Cold War 1947 - 1991

[m4ti140]

9 hours ago, Sideburns said:

 

You might want to look up what the J stands for in AJ-37 / AJS- 37. The Rb24j was removed in a major part due to exploitation of the speed issue so it seems harsh not to return it. But it is what it is and I do not intend to waste my time arguing balance when the agenda has been set. I do wonder if the MiG21 should be reviewed from the same perspective given its radar range and RWR bugs? (And I say this as someone currently flying and enjoying the MiG21!)

 

I'm glad we've arrived at, as I introduced it, a "rough fix" for the Viggen speed issue, the main complaint in this context, based on some clever use of triggers. I spent literally 10 minutes figuring out the simplistic triggers I posted, as presented it was intended as a stopgap measure / quick fix and I knew it was not a perfect mitigation. I am aware of how IAS, ground speed, air pressure etc work in this situation and how it applies to my original suggestion, hence why I called it a "rough fix" because it was rough. It is good to see Alpenwolf refine the original suggestion into the mitigation we have, but bear in mind we are limited by the mission editor tools available and time someone is willing to commit to this. I think having acceleration based controls in place would be quite a bit trickier than the speed controls implemented, probably extend into custom LUA scripting. I'm not sure it would be worth the effort based on your unconvincing concerns on acceleration. Lets see how this speed mitigation plays out.

 

Thanks to Alpenwolf for taking the original speed trigger suggestion seriously and working it through.

What "RWR" bugs? This is the first time I've heard of it since the RWR overhaul. If there's a bug report it.

I can make custom lua predicates for different speeds.

As for "unconvincing concerns" - well it's not my problem if your imaginary universe has different laws of physics.

[m4ti140]

5 hours ago, Conker4 said:

I look forward to the trigger for the mig-21 special afterburner destroying the engine after a short time of use 

 

Finally a valid point - I was actually pretty sure the damage was simulated, so I never used it. This could probably be considered a bug if there are no repercussions for using it over 3 minutes. Not sure how to extract info from client on whether or not it is on, maybe RPM could be used as reference as the engine overspeeds in second regime.

That being said - not sure what you think this does, but it does not allow the aircraft to go even 1kph faster - the max speed in MiG-21 is limited by what the compressor can withstand and it doesn't matter whether you're in normal regime or second regime - the engine flames out at a fixed speed. Moreover there's only a narrow range of altitudes (and sea level is not one of them) where the emergency afterburner gives substantial performance boost. I'd be all for dealing damage to aircraft if they run it over 3 minutes in similar matter to how Viggen got handled.

Edited June 13, 2021 by m4ti140

[GeneralMav24]

maybe rather than base it off limiting AAM numbers maybe require atleast 2 pylons have AG Missiles, Bombs, rockets, or maybe pods too  until flag for some objectives completed

with swedish delivery for an example could apply that to the viggen slots and not allow them to go without AG in alpha slots until objective Alpha is completed. 
only problem with a method like that is airframes getting destroyed

[Alpenwolf]

1 minute ago, Conker4 said:

All that is meant by bias is that you see the plane as an air to ground platform that has some AA rather than a multirole aircraft, that's all.

 

Multirole doesn't mean you can do with it whatever you want any time you want. For instance, the F-15E is a multirole aircraft. During the Gulf War it flew strike missions mainly. Why? Because it was assigned with such tasking. If you check out the briefing for the AJS37 in all my missions they're mainly assigned with taking out enemy ground units/buildings and sometimes ships. Can you do some air to air with it? SURE! Has it become ridiculous to the extent AJS37 pilots are doing MOSTLY air to air? YES. That's the whole point, hence the restrictions.

 

It's a public server and I'm not putting any password on it so obviously players can do whatever they want (within the server rules!) and they've been doing do for 7 years. Once in a while a specific behaviour becomes obtrusive in a way I'm forced to react to. This issue here is yet another example for such an obtrusive behaviour.

[Alpenwolf]

47 minutes ago, GeneralMav24 said:

maybe rather than base it off limiting AAM numbers maybe require atleast 2 pylons have AG Missiles, Bombs, rockets, or maybe pods too  until flag for some objectives completed

with swedish delivery for an example could apply that to the viggen slots and not allow them to go without AG in alpha slots until objective Alpha is completed. 
only problem with a method like that is airframes getting destroyed

 

Obviously you have no idea how much scripting knowledge that requires. There is nothing like it out there and certainly not a thing for users of the DCS mission editor.

Having ideas is not the problem, mate. Trust me, I'm full of them! Transforming them into actual practice however, is a mountain of a dizzy height to climb

[GeneralMav24]

1 minute ago, Alpenwolf said:

 

Obviously you have no idea how much scripting knowledge that requires. There is nothing like it out there and certainly not a thing for users of the DCS mission editor.

Having ideas is not the problem, mate. Trust me, I'm full of them! Transforming them into actual practice however, is a mountain of a dizzy height to climb

scripting part yea I got hardly any idea I just know triggers and all that really 

[rossmum]

21 yeet burner is what, 3 mins use, 30 seconds, then clear to use again? You're running down engine hours as you do it, but my understanding is the immediate limit is thermal. Don't think it's modelled (or honestly, any engine temp issues at all). I would love for DCS to model effective attrition loss through people flogging airframes and the maintenance guys having to tear them down for inspection, but it doesn't and probably never will, especially since most players seem to prefer reslotting over even waiting a whopping 3 minutes for a good-as-new repair. 3 mins continuous in E-burner seems unlikely anyway as unless you're just standing on your tail the whole time, you're either coming out of AB to avoid overspeeding the engine, coming out of AB to avoid overshooting, or coming out of AB to avoid bamboozling the ARU into letting you rip your wings. It should be modelled for sure but I don't think it would significantly change the situation, most people already throttle back enough to cool it or don't use it in the first place. I think it'd be another one of the things (like the SPS/AB inhibiting behaviour) that people think is actually a bug because it's so uncommon and they don't understand how they caused it.

 

RIP Zach though.

[Alpenwolf]

17 hours ago, m4ti140 said:

If you used the regular unit speed trigger, then it's not IAS, it's GS, that's why I had concerns with it.

 

Just checked. The trigger uses TAS and nothing else. I'll make some adjustments using the TAS trigger so it's 1400 kph indicated.

[MAXsenna]

 
Interesting to see so many players gave a like for this.
Seems like many agree with you and saw conker4 many times doing that.
And it's conker4 who's debating things here back and forth.........
You know what they say? It's always those who are the loudest

Well, one can always like a post even if one disagree, if it's a good debate. I do!

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

[MAXsenna]

 
Bro there is nothing to like about a comment if you don't agree with it. really? You think so many players gave him a like because there is something likable about it?! come on son. it's a like sign but dont take it only as a like is in liking something. come on son.
ok I remeber players talking about him online during one of the nights......

Okay didn't know that. But I was actually referring to him giving likes. But I probably misunderstood you. Apologies.
Nobody's been calling me "son" for years. Thanks!

Sent from my MAR-LX1A using Tapatalk

[NELLUS]

The Viggen is a brilliant striker, but it takes some dedication to master. Many if us that fly it use it for strike purposes only, and trying to stay away from the lighter 21’s/19’s as much as we can. We have almost twice as much fuel onboard which makes it a clumsy dogfighter, but the fuel helps us to get out of harms way if we need to. 
I still say that server rules with x2 RB24J’s should be applied and warnings first, followed with short term bans if disregarded, for those that break them. 

[Sideburns]

14 hours ago, m4ti140 said:

What "RWR" bugs? This is the first time I've heard of it since the RWR overhaul. If there's a bug report it.

I can make custom lua predicates for different speeds.

As for "unconvincing concerns" - well it's not my problem if your imaginary universe has different laws of physics.

 

Ok, you being unaware of MiG21 this goes someway to explaining your approach this discussion. Having said that I assumed, given your extensive involvement in the discussion, you would be aware of the MiG21 issues. Also generally speaking I consider the whole weapons and aircraft choice to be a "balance of bugs" that unfortunately Alpenwolf has to juggle for his CW server.

 

The bugs are already reported but not yet resolved and relatively fresh / easy to find on the MiG21 subforum. The MiG21 suffers from radar bugs resulting it an overly optimistic radar range (fighter sized targets being picked up at 30km, whereas this is probably an accurate range for bomber size targets based on the technical aspects of the radar and some documentation) and it also does not present correctly on other aircraft's RWR (MiG21 does not appear on an RWR until it the MiG21 has detected the target, MiG21 does not give correct lock indications resulting in targets being unaware they are locked or fired upon).

 

Hopefully you will agree this gives the MiG21 a significant advantage when using the radar and radar weapons, but I suspect you will attempt to "downsplain" it again. Just as you have tried to underplay the significance of the MiG21 emergency AB beyond permitted time limits issue affecting speed when really the advantage it provides, given the MiG21 speed limits, is TW increase and improved acceleration beyond what the jet should be capable of. Somewhat ironically at the same time as bemoaning the Viggen's acceleration situation now the speed situation is hopefully in hand.

 

As before I think the acceleration issues would be non-trivial to solve via scripting, and I personally think people's time (mainly Alpenwolf's time) is probably better spent elsewhere given the impact the acceleration has on Viggen usage (and arguably it also has parity with the MiG21 emergency AB time limit situation). Hence why I find your argument unconvincing to change things further or continue the Rb24 restriction based on the Viggen acceleration situation. Not because of the physics involved, which I am well aware of being a physics graduate and having worked many years in the aviation industry.

 

I sincerely hope you give the blufor jets a go, given the free trials, and review the MiG21 bugs highlighted to get a better perspective on things before commenting in the future.

 

[Alpenwolf]

Server News:

 

- All missions on all maps include the speed limit for the Viggen. Trigger fixed.

- Added FAQ's to the main post of this thread.

[CrazyGman]

Mi-24 guide is out

 

 

Mi-24P Quick Start Manual EN.pdf

[Alpenwolf]

1 minute ago, CrazyGman said:

Mi-24 guide is out

 

 

Mi-24P Quick Start Manual EN.pdf 2.9 MB · 0 downloads

 

Thank you very much!

[Bisch]

Will the Mi24 get the R60M in (some)Cold War Server Missions as soon as they will become available during EA?

[CrazyGman]

 

2 hours ago, Atelophobia said:

Will the Mi24 get the R60M in (some)Cold War Server Missions as soon as they will become available during EA?

I think that would be a little too overpowered, considering you could carry up to at least 4 R60m and also anti-tank missiles if you had just Mi-24s in sufficient numbers they could clear missions possibly a bit too easy. The Mistrel Gazelle is pretty limited in the server because it's quite effective, now add the ability to move faster, and have anit-tank missiles and it's a bit much. Maybe if it could just carry the R60 vanilla but even then I would say only for a mission or 2 at best.

and we have the missile vid out

 

 

just got the Mi-24 Anti-tank missile vid out. Might come out this Wednesday guys

Edited June 15, 2021 by CrazyGman

[Admiral_ZIPANGU]

I saw that on another PvP server, a script has been implemented that will issue a warning if a certain armament exceeds the limit of the number of armaments carried. I thought it might be effective if this could be implemented on this server as well. But that script is not easy to find...

Edited June 15, 2021 by Admiral_ZIPANGU

[Alpenwolf]

8 hours ago, Atelophobia said:

Will the Mi24 get the R60M in (some)Cold War Server Missions as soon as they will become available during EA?

 

Yes.

[Sideburns]

The ability to limit payload per pylon can't arrive soon enough, by official utility or mod. The Rb24/aim9b is not a practical weapon and having an Mi24 with many R60m and ATGM seems quite overpowered. The Mi24 is also quite a fast helicopter and should be able to dictate engagements with other helos. Having said that as much I have not pre-ordered (F16 pre-order wounds still not healed) I can't wait to see this most ugly yet beautiful thing in the DCS sky.

[Bisch]

3 hours ago, Alpenwolf said:

 

Yes.

Awesome! Can’t wait try that legend of my childhood on your great server. 
Do you expect a longer downtime of your server when it releases?

9 hours ago, CrazyGman said:

 

I think that would be a little too overpowered, considering you could carry up to at least 4 R60m and also anti-tank missiles if you had just Mi-24s in sufficient numbers they could clear missions possibly a bit too easy. The Mistrel Gazelle is pretty limited in the server because it's quite effective, now add the ability to move faster, and have anit-tank missiles and it's a bit much. Maybe if it could just carry the R60 vanilla but even then I would say only for a mission or 2 at best.

and we have the missile vid out

 

 

just got the Mi-24 Anti-tank missile vid out. Might come out this Wednesday guys

 

I guess Alpenwolf will find a way to keep it balanced. I prefer balancing to simply restricting. Even some unbalanced days in the beginning shouldn’t hurt too much. And it doesn’t replace a bad helo. Taking out the shark also takes away its special advantages. 

[Alpenwolf]

Server News:

 

- There will be 2 more slots for the F-5's than for the MiG-21's in some missions.

- This is due to the fact that Red has MiG-21's and MiG-19's as main fighters/interceptors, while Blue has only the F-5. MiG-15's and F-86's cancel each other out.

- The RB-24J is being added back to the missions so expect the missile back soon over the upcoming days.

- There will be ca. 40 x RB-24J's max. If the first 8 Viggen pilots decide to go with 6 x RB-24J's each that'd be it. Up to them.

- There will be no scripting or additional monitoring of which player is taking how many RB-24J's. The Viggen is consuming most of the mission editing time these days.

- You can spread the word and maybe notifiy Viggen players of that once online. Don't expect much from the casual DCS player though.

Edited June 15, 2021 by Alpenwolf

[NELLUS]

49 minutes ago, Alpenwolf said:

Server News:

 

- There will be 2 more slots for the F-5's than the MiG-21's in some missions.

- This is due to the fact that Red has MiG-21's and MiG-19's as main fighters/interceptors, while Blue has the only F-5. MiG-15's and F-86's cancel each other out.

- The RB-24J is being added back to the missions so expect the missile back soon over the upcoming days.

- There will be ca. 40 x RB-24J's max. If the first 8 Viggen pilots decide to go with 6 x RB-24J's each that'd be it. Up to them.

- There will be no scripting or additional monitoring of which player is taking how many RB-24J's. The Viggen is consuming most of the mission editing time these days.

- You can spread the word and maybe notifiy Viggen players of that once online. Don't expect much from the casual DCS player though.

I hope that the regular Viggen flyers (about 10 of us) will stick with x2 RB24J’s per flight. 

Edited June 15, 2021 by NELLUS

[GeneralMav24]

15 minutes ago, NELLUS said:

I hope that the regular Viggen flyers (about 10 of us) will stick with x2 RB24J’s per flight. 

 

unfortunately theres a couple people I see regularly that dont follow objectives at all with strike loads that Im sure will take 6 24js

[NELLUS]

Here’s two pics showing the RB24 followed by the RB24J. It’s pretty easy to identify them. We can give a heads up about the limited amount available for those that load up with more than two RB24J’s per flight. 

 

Edited June 16, 2021 by NELLUS