soon™).


Short bug report (unrelated):
"Mountain Peaks" mission. Status message of target showed Blue Coms towers active that were destroyed (towers and most surrounding assets, some AA still up that was NOT relevant accordng to briefing), so maybe a trigger failed or some other lua bug.

Edited August 4, 2021 by rogorogo

[carss]

50 minutes ago, rogorogo said:

"He" has also a name, Gero Fin(c)ke, and at the end of his service career was also a little more than "just" an instructor and pilot on both airframes.
He is also not the lead dev, but more the GM/rel equity holder - and he partnered as their PR project has seemingly gotten them some project(s)/contract(s) TrueGrit was gestated for and was after in the first place.

(Also would like to see and early Phantom, and looking forward to the a mid belly Lightning, not that it would matter but so I can utterly fail in more modules).

 

 

What is the A mid belly Lightning?

[rogorogo]

vor 24 Minuten schrieb carss:

 

What is the A mid belly Lightning?

"Mid era evolution Lighting", noticeable by the "fat belly" (airframe extension) that remained an identifying feature until the last evolution of the airframe, even if the truly British and wonderfully weird missile hardpoints were not present/mounted/removed.

[carss]

2 minutes ago, rogorogo said:

"Mid era evolution Lighting", noticeable by the "fat belly" (airframe extension) that remained an identifying feature until the last evolution of the airframe, even if the truly British and wonderfully weird missile hardpoints were not present/mounted/removed.

Well I believe Razbam is actually working on an EE Lightning so there's that, not sure if it's the one you want

[rogorogo]

vor 53 Minuten schrieb carss:

Well I believe Razbam is actually working on an EE Lightning so there's that, not sure if it's the one you want

It is, look at the WIP pictures - any of those it "is" Mk-wise and "could represent" loadout-wise would fit nicely to pad out the earlier Cold War era.

That the full fidelity Mig-29 will be most likely an "A" is also good news (another "pilot's plane" that flies for that era instead of a Sega-Nintendo-clicky-frame).

Edited August 4, 2021 by rogorogo

[rossmum]

21 hours ago, carss said:

Hey Alpenwolf, yeah you're right and I do wholly understand your point of view. Now I did speak to (I can't exactly remember) was it Chizh or Nineline asked them if they would integrate the A-4 into DCS as an asset, they said they'd gladly do it and they just need the yes from the main creators and they'd work with them. Now on the off chance that this happens just out of curiosity? Would you then maybe consider including it? Because then it won't break integrity nor would people have to download it

 

It won't, as the A-4 guys have made it clear that they intend to keep it as a free, community-led project without signing anything over to ED or any other official party. IIRC one of the team passed away during development and so the already decided-upon position became basically set in stone to honour their wishes. It's unfortunate for us multiplayer creatures, but it is what it is.

[Gunslinger22]

18 hours ago, Lurker said:

@Alpenwolf Please correct me if I'm wrong but TrueGrit's lead developer is (or was, not sure about that) an active duty German Airforce fighter pilot who flew on....you guessed it the Eurofighter Typhoon type

 

But I digress, I get where you're coming form and the fact of the matter is that most players will always want to get their hands on the latest and the best. It's understandable. I don't mind it, and I think that it's even skewed in our favor since we are still getting some great "oldies" in the pipeline. In fact most of the new modules in development are indeed cold war aircraft. The Mirage F1, the Mig23, Mig29A, the Crusader F-8, the A-7 Corsiar, the A-6 Intruder, etc. 

 

In fact I was extremely surprised that we are even getting a Typhoon, or that an AH64D is in development. If anything I would argue that these "newer" aircraft are the exception and not the rule where DCS is concerned. 

 

Funnily enough though, all the aircraft you have mention apart from the MiG's will be their late in production and service life variants, so in part we will always get the latest of an aircraft in DCS, rather than what they were in initial production or early in their service lives. The A-6E, A-7E and F-8J which realistically are all out of the Rolling Thunder timeframe, with both the 6E/7E being out of Vietnam completely. So no, we still don't have a realistic complete set of aircraft for any timeframe. Heck even our current F-14A doesn't fit within any coldwar scenario. 

[Lurker]

1 hour ago, Gunslinger22 said:

Funnily enough though, all the aircraft you have mention apart from the MiG's will be their late in production and service life variants, so in part we will always get the latest of an aircraft in DCS, rather than what they were in initial production or early in their service lives. The A-6E, A-7E and F-8J which realistically are all out of the Rolling Thunder timeframe, with both the 6E/7E being out of Vietnam completely. So no, we still don't have a realistic complete set of aircraft for any timeframe. Heck even our current F-14A doesn't fit within any coldwar scenario. 

 

All of the aircraft above were developed and served during the years of the so called "Cold War" conflict. Just because we are not getting specific variants that were active in specific conflicts, such as the above mentioned Rolling Thunder timeframe, doesn't mean that they weren't in active service until 1991. Most "cold war gone hot" scenarios are fictional anyway, so while yeah I agree you wouldn't be able to say simulate Rolling Thunder (let's forget for a moment that we don't even have a Vietnam map) there are still a multitude of theoretical fictional scenarios you could design and populate with those modules. 

Edited August 4, 2021 by Lurker

[TheLongShanks]

Hello, I am fairly new to this server.

I like to fly the Hind. How do I know when Hind missions are available? It doesn't seem to always be a slot.  Also, are there multiple servers? Is there a guide where I can see the differences between them all in one place?

 

[Gunslinger22]

1 hour ago, Lurker said:

 

All of the aircraft above were developed and served during the years of the so called "Cold War" conflict. Just because we are not getting specific variants that were active in specific conflicts, such as the above mentioned Rolling Thunder timeframe, doesn't mean that they weren't in active service until 1991. Most "cold war gone hot" scenarios are fictional anyway, so while yeah I agree you wouldn't be able to say simulate Rolling Thunder (let's forget for a moment that we don't even have a Vietnam map) there are still a multitude of theoretical fictional scenarios you could design and populate with those modules. 

 

But this goes back to the point that both aplenwolf and I are trying to make, DCS is not remotely trying to create a world or scenario where things fit within their respected place give or take a year.

 

I think many people get it twisted in by thinking that because all ‘Cold War gone hot’ scenarios are fictional that it means the systems and weapons within can be anachronistic. For example currently for the 80’s we have only the F-5, 37 and FC3. Everything else does not fit within the timeframe. 
 

I mean we currently don’t even have a map that is pre 2008, the Falklands map is my most anticipated map because it’s truly going to give us somewhere set within a timeframe that supports 80’s Cold War. 

Edited August 4, 2021 by Gunslinger22

[Alpenwolf]

11 hours ago, rogorogo said:

...
Short bug report:
"Mountain Peaks" mission. Status message of target showed Blue Coms towers active that were destroyed (tower and most surrounding assets, some AA still up that was NOT relevant accordng to briefing), so maybe a trigger failed or some other lua bug.

 

 

I can't see anything wrong with triggers nor the lua script. Nevertheless, changed the line into something else that will still force the same action, so maybe this works better.

 

Thanks for reporting!

 

2 hours ago, TheLongShanks said:

Hello, I am fairly new to this server.

I like to fly the Hind. How do I know when Hind missions are available? It doesn't seem to always be a slot.  Also, are there multiple servers? Is there a guide where I can see the differences between them all in one place?

 

 

Welcome to the Cold War server, mate! Yes, server and not servers.

 

When you're viewing the servers' list before double clicking on any server to join, click once on the Cold War 1947 - 1991 server (or any other server you want) and you'd be able to see what modules are included as they are listed just below the server's list. Now, specifically for the Cold War server, you also get to see the mission's time shown under the servers' list, but further to the left under Server Description and Mission Description. It includes something like this:

 

*** The mission lasts for 4 hours ***   or   *** The mission lasts for 6 hours, unless the objective is completed ***

 

And by having a look a the Elapsed Time next to the Server Name and Mission Name, you can determine the maximum amount of time left until the mission ends. So if the Hind is not included in the current mission, you'd know (more or less) when the mission's going to be over, before the next one (hopefully with the module you want) goes online.

 

The main post of this thread includes a list of all missions, and also right below that a list of the currently online missions and in what order they run. This helps you determine what mission is coming up next, and if you check out the second post of this thread (Missions' Briefings) you could find out what modules are included in any mission by viewing the objectives quickly.

 

Safe flying!

[Alpenwolf]

Server News:

 

As many of you already know, the server is funded partially by me and partially by your donations. Thanks for all the donations so far! However, I'm forced to tell you that it's been rather a bit dry on your side as of late

I understand how difficult it is for many these days to afford things that used to be affordable. Tough times, I know. So, if you can spare a bit for the server, then please, donate via PayPal to the following address:

 

hokumyounis@yahoo.com

 

Thank you all in advance and God bless!

[sLYFa]

Any chance to bring back US carriers ? I understand that search and destroy was probably not the most popular mission, but maybe include carrier based Tomcats in other missions (e.g. Battle for Sukhumi)?

Edited August 4, 2021 by sLYFa

[Alpenwolf]

30 minutes ago, sLYFa said:

Any chance to bring back US carriers ? I understand that search and destroy was probably not the most popular mission, but maybe include carrier based Tomcats in other missions (e.g. Battle for Sukhumi)?

 

 

I'll see what I can do. And I never though Search & Destroy to be unpopular. Really? I think Jahrom Town being big and difficult for Red to capture and hold is what made it for Red a bit frustrating, if that's what you meant. The mission is on the to-do list, especially Jahrom Town.

 

As for now, operation Allied Assault kicks off this Friday if you're interested.

 

Thanks for the donation. Very helpful!

[coldViPer]

6 hours ago, LoneS said:

 

Sure Alpy. You do more than enough bro. Money is on the way!!!!!

+1 really enjoying this server

[sLYFa]

Thanks for keeping the server up! I personally liked S&D not only for carrier ops, but my impression from casual SRS chatter was that folks didnt like it all too much, but again, thats very subjective. 

The friday missions sounds great, I'll try to be there. 

Btw if you need any info on RL carriers ops and battlegroup formations send me a DM, we've got plenty of knowledge on that in our squadron. 

 

[TheLongShanks]

18 hours ago, Alpenwolf said:

 

I can't see anything wrong with triggers nor the lua script. Nevertheless, changed the line into something else that will still force the same action, so maybe this works better.

 

Thanks for reporting!

 

 

Welcome to the Cold War server, mate! Yes, server and not servers.

 

When you're viewing the servers' list before double clicking on any server to join, click once on the Cold War 1947 - 1991 server (or any other server you want) and you'd be able to see what modules are included as they are listed just below the server's list. Now, specifically for the Cold War server, you also get to see the mission's time shown under the servers' list, but further to the left under Server Description and Mission Description. It includes something like this:

 

*** The mission lasts for 4 hours ***   or   *** The mission lasts for 6 hours, unless the objective is completed ***

 

And by having a look a the Elapsed Time next to the Server Name and Mission Name, you can determine the maximum amount of time left until the mission ends. So if the Hind is not included in the current mission, you'd know (more or less) when the mission's going to be over, before the next one (hopefully with the module you want) goes online.

 

The main post of this thread includes a list of all missions, and also right below that a list of the currently online missions and in what order they run. This helps you determine what mission is coming up next, and if you check out the second post of this thread (Missions' Briefings) you could find out what modules are included in any mission by viewing the objectives quickly.

 

Safe flying!

Ok, thanks very much!

[Alpenwolf]

Server News:

 

- Work on a new mission has started.

- The new mission features the Persian Gulf map.

- Nuke bombs included (maybe 1 or 2 bombs max and only if a certain objective is completed and not everyone will have access to the bombs!)

- Scud launchers included - Blue MUST take 'em out!

- Possible ship and an anti-ship scenario.

- Not sure if this is going to be a limited edition for the Cold War server, or just another regular mission. It'll come to me while designing the mission.

- Possible B-52 strike missions (if certain objectives are completed by Blue) and/or F-117's, obviously AI.