Cold War 1947 - 1991

[Alpenwolf]

The Ka-50 is early 80's. The Vikhr missiles were also introduced in the 80's. And I did say the Mi-24 will replace the Ka-50 is some missions rather than being added to the Red roster. We talked about the Viggen's arsenal multiple times and I had a user translating articles for me from Swedish into English regarding the matter. We also talked about the Harrier more than any other module. The list goes on so not sure why we keep bringing up these issues.

It's always about trying to make things as realistic as possible with the options and modules at hand, WHILE never neglecting the FUN factor in all this. Therefore, some features will always be off the line. And in time features/modules will replace features/modules.

[metzger]

Ми-24 would be really nice addition to the server. KA-50 feels a bit too modern even tho completely defenseless.

 

Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk

[rossmum]

The Ka-50 didn't actually reach initial operational capability until the mid 90s. First flight was in '82 but like many late Soviet aviation programs, and especially ones that were heavily reliant on automation of systems, it took a long time to work out the kinks and pay for production to begin. Likewise, the Su-33 dragged on beyond the end of the USSR before hitting IOC, and the Su-25T was built in high single/low double digits before being quickly abandoned for something cheaper.

 

Personally I wouldn't say the Ka-50 is too capable (versus, say, AV-8B which does have issues), but in terms of timeframe, it should be replaced by the Mi-24 when that arrives. There's a lot of 'timeline creep' in DCS, part of it comes from modules tending to be the most capable version of an aircraft, and part of it just comes from popular memory not being 100% accurate. A lot of people will take the belief that the AIM-120, R-77, and even R-27ER/ET are "Cold War" missiles to their grave despite the fact the ER/ET only appeared the year before the USSR collapsed and the AMRAAM only towards the end of 1991.

Edited June 15, 2020 by rossmum

[Tolovay]

Not quite sure why you involve irl here at all when we are speaking only about dcs so take it easy.

Speaking about dcs, we already met multiple times in the server and from what I see, if Alpenwolf introduce some sort of limited lives, you ain't be flying very long before run out of lives :D

 

Sent from my Redmi 4 using Tapatalk

 

Haha, guess what? Being good pilot as you in PC world is worthless skill in real life so give me a break showing virtual muscles :D. I realy don't care how many time will I die in virtual world.

[Alpenwolf]

Server News:

 

* All warehouses in all missions are now fixed.

* The mission Open Range replaces the mission Phone booth in the server's rotation list.

 

 

Open Range:

- Mission's time is now 5 hours instead of 4.

- MiG-29's and M-2000C's were added and must be activated (check out the briefing for Mi-8's and UH-1's).

- More ground units can now be deployed.

- The weather has been changed from rainy autumn to clear summer.

 

 

 

* I believe this is the first time Phone booth is out of the rotation ever.

[Raviar]

is that possible to add A-10C as there is already A-10A?

can you please install LotATC on the server ?

[Tolovay]

No argument there from me! I don't think the Ka-50 or the Su-25T should be on the server, at least not with Vikhrs.

 

Additionally, the AV-8B in DCS is an early 2000s version. The biggest problem* with the Harrier is the HUD-integrated RWR: it far surpasses anything else on the server and can hunt down MiGs just from their radars. And since it's "hardwired" into the plane, you can't disable the functionality like with the weapons. But it is what it is...

 

*Well, aside from the unrealistic effectiveness of the Sidearm, but that's a Razbam/ED problem that will never change.

 

Devils never used radar on migs cause it is uselles. As the matter of fact, all that I know and know how to fly, don't use migs radar. :pilotfly:

[rossmum]

is that possible to add A-10C as there is already A-10A?

can you please install LotATC on the server ?

 

The A-10C is too capable for the server and doesn't fit the time frame. This is a Cold War server with a mostly 70s/80s planeset, not a 90s/00s planeset. There are some outliers to this time period, but they're there as placeholders - there's nothing the A-10C needs to hold a place for as we already have the (period-correct) A to use.

 

Devils never used radar on migs cause it is uselles. As the matter of fact, all that I know and know how to fly, don't use migs radar. :pilotfly:

 

The MiG-21's radar is far from useless, you can spot people sometimes in turns or as they pop over ridges, can use it to IFF contacts and orient yourself in a fight, and if blue take to flying high I like to slap them with R-3Rs. Most blue players seem to either ignore their RWR or turn it off, because they usually don't react to being locked and assume any missile shot at them is a heater.

 

Any time I expect combat my radar goes on right away.

 

Alpen - I had some severe (and I mean, one frame every two seconds) FPS drop while looking anywhere near the western end of the blue-held town on Two Towns last night. Not sure what it was and it's the first time I've ever had trouble on that mission, performance-wise, and I don't know if the mission's been adjusted recently. I'll have to see if it happens again next time or if it was just a weird fluke.

 

Also, I know the Harrier has the 9M because that's all it can use, but can't the A-10A carry the 9P5? I've noticed the A-10s are carrying 9Ms in at least a few of the missions and those things almost never go for flares, compared to anything else in use by either team.

[NELLUS]

I've noticed the A-10s are carrying 9Ms in at least a few of the missions and those things almost never go for flares, compared to anything else in use by either team.

 

The A10 is extremely slow, and even if the missile is all aspect it almost never catches up with the faster opponents. It takes allot out of the missile to get up to speed, and then try to catch up.

[rossmum]

Every time I've seen an A-10 get a hit, it's been fairly close range. They should be using them as self-defence, which doesn't require running down a transonic or supersonic MiG - usually the shots are quite close on a MiG that either hasn't seen you, or has overshot and is coming in for another pass. Frankly the 9M shouldn't be around at all, but until the Harrier goes away we're going to have to deal with people using the Harrier as an air to air platform purely because it has the best missile and a broken damage model. I really don't think we should have to deal with the same missile on the A-10 as well, considering Su-25s are stuck with the same R-60s the MiG-21s use.

[Foka1]

A-10A can carry AIM-9P5 and can fit with Su-25A if other weapons are managed to form specific gameplay.

 

Overall would like to see stats but there are none.

 

Its not even about missile being all aspect, AIM-9M is missile which you can launch 5 miles head on, with GCI you can make A-10 designated CAP platform on this server no problem. I already did that on ACG Cold War back in the days when Su-25T had R-73. Pretty much same thing, near BVR experience in that environment. A-1oA with AIM-9M and Su-25T with R-73 can be a thing, but like "Cold War" meaning will be really stretched here.

 

Also A-10 being slow etc. doesn't play here. As I understood server encourage teamplay and no team deathmatch furballs. A-10 should have escort or work after air superiority is established or should't complain that its being jumped on it those conditions are not met. Having superior weaponry just for sake that someone could do something alone is weak argument.

[Alpenwolf]

Couldn't agree more with P61 and some of the posts up here.

 

One of the reasons I took the Su-25T out of most missions (only some small missions still have them) is because as P61 said they were used as a BVR platform. I can't remember the player's name but some guy used to take 2 x R60M's, 2 x R-73's and 4 x laser guided missiles. He once even posted a video here of him shooting down F-5's and Viggens using the bloody laser guided missiles!!! Then of course the IR missiles for "close" range combat. At one time he shot down 7 enemy airplanes in his Su-25T in 1 sortie!!! I mean, damn that's something but it's not how it's supposed to be.

Same thing with the A-10C back in the day with its incredible countermeasures and deadly AIM-9M's.

Same as the Harrier.

Players were/are using them as fighters. I'm trying what I can to encourage players to fly helicopters and strikers and it seems to work at least for helicopter operations. It's not that you used to see that many helicopter pilots on the Cold War server back in the day. Only since a couple of months with the last 5 missions designed as some sort of a mini BlueFlag operation players realised there's no way around flying the helis any more. And they seem to have fun. That even conveyed to the smaller missions too.

Another issue is reducing the number of MiG-21's and F-5's. Should yet again encourage strikers to fly AG missions. The other night we had at some point 45 players flying on the mission Prince of Persia. Some players were complaining and asked for more MiG-21 and F-5 slots. But this is the idea behind reducing the number of those. If not available, then get on comms and ask for what is needed to help your team advance. As of late I find myself quite often doing GCI and driving around some ground units. I never thought I'd love Combined Arms that much. It's FUN!!! If not that I grab an Mi-8 and see what I can do for the team. I get on comms and ask for cover.

 

Yesterday in the mission Five Points Unleashed Blue had captured 3 airbases and Red 2. However, before I went to bed it was 1 Blue and 5 Red. Why? Because we mostly had good cover for the helicopters and sometimes strikers moving in. And only "mostly" because as always not everyone's on comms.

[Hiromachi]

The total server cap is limiting anyway. I dont see the point in reducing 21/F-5 numbers since thats what most of the people want to fly. It's just the way it is. This is the only server where they are truly and properly in place. Plus MiG-19 and in future F-8J.

 

On the other hand you can fly A-10, Ka-50, Su-25, Viggen and few others on modern servers with all the fancy weapons, that are absent on MiG-21 and F-5, and they fit just right. Instead all those newer aircraft are used to hunt 21s/F-5s since they are equipped with more advanced missiles, actually useful rwr (Harrier in particular) and sufficient load of countermeasures. Thus I absolutely disprove the addition of MiG-29 and Mirage. The balancing point should be closer to 70s, not 90s despite the fact that server timespan is really stretched and goes through several jet generations.

 

As for furballs. The answer to that problem is greater dispersion of targets and spawn bases without changing player cap for the server. Maps are large enough to utilize them fully. That way you can add more 21s and F-5s so people wont be fighting with pitchforks every evening for the spot yet it should deny concentration of whatever number you consider making a furball.

[rossmum]

29 and Mirage are a bit weird when limited to heaters anyway - and of the two, the Mirage is enormously easier to fly and has a far better radar. The tradeoff is acceleration and two less missiles, but the missiles you do have are a bit punchier than the R-60s.

 

IMO 29 with 2 R-27R/4 R-60 is an acceptable stand-in for the MiG-23, for the time being, and blue having the Mirage with its 530s available would sit fairly well against that. People are going to need to get used to the concept of actually watching their RWRs and watching for missile trails, or I have no idea what they're going to do when the 23/F1 arrive. At the same time, limiting the number of SARH missiles along with the airframes should stop them from dunking on people too hard (although with careful flying, the Mirage in particular is already an absolute death machine even with heaters and guns).

 

Furballs are going to naturally form no matter what you do, the main point IMO is to get people fighting for air superiority where it matters rather than in the middle of nowhere. This depends heavily on player coordination and/or GCI, but a well-coordinated effort can make or break gameplay for the guys in strikers or helicopters - for example on Two Towns yesterday, blue had such a hellcamp going on around our FARP that we could barely get anything done, and by the time we got a decent amount of CAP going they'd managed to kill our EWR and SAMs and basically push us back to our own base. IMO dogfights should not be the focus necessarily, but they are going to happen and they should happen in order to clear the skies for the other guys.

 

I have to admit I'm biased as I'm far better at air to air than anything else, although I've been enjoying messing with helicopters, but I definitely think it needs to be viewed holistically rather than as a separate entity. Plus, they're absolutely sick to watch from below as you try and sneak your Mi-8 past them :D

[Hiromachi]

Instead of Mirage Id rather see as a legit cold war (even fitting 21 and F-5 timeframe) machine F-14A with early AIM-9s and Sparrows (hope HB will deliver it with earlier Sparrows).

[Alpenwolf]

Good points above this post.

 

 

You can only stretch the area you're using for a certain scenario depending on what the maps have to offer. For example, Prince of Persia has 4 airbases placed on the western side of the peninsula and thank God we have at least Fujairah on the eastern side to make fighters/strikers/helicopters fight on two different sides rather than over one area to avoid heavy airquakes. In Five Points Unleashed we have the two Kras. airbases to the north, Krymsk in the middle with Gelendzhik and Novorossiysk in the south. The problem is, they're still too close from one another. Again, I can only work with what I have.

 

 

I thought about using the whole Caucasus/PG map and I actually did that once with using 2/3 of the Caucasus map (check out the third post of this thread - Operation Act Three) and the result was an empty server after it was stacked with players every night. This was around the time when the F-18 was released so that could be another reason, but after putting back the usual short missions online players started coming back to the server.

 

 

The mini BlueFlag type of missions seem to work very well and I can only take it from there and make things better.

On a side note, if I can't "stretch" the area I'm using for a skirmish I simply reduce the number of the available aircraft to counter that in order to avoid having major airquakes.

 

 

Oh, by the way. Operation Act Three used to run 24/7 day and night nonstop. I was expecting more helicopter operations during the night (even the Harrier was included) and as always only complains and an empty server for weeks.

 

 

Believe me, friends, I've tried quite a lot of things and it's never going to please everyone and be as perfect as everyone perceives perfection. But I appreciate all the feedback available and massive thanks for that because it really helps.

On another side note, the mission editor is really good. Unfortunately, it's not that good to the extent I could make missions more dynamic/realistic. Ground units sitting ducks and waiting to be destroyed is only one example of many. No matter what advanced options I use, it only gets complicated and one time in the past an update caused some trouble so all the units stopped working as desired so I had to redesign the mission.

 

 

It's always about trying to include your ideas and mine with options at hand while approaching that very carefully in order to avoid chaos. Which is why I'm reluctant sometimes regarding some issues and seemingly minor changes to you but actually a pain in the ass for the mission designer. Especially when external script files are included to compensate for what is missing in the mission editor.

 

 

As mentioned above by some of you, the MiG-29A and the M-2000C were my idea of adapting to what is coming: MiG-23 and F-4, etc.

If we had the F-14A, you wouldn't see the Mirage here.

So again, working with what is available at hand.

[BEliY]

There is a new version of SRS. Alpenwolf, do you plain to update it?

[Alpenwolf]

There is a new version of SRS. Alpenwolf, do you plain to update it?

At server's rotation, yes.

[BEliY]

Thanks

[Hiromachi]

As mentioned above by some of you, the MiG-29A and the M-2000C were my idea of adapting to what is coming: MiG-23 and F-4, etc.

If we had the F-14A, you wouldn't see the Mirage here.

So again, working with what is available at hand.

Thats the biggest problem. There simple are not enough 60s and 70s iconic jets for immersive experience.

 

I still wonder how things would look like when we get Syria and someone makes mission attempting to replicate 1973 war. Strip MiG-21s of R-60M / R-60, leaving only R-3S and R-13M and F-5 of AIM-9P. I'm curious how dynamics would change if people actually had to maneuver behind and launch in a lot more G limited environment.

[NELLUS]

The mini BlueFlag type of missions seem to work very well and I can only take it from there and make things better.

On a side note, if I can't "stretch" the area I'm using for a skirmish I simply reduce the number of the available aircraft to counter that in order to avoid having major air quakes.

 

Search & Destroy and Desert has Eyes are in my opinion the best missions out there.

Both teams have 2-4 objectives to either defend or destroy. Simple is usually best.

 

The focus among the CAP flyers tend to fade as soon as there are too many objectives to work with. This is usually when things turn into a Quake situation.

 

It is absolutely vital for the Hilo community to have Farps placed close to the action. This has become rather clear in the Search & Destroy mission which has taken the dynamic warfare approach to the next level. Combined arms has really flourished here.

 

[DEVILS]

[Brown Floyd]

My local group has spent the last couple weeks preparing for an 1980s-era event, with Mirages and Hornets providing the CAP support and, holy hell, you would not believe the bitching and moaning from guys who are being forced to use Fox 1 missiles. People are so used to either flying into a Red Baron-style furball or lobbing AMRAAMs from 40 miles away that they can't wrap their heads around staying head down in the cockpit and maneuvering into the best envelope for a Sparrow shot. It's a bit disheartening to see because there's a sweet spot right around 1986-1988 where many of the frontline aircraft on both Red and Blue now have modules in DCS; just looking at airframes and ignoring specific models and blocks, I think only the Su-25T, Ka-50, Su-33, and JF-17 were introduced after 1988.

 

As for me, while there's so many different missions and aircraft on this server that it's always interesting and fun, there is nothing as satisfying as getting an R-3R kill. (Since I suck, that happens about once every month for me...) And that's something that basically doesn't happen on any other multiplayer server out there.

[rossmum]

The models and blocks are a problem, though. A 16C bl. 50 bears very little resemblance in anything but external silhouette to an early 16A, and an 18C lot 20 also has a number of stark differences to an 18A (in fact our 18C even has more powerful engines than most C-model Hornets, nevermind avionics).

 

The Hornet started out with MFDs, but an early 16 would be absolutely unrecognisable to blue players - it doesn't have a single one. The SMS page equivalent is a bunch of vertically stacked one-line LCDs and the radar is an older-fashioned scope between the pilot's legs.

Edited June 20, 2020 by rossmum

[streakeagle]

I recently started participating in online multiplayer. I have little interest in trading AMRAAMs. This server is consistently the most populated of the cold war themed ones, and therefore where I have been spending most of my online time. Thank you for hosting it!

 

The MiG-21bis was once my favorite DCS module, and now that it finally has a decent flight model and some of the other problems patched up, it has become my favorite again. Clearly, this is the best option for enjoying the MiG-21bis right now.

 

My problem is that I prefer the older aircraft and the older versions of a given aircraft. So, I would rather have Vietnam and 1973 Yom Kippur versions of MiGs, F-4s, F-5s, etc. I would prefer F-14A, F-15A, F-16A, and F/A-18A to what we have now. At least the F-14A is coming fairly soon. But I doubt the other "A" models will ever come to DCS.

[Brown Floyd]

The MiG-21bis was once my favorite DCS module, and now that it finally has a decent flight model and some of the other problems patched up, it has become my favorite again. Clearly, this is the best option for enjoying the MiG-21bis right now.

 

One of my DCS dreams is for them to someday release a combined module which includes both the Fishbed-D from the '60s and the modern MiG-21 that the Indian Air Force is flying now. Make it a true study sim, showing us the evolution over 60 years of flying.

 

If Mag 3 or somebody did this, they'd easily sell several dozen copies, so it's a no-brainer from a business perspective...:smilewink: