Cold War 1947 - 1991

[Apok]

As usual Abrams is safe from all but nuclear strike. No indirect dmg.

[Snappy]

Hi @Alpenwolf,

I have a few questions regarding "Disturbed Pacific" :  I'm relatively new to the helicopter side of things, but in this mission,( when there is no human tactical controller ),

what is the best use for the troops that are transported by the Mi-8?  Serious question, I just don't know. They seem to be infantry & RPG only, so they don't bring anti-Air capabilities. They can't protect the oil platforms obviously.  Should I just chaffeur them to Rota Airport and deposit them somewhere in the occupation zone in order to keep/reclaim it  or what?

Also , as for comms, would it be possible to include  in the briefing which radio channel on the 3 Mi-8 radios is set to the GCI comm frequency? I mean analogue to the Mig-21 / 19 info about which radio channel to use.

One last general question for helicopter operations on cold war server:

Do I need to hover taxi on the left side of the taxiway if I want to move around on an airfield to up pick up cargo or troops? or can I just fly to pick up point across the airfield straIght line?

 

Kind regards,

Snappy

 

Edited November 22, 2021 by Snappy

[Alpenwolf]

1 hour ago, Snappy said:

Hi @Alpenwolf,

I have a few questions regarding "Disturbed Pacific" :  I'm relatively new to the helicopter side of things, but in this mission,( when there is no human tactical controller ),

what is the best use for the troops that are transported by the Mi-8?  Serious question, I just don't know. They seem to be infantry & RPG only, so they don't bring anti-Air capabilities. They can't protect the oil platforms obviously.  Should I just chaffeur them to Rota Airport and deposit them somewhere in the occupation zone in order to keep/reclaim it  or what?

Also , as for comms, would it be possible to include  in the briefing which radio channel on the 3 Mi-8 radios is set to the GCI comm frequency? I mean analogue to the Mig-21 / 19 info about which radio channel to use.

One last general question for helicopter operations on cold war server:

Do I need to hover taxi on the left side of the taxiway if I want to move around on an airfield to up pick up cargo or troops? or can I just fly to pick up point across the airfield straIght line?

 

Kind regards,

Snappy

 

 

Hi, Snappy, and welcome to the server.

As an Mi-8 player, you're basically tasked with deploying the troops anywhere you see fit to help stop enemy troops and APC's on their way to the airbase and your FARP. The RPG's quite often take out enemy vehicles even heavy armoured tanks like the Abrams. The MG's are to protect them from other troops.

I think, I generally expect players to know the basics about their modules, so things like operating the radio systems onboard or figuring out anything in that regard is inevitable. Probably one of the reasons why my missions are a bit tough for newcomers, so they end up hating on the missions' setup and maybe leave. Hope that's not the case with you.

- The R-863 in the Mi-8 is the radio you need to dial to 124 MHz manually to communicate with others.
- The R-828 has preset frequencies installed by the ground crew (or the mission designer in our case) and can be used for helicopters' operations only.
- The YaDRO-1A is available in the Mi-8 and the Mi-24. So, if there are Ka-50's, the R-828 is better for helicopters' comms to have all three helicopters included.

MiG's have preset channels, hence the clarification on what channel they should use.

Basically, many aircraft on the server have radio systems with preset channels. Most players just dial through quickly and figure it out themselves. And it's always the same channel in all missions.

The rule where one should use the left side of taxiways and runways is only needed when an aircraft is coming up on your nose opposing your direction, so you don't collide with one another. You should follow the yellow line basically, and takeoff from the middle of the runway, but when many players are at an airbase, you need some sort of order. That's the only thought behind it.

You don't need to hover or follow ATC instructions or anything in that regard. It's up to each and every player if they want to experience some realism. Sometimes I do that, other times I just take off and fly over parked MiG's and away from the airbase. Just yesterday I performed a rolling landing at Kutaisi Airbase in the Mi-8. No one has to do that though Just have FUN, mate!

Post your questions any time, mate. Don't hesitate.

 

Cheers!

[Snappy]

1 hour ago, Alpenwolf said:

Hi, Snappy, and welcome to the server.

As an Mi-8 player, you're basically tasked with deploying the troops anywhere you see fit to help stop enemy troops and APC's on their way to the airbase and your FARP. The RPG's quite often take out enemy vehicles even heavy armoured tanks like the Abrams. The MG's are to protect them from other troops.

I think, I generally expect players to know the basics about their modules, so things like operating the radio systems onboard or figuring out anything in that regard is inevitable. Probably one of the reasons why my missions are a bit tough for newcomers, so they end up hating on the missions' setup and maybe leave. Hope that's not the case with you.

- The R-863 in the Mi-8 is the radio you need to dial to 124 MHz manually to communicate with others.
- The R-828 has preset frequencies installed by the ground crew (or the mission designer in our case) and can be used for helicopters' operations only.
- The YaDRO-1A is available in the Mi-8 and the Mi-24. So, if there are Ka-50's, the R-828 is better for helicopters' comms to have all three helicopters included.

MiG's have preset channels, hence the clarification on what channel they should use.

Basically, many aircraft on the server have radio systems with preset channels. Most players just dial through quickly and figure it out themselves. And it's always the same channel in all missions.

The rule where one should use the left side of taxiways and runways is only needed when an aircraft is coming up on your nose opposing your direction, so you don't collide with one another. You should follow the yellow line basically, and takeoff from the middle of the runway, but when many players are at an airbase, you need some sort of order. That's the only thought behind it.

You don't need to hover or follow ATC instructions or anything in that regard. It's up to each and every player if they want to experience some realism. Sometimes I do that, other times I just take off and fly over parked MiG's and away from the airbase. Just yesterday I performed a rolling landing at Kutaisi Airbase in the Mi-8. No one has to do that though Just have FUN, mate!

Post your questions any time, mate. Don't hesitate.

 

Cheers!

Hi Alpenwolf,

thank you very much for your quick and very detailed reply. Things are much clearer now and I think I will figure the rest out, just by trying and experience.

It is totally fine to expect  players to know the basics of their aircraft. I just asked about the radio channel, because the main radio, the R-863 , also has 

a number of preset channels available (which I think are also pre-set in the Editor) , you just have to toggle between manual tune or preset channels.

Thats why I thought, maybe one of those preset channels  is already tuned to the red frequency and this could be added to the Briefing. But manual tuning is fine too. 

Thanks again for your welcoming words! 

Hope you're well and kind regards,

Snappy

[Alpenwolf]

Just now, Snappy said:

Hi Alpenwolf,

thank you very much for your quick and very detailed reply. Things are much clearer now and I think I will figure the rest out, just by trying and experience.

It is totally fine to expect  players to know the basics of their aircraft. I just asked about the radio channel, because the main radio, the R-863 , also has 

a number of preset channels available (which I think are also pre-set in the Editor) , you just have to toggle between manual tune or preset channels.

Thats why I thought, maybe one of those preset channels  is already tuned to the red frequency and this could be added to the Briefing. But manual tuning is fine too. 

Thanks again for your welcoming words! 

Hope you're well and kind regards,

Snappy

You run into trouble, simply post your questions here. Other users quite often reply too and offer their help.

[Alpenwolf]

A NEW MISSION HAS ARRIVED!!!

Operation: Fast & Furious

* The mission runs as part of the daily server missions
* The mission will go online tonight and for the first time around 1900 zulu

 

Situation:

*** The mission lasts for 5 hours, unless the objective is completed ***

RED Bases: Adana Sakirpasa, FARP Podkova and a Road Base
BLUE Bases: Gazipasa, FARP Warsaw and a Road Base

- Each coalition is tasked with destroying enemy ground units at 3 different locations.
- At mission start Target Area Alpha is active for both sides independently.
- Once Alpha is completed, Bravo is activated.
- Once Bravo is completed, the last Target Area Charlie (the bullseye) is activated.
- The coalition destroying all enemy ground units at all three TA's first, is the winner!
- Light APC's and infantries at all TA's, and poorly skilled AAA's.
- Light tanks, 2 x MANPAD's and 1 x Strela-9/Chaparral at TA Charlie.
- Mi-8's and UH-1's have no CTLD tasking. Test your skills strafing ground units!
- All ground units are AI controlled and some of them are mobile.

* Be fast, be precise and unleash fury on enemy ground units before they finish their job striking friendly ground units.

 

Objectives For Both Coalitions Are The Same:

All Aircraft (helicopters included):

- Waypoint-1 is Target Area Alpha.
- Waypoint-2 is Target Area Bravo.
- Waypoint-3 is Target Area Charlie.

* You aircraft can test their air-to-ground skills.
* Fighters can and should intercept enemy strikers to protect friendly ground units.

 

RED Frequencies:

EWR / GCI: 124 MHz, channel 0 for MiG-21's and L-39's. Channel 2 for MiG-19's.
EWR-MiG-15 (callsign: 15): 4.95 MHz (tuned in by default)
FARP Podkova: 136 MHz

Road Base (Otkrytka): 125 MHz - Channel 11 for L-39's

ATC: 126 MHz

 

BLUE Objectives:

EWR / GCI: 251 MHz
ATC: 256 MHz
FARP Warsaw: 259 MHz

Road Base (Berlin): 260 MHz - Channel 3 for C-101's

 

[Admiral_ZIPANGU]

@Alpenwolf

I was playing Oil&Water just now, and it seems that the SA-5 on the Red side is too strong.
One Blue F-5E that was crawling at low altitude was shot down at a distance of 60 miles. Could you please review the airfield air defense on the Red side?
Also, it seems unfair to the Blue side that the Red side has both Ka-50s and Mi-24s. We on the Blue side managed to survive the offensive with our fighters, but it was too harsh for the Blue ground forces.

Edited November 26, 2021 by Admiral_ZIPANGU

[rogorogo]

may I ask - no one in particular - how the EWR map mission ended yesterday?
I felt disappointment that I had to leave right when it got really interesting, and the swarms of SRAA-HMMVs & Bradleys were starting to move under JTAC supervision in overlapping groups.

I feel like I missed the best part, since it meant dangers & surprises and challenging ground units beyond the obvious anytime and anywhere to encounter.

Also - just a sight to behold. The dust-columns alone

Edited November 26, 2021 by rogorogo

[Alpenwolf]

1 hour ago, Admiral_ZIPANGU said:

@Alpenwolf

I was playing Oil&Water just now, and it seems that the SA-5 on the Red side is too strong.
One Blue F-5E that was crawling at low altitude was shot down at a distance of 60 miles. Could you please review the airfield air defense on the Red side?
Also, it seems unfair to the Blue side that the Red side has both Ka-50s and Mi-24s. We on the Blue side managed to survive the offensive with our fighters, but it was too harsh for the Blue ground forces.

 

I could remove the SA-5, no problem. With that, the only mission that will still have the SA-5 is Disturbed Pacific. Two reasons: 1- To counter Blue warships firing missiles at MiG's from afar. 2- Once the SA-5 at Rota Island (bullseye) is destroyed by Blue (which is one of the objectives), the Reds are down to 1 x SA-5 SAM site at Guam Island which is 70-80 km further south.

As to the helicopters, you have more tanks than Red and more Avengers than the Reds have Strelas. In addition, the Mistral Gazelles are added to hunt Red helicopters down and they do well every session. It's a very asymmetric balance and I've always been fan of that. Not saying that I always get it right. Asymmetry brings loads of challenges with it.
On a side note, Blue managed to win the mission once so far and Red not even close.

I could remove the Ka-50's in the future while reducing the amount of Abrams, but not so significantly. After all, Mi-24's carry more ATGM's than the Gazelle M does.

44 minutes ago, rogorogo said:

may I ask - no one in particular - how the EWR map mission ended yesterday?
I felt disappointment that I had to leave right when it got really interesting, and the swarms of SRAA-HMMVs & Bradleys were starting to move under JTAC supervision in overlapping groups.

I feel like I missed the best part, since it meant dangers & surprises and challenging ground units beyond the obvious anytime and anywhere to encounter.

Also - just a sight to behold. The dust-columns alone

 

We were still struggling with EWR-2 because Mike-Delta, Miccara and others deployed at least 10 x Avengers in that area The_Tau was the last remaining Blue player. He took an F-5 and quickly destroyed the Red EWR-4 and got the job done. 10-20 minutes later we would've got it done. Was close and intense.

The way the mission played out yesterday highlights once again the importance of the Combined Arms module and how unpredictable and dynamic things can be. I know that things aren't always like that because we don't always have GCI operators, but the way I see it it's rather becoming better. After all, it was almost just me who played with CA back in the day when I first started hosting and implementing the module. We're obviously in a better spot these days with more and more CA players finding joy in the module. As to that, thanks to the players and their patience with me. I know I push too much sometimes, but it's always in an attempt to get the most out of this sim

[rossmum]

5 hours ago, Admiral_ZIPANGU said:

@Alpenwolf

I was playing Oil&Water just now, and it seems that the SA-5 on the Red side is too strong.
One Blue F-5E that was crawling at low altitude was shot down at a distance of 60 miles. Could you please review the airfield air defense on the Red side?
Also, it seems unfair to the Blue side that the Red side has both Ka-50s and Mi-24s. We on the Blue side managed to survive the offensive with our fighters, but it was too harsh for the Blue ground forces.

That honestly doesn't really look that low to me... he's well clear of terrain, was evidently even higher since he's descending quite sharply, and the radar has direct line of sight. The system is also SARH so he would have had a non-stop lock warning and the launches are very smoky, even if the sustainer motor is not.

F-5 pilots will have to learn to deal with the new threat, and adapt. The number of times I watched them fly face-first, at high altitude, into the S-200s on Disturbed Pacific was quite frankly astonishing. If people don't want to learn how to use/read their RWR and expect to survive threats by not reacting until several minutes too late, I dunno what to tell you.

Edited November 26, 2021 by rossmum

[Alpenwolf]

26 minutes ago, rossmum said:

That honestly doesn't really look that low to me... he's well clear of terrain, was evidently even higher since he's descending quite sharply, and the radar has direct line of sight. The system is also SARH so he would have had a non-stop lock warning and the launches are very smoky, even if the sustainer motor is not.

F-5 pilots will have to learn to deal with the new threat, and adapt. The number of times I watched them fly face-first, at high altitude, into the S-200s on Disturbed Pacific was quite frankly astonishing. If people don't want to learn how to use/read their RWR and expect to survive threats by not reacting until several minutes too late, I dunno what to tell you.

 

Couldn't agree more, ross, and you know it.

I'll see what I can do. Maybe move the SA-5's further north or something.

[rogorogo]

vor 15 Stunden schrieb Alpenwolf:

I could remove the SA-5, no problem. With that, the only mission that will still have the SA-5 is Disturbed Pacific. Two reasons: 1- To counter Blue warships firing missiles at MiG's from afar. 2- Once the SA-5 at Rota Island (bullseye) is destroyed by Blue (which is one of the objectives), the Reds are down to 1 x SA-5 SAM site at Guam Island which is 70-80 km further south.

As to the helicopters, you have more tanks than Red and more Avengers than the Reds have Strelas. In addition, the Mistral Gazelles are added to hunt Red helicopters down and they do well every session. It's a very asymmetric balance and I've always been fan of that. Not saying that I always get it right. Asymmetry brings loads of challenges with it.
On a side note, Blue managed to win the mission once so far and Red not even close.

I could remove the Ka-50's in the future while reducing the amount of Abrams, but not so significantly. After all, Mi-24's carry more ATGM's than the Gazelle M does.

We were still struggling with EWR-2 because Mike-Delta, Miccara and others deployed at least 10 x Avengers in that area The_Tau was the last remaining Blue player. He took an F-5 and quickly destroyed the Red EWR-4 and got the job done. 10-20 minutes later we would've got it done. Was close and intense.

The way the mission played out yesterday highlights once again the importance of the Combined Arms module and how unpredictable and dynamic things can be. I know that things aren't always like that because we don't always have GCI operators, but the way I see it it's rather becoming better. After all, it was almost just me who played with CA back in the day when I first started hosting and implementing the module. We're obviously in a better spot these days with more and more CA players finding joy in the module. As to that, thanks to the players and their patience with me. I know I push too much sometimes, but it's always in an attempt to get the most out of this sim

Was the mystery of the abduction of Blue 4 by aliens in the beginning ever brought to closure  ?

I SAR-patterned its location are 6+times and I had seen it before in a Mig-21 in an earlier mission - but all I was presented with... was sand, sand, and more sand, and villages with supermarket parking lots.
No EWR group, no dispersed AA, nothing but sand and sandy beaches...
And we know the aliens gave us Blue 4 back since it got destroyed later... but still.. just odd.
Moreso since I would normally blame my client and my - far beyond geriatric - system but all other assets were present all the time.

And yes, CA is a very relevant addition to the experience, by mitigation of long omissions by the product provider alone  but also by just adding a human element and unpredictability to ground assets (positioning, application, mobility, intentions, changing plans, reactive and proactive everything).
 

[Zachrix]

On 11/27/2021 at 3:13 AM, rogorogo said:

Was the mystery of the abduction of Blue 4 by aliens in the beginning ever brought to closure  ?

I SAR-patterned its location are 6+times and I had seen it before in a Mig-21 in an earlier mission - but all I was presented with... was sand, sand, and more sand, and villages with supermarket parking lots.
No EWR group, no dispersed AA, nothing but sand and sandy beaches...
And we know the aliens gave us Blue 4 back since it got destroyed later... but still.. just odd.
Moreso since I would normally blame my client and my - far beyond geriatric - system but all other assets were present all the time.

And yes, CA is a very relevant addition to the experience, by mitigation of long omissions by the product provider alone  but also by just adding a human element and unpredictability to ground assets (positioning, application, mobility, intentions, changing plans, reactive and proactive everything).
 

I swear it requires Shakespeare's reading comprehension to understand you my austrian friend.

[Apok]

Battle over Sukhumi unleashed:
This mission always turns into attrition warfare. Red is fighting a 3D printer at blue farp. Last time we did well and still couldn't destroy as much as they deploy.
Is it possible to have a limit on the amount of stuff you can print? Or at least have custom made farp. So it can be cratered with bombs? Currently pads are elevated so no amount of big bombs will do anything to it.
This mission is very fun once it moves from that bottleneck.

Edited November 29, 2021 by Apok

[Alpenwolf]

1 hour ago, Apok said:

Battle over Sukhumi unleashed:
This mission always turns into attrition warfare. Red is fighting a 3D printer at blue tarp. Last time we did well and still couldn't destroy as much as they deploy.
Is it possible to have a limit on the amount of stuff you can print? Or at least have custom made farp. So it can be cratered with bombs? Currently pads are elevated so no amount of big bombs will do anything to it.
This mission is very fun once it moves from that bottleneck.

Limiting the amount of deployable crates is a possibility and a good idea. Will do!

[Ian Boys UK]

Flying Fast and Furious with a bunch of Hinds tonight was fun!

[Alpenwolf]

Just now, Ian Boys UK said:

Flying Fast and Furious with a bunch of Hinds tonight was fun!

You guys won it?

[Ian Boys UK]

1 hour ago, Alpenwolf said:

You guys won it?

Couldn't stay to the end. We did A easily then 98% of B when I had to go.

 

[The_Tau]

On 11/26/2021 at 8:11 PM, Alpenwolf said:

 

We were still struggling with EWR-2 because Mike-Delta, Miccara and others deployed at least 10 x Avengers in that area The_Tau was the last remaining Blue player. He took an F-5 and quickly destroyed the Red EWR-4 and got the job done. 10-20 minutes later we would've got it done. Was close and intense.

Those Sa13s almost got me, I did some mistakes on my attack approach, was in hurry, I was not sure how close you were killing our last EWR ;). And I loaded HE gun ammo for some reason, so when I run out of all other ordinance I was praying for my HE to be even able to kill that last Sa13 remaining. Really stressful, but what a satisfaction in the end

[Apok]

Is it possible to maybe add spawnable Cold war planes as a result for one/some of objectives completed?

Example:

Red EWR no.1 blownup spawns 2 F-4 on fightersweep mission, or doing something to blue spawns 2 MiG-23s. GS server had those. While it dont change anything mission wise it just ads stuff to go for when low player numbers are on. Weapons can always be limited to Aim9/R60s if ppl complain about BVR ones.

Or it can be other way round. If one side is dominant and did like most of objectives while other didnt even one then underdog side gets its spawn.

Also we could see planes that are not yet created as a modules. Nothing massive or mission changing, just to spice things.

 

Edited November 30, 2021 by Apok

[Alpenwolf]

1 hour ago, Apok said:

Is it possible to maybe add spawnable Cold war planes as a result for one/some of objectives completed?

Example:

Red EWR no.1 blownup spawns 2 F-4 on fightersweep mission, or doing something to blue spawns 2 MiG-23s. GS server had those. While it dont change anything mission wise it just ads stuff to go for when low player numbers are on. Weapons can always be limited to Aim9/R60s if ppl complain about BVR ones.

Or it can be other way round. If one side is dominant and did like most of objectives while other didnt even one then underdog side gets its spawn.

Also we could see planes that are not yet created as a modules. Nothing massive or mission changing, just to spice things.

 

 

Man, Apok, you kind of read my thoughts a bit...

While I was designing the mission Oil & Water I had 2 x MiG-23's and 2 x F-4's, even with BVR weapons onboard. I ran some tests with those and everything was fine until a few days later a DCS update was released and caused some issues to the MiG-23's flight path. I couldn't figure out why, but they kept flying back to the home base and never got into any fights. I checked out their waypoints and advanced options and everything was good. The point is, the more AI, the more trouble. And when having so many missions (my own handmade curse) fixing any tiny issue becomes a big deal when doing it in so many missions. There are quite a few things I would love to implement, but always reluctant to do because of that.

That being said, I'd love to hear what other players think about having the two aircraft involved in maybe one mission. Maybe a big mission like When The Mountains Cry or Battle Over Sukhumi Unleashed? Personally, I'd rather not have the AI implemented, except for AI bombers as it is the case in some missions, but if players want to see that for a change, then I could do it in one mission of your choice.

[The_Tau]

15 hours ago, Alpenwolf said:

Man, Apok, you kind of read my thoughts a bit...

While I was designing the mission Oil & Water I had 2 x MiG-23's and 2 x F-4's, even with BVR weapons onboard. I ran some tests with those and everything was fine until a few days later a DCS update was released and caused some issues to the MiG-23's flight path. I couldn't figure out why, but they kept flying back to the home base and never got into any fights. I checked out their waypoints and advanced options and everything was good. The point is, the more AI, the more trouble. And when having so many missions (my own handmade curse) fixing any tiny issue becomes a big deal when doing it in so many missions. There are quite a few things I would love to implement, but always reluctant to do because of that.

That being said, I'd love to hear what other players think about having the two aircraft involved in maybe one mission. Maybe a big mission like When The Mountains Cry or Battle Over Sukhumi Unleashed? Personally, I'd rather not have the AI implemented, except for AI bombers as it is the case in some missions, but if players want to see that for a change, then I could do it in one mission of your choice.

Actually I would love more AI planes, like Alpha strike or more B52 with some token escort or F4s (MiG27s?) on bomb run, Vietnam Style.

[SturmVogel]

Hi all, I would like to make some suggestions for missions on the server to Alpenwolf.

In the modern missions (like a "When the mountains cry") F-14 overpowered in terms of BVR weapons (6 AIM-7 vs 2 R-27 at MiG-29A in named mission, for example). It doesn`t matter (only 2 slot for 4th Gen) when server online 30 players, but very important when 5 players, this is completely broke gameplay for F-5/MiG-21 players.
Some suggestions:

-accept WVR weapons for 4th Gen aircraft (excluding R-73) and ban all BVR (AIM-7 and R-27) for more dogfights (it`s key feature of this server, I think) and no hurting for F-5/MiG-21 pilots, which can`t answer for BVR missiles (F-14 can spam it);

-ban Su-27, cause he can`t carry R-60;

In some missions (like a "When the SturmVogelmountains cry") MiG-21 overpowered and can carry 6 WVR mis., but blue side F-5/AJS-37 only 2. Suggest to accept AJS-37 6 WVR and BK90 mis. for answer MiG-21 (which, for a minute, carry Flares and Guns in 6 WVR mis. configuration, unlike AJS-37).

Instead of conclusion: I have all this aircrafts and can speak from position of every named here aircrafts, thx all, fly safe o7

 

PS Statistics will be great feature for this server)

PPS Alpenwolf, I can help you with redacting of missions and statistic server

 

[rogorogo]

Am 30.11.2021 um 19:48 schrieb Alpenwolf:

Man, Apok, you kind of read my thoughts a bit...

While I was designing the mission Oil & Water I had 2 x MiG-23's and 2 x F-4's, even with BVR weapons onboard. I ran some tests with those and everything was fine until a few days later a DCS update was released and caused some issues to the MiG-23's flight path. I couldn't figure out why, but they kept flying back to the home base and never got into any fights. I checked out their waypoints and advanced options and everything was good. The point is, the more AI, the more trouble. And when having so many missions (my own handmade curse) fixing any tiny issue becomes a big deal when doing it in so many missions. There are quite a few things I would love to implement, but always reluctant to do because of that.

That being said, I'd love to hear what other players think about having the two aircraft involved in maybe one mission. Maybe a big mission like When The Mountains Cry or Battle Over Sukhumi Unleashed? Personally, I'd rather not have the AI implemented, except for AI bombers as it is the case in some missions, but if players want to see that for a change, then I could do it in one mission of your choice.

well.. as an occasional participant of... questionable.... competence taking advantage of this server I am the last person that should type suggestions... BUT.. I am Austrian and we can not not have an opinion on anything (see.. that is what you get when you take our toy-empire of KaKanien away instead of letting us ruin it and ourselves  ).
Thus typed...

Given what knowledge of the engine, the product and the entire suite I have for the moment I think the serverrrunner is absolutely right with his hesistance to use more AI. It is a matter of performance.

Bombers on the other hand seem to have the least impact and work somewhat reliably lately from what I gather.

So would an inclusion of bomber flights (more than 1 airframe) on and for BOTH SIDES (for clarity, so both B-52 flights AND Tu-142/Tu-22 flights with maybe suitable AI escorts of airframe types we normally do not get to see )in the mission, and a dynamic situational trigger as outlined by Apok be an easier to reach goal?
Moreso since it would also have the addidional impact of adding/enhancing gameplay loops (no matter which population numbers and in what dissemination are on the map):

• Interceptors like the Mig-21 can actually intercept (with GCI if Magic is online)
• multirole fighters like the F-5 can enjoy escort duties (with GCI if Merlin is online)
• Everyone may see some as of yet omitted modules (of F-4, why Eagle, why.. smh) at least as AI (used as escort and AI CAS)
• it helps break up a little the dogma of pure "tactial" fixed wing operation (CAS, Anti-CAS, lookdown) for higher angels AO variety
• Some weapons that do not work reliably tho this day (yet, we hope, see R27 standards for all modules instead of per module, see AIM9 standards) could see more use (fe R3R) in mixed loadouts fe
• Bombers should do some actual damage on actual targets, making them not scenery but something that has to be considered and reacted to

I am also stressing the bomber issue as the upcoming EE Lightning (whenever and if that module sees the light of day) will be a mid/latecycle bigbell(y) version perfectly fitting the era and giving Blue also a pure interceptor, and the 21 an almost perfect mirror airframe (as it is duly missing an early F-4 variant as a FF module dancing partner since the dark ages, but a mid to late lighting is actually an even better fit, really).

Thus both sides would have actual interceptor loops available, not only against AI bombers but also against fighters -> PvA.

But, as typed before, if it can be made to work, of course small flights of small fixed-wings would be nice, too.

As for "statistics", as typed by someone else. From my PoV I can understand where this is coming from - but I would like to utter a word of caution.

While it seems logical and common sense, it would mean a lot of effort (aka a website) and it would also inevitably have unintenden byproducts this server and this server-population would like to and should avoid at all cost.
Of which the "cult of the liederbored" (not a typo  ) would be the least of the issues (let us leave it at that).
A simple serverwebsite showing the current mission, map and briefing dynamically on the other hand and "maybe" extremely carefully chosen and curated considerate statistics naturally would go a long way to enhance the experience.

But again - this is just an observation, another angle for consideration - all of it and just that.

Edited December 1, 2021 by rogorogo

[Admiral_ZIPANGU]

3 hours ago, SturmVogel said:

In the modern missions (like a "When the mountains cry") F-14 overpowered in terms of BVR weapons (6 AIM-7 vs 2 R-27 at MiG-29A in named mission, for example). It doesn`t matter (only 2 slot for 4th Gen) when server online 30 players, but very important when 5 players, this is completely broke gameplay for F-5/MiG-21 players.
Some suggestions:

-accept WVR weapons for 4th Gen aircraft (excluding R-73) and ban all BVR (AIM-7 and R-27) for more dogfights (it`s key feature of this server, I think) and no hurting for F-5/MiG-21 pilots, which can`t answer for BVR missiles (F-14 can spam it);

-ban Su-27, cause he can`t carry R-60;

I agree that we need to rethink the nature of the F-14A and MiG-29A. But I also think that the few BVR opportunities on this server can sometimes be an interesting factor.
My suggestion would be to limit the number of AIM-7s on the F-14A to a maximum of two, and only allow fuselage pylons to be mounted, which would be 2BVR + 4WVR, which I think would be fair to the MiG-29A.

 

3 hours ago, SturmVogel said:

In some missions (like a "When the SturmVogelmountains cry") MiG-21 overpowered and can carry 6 WVR mis., but blue side F-5/AJS-37 only 2. Suggest to accept AJS-37 6 WVR and BK90 mis. for answer MiG-21 (which, for a minute, carry Flares and Guns in 6 WVR mis. configuration, unlike AJS-37).

In this regard, I think the MiG-21bis should increase the number of things it has to intercept instead of being able to carry more AAMs. For example, if there is an AI B-52 or F-4E coming to bomb a FARP or base from high altitude, Red must go to intercept it. Red's interceptors will chase away Blue's carpet-bombing planes, reminiscent of the Vietnam War during the Cold War.

Blue F-5Es and AJS37s, on the other hand, will be able to choose from a variety of actions, such as going on ground attacks or escorting bombers. This way, we may not have to worry so much about Blue's lack of AAMs. (I am eagerly awaiting the addition of the MirageF1 module.)

 

In short, what I would like to propose are these two things.

"Adjust the number of BVR missiles on board.
"Fly the AI bombers on the Blue side and let the MiG-21bis consume the missiles."

 

I think this constructive flow of discussion is wonderful.

Edited December 1, 2021 by Admiral_ZIPANGU