Jump to content

Cold War 1947 - 1991


Alpenwolf

Recommended Posts

16 minutes ago, Admiral_ZIPANGU said:

The Blue side will enter a new era this year...

PHANTOM FOREVER

Cant wait, to be demolished by some MIG-21 pilot!

 

MY SYSTEM SPECS: Hardware Intel pentium 3 @ 800 MHz, 256 Mb RAM, Geforce 2 64Mb, Dell screen 1024x768 + Microsoft sidewhiner joystick + TrackIR 2 + TrackClitPro SOFTWARE: Microsoft Windows 98, Noice Attack & VIASAT PRO, SnackView

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is not in the distant future, but this year. Later this year, air combat on this server will become more exciting.
In my country, the F-4EJ/EJ Kai was retired last March. I am sure I will be flying in my country's Liveries. My dream is expanding.

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

If the F4 beats the MiG-23 to release, REDFOR might be in for a roller coaster... F5, F1, and F4 vs MiG-21 and 19. We might have to donate them the F1 once the F4 gets released to hold them over until the 23 arrives. ofc this is very far away.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

At least some missions. Like we can simulate Iran-Iraq War, thats literally our current Alpen's Cold War Meta in RL ;). Total War in 80s with limited weaponry with diverse types of targets with MiG-17 (soon™), 19, 21, 23(maybe?), 29, F1, Su-25, Mi-8, 24, gazelle, even L39 (!) vs F-5E, F-4, F-14A, UH-1s, AH-1s (Cobraaas pls!)

Ground equipment T-55s 62s vs Chieftans and M60s, SA6s vs HAWKs.

Crazy

shame that we dont get Iraq map...


Edited by The_Tau
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never ever watched a DCS trailer and was so surprised and speechless. And I'm for sure not the type to ever be speechless!

The Cold War 1947-1991 server will embrace the Phantom, hug it, kiss it, drool all over it and never let go!

Godspeed, Heatblur!

  • Like 5
  • 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

Server News:

Operation Phone Booth has been updated. Here's the change log.

- In addition, the weather has been changed. It's now snowy, cold, partially clouded, foggy and turbulent.
- The mission is currently online, therefore, the update will be included next time it goes online.

Updating more missions is on the way, just bear with me, please. Family and work come in between.

 

Operation Search & Destroy:
The mission kicks off this Friday, 28.01.2022, around 1900 zulu.

  • Like 3
  • 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

1 hour ago, Alpenwolf said:

I've never ever watched a DCS trailer and was so surprised and speechless. And I'm for sure not the type to ever be speechless!

The Cold War 1947-1991 server will embrace the Phantom, hug it, kiss it, drool all over it and never let go!

Godspeed, Heatblur!

Alpen...they borrowed nozzles for that video. Whole thing is not in dcs.

But they sure know how to hype.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, Get_Lo said:

If the F4 beats the MiG-23 to release, REDFOR might be in for a roller coaster... F5, F1, and F4 vs MiG-21 and 19. We might have to donate them the F1 once the F4 gets released to hold them over until the 23 arrives. ofc this is very far away.

F-4E has no lookdown and isn't much of a BFM monster. I would suggest people manage their expectations severely... the Phantom is going to be a worse dogfighter than the F-5 in the horizontal, and its advantages in the vertical against an early 21 largely cease to exist against a 21bis. Its load factor limitations in air to air config are even lower than those of the F-5. As the server meta is already very heavily skewed towards low altitude, the Phantoms are not going to have a very fun time in air to air combat. They'll be fantastic bomb trucks, though. Red will not need the F1 (and the F1 itself is likely going to be a lot less than people are hyping it up to be as well, though I don't have performance figures I can trust for it, so that's just a guess right now).

I have doubts on a 2022 delivery for the Phantom, but we'll see. I've learnt never to trust DCS release dates, especially third party ones.

As for the reds... we haven't had many of our usual GCIs on for some time, mainly because they've moved on from DCS or just shifted focus to other eras within it. It can make it frustrating and so probably not as many of them are bothering to turn up. Unfortunately experienced and committed GCIs are few and far between, but the population still gets back up there once a few red regulars hop on and it'll flow back over time I think.

Anyway, what I came here to post... please do not use the tac commander role unless you are actually moving ground units. I know most of you guys in the thread don't need to be told, but I'd like to repeat it just in case. The other day I had to kick someone for sitting in a tac comm slot while neither being on comms nor using it to advance the ground war, and it isn't something I particularly enjoy doing and it wastes everyone's time. If you just want to GCI or drive a single unit around, use JTAC, that's what the slots are there for.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would hope that people and fellow digital fake pilots are exited for what the F-4E (with agile eagle retrofits) is and for what it is not.

It will finally be a correct dancing partner/match/adversary for the Mig-21.

It has capabilities, character and limtiations..

It also is an era and period correct asset according to the Q&A, explicity stating for once that the DMAS version will be a separate airframe within the same module, next to the agile eagle retrofit airframe.

It is in character a BFM brute (maybe even the last of them), it mainly thrusts, and accidentally also flies and thanks to the nosejob is also can pew-pew, a transitionary aiframe. 

But so is the 21, just with a different concept (fe far heavier GCI reliant).

And neither of which could thus far be actually utilized, because DCS as a product makes it extremely difficult to provide the proper scenario cage for it.
As long as the battlefield cannot be populated as it would be technically possible (cough.. waypoint mentality vs background LOS/proximity globes with dormancy, multicore, authoritative services aso aso aso aso aso) paired with approach legs that are 150 seconds (none of which is anyones "fault".. that are necessities by product realities and by human nature and time allocation of he limited good of me time), it wil always be extremely difficult to encourage a proper experience organically.

If there were proper means available (which - again - technically would have been possible for almost a decade by now) teamwork would also not be far more relevant because of the lack of fixed hotzones but by also breaking up any altitude centroids by sheer neccessity and diversity. But that is not the case, and will not be for quite a while longer.

Put the tendency of "airquaking", "gamer mentality" and "meta" (🤮)  as a sprinkle on top and there is a steep task for anyone trying to provide a diverse loop-scenario and era experience in DCS MP. Not helped by the fact that Eagle themselves is culturally.... "special". Lest we forget that they favour and cater creatures that in surprising uniformity regularly effluviate statements (on audio, on video, in typing) like "I don't care about missions 'n stuff, I just wanna shoot at things "  while pretending the opposite with their servers whose proxies enact hardcore crowding-out playerbase-mining despite being lowest-denominator arenas (nothing wrong with that - for those that seek this loop, it is the perfect environment for loop fulfillment and should exist) at peak social media cringe (adtults with the right to vote vyying for the adoration and worship by the underage and the intellectually minor 🤦‍♂️). But this janiformity has always existed and was always enacted, only the medium applied and the methodology iterates (again, human nature.. not good or bad.. it just is a reality).

So yes, in outcome you will still see tigers bunnyhop around, with their wrong RWR array and many other things - but at least not-only tigers with a sprinkle of smoerebröd-ufo.. 
I mean, just a few days ago I flew around in my Viggen, since for once numbers allowed me to do so. I had completely forgotten how it works (and no, I never press "E", it is the button for w***s) and it did end accordingly (as if it ever would not 🤪).

But I did come across a Mig-29 (A, I hope). It had me long tracked on EO (as it should), in lookdown, and did a proper single pulse IFF check (as it should, and since I know who it was I would have excpected no less 😉 ).
Single.pulse.IFF.check... and my RWR went chirp-chirp. and I not only knew what was going on and where but looking there had me not only visually aquire but also enjoy the steamy cloud of impending doom by launch transition (note2self: you may want remember to bring the CM pod when going sightseeing without a customized datasette... you absolute r***d 🤪).

Which shows how great the AJS is - but the AJ would have not insta-processed this information this way this quickly from a single.pulse.IFF.check.

But again, as the Phantom (later maybe a naval module as per Q&A) will be available as an era and period correct item, there will be also those that will just enjoy the fidelity - from 2025 onwards.
And suitable, period-correct, fidelic modules are one step to encourage players to play the scenario, to enjoy the unique aspects of the era and the airframes visceral experiences and limitations. They also help shift out-scope loops to organically take place closer or withing the scenario.

And maybe one day Eagle might introduce practices and methodology in PM, franchise standardization and product for market game-design (and as a combat flight simulator DCS very much is a gaming product by industry and character), apart from sensibly populating their playable asset scope - and it only took them 15 years to understand that and that actual sales sells more in numbers and profit, while creating retention and seeding expansion, and also accept the fact that PvA is the future, for everything, and "gamemasters" (if a product provider defaults and offhands that role to its consumers) need systemic and proper tools and tools to set boundaries for what the product can do.. not wonky hodgepode by lua.
And then we can all enjoy DCS even more. DCS and world peace ;).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe update the server?😕

MY SYSTEM SPECS: Hardware Intel pentium 3 @ 800 MHz, 256 Mb RAM, Geforce 2 64Mb, Dell screen 1024x768 + Microsoft sidewhiner joystick + TrackIR 2 + TrackClitPro SOFTWARE: Microsoft Windows 98, Noice Attack & VIASAT PRO, SnackView

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, MMI_Grim said:

Maybe improve your tone while asking someone to tweak something on his free to play server ...in his sparetime?

All good, mate. No offense taken 😅

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

7 hours ago, Alpenwolf said:

Done.

It was actually meant as a joke, the update had been out for like 1 hr when i wrote that thing.

  • Like 1

MY SYSTEM SPECS: Hardware Intel pentium 3 @ 800 MHz, 256 Mb RAM, Geforce 2 64Mb, Dell screen 1024x768 + Microsoft sidewhiner joystick + TrackIR 2 + TrackClitPro SOFTWARE: Microsoft Windows 98, Noice Attack & VIASAT PRO, SnackView

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Apok said:

Can we disable isometric view for Combined arms? Its a bit cheatish because it enables players to see over the obstacles they wouldn't be able to see from vehicle. 

 

True. I'll check it out.

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

In real life you'd either get the infantry you have with you to go climb on something and look, or get out of the tank and do it yourself. It's honestly not that big a deal and it's the only thing that makes driving various vehicles (given DCS ground physics and Stalinium trees) bearable.

I'll be away from home for somewhere between "a few days" and a week, starting tomorrow, so hopefully nothing explodes between now and then that Alpen isn't around for 😅


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

20 minutes ago, rossmum said:

...

... so hopefully nothing explodes between now and then that Alpen isn't around for 😅

 

😅


Edited by Alpenwolf

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

vor 1 Stunde schrieb rossmum:

In real life you'd either get the infantry you have with you to go climb on something and look, or get out of the tank and do it yourself.

While DCS' atrocious issues are an unfortunate reality - this statement about "real life" is a little bit... well... not how this works... or should work.. for a few, more than just a few decades by now, not by the timeframe the server tries to represent.
Unless all involved have/had a pronounced communal deathwish.
Not for amour, MBTs, TDVs, MGSs... nor for mechanized, APCs, IFVs, AFVs....

How big of a deal the issue raised "is" in the context of DCS's multiplayer reality could only be determined by empiric data that are statistically significant, which will never be available, despite not actually requiring that large of a sample. 
For the context of this server it can actually make all the difference though (imho ofc, cellular, subjective, subject to my personal biases of confirmation and preference counteweighed by my individual capability to be intersubjective only to an undetermined summary gradient) - so it actually "is" a "big deal" less in the context of "fidelity" but more in the scope of "loop co-existence and interaction viablity".
It might be prudent to remember economics 101's prisoner dilemma and create the organic environmental ruleset based on the outliers, the excessions, and the defaults - not on an idealized notion of a voluntary consensus that is systemically impossible.
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Apok said:

Can we disable isometric view for Combined arms? Its a bit cheatish because it enables players to see over the obstacles they wouldn't be able to see from vehicle. 

 

Just finished playing around with Combined Arms with the isometric view being disabled.

If you're driving a vehicle of any type, you're limited to only seeing what's ahead of you. You'd have to rotate the turret or the gun around to check out your surroundings, and that's in general a very slow process depending on the speed of that turret or gun.

I don't mind the isometric view as it acts as if the tank commander is peaking out of the hatch. What I don't like about it, and that's where I agree with you, is the zooming feature of it. And that's something that can't be disabled.

If more CA players would want me to disable the isometric view I can't see why not.

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...