Cold War 1947 - 1991

[=475FG= Dawger]

46 minutes ago, Alpenwolf said:

I'll make one for Syria too. Might add B-52's as well. I'll figure out something.

We would enjoy a bomber escort component.

[Miccara]

Enjoyed Bandar 1949! Especially liked the reasonable distance to target. Could use a little more "discouragement" around the airbase I think. Near the end, Delta and I sat on the ground while a Mig circled and buzzed the runway for 5-7 minutes then eventually shot me on the ground.

[rossmum]

On 4/8/2022 at 4:31 AM, Alpenwolf said:

I wouldn't mind adding the MiG-19 either. Guns only anyway. And the Sabre doesn't have the GAR-8. We'll see how it plays out.

19 would be extremely brutal I think, especially with no missiles for the Sabre. Nothing will catch it, and its performance in the vertical makes it quite trivial for it to just lurk above and bully peoople.

I really enjoyed the mission, the AAA fire at the road outposts was enough to be scary but not enough to be oppressive, and we had some awesome fights around the town. Adding the Spit and maybe a few more slots and/or airframes is really the main thing it needs right now I think. It went down a treat on stream too!

 

On 4/3/2022 at 8:02 AM, Alpenwolf said:

Arab-Israeli War - Round 3:

Red won!

In the beginning of the mission Red were outnumbered by 1:3 for about 20-30 minutes. Still, they managed to nuke the industrial area by Haifa!
Throughout the mission Red had a bit more players with almost everyone flying MiG's looking for bandits. This made it hard for the outnumbered Blue strikers to get the job done.
3 hours into the mission Red was able to capture both Kiryat Shmona and Rosh Pina Airbases.

Possible changes for future rounds:
- Less slots for MiG's or more for F-5's and A-4's.
- More M60 tanks for Blue.
- Less bunkers to destroy at the TA's for Blue to get the job done.
- Your suggestions.

I think blue's problem was partly that we all wanted to go bomb stuff in Skyhawks and that left nobody for CAP. When the nuke carrier appeared we had nobody really in position to stop it and none of us were loaded for air to air. As crazy as it sounds, less A-4 slots might actually be the problem - though it'll suck for people who want to try out the jet in a MP environment but join late in the mission.

I also learnt a harsh lesson, to the tune of "just because you survived a cat shot with a loadout once, it doesn't mean you won't be sleeping with the fish the next two times". The carrier probably turned without me realising it and I lost just enough headwind that all those bombs plus full fuel was a bit ambitious. Landlubber pilot...

Edited April 10, 2022 by rossmum
finally caught up to this page and saw the Spits were already added, lol

[Alpenwolf]

3 hours ago, rossmum said:

19 would be extremely brutal I think, especially with no missiles for the Sabre. Nothing will catch it, and its performance in the vertical makes it quite trivial for it to just lurk above and bully peoople.

Also, reminder to swap the I-16 out for a Spitfire Use the LF. IX, not LF. IX (CW). Clipped wings are ugly and knock off some turn performance for a little extra roll rate, which is not really necessary against the early jets as they struggle to roll at high speed anyway. I do like the I-16, but it's a 1930s fighter (the first cantilever monoplane with retractable gear to enter service), so more appropriate opponents for it would be prewar Bf 109Bs or Fiat CR.42s or something, and it's hard enough to get off a runway in one piece let alone a two lane road. There's at least one Soviet livery for the Spitfire as they used lend-lease Mk.IXs for high altitude air defence during the war.

I really enjoyed the mission, the AAA fire at the road outposts was enough to be scary but not enough to be oppressive, and we had some awesome fights around the town. Adding the Spit and maybe a few more slots and/or airframes is really the main thing it needs right now I think. It went down a treat on stream too!

 

I think blue's problem was partly that we all wanted to go bomb stuff in Skyhawks and that left nobody for CAP. When the nuke carrier appeared we had nobody really in position to stop it and none of us were loaded for air to air. As crazy as it sounds, less A-4 slots might actually be the problem - though it'll suck for people who want to try out the jet in a MP environment but join late in the mission.

I also learnt a harsh lesson, to the tune of "just because you survived a cat shot with a loadout once, it doesn't mean you won't be sleeping with the fish the next two times". The carrier probably turned without me realising it and I lost just enough headwind that all those bombs plus full fuel was a bit ambitious. Landlubber pilot...

 

It is the LF. IX and not the LF. IX (CW). I didn't like the clipped wings so went with the other. Yup! Based my choice on optics only

In round 1 and 2 (especially 1) Blue had more F-5's and were able to scare off the MiG's. However, and despite reaching the TA's often enough, A-4's weren't very effective. I think most A-4 players are not used to flying in such a hostile MP environment. And while they were struggling with that, you had veterans and aces of the server flying the MiG's looking for the kill. I could add more F-5's as posted above, but it's not like all 8 x F-5 slots were taken. Maybe reducing the slots for MiG's is the answer? I'll have to check out the scenario again.

[=475FG= Dawger]

WRT the Mig-19, I was a bit worried we might be short on Mig-15 pilots. Whoops. It seems there are plenty who enjoy a good fight. I saw some well flown Migs yesterday. As long as the Mig-15's are populated, there is no need to juice it with 19's.

The weather was a bit of a factor. 39 degrees, while not very hot, doesn't play nice in DCS with engine starts and such.

We did see Mig's flying all the way to base and harassing folks in the pattern. I don't mind that in particular but I do know folks react very negatively to being strafed on the ground. I don't know if any Sabres reciprocated.

 

[Alpenwolf]

 

[MarkMD]

19 hours ago, Alpenwolf said:

Server News:

* Operation Hold The Line is now offline.

* Operation Bandar 1949:
- I-16's removed.
- Instead, 12 x Spitfire LF Mk. lX's were added to Red and operate from Bandar Lengeh Airbase.
- The Red road base has been removed.
- Added 8 x MiG-15's to Red with 2 more slots at Lar Airbase.
- Added 8 x MiG-15's to Red with no additional slots at Bandar Lengeh Airbase.
- Added 16 x F-86's to Blue with 2 more slots at Lavan Island Airbase.

More aircraft and slots are possible. We'll see how round 2 goes.

Operation Bandar 1949 kicks off again today, Sunday, 10.04.2022, around 1830 zulu.

This mission was really good from what I saw.  The Military base is really hard to destroy, but well so it should be.  Local AAA should be a little more beefy.  This would give the airfield that little comfort in taking off without trouble.  

Keep up the good work guys!!!

Thanks,

Mike-Delta...

[Alphaless]

Given that ED is about to implement R60 support on the Hinds, I'm just curious about all of your takes on them possibly being allowed in this server. Personally speaking, I think they're unnecessary, but I'd love to hear others' opinions on it. 

[irgendjemand]

I think they would be a good addition. It would allow some interesting fights between helicopters and jets and give the hind a way to defend itself against jets which I´ve experienced to be very necessary if the server/ the red side isn´t very populated and there are no MiG's to support the helicopters.

Edited April 15, 2022 by irgendjemand

[=475FG= Dawger]

40 minutes ago, Alphaless said:

Given that ED is about to implement R60 support on the Hinds, I'm just curious about all of your takes on them possibly being allowed in this server. Personally speaking, I think they're unnecessary, but I'd love to hear others' opinions on it. 

Only if both sides have Hinds. That would be fun to see.

[rogorogo]

Am 15.4.2022 um 21:00 schrieb Alphaless:

Given that ED is about to implement R60 support on the Hinds, I'm just curious about all of your takes on them possibly being allowed in this server. Personally speaking, I think they're unnecessary, but I'd love to hear others' opinions on it. 

let the cultural de-evolution games of the process formerly known as contextuality begin, earplugs unfortunately not complimentary as screeching even under laboratory conditions in statistical significance within the datapoint-cloud most likely to be in direct reciprocality of decibel==max WHERE cognition==underage and/or intellectually minor

booop!

Edited April 16, 2022 by rogorogo

[MMI_Grim]

As long as Im off the scope Im happy with the limited AA-weapons I have when flying the Hind.

If the last red fighters perish that might change.

[Alphaless]

On 4/15/2022 at 3:12 PM, irgendjemand said:

I think they would be a good addition. It would allow some interesting fights between helicopters and jets and give the hind a way to defend itself against jets which I´ve experienced to be very necessary if the server/ the red side isn´t very populated and there are no MiG's to support the helicopters.

 

6 hours ago, MMI_Grim said:

As long as Im off the scope Im happy with the limited AA-weapons I have when flying the Hind.

If the last red fighters perish that might change.

I think the topic of the lack of Red pilots is definitely relevant here like you guys have said. It's really a shame that Blue is often more more populated, but if the trend continues I think this definitely can be taken into consideration.
 

On 4/15/2022 at 3:40 PM, =475FG= Dawger said:

Only if both sides have Hinds. That would be fun to see.

As much as I like the asymmetric units I think this is one of the best available options to close the rotary gap a little bit between the sides and a way to simplify the balance a bit overall. 

Hard to gauge balance without any testing but I appreciate hearing all of your opinions on the matter. 

[=475FG= Dawger]

4 hours ago, Alphaless said:

I think the topic of the lack of Red pilots is definitely relevant here like you guys have said. It's really a shame that Blue is often more more populated, but if the trend continues I think this definitely can be taken into consideration.
 

As much as I like the asymmetric units I think this is one of the best available options to close the rotary gap a little bit between the sides and a way to simplify the balance a bit overall. 

Hard to gauge balance without any testing but I appreciate hearing all of your opinions on the matter. 

The lack of red fighter pilots has basically killed the server. They all went where things are easier, I guess. Adding R-60's to the Hind isn't going to help that situation.

We need some missions with Blue equipment on both sides or something. I am very sad to see the population migrate elsewhere.

[MMI_Grim]

The major issue is that blue has a dedicated GCI and red seldom get a random doing it.

Thats like boxing blindfolded. 

2nd biggest problem imho is a lack of willingness of blue regulars to play red regardless of player stack ...at least most of the time.

Blue equipment on red would maybe bring blue regulars to red, but no red regulars back on the server.

[=475FG= Dawger]

1 hour ago, MMI_Grim said:

The major issue is that blue has a dedicated GCI and red seldom get a random doing it.

Thats like boxing blindfolded. 

2nd biggest problem imho is a lack of willingness of blue regulars to play red regardless of player stack ...at least most of the time.

Blue equipment on red would maybe bring blue regulars to red, but no red regulars back on the server.

This is part of why I want Blue equipment on both sides. It alleviates the "Red has no dedicated GCI" whine completely. 

As for Blue regulars playing Red, using Blue equipment for both sides solves the main issue with flying Red, (for us in any case). If we have aircraft we enjoy flying, we will ALWAYS fly on the low numbers side. The problem is we don't enjoy the Mig-21 even though it is more capable than the F-5.

I know there would be friendly fire issues but I would rather deal with friendly fire than an empty server.

[Alphaless]

17 minutes ago, =475FG= Dawger said:

The problem is we don't enjoy the Mig-21 even though it is more capable than the F-5.

Right on target here. I think that equipment preference plays almost as much of a role in low red player counts as much as the lack of a GCI does. Not hard to see why, its inherently more difficult to fly MiGs. Unfortunately this is a problem that cannot be addressed directly if the intention is to keep the vehicles different.

Perhaps we could see a mission with symmetric equipment and see how that translates to the teams. 

[MMI_Grim]

I dont see how that alleviates a lack of GCI on red.

Maybe just bite the bullet and fly the bit less enjoy- or capable bird then? Maybe the 19?

I enjoy the Viggen the most, still Im in a Hind 90% of the time thinking better flying not the first choice then killing the server.

If this server changes to some red and blue in name only with the same gear on both sides, its completly changes its core thats realism driven.

[=475FG= Dawger]

16 hours ago, Alphaless said:

Right on target here. I think that equipment preference plays almost as much of a role in low red player counts as much as the lack of a GCI does. Not hard to see why, its inherently more difficult to fly MiGs. Unfortunately this is a problem that cannot be addressed directly if the intention is to keep the vehicles different.

Perhaps we could see a mission with symmetric equipment and see how that translates to the teams. 

Migs are not more difficult. They are just not designed to be pleasant to fly. A different design philosophy.

There isn't a shortage of Mig pilots in DCS. In fact, quite often during European evening time, there are more Mig-21 pilots populating the Cold War era servers than F-5 pilots. 

So the issue is one of migration, not shortage.

Red pilots have decided to play elsewhere and blame it on one blue player.

[=475FG= Dawger]

15 hours ago, MMI_Grim said:

I dont see how that alleviates a lack of GCI on red.

Maybe just bite the bullet and fly the bit less enjoy- or capable bird then? Maybe the 19?

I enjoy the Viggen the most, still Im in a Hind 90% of the time thinking better flying not the first choice then killing the server.

If this server changes to some red and blue in name only with the same gear on both sides, its completly changes its core thats realism driven.

Realism and history are too different things. Historically, the two sides had different equipment in the Cold War. However, the server does not stick to history. If it did, we would be shooting at each other a lot less.

There exists a population of players with a preference for Blue equipment who enjoy a challenging fight. There does not seem to be a similar group among those who prefer Red equipment. So instead of an empty server, I propose splitting the existing Blue population so we can fight each other.

I don't have any hope that the Red players who supposedly left because of one Blue player would ever come back to a harder server when there is an easier populated choice.

[rossmum]

"Migration" is overstated, at least when it comes to the core population. A few regulars do play elsewhere now, but many of them no longer play at all, or have been unable to play as often at the hours the server tends to populate (for example, I've barely been able to play more than twice a week at the usual hours for some time now, and the past couple of times nobody has been on either team). Some of the most active red players have simply been busy with other things and when they go, the rest will tend to fly less as we usually enjoy flying with each other. I've been hearing about migration for months now but I'm rarely seeing more than 2-3 familiar names on the player list of the server people usually single out, and they aren't always red players, either - if anything I think I see more familiar blue names there.

What the server needs is enough players on during prime time to hit critical mass, at which point transient players will start joining again. There are plenty of people who say they'd play the server but it's never populated when they're around, but few with the time or patience to sit in it until more people join, unfortunately. In some respects the set piece nature of the missions probably factors in as well, although it's great for holding onto players once they do join - it's harder to just pick up and play for a few sorties.

I also very much doubt it's to do with it being "easier", as having to deal with AIM-9P5s is anything but that. The general skill level is lower but the airspace is crowded, all-aspect weapons are in play (and in that regard the 9P5 is absolutely top dog), and GCI coverage can be spotty as well. The real ease in that regard is it being easier to jump on for 20-30 mins and find action, which probably appeals more to those with limited play time.

Edited April 19, 2022 by rossmum

[Miccara]

On 4/15/2022 at 3:00 PM, Alphaless said:

Given that ED is about to implement R60 support on the Hinds, I'm just curious about all of your takes on them possibly being allowed in this server. Personally speaking, I think they're unnecessary, but I'd love to hear others' opinions on it. 

No.
Hinds are already too powerful and too difficult. We have nothing to really take them out. Perhaps put them in one mission in rotation, and give us Gazelle Mistral's with air-to-air.

While we're at it... make up a mission removing all the equipment/viewing restrictions we normally play with and put it in the rotation. This will bring in some new players that like the "easy" game. Maybe they'll stick around for the other missions and learn to enjoy them, too.

P.S.
I have been playing Red in the Mi8 almost 50% of the time over the last week. For the most part I look at which side needs players and that's where I now tend to go. Mike-Delta has also been switching sides lately. I still say cooperation and communication is far greater when on the Blue side, but maybe with us changing sides more often, this will improve? It'll be nice to hear Blue complaining about my work (but I'm betting they won't).

 

Edited April 20, 2022 by Miccara

[=475FG= Dawger]

16 hours ago, rossmum said:

"Migration" is overstated, at least when it comes to the core population. A few regulars do play elsewhere now, but many of them no longer play at all, or have been unable to play as often at the hours the server tends to populate (for example, I've barely been able to play more than twice a week at the usual hours for some time now, and the past couple of times nobody has been on either team). Some of the most active red players have simply been busy with other things and when they go, the rest will tend to fly less as we usually enjoy flying with each other. I've been hearing about migration for months now but I'm rarely seeing more than 2-3 familiar names on the player list of the server people usually single out, and they aren't always red players, either - if anything I think I see more familiar blue names there.

What the server needs is enough players on during prime time to hit critical mass, at which point transient players will start joining again. There are plenty of people who say they'd play the server but it's never populated when they're around, but few with the time or patience to sit in it until more people join, unfortunately. In some respects the set piece nature of the missions probably factors in as well, although it's great for holding onto players once they do join - it's harder to just pick up and play for a few sorties.

I also very much doubt it's to do with it being "easier", as having to deal with AIM-9P5s is anything but that. The general skill level is lower but the airspace is crowded, all-aspect weapons are in play (and in that regard the 9P5 is absolutely top dog), and GCI coverage can be spotty as well. The real ease in that regard is it being easier to jump on for 20-30 mins and find action, which probably appeals more to those with limited play time.

 

So, the position of the Cold War 1947-1991 server administrator is that the server regulars concurrently decided to quit playing, or had concurrent schedule changes and only a "few" regularly play over "there". And, also, defending what basically amounts to "Just Dogfight" gameplay as definitely not "easier".

I guess I should take the hint and find something else to do.

Cheers. 

It was fun while it lasted.

[Alphaless]

23 hours ago, rossmum said:

I also very much doubt it's to do with it being "easier", as having to deal with AIM-9P5s is anything but that. The general skill level is lower but the airspace is crowded, all-aspect weapons are in play (and in that regard the 9P5 is absolutely top dog), and GCI coverage can be spotty as well. The real ease in that regard is it being easier to jump on for 20-30 mins and find action, which probably appeals more to those with limited play time.

I don't think the 9P5 is as impactful as you say it is. It's only available to the A-10 in some of the missions in rotation, and in considerably limited quantities. The vast majority of missiles being employed are more conventional rear-aspect sticks. Moreover, I'm pretty sure the Su-25 gets R-60Ms as well, which are equally, if not more nasty than the 9P5. Perhaps the 9P5 gets more of the spotlight because I haven't seen as many Frogfoot pilots in comparison to A-10 pilots. 

Edited April 20, 2022 by Alphaless

[Miccara]

Occasional players dislike not being able to see themselves on the F10 map. I'd gamble this is a significant obstacle for many players.