Jump to content

Cold War 1947 - 1991


Alpenwolf

Recommended Posts

Just now, Knock-Knock said:

@Alpenwolf
Maybe worth changing to payload restrictions instead? Will take some time adding this to each of the slots you placed in your missions, but in the long run Im guessing it will save a lot of time and frustrations, since the warehouse gets corrupt everytime ED add, remove or change (names I guess) weapons.

You can use it to dissalow given weapons. Simply click the weapon and station, and X'it.:

payload restrictions.jpg

 

Trust me, I've thought about it and like you said it's a LOT of work! It's not just the nuke bombs, but so many assets including the numbers of aircraft. So, I'll always have to at least fix the aircraft and helicopters' numbers in all airbases and FARP's (single FARP's actually). Fixing the assets in the warehouses takes me 5-7 minutes to do. Then I copy that file to all the other missions of the same map. After that it's only the aircraft numbers I'll have to do manually for each an every airbase/FARP separately. Just finished Fight Island and it took me about 15 minutes.

When all weapons are available, and when checking out the warehouses through cmdr or JTAC to see what's left, you get that long list of so many weapons that are not even of your concern as a pilot of a specific aircraft. That means the overview becomes annoying to work with.

cold war 1947 - 1991.jpg

Cold War 1947 - 1991                                       Discord
Helicopters Tournaments
Combined Arms Tournaments

You can help me with keeping up the server via PayPal donations: hokumyounis@yahoo.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/26/2021 at 1:54 PM, batsoup said:

Red generally has some really solid GCI by the usual suspects. But every now and then, there are some GCI who seems to optimize for orchestrating air quake and ignores the needs of attack helos / strikers in Su25s. Will load up tacview after some of these and see multiple Mig's all chasing after one F5 tens of km's away from the objective while the strikers are left on their own and get gangbang'd by F5s and Viggens. Unless you need to defend - you should be pushing your CAP to defend your attack a/c. 

Sometimes it's not just GCI. Some players tend not to react well to being told to orbit a point or establish a patrol, it can get extremely frustrating to watch people fly off in the complete opposite direction to where you actually need them.

On 10/27/2021 at 10:11 PM, MarkMD said:

!Friendly fire incident! Just to remind pilots of the dangers.

This is an AI incident, but none the less still friendly fire.  
Please note that since the last update, I’ve seen this happen twice. The fire came from a CHAP launcher, and you can see that it hits both friendly fighters. Granted they are in line of the enemy so yes they would of been hit in real life.  However in real life, the operator would of held their fire until a safe release could be achieved. 

This was the first of two separate Friendly fire incidents in this mission.

https://clips.twitch.tv/BlindingKathishHamSeemsGood-asaWDLXENsaESDdZ

Upon deeper investigation, I see that the enemy plane was destroyed and off screen prior to the second release of the missile.  The AI, may still have eyes on the destroyed mig due to the aircraft still being in the air at time of the second launch.

Cheers,

Mike-Delta

 

Ah yes, the Chappy is our greatest asset 🤣 I know of at least two times I baited one into shooting a guy off my tail, and I've seen Zach do the same.

Re: radar missiles - they're OK but can be defeated with the right tactics. It also helps that the average DCS player has been conditioned by years of fawning over 120s and unironically subscribes to "Sparrow bad", so they'll get cold feet and dump support on a missile that was tracking perfectly. Remember that the Sparrow's tracking logic will make it appear like it might not be tracking, because it tries to make the least amount of turns necessary in order to intercept. I got saved yesterday on BF 80s by a Hornet firing a second missile (dumping support on the first) right as it was in terminal guidance.

Honestly the SARH missiles are quite cool. It turns into a game of nerves to make sure your missile has support all the way in and actually scores a hit.

Dust - I think a bunch of the Caucasus missions do have/did have fog. I don't know if it causes the same issues as dust in VR, but it looks similar in 2D at any rate.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, rossmum said:

...

Dust - I think a bunch of the Caucasus missions do have/did have fog. I don't know if it causes the same issues as dust in VR, but it looks similar in 2D at any rate.


I'd need a VR user to confirm that. So far the reports were only about the dust. Could be similar though.

cold war 1947 - 1991.jpg

Cold War 1947 - 1991                                       Discord
Helicopters Tournaments
Combined Arms Tournaments

You can help me with keeping up the server via PayPal donations: hokumyounis@yahoo.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Server News:

* The warehouses in all PG missions have been fixed. This was "necessary" to include the Ataka missiles for the Hind.

  • Thanks 1

cold war 1947 - 1991.jpg

Cold War 1947 - 1991                                       Discord
Helicopters Tournaments
Combined Arms Tournaments

You can help me with keeping up the server via PayPal donations: hokumyounis@yahoo.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Am 26.10.2021 um 17:18 schrieb Alpenwolf:

That, and hopefully some fixing for the MiG-21's radar. Also, let's hope the MiG-23 and the F-1 don't have an over performing radar like the miG-21's. So, it's not just the missiles I'm worried about.

Dear Serverrunner, may I ask an HONEST and EARNEST question out of actual technical interest (and I have not flown DCS for a while now.. and I only ever visit the Cold War Server, not matter how bad I am, because it is the only COHESIVE and COHERENT server).

Where does this neverending myth come from that the "21er" radar overperforms. While this might or is very true when it comes to codelines - the reality in a normal scenario presents itself differently. 
Ever so often, wheter in COMP or NORM, whether in normal dish orientation or with "terrain" (2% upward) I can never pick up signatures (not IFF, signatures) for planes even I can see with my poor specs, looking upwards, planes that are close, are skylining, with no terrain maskiing, no terrain interference.

The "overperformance" applies only in a combination of factors that have nothing to do with the module but the complete lack of things we cannot mention here... from my limited understanding of a few decades in a related field in topically relevant functions.

That no one could change but the core product provider and franchise holder and its symptoms arise arbitrarily, not globally and not systemically.

So - again - I ask.. why does this keep popping up by people (not you) who "should" know better as they are that involved in a high intensity in the product consumption and server attendance?

Again, I am "bad at <enter what you want here>", and a total irrelevant bystander - but that persistence and insistence to misinterpret and misunderstand (maybe even "twist") something honestly and earnestly intrigues me.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Alpenwolf said:

Server News:

* The warehouses in all PG missions have been fixed. This was "necessary" to include the Ataka missiles for the Hind.

  Mountains cry still no atakas. ED said they implemented in last patch fix fo ME ataka missing problem.


Edited by Apok
Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Alpenwolf said:


I'd need a VR user to confirm that. So far the reports were only about the dust. Could be similar though.

Fog causes issues in VR but not as extreme as the desert dust. I know there is one mission with sea fog that looks really crappy and keeps us from fighting at low level off shore. I don't remember the name but next time I encounter it I will make a note.

 

 

 

 

EDsignaturefleet.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, rogorogo said:

Dear Serverrunner, may I ask an HONEST and EARNEST question out of actual technical interest (and I have not flown DCS for a while now.. and I only ever visit the Cold War Server, not matter how bad I am, because it is the only COHESIVE and COHERENT server).

Where does this neverending myth come from that the "21er" radar overperforms. While this might or is very true when it comes to codelines - the reality in a normal scenario presents itself differently. 
Ever so often, wheter in COMP or NORM, whether in normal dish orientation or with "terrain" (2% upward) I can never pick up signatures (not IFF, signatures) for planes even I can see with my poor specs, looking upwards, planes that are close, are skylining, with no terrain maskiing, no terrain interference.

The "overperformance" applies only in a combination of factors that have nothing to do with the module but the complete lack of things we cannot mention here... from my limited understanding of a few decades in a related field in topically relevant functions.

That no one could change but the core product provider and franchise holder and its symptoms arise arbitrarily, not globally and not systemically.

So - again - I ask.. why does this keep popping up by people (not you) who "should" know better as they are that involved in a high intensity in the product consumption and server attendance?

Again, I am "bad at <enter what you want here>", and a total irrelevant bystander - but that persistence and insistence to misinterpret and misunderstand (maybe even "twist") something honestly and earnestly intrigues me.
 

I've been flying the MiG-21 since day one. I've been in countless situations where the radar no way could've had "seen" that one target. Whether flying in the deep Caucasus valleys and instantly seeing targets on the radar screen once switched on (regardless of all the massive mountains and rugged terrain all around what the radar "sees"), or flying just as low as slightly over the rooftops of buildings in Dubai, and yet easily picking up low flying F-5's, despite all the high buildings, etc.

I've literally been in so many situations where I started wondering if that old radar is that good. Other players started posting their "concern" over the years and there you have the idea of the overperforming radar of the MiG-21. We're not real MiG-21 pilots to know for sure, so all that is rather based on what we read, watch on the internet, maybe study something with high relativity at college, know someone who did actually fly the aircraft, etc. You know, all the different sources out there.

29 minutes ago, Apok said:

  Mountains cry still no atakas. ED said they implemented in last patch fix fo ME ataka missing problem.

 

I literally said "PG missions", not Caucasus.

cold war 1947 - 1991.jpg

Cold War 1947 - 1991                                       Discord
Helicopters Tournaments
Combined Arms Tournaments

You can help me with keeping up the server via PayPal donations: hokumyounis@yahoo.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team
3 hours ago, rogorogo said:

Dear Serverrunner, may I ask an HONEST and EARNEST question out of actual technical interest (and I have not flown DCS for a while now.. and I only ever visit the Cold War Server, not matter how bad I am, because it is the only COHESIVE and COHERENT server).

Where does this neverending myth come from that the "21er" radar overperforms. While this might or is very true when it comes to codelines - the reality in a normal scenario presents itself differently. 
Ever so often, wheter in COMP or NORM, whether in normal dish orientation or with "terrain" (2% upward) I can never pick up signatures (not IFF, signatures) for planes even I can see with my poor specs, looking upwards, planes that are close, are skylining, with no terrain maskiing, no terrain interference.

The "overperformance" applies only in a combination of factors that have nothing to do with the module but the complete lack of things we cannot mention here... from my limited understanding of a few decades in a related field in topically relevant functions.

That no one could change but the core product provider and franchise holder and its symptoms arise arbitrarily, not globally and not systemically.

So - again - I ask.. why does this keep popping up by people (not you) who "should" know better as they are that involved in a high intensity in the product consumption and server attendance?

Again, I am "bad at <enter what you want here>", and a total irrelevant bystander - but that persistence and insistence to misinterpret and misunderstand (maybe even "twist") something honestly and earnestly intrigues me.
 

It does overperform, because it doesn't have any detection limits modelled, you can see fighter sized aircraft at 30km when you realistically shouldn't see them until like 21 at altitude and progressively less as you get lower.

And I am flying almost EXCLUSIVELY MiG-21, before you start trying to poison the well. The radar is horribly broken, it's known since forever. Probably the most hilarious "feature" is that the fixed beam mode is actually a hidden shkval sensor, it even triggers LWS in the Ka-50


Edited by m4ti140
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

vor 26 Minuten schrieb Alpenwolf:

I've been flying the MiG-21 since day one. I've been in countless situations where the radar no way could've had "seen" that one target. Whether flying in the deep Caucasus valleys and instantly seeing targets on the radar screen once switched on (regardless of all the massive mountains and rugged terrain all around what the radar "sees"), or flying just as low as slightly over the rooftops of buildings in Dubai, and yet easily picking up low flying F-5's, despite all the high buildings, etc.

I've literally been in so many situations where I started wondering if that old radar is that good. Other players started posting their "concern" over the years and there you have the idea of the overperforming radar of the MiG-21. We're not real MiG-21 pilots to know for sure, so all that is rather based on what we read, watch on the internet, maybe study something with high relativity at college, know someone who did actually fly the aircraft, etc. You know, all the different sources out there.

I literally said "PG missions", not Caucasus.

Thank you for the quick answer.. but please... that is EXACTLY what I have been typing.. that has nothing to do with the 21's module radar but with other things... and I have presented you the opposite example of the scope. 
As you are in the unthankfull position of "gamemaster" on top of server-runner and maintainer and mission content creator you have to reamain steadfast in a purely analytical approach and not give in to confirmation bias.

I know this is another load on your almost unbearable position, since - in case that is not clear enough - I as a random consumptor am more than gratefull for your conviction to keep a cohesive workable Cold War scneario against all the odds.
And you yourself have noticed the troublesome notion of the "rapidly changing mentality". 
So while the symptoms very much arbitrarily arise (but so do with all other modules), these are issues born of combinations, with source issues we are not allowed to mention, even hint at.

We can only hope, hope - that at some point the changed equity structure, which has already bruteforced necessary changes for the better may also address these issues, methodolgy at least.

Any notion in insularity to the symptom instead the source issue only validates screeching.

vor 5 Minuten schrieb m4ti140:

It does overperform, because it doesn't have any detection limits modelled, you can see fighter sized aircraft at 30km when you realistically shouldn't see them until like 21 at altitude and progressively less as you get lower.

And I am flying almost EXCLUSIVELY MiG-21, before you start trying to poison the well. The radar is horribly broken, it's known since forever. Probably the most hilarious "feature" is that the fixed beam mode is actually a hidden shkval sensor, it even triggers LWS in the Ka-50

 

and I have typed that this DOES apply codewise, but would not show in behaviour if not for entirely unrelated reasons. 
Comprehensive reading.

And bandaid workaround fixes would only intensify the mess and lack of we are not allowed to mention here.
As much as describing outlier events as systemic standards shows a limit in cognition of basic statistics. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team
9 minutes ago, rogorogo said:

and I have typed that this DOES apply codewise, but would not show in behaviour if not for entirely unrelated reasons. 
Comprehensive reading.

And bandaid workaround fixes would only intensify the mess and lack of we are not allowed to mention here.
As much as describing outlier events as systemic standards shows a limit in cognition of basic statistics. 

It does show behavior in me, cause since I realized how far it can see I've been relying on it subconsciously more and more. The sidelobe clutter is just a visual effect, I can detect head on targets pretty much at the edge of the screen, even down low. You can even see low flying helos all the way at the edge of the screen. It's really not servicable. And it shouldn't be fixed using "bandaid solutions", but re-written from scratch - modelling like this has no business being in a paid module.

Also what is "we are not allowed to mentioned here"? This is a pre-1980 aircraft, we totally are. And the documentation is not classified, just hard to get a hold of if you live in US and don't speak any WP language, as it's in physical form in libraries and archives all around the former WP.


Edited by m4ti140
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, m4ti140 said:

It does show behavior in me, cause since I realized how far it can see I've been relying on it subconsciously more and more. The sidelobe clutter is just a visual effect, I can detect head on targets pretty much at the edge of the screen, even down low. You can even see low flying helos all the way at the edge of the screen. It's really not servicable. And it shouldn't be fixed using "bandaid solutions", but re-written from scratch - modelling like this has no business being in a paid module.

You hit the spot there, mate! Well said.

@rogorogo
What are these things we can't or not allowed to talk about?! I can't think of any.

cold war 1947 - 1991.jpg

Cold War 1947 - 1991                                       Discord
Helicopters Tournaments
Combined Arms Tournaments

You can help me with keeping up the server via PayPal donations: hokumyounis@yahoo.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Team

I dunno, maybe he's the one having issues with reading comprehension he accuses us of - namely didn't understand the forum rules as he was reading them:

"1.16 Posting of images, file links, file sharing links, and copying and pasting information is prohibited if the source document is from a classified or ITAR controlled source.
When posting aircraft, sensor or weapon information more recent than 1980, you must also include the source of the document showing that it is 100% public and verified as not from a classified or non-ITAR controlled source. To not do so will result in the removal of the message."

All information on MiG-21bis that is not pre 1980 is publicly accessible - for instance the Polish flight manual is from 1982 iirc but it's hosted publicly on the website of the Polish Aviation Museum, you can't get less classified then that. If it's not easily accessible, you'll still be given access if you go to any EU library or archive that has them, save maybe for countries that still use the aircraft (Croatia). Not to mention - ITAR doesn't exactly apply to outdated sources from a now-defunct military organization.


Edited by m4ti140
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • ED Translators
4 hours ago, rogorogo said:

Dear Serverrunner, may I ask an HONEST and EARNEST question out of actual technical interest (and I have not flown DCS for a while now.. and I only ever visit the Cold War Server, not matter how bad I am, because it is the only COHESIVE and COHERENT server).

Where does this neverending myth come from that the "21er" radar overperforms. While this might or is very true when it comes to codelines - the reality in a normal scenario presents itself differently. 
Ever so often, wheter in COMP or NORM, whether in normal dish orientation or with "terrain" (2% upward) I can never pick up signatures (not IFF, signatures) for planes even I can see with my poor specs, looking upwards, planes that are close, are skylining, with no terrain maskiing, no terrain interference.

The "overperformance" applies only in a combination of factors that have nothing to do with the module but the complete lack of things we cannot mention here... from my limited understanding of a few decades in a related field in topically relevant functions.

That no one could change but the core product provider and franchise holder and its symptoms arise arbitrarily, not globally and not systemically.

So - again - I ask.. why does this keep popping up by people (not you) who "should" know better as they are that involved in a high intensity in the product consumption and server attendance?

Again, I am "bad at <enter what you want here>", and a total irrelevant bystander - but that persistence and insistence to misinterpret and misunderstand (maybe even "twist") something honestly and earnestly intrigues me.
 

I have a hard time into reading between lines here and do not understand post fully.

Only one thing I can say as someone who was co-creator of first MiG-21 squadron in DCS (well it was created one day after 21 release) and still flying it. MiG-21 radar IS overperforming. Although all of noticed discrepancies were reported and process of addressing that is in motion as I see it. I can't say how much boost it gives because I use radar in mig-21 like I was using it 5 years ago, when we were flying it on 104th against 4th gen planes, turn it on for 3 seconds check contacts in front and turn off to not appear on RWR for too long. If others got used to its overperforming maybe they can get some excessive info out of it, importance of which for practical fight and approach I can't judge myself.

Remark about whole history of things like that I've noticed. Unlike some other issues with BLUE side aircraft, people on RED side report issues for their side and achieve fixes and there is proven history of that:

R-13M, R-3S, RS-2US missiles having same IR seeker (4 or so years ago, fix achieved)

R-60 - missile not reacting to flares  (I was reporting 3 or so years ago fix achieved)

R-3S and R-13 missiles refactoring after reports about performance started from BLUE guys and then detailed by us when saw no reaction (refactoring was done (around 2 years ago)

Afterburner IR signature being less visible than non AB one (around 2 years ago reported by me and others fix achieved)

Then things were done where I was not really playing a role, but we got MiG-21 over G wing damage not just out of nowhere too.

Maybe I did not remember all cases and others can chip in, but you get the notion.

AKA LazzySeal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's all good, keep the circle-validation up instead of trying to actually issue-trace.
You do not have to mind me, for I am truly and earnestly irrelevant. I was asking a question, I got my answer and to everything I typed instantaneously perfect examples were provided.

That does not take anything away from the great experience on the CW server, does take nothing away from the positive spirit.

It just shows that zero admonishment from the consumer role for systemic issues is even theoretically possible, and actual change for the desired outcome has to be instigated from an entirely different vector (highly unlikely and even if in a few years the earliest).

So instead of anything else, let us all cross our fingers together.

/topic

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am a much more prolific user of the radar than most. It does affect gameplay but a little less than people think. The biggest issue is actually the lack of lock warning, not that it sees things it shouldn't - you can lock someone 20km out, then just follow the contact on the scope until they're directly on your nose. With that said, I've noticed some players won't even react to a radar lock from an aircraft which does give warning, so I don't know how many easy kills would have happened anyway due to overconfidence/RWR in wrong mode/RWR muted/etc.

As far as spotting things goes, you can go into a situation knowing beforehand roughly how many aircraft there are and who is or isn't friendly. This is probably its most useful side effect after the above, but it's only really useful when there's no GCI - when there is one, it's not giving you any new info that they haven't already given you. When it comes to R-3R kills, let's just say you have to be pretty stupid to try some 1v1 neutral merge BFM lunacy in a live combat environment. You practically have to fly into an R-3R to be hit by it, I have no pity for anyone who dies to a head-on joust and I don't think they'd be any better off if the radar functioned properly. At that point they're nearly as likely to be killed by the gun (or, if we still had them, R-60M).

I'm hoping we get a radar fix soon, both so I can stop picking up bad habits and have one less thing to worry about being modelled wrong on my favourite module. It is a factor, however it's one that does also get played up for whatever purpose - for every time I'm able to stealth-lock someone 20km out at low altitude and follow through to an R-3R kill, there's another time where the radar resolutely refuses to hold a steady track on a target a few kilometres off my nose which I can visually see and which isn't manoeuvring especially violently.

It's not the only radar with issues (F-5 can lock in ground clutter consistently, if you know what you're doing, and is totally unaffected by either weather or chaff), but it's got the worst issues by quite a large margin.


Edited by rossmum
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello everyone.


Yesterday's "When the Mountains cry" ended with a victory for the Red team, but the Blue side was just as exciting in their air battle.
While I was on Red's TacCmdr, I saw a Viggen that did some great bombing towards the end of the mission, so I'll leave it here along with some other images.

I'm not very good at taking pictures, and the picture quality is not very good, but I hope you enjoy watching it.

Screen_211031_021807.jpg

Screen_211031_022100.jpg

Screen_211031_022040.jpg

Screen_211031_022439.jpg

Screen_211031_021009.jpg

Screen_211031_021536.jpg

  • Like 3

Phantom Forever

F-4EJ / F-4EJ Kai 1971-2021

Sorry, I don't speak English, so I use DeepL Translate. Well, I can speak Japanese.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MiG-15's Being Alone on Comms:

We all know that MiG-15's operate on different frequencies, so they're literally left all alone. I enabled "unrealistic" comms on the server for about 3 weeks a while ago, so that MiG-15's can communicate with everyone else and vice versa. The problem was, Red players started operating on 251 MHz which is the default freq. (Ciribob told me it's tough to change to something else. It'd require changing lots of basics in the script). So, we ended up having players operating on 251 MHz and others on 124 MHz. It literally split the team in half on comms. If only players would still dial to 124 MHz (good luck with that), but they didn't and I was urging everyone for that period of time continuously. Red EWR's operate on 124 MHz as you all know, the briefing says that, and with players operating on random frequencies it was simply chaos.

One argument was: "Well, Su-25's and MiG-29A's are dialed to 251 MHz upon spawning". Yes, they are. And they dial to 124 MHz manually, because that's the normal format everyone on Red is used to and knows well. There are always exceptional situations where some random player doesn't do it, but since when random is a valid argument when talking about normality? Casuals are always there.

I literally had players asking me what's going on with comms. Why the chaos and why does the briefing say something else when quite a few are on 251 MHz. It was lots of headache trying to keep everyone in line, so that players can communicate with one another. So, yes, MiG-15's were finally able to talk to the rest of the team, but others ended up operating on different frequencies. In other words, it was the same result more or less (sometimes even worse), only this time it didn't effect the MiG-15's.

It's a pain in the ass, I know. I looked up the SRS script, changed a couple of things to make it possible for Red to have 124 MHz as their default freq., but I couldn't get it to work. If someone can, please, by all means.

cold war 1947 - 1991.jpg

Cold War 1947 - 1991                                       Discord
Helicopters Tournaments
Combined Arms Tournaments

You can help me with keeping up the server via PayPal donations: hokumyounis@yahoo.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Alpenwolf said:

MiG-15's Being Alone on Comms:

We all know that MiG-15's operate on different frequencies, so they're literally left all alone. I enabled "unrealistic" comms on the server for about 3 weeks a while ago, so that MiG-15's can communicate with everyone else and vice versa. The problem was, Red players started operating on 251 MHz which is the default freq. (Ciribob told me it's tough to change to something else. It'd require changing lots of basics in the script). So, we ended up having players operating on 251 MHz and others on 124 MHz. It literally split the team in half on comms. If only players would still dial to 124 MHz (good luck with that), but they didn't and I was urging everyone for that period of time continuously. Red EWR's operate on 124 MHz as you all know, the briefing says that, and with players operating on random frequencies it was simply chaos.

One argument was: "Well, Su-25's and MiG-29A's are dialed to 251 MHz upon spawning". Yes, they are. And they dial to 124 MHz manually, because that's the normal format everyone on Red is used to and knows well. There are always exceptional situations where some random player doesn't do it, but since when random is a valid argument when talking about normality? Casuals are always there.

I literally had players asking me what's going on with comms. Why the chaos and why does the briefing say something else when quite a few are on 251 MHz. It was lots of headache trying to keep everyone in line, so that players can communicate with one another. So, yes, MiG-15's were finally able to talk to the rest of the team, but others ended up operating on different frequencies. In other words, it was the same result more or less (sometimes even worse), only this time it didn't effect the MiG-15's.

It's a pain in the ass, I know. I looked up the SRS script, changed a couple of things to make it possible for Red to have 124 MHz as their default freq., but I couldn't get it to work. If someone can, please, by all means.

So why do the Mig 29's and Su-25's fail to tune 124 when expansion radios are allowed but somehow manage to tune 124 when they aren't allowed? Am I missing something here?


Edited by =475FG= Dawger

 

 

 

 

EDsignaturefleet.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, =475FG= Dawger said:

So why do the Mig 29's and Su-25's fail to tune 124 when expansion radios are allowed but somehow manage to tune 124 when they aren't allowed? Am I missing something here?

 

Because when they spawn, and like everyone else, 251 MHz is on by default. They hear people talking on 251 MHz, so why change? However, if everyone is 124 MHz the two are compelled to dial to 124 MHz. Sooner or later they'll realise that no one is with them on comms (251 MHz). That gives them the incentive to investigate and see if there's some other frequency they need to be on. They either check out the briefing (rarely) or ask around about the current frequency in use in the chat window.

cold war 1947 - 1991.jpg

Cold War 1947 - 1991                                       Discord
Helicopters Tournaments
Combined Arms Tournaments

You can help me with keeping up the server via PayPal donations: hokumyounis@yahoo.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Alpenwolf said:

Because when they spawn, and like everyone else, 251 MHz is on by default. They hear people talking on 251 MHz, so why change? However, if everyone is 124 MHz the two are compelled to dial to 124 MHz. Sooner or later they'll realise that no one is with them on comms (251 MHz). That gives them the incentive to investigate and see if there's some other frequency they need to be on. They either check out the briefing (rarely) or ask around about the current frequency in use in the chat window.

The best would be to somehow force it to be 124 like you mentioned.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Zachrix said:

The best would be to somehow force it to be 124 like you mentioned.

And if someone can figure that out in the SRS lua script I'd be very grateful. I'll check it out again and play with it a bit.

cold war 1947 - 1991.jpg

Cold War 1947 - 1991                                       Discord
Helicopters Tournaments
Combined Arms Tournaments

You can help me with keeping up the server via PayPal donations: hokumyounis@yahoo.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Alpenwolf said:

And if someone can figure that out in the SRS lua script I'd be very grateful. I'll check it out again and play with it a bit.

I have done a lot of personal mods with the SRS lua. It is very easy to mod individual aircraft. The problem is that the SRS script that determines the radio setup in the aircraft is client side. It is easily modified but every client would need the mod, which means it would have to be a forced update by Ciribob.

If its not forced, casuals won't have it. 

For the Mig-29 you just need to change line number 377 from

_data.radios[2].freq = 251.0 * 1000000 --V/UHF, frequencies are: VHF range of 100 to 149.975 MHz and UHF range of 220 to 399.975 MHz

to 

_data.radios[2].freq = 124.0 * 1000000 --V/UHF, frequencies are: VHF range of 100 to 149.975 MHz and UHF range of 220 to 399.975 MHz

For the Su-25 its the same change on line 421


Edited by =475FG= Dawger

 

 

 

 

EDsignaturefleet.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, =475FG= Dawger said:

I have done a lot of personal mods with the SRS lua. It is very easy to mod individual aircraft. The problem is that the SRS script that determines the radio setup in the aircraft is client side. It is easily modified but every client would need the mod, which means it would have to be a forced update by Ciribob.

If its not forced, casuals won't have it. 

 

 

Exactly! And I know what you're talking about. I was trying to get Ciribob to implement quite a couple of things (in CTLD as well), but he always preferred to have users do with it whatever they want to rather than forcing things. I understand that.

cold war 1947 - 1991.jpg

Cold War 1947 - 1991                                       Discord
Helicopters Tournaments
Combined Arms Tournaments

You can help me with keeping up the server via PayPal donations: hokumyounis@yahoo.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...