Cold War 1947 - 1991

[Tolovay]

First of all, i never had chat opened and i will never will because it is limiting view. Secondly, if you would realy want to make contact with me, it would be loud and clear, repetadly. I never heard that. I heard all of you. So I was on right frequency. And I clearly remember when you have warned me about F5 going after me and instructing me to break, break confirmed by "copy that". So, there was no clear commands from you, sorry.

 

Surprise, surprise, how come I was so responsive on Tiberias missions to when we, ka 50 were very useful and killed many => your words. So, suddenly for some reason I don't listen on SRS??? Give me a break. And I was the that encourage JTAC to talk to attack hilos more often.

 

Well, you know what? I don't know why i am explaining all of this. Have it your way. Cheers.

[rossmum]

Worth note that SRS still has days where it decides to randomly crash or not recognise controls, or not play nice with a particular module. Repeatedly over the past month or so I've started having issues again where it simply refuses to recognise my PTT and I don't realise it until I'm in the middle of a fight and trying to respond to someone, at which point tabbing out to restart it is not viable. The radio also frequently goes down with battle damage. Like Tolovaj I have chat minimised, and although I tab it open now and then I do miss things.

 

I totally get the frustration of people not being on comms... when I tried my hand at GCI the other day I had maybe half the team on comms and only a few would reply back. Often when I find myself in trouble, GCI tries to direct help my way only to find none of them are on comms. With that said, I think kicking should be reserved for people who are wasting very limited airframes (MiG-29s, F-14s) or clearly attacking their own team's units or airbases. We need more people moving into the Cold War side of DCS and IMO that goal is more important than having one or two bad experiences where nobody's coordinating - because they probably will be soon. It took me a while before I finally figured out my original SRS issue and was able to use it on the server, but now I don't fly without it. Once people start playing regularly, they'll get into the habit.

[Alpenwolf]

Whether you use VR or TrackIR or whether you have a top notch PC or not that's everyone's dilemma. You don't really expect servers and missions out there to suit your gear.

 

I don't have my chat open all the time either. I hit the "Tab" key quickly once in a while when there are several new messages which by the way are mostly players connecting or disconnecting. Sometimes someone's writing something to any of us so it's worth checking. No big deal, and especially because SRS crashes sometimes which happens to all of us. Which is, again, checking out the chat every now and then should help avoiding confusion. So pointing that out is actually showing that we're all aware of the issue, which is why we're trying to work together here to help reduce the amount of bugs we have in DCS. But when guys like you, Tolovaj, who are normally on SRS and normally cooperating (and I know which players are like that and who aren't) are not there when you expect them to be and all that teamkilling and chaos with the ground units taking place, with me tending to all these issues simultaneously for the first 2 hours into the mission, to only maintain order so that you all have that atmosphere on the server that I'm trying to create, I simply have had enough. I owe it to the hours I invest in the ME and the effort I put into this passion of mine to not just go along with it. And I've posted earlier that yesterday's session was literally something else. I've never had a chaotic session like yesterday's in quite some long time. And you would only know that if you were watching the whole thing through GCI. I had to react and I had to make a statement. Whether you were not on comms or you were but had SRS issues I couldn't tell. So I started using the chat for that matter and only after 30-40 minutes of trying to reach out to you I reacted and kicked some players out. You flew north and were doing your thing for quite a long time just like everyone else. So it's like I was eager to kick you out or something. But the massive lack of comms together with the chaos that resulted due to that knowing and seeing that most of it would've had been avoided if players were on comms forced me to react like that. Because I also owe it to those who were on comms and getting shot down by friendlies. When players (not just you) were not even responding in the chat window (a few did though) and I did tolerate that for the first 2 hours, it simply reached its peak.

 

That's all there is to it.

 

But...

 

... if you want to make a big deal out of it and start taking things out of context and talk about Tiberias (had nothing to do with yesterday) and moan about it all over the forums saying things like not wanting to participate in tournaments and all that (you know what I'm talking about) "because I kicked you out of the server only because your radio was damaged" or "if you would realy want to make contact with me, it would be loud and clear, repetadly" when you're not even willing to quickly check out the chat, KNOWING that SRS can malfunction sometimes as we've all agreed on that already, then you're crossing the line with me, mate. Don't twist facts with me like that trying to paint an image of me being someone who kicks players left and right as if I had been doing that all these years for whatever unjustifiable reasons. Every day and night and in every mission many players are not on comms and all I do is write things like "get on SRS, please. Human GCI available" or the like. Nothing more. Why? Because I'm aware of the fact that many players don't even understand English let alone speak it. I don't just start kicking players out for the heck of it. And I don't put all the hours in the server trying to listen to you all and include your ideas whenever possible and react to your criticism to have you bullshit me like that. I ain't taking that, mate. And it's not the first time we had a chat you and me, is it? We did have some pm back and forth, didn't we? You might want to reconsider.

[BerryMORE]

wow wow) too much burned chairs here)

First of all I wanna to apologize for myself personally and for my teammates if we ruins the game totally yesterday.

 

2nd. I wanna say big thanks for Alpenwolf for interesting missions and good server. Really appreciate it! Thanks!

3rd. We respect any server rules, but yesterday that was some minor mismatch). No problem here - rules changed and SRS required for GCI espesially. There is no problem.

Zero tolerance for rulebreaker. That only way to keep all on track as designed. Teamwork is the only way to win. Im think that there no any other opinion.

 

As the solution the teams can have own freq one click up or down from main freq. GCI must be on main freq also, is the good option.

 

But there is can be some issues, aircraft can be damaged, users with non native english in "dirty" enviroment with high workload just cant hear request - as it was with me at the last kick))

Yesterday we was more concentrated on the issue that one of our pilot cant take slot for su-25T and when he fly we didnt see him on map - his mark was on the field all time.

 

Can I offer my little help to translate mission briefings, rules for russian language? I think it will help to understand rules more easy for russians pilots. (oh i see Pups make this proposition))

 

So guys, please be patient and respectful. Teamplay is one of our main goal, after mission win).

Thanks again for great missions and server. S!

 

[Lurker]

Your house, your rules. Allow me make one suggestion: keep them clear, and preferably translate at least the most important parts into russian in the server description. It will save you a lot of grief in the long run.

[Alpenwolf]

wow wow) too much burned chairs here)

First of all I wanna to apologize for myself personally and for my teammates if we ruins the game totally yesterday.

 

2nd. I wanna say big thanks for Alpenwolf for interesting missions and good server. Really appreciate it! Thanks!

3rd. We respect any server rules, but yesterday that was some minor mismatch). No problem here - rules changed and SRS required for GCI espesially. There is no problem.

Zero tolerance for rulebreaker. That only way to keep all on track as designed. Teamwork is the only way to win. Im think that there no any other opinion.

 

As the solution the teams can have own freq one click up or down from main freq. GCI must be on main freq also, is the good option.

 

But there is can be some issues, aircraft can be damaged, users with non native english in "dirty" enviroment with high workload just cant hear request - as it was with me at the last kick))

Yesterday we was more concentrated on the issue that one of our pilot cant take slot for su-25T and when he fly we didnt see him on map - his mark was on the field all time.

 

Can I offer my little help to translate mission briefings, rules for russian language? I think it will help to understand rules more easy for russians pilots. (oh i see Pups make this proposition))

 

So guys, please be patient and respectful. Teamplay is one of our main goal, after mission win).

Thanks again for great missions and server. S!

 

One of most objective and rational posts I've ever read on this thread, especially after the latest and rather inconvenient occurrence. Благослови тебя Господь!

 

First of all, don't apologise, please. That's not needed. Again, it's not a big deal and I'm not making a big deal out of it. Only a statement needed to be made as I felt so yesterday. In fact, I didn't expect such reactions. But all good as I'm always open to that here and on TS.

 

I know that many Russian speakers are on the server which is why I'm never going to limit it to English speakers only. Especially when most Russian speaking players have been around here since the very beginning.

And now you approach me with a generous offer like that. How can I say no?!

 

The second and third post of this thread include the briefings for all missions. The server's rules are included in every mission as a briefing image. I don't want you to feel burdened with a task that must be accomplished quickly. However, if you're willing to translate and maybe have others translate with you then please take all the time you want. No need to rush it. Once that's done, I could (or maybe you or someone else) start a Cold War thread in the Russian forums similar to this one for all Russian speakers to see.

 

Your offer is a refresher.

 

очень высоко ценится!

[Foka1]

 

I'm so looking forward to when the Hind replaces the KA-50 and the Kiowa the Gazelle.

 

Hind replacing KA-50 I can see sense in that. But Kiowa is same as KA-50 if not more capable in regards of having Hellfire and IR camera. If you replace KA-50 with Hind and Gazelle with Kiowa you will just flip current setup backwards but with more divide between sides capabilities.

 

Gazelle (if fixed) has same 4 ATGMs Hind has (and they have similar range of engagemnt with those ATGMs. In that regard it is more balanced. If Kiowa is there KA-50 minimum should stay in my opinion. KIOWA is more advanced and modern platform than KA-50 (although it is another role it still have access to more modern weapons like Hellfire and APKWS) so I don't see much sense in removing KA-50 and adding Kiowa at the same time.

 

The only good opponent for Hind in view of this server is Early Apache or Cobra, as I see it.

 

In current setup I would actually try and restrict KA-50 Vikhrs to see how it'll go compared with Gazelle and its ATGM. KA-50 without Vikhrs still have better aiming capabilities for unguided weapons.

[m4ti140]

@Alpenwolf You do realize that SRS has its own client list, you can SEE who is connected and who isn't. I mean, obviously you do, you're the server administrator here, you're supposed to know this. Or don't you?

[Volator]

 

Hind replacing KA-50 I can see sense in that. But Kiowa is same as KA-50 if not more capable in regards of having Hellfire and IR camera. If you replace KA-50 with Hind and Gazelle with Kiowa you will just flip current setup backwards but with more divide between sides capabilities.

 

Gazelle (if fixed) has same 4 ATGMs Hind has (and they have similar range of engagemnt with those ATGMs. In that regard it is more balanced. If Kiowa is there KA-50 minimum should stay in my opinion. KIOWA is more advanced and modern platform than KA-50 (although it is another role it still have access to more modern weapons like Hellfire and APKWS) so I don't see much sense in removing KA-50 and adding Kiowa at the same time.

 

My main concern with the Kiowa replacing the Gazelle was primarily the flight model that - hopefully - will be a lot better with the Kiowa. Optronics-wise, the Kiowa actually flew in the 1980s with the optronics it has now, so it's realistic to have that helicopter on the CWS. The Ka-50 didn't fly operationally in the 1980s. I know it was developed in the 80s and that's why Alpenwolf considers it a Cold War machine, but I beg to differ here, it's a 1990s machine. I never questioned his decision though because without the Ka-50 Red wouldn't have an attack helicopter at all today, plus Blue also enjoys a nice advantage with the AV-8B NA here and there, but I think we'll be getting to the point where both the Ka-50 and the AV-8B NA will not be needed on this server anymore. Also, realistically the Kiowa will only be able to carry two Hellfires maximum, and I hope that APKWS will not be allowed on the Cold War Server, so the Kiowa will not be such a big thing.

 

The only good opponent for Hind in view of this server is Early Apache or Cobra, as I see it.

I think with an early Apache, things would be even more out of balance for Red than with a Kiowa. It would be realistic though!

 

In current setup I would actually try and restrict KA-50 Vikhrs to see how it'll go compared with Gazelle and its ATGM. KA-50 without Vikhrs still have better aiming capabilities for unguided weapons.

That's an unhistoric balancing approach that I think is unnecessary. Historical background and mission design should be the only means of balancing the gameplay.

[Alpenwolf]

@Alpenwolf You do realize that SRS has its own client list, you can SEE who is connected and who isn't. I mean, obviously you do, you're the server administrator here, you're supposed to know this. Or don't you?

 

Yea, I'm aware of that :smilewink:

[Alpenwolf]

There used to be 4-6 x Ka-50 slots in all missions. Nowadays it's only 2 x slots in most and not all missions. So there has been an obvious reduction in that regard. However, removing the Ka-50's completely is a bit too much. Red has no strikers and now no Ka-50'S? That's tough. OK, I'm bringing back the Su-25T for exactly that reason but that doesn't mean the Ka-50's will leave all together for the very reasons mentioned by P61. Plus I did say back in the day that helicopters might be the only exception when it comes to the era of the CW. Again, might. Because no matter how good their systems are they're just helicopters and can always be shot down easily if approached properly.

 

As to the Hind. Well, we're all hyped but let's bump the brakes a bit. It might have 4 x ATGM's at the most which is nothing when it comes to clearing out areas of tanks. And it's not like Ka-50's always fly back home after destroying 8-10 enemy tanks. They're often jumped by enemy planes instantly or shot down by enemy ground units, especially when driven by GCI players. EWR's seem to do a good job at spotting helicopters. AWACS is even worse which shows the GCI operator each and every aircraft of the enemy no matter how low it's flying, but AWACS planes are no more as you know.

 

The Hind is mostly for flying fast, flying low and firing loads of rockets at infantries mainly, trucks and APC's. They're not there to hover around and snipe out tanks. That's what the Ka-50 was designed for. If I'd remove the Ka-50's completely then I'd have to maybe remove most tanks and replace them by infantries and light APC's (no Bradley's) for that matter. Not with the current rubbish infantries we have though. However, in some missions there are no tanks. APC's and trucks only. Like in the mission Street Fight where it's mostly BTR-80's and M-113's. Or the mission One Night in Arabia.

 

I might end up designing missions for the sake of the Mi-24 where some or all TA's have no tanks at all. We'll have to wait and see what's the DCS Hind is all about. Same with Kiowa.

[rossmum]

Bear in mind that it is highly likely the Mi-24 will be able to defend itself against air attack- I expect it to get R-60s when it arrives. They certainly carried them enough operationally that the module will be incomplete without them.

 

As for comms - I often miss things directed at me when the fight gets hairy, and English is my first language! I try to use what Russian I know when talking to Russian speaking players but even remembering numbers gets hard under stress )

[ROSS_Pups]

 

I think the majority is English-speaking, and frankly, I stopped flying for red because of the russian chatter on comms.

 

Это вы Вьетнамцы врёте зря.

В гермошлеме четко слышит я.... (С) :music_whistling:

[Alpenwolf]

Lol, ROSS_Pups. That's a funny reply :)

I believe he meant "most players on the Cold War server" are mainly English speakers. I'm not sure though to be honest. Would be nice to have a statistic for that one. Who knows...

[Decibel dB]

To be fair technically Chinese is not a language, Mandarin and Cantonese is :P

I saw your message on chat Alpen, I am glad to be back. I really like the way Mike Delta operate on GCI. Personally I never been a fan of being on coms with a bunch of stranger that talks and talks and talks but it isn't the case now, we're too busy kicking your ass :D

 

Merci mon ami

[BEliY]

WTF!?)))

 

TacView Five Points Unleashed:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_JG51znHWlM

[Volator]

I believe he meant "most players on the Cold War server" are mainly English speakers.

 

Exactly. And while the statistics show native speakers only, there are also many, many users who do understand and use English as their second or third language. English is the primary language in aviation.

 

 

[Foka1]

 

My main concern with the Kiowa replacing the Gazelle was primarily the flight model that - hopefully - will be a lot better with the Kiowa. Optronics-wise, the Kiowa actually flew in the 1980s with the optronics it has now, so it's realistic to have that helicopter on the CWS. The Ka-50 didn't fly operationally in the 1980s. I know it was developed in the 80s and that's why Alpenwolf considers it a Cold War machine, but I beg to differ here, it's a 1990s machine. I never questioned his decision though because without the Ka-50 Red wouldn't have an attack helicopter at all today, plus Blue also enjoys a nice advantage with the AV-8B NA here and there, but I think we'll be getting to the point where both the Ka-50 and the AV-8B NA will not be needed on this server anymore. Also, realistically the Kiowa will only be able to carry two Hellfires maximum, and I hope that APKWS will not be allowed on the Cold War Server, so the Kiowa will not be such a big thing

 

 

That's an unhistoric balancing approach that I think is unnecessary. Historical background and mission design should be the only means of balancing the gameplay.

 

Agree about FM.

 

Although you may have missed the point about mission design that was raised before in this thread several times. That is the thing here - balance is not historical, balance what Alpenwolf is working with is gameplay balance (means finding same capability on both sides and put it versus each other, or get as closer to balanced asymmetric balance as possible). It is hard to balance anything in DCS for cold war specific years because there are not enough assets in DCS yet to do that.

 

If you would try "Historical background and mission design should be the only means of balancing the gameplay" you would probably see this. In theory it is logical, in practice it is nearly impossible for public 24/7 server. Historical balance may work in event based server though.

 

[Volator]

It is hard to balance anything in DCS for cold war specific years because there are not enough assets in DCS yet to do that.

 

I agree with you here. But as I wrote: Things will become better eventually, reducing the need for unhistoric planesets. As of today we are not yet there to leave out the Ka-50 due to gameplay balance, I get that, and I don't argue against that. However, it appears to be a much better idea by Alpenwolf to put in more Su-25T as strikers for Red than Ka-50s.

 

In the field of available DCS helicopters, the Ka-50 is an amazing killer machine and Blue doesn't have anything that comes even close to its potential. The Kiowa will by far not have the potential of the Ka-50. Once Blue gets an Apache, that's another story then, but that's going to take a very long time.

 

So all in all I still advocate for the Ka-50/Hind and Gazelle/Kiowa substitution, I think that's a fair match. But let's see, Polychop promised to revisit the Gazelle FM after the Kiowa, maybe this helicopter will become a fine machine at last.

 

 

 

 

[Foka1]

the Ka-50 is an amazing killer machine and Blue doesn't have anything that comes even close to its potential.

 

I would suggest to wait until we see what Hellfire will do.

 

Also KA-50 vs Kiowa can be balanced in numbers. Three Kiowas for 1 KA-50 slot for instance.

 

Same though can be done vice versa if Hellfire prove to be much better weapon, than Hind SACLOS ATGMs more Hind slots can be placed.

 

[Foka1]

Other point that I've mentioned already is IR camera. See first shoot first. while KA-50 has more ATGMs its ATGMs are not 100% killing tank in one hit. Abrams some time can take three even to die. And KA-50 Shkval doesn't have IR mode, so finding targets with it is times harder than with huge mast camera with IR that is not exposing chopper BTW. So in numbers it may be 2 Hellfires against 16 Vikhrs, but in practice it may play out that effectiveness will be on the either side.

 

 

Plus in suggested setup Hind vs Kiowa, we need to look at Hind ATGMs compared to Hellfires. Hind will carry 4 ATGMs that are inferior to Vikhrs in effective distance. Most likely they will not kill tank in one hit either, moreover their guidence will be much harder process than in KA-50 with no screens at all, while Kiowa will have far better aiming and shooting capabilities from safe distances, yes it is 2 hellfires, but 4 Hind ATGMs may prove to be less effective than even one hellfire all things considered.

Edited November 7, 2020 by P61

[Alpenwolf]

In the field of available DCS helicopters, the Ka-50 is an amazing killer machine and Blue doesn't have anything that comes even close to its potential.

...

So all in all I still advocate for the Ka-50/Hind and Gazelle/Kiowa substitution, I think that's a fair match...

Maybe I'm wrong but it does sound like you're pushing for symmetric balance which I'm not in favour of. It's not Blue's fault the visibility in the MiG-21's cockpit is bad while that of the the F-5 is very good. It's not Red's fault the Ka-50 is such a good attack helicopter or Blue's fault the Viggen is such a capable jet. Even if we had the Apache and the Su-24 and all that is missing you will always have aircraft besting aircraft in systems among other things as well. You get the point, right? Now, I know that many servers try to counter that by adding the same modules to both sides. Which is another reason by the way why I needed to start my own thing. Having a module on both sides, especially when talking about old planes, is a solid no go to me. I remember when Blue players used to complain about lacking a SEAD plane like the Su-25T so most servers started adding the Su-25T to Blue. Then Red players would complain about lacking a proper CAS aircraft like the A-10C, and with that it's added to Red. Then it's the Ka-50. Then it's the this. And then it's that.

 

Isn't it more challenging to try a figure out a way to beat your enemy despite having the disadvantage in regard to a specific role your coalition is unable to fulfill? And in time when new modules arrive that challenge grows and grows and is always adding more obstacles to overcome, right? If that doesn't sound sexy then I don't know what does! Now tell me that's not the fun you're looking for in DCS. I know I am.

While Blue has the A-10, the Viggen, sometimes the Harrier and even the F-14 (which can perform strike missions) Red mostly has the Ka-50 and/or the Su-25 only. And by the way, only a few days ago I started adding the Su-25T to some missions, and still Red quite often turned the tide in many missions and won the day or even completely dominated the whole skirmish till the end of the mission. How does that not sound like FUN! And when Red won it... well... it was mostly (here we go again) due to proper teamwork. It always comes down to that, doesn't it?

 

But what happens if both teams have good comms and good teamwork? Well, in that case, I think he who outsmarts the other side and provides better tactics while making less mistakes wins. And we do have some sessions like that sometimes. And those are my FAVOURITE and the goal of this whole server. The very reason why I had the idea with operation Tiberias. I needed some "event" where I could "push" players into that direction. And Tiberias - round 4 proved to be such a tasty session.

[Alpenwolf]

Server News:

 

- Operation Phone Booth is offline.

- Operation Hold The Line is offline.

 

- Operation Two Towns is back online. All aircraft are limited in numbers!

 

 

 

 

- Operation Catch Me If You Can is back online. All aircraft are limited in numbers!

 

[Hiromachi]

Server News

 

Server ded. Please check it.

[Volator]

Maybe I'm wrong but it does sound like you're pushing for symmetric balance which I'm not in favour of.

 

Yeah, you totally misread that, I'm not pushing for any balance, I think that's rather Lazyseal's point in this discussion. I'm more for historical accuracy, but still acknowledging certain limitations set by DCS that require compromise here and there. I'm not going to repeat all this, I think I explained my point well enough, it's all there.