Cold War 1947 - 1991

[Admiral_ZIPANGU]

@Alpenwolf

 

Thanks for maintaining a great server.

 

I was playing The Mountains Cry mission and noticed that when my friend boarded the Ka-50 it had an airborne start. Is this a spec for this mission?

 

Also, when my friend was transporting supplies by helicopter, we were discussing that it would be very useful if the helicopter transport could provide additional radar sites. On the Blue side, this could be accomplished by allowing the HAWK search radar to be deployed on its own, rather than the EWR radar. This mission had a lot of small undulations in the terrain that made it easy for enemy aircraft to hide, so the EWR radar alone had limited detection time and GCI had a hard time.

[Lurker]

11 hours ago, Alpenwolf said:

 

The thing is, I don't own the F-14 and frankly she's not my type of plane

 

You don't own one of the most iconic cold war fighters? Heresy....

Edited February 24, 2021 by Lurker

[The_Tau]

In Search and Destroy, tactical commander can give order to ships to move

[LegionCW]

 

On 6/26/2020 at 2:32 PM, Alpenwolf said:

A NEW MISSION HAS ARRIVED!!!

 

Operation: Fight Island

 

 

* The mission will go online tonight around 1930 zulu time, after the mission When The Mountains Cry.

* Mission lasts for 5 hours.

* AWACS is not available! Only EWR's. You can deploy more for a clearer picture.

* The mission focuses mainly on the Combined Arms module.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Situation:

 

Red: Bandar Abbas Intl and Havardaya.

Blue: Bandar Lengeh, Tunb Kochak, Tunb Island AFB and Khasab.

 

Red and Blue are fighting over Qeshm Island. It's vital for both sides which is why ground units already have been deployed.

The goal is capture and hold Qeshm Island airbase. Each coalition will have to move in as many ground units as possible. Holder of the airbase by the end of the mission is the victor on the island!

 

 

Red Objective:

 

 

MiG's, L-39's:

 

- Provide CAP around Qeshm Island for friendly strikers and helicopters to operate safely.

- Feel free to perform CAS.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Su-25's and Ka-50's:

 

- Provide CAS over Qeshm Island. Contact other pilots over SRS, especially friendly ground forces for cooperation.

- Watch out for AA's.

- IFF before you take out ground units!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mi-8's:

 

- As always, the backbone of every operation! Deploy ground units on Qeshm Island.

- Deploy AA's for a better coverage.

- Deploy EWR's for a better picture.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Frequencies:

 

EWR-1: 124 MHz, channel 0 for MiG-21 and L-39, channel 2 for MiG-19.

EWR-2: MiG-15 -> 4.95 MHz (tuned by default).

 

Mi-8's Jadro 1A for intercomms with other Mi-8's only: 035500 KHz

R-828: Channel 9 for Mi-8's and Ka-50's (helicopters comms)

 

Qeshm Island airbase NDB: 233 KHz.

 

 

************************************************************************************

 

 

Blue Objective:

 

 

F-5's, AJS37's, F-86's and C-101's:

 

- Provide CAP around Qeshm Island for friendly strikers and helicopters to operate safely.

- Feel free to perform CAS.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A-10's and SA342M's:

 

- Provide CAS over Qeshm Island. Contact other pilots over SRS, especially friendly ground forces for cooperation.

- Watch out for AA's.

- IFF before you take out ground units!

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

UH-1's:

 

- As always, the backbone of every operation! Deploy ground units on Qeshm Island.

- Deploy AA's for a better coverage.

- Deploy EWR's for a better picture.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Frequencies:

 

EWR: 251 MHz.

 

Day before yesterday we did fight Island, I moved 4 T-72s north of Qeshm, and all 4 got 1-tapped by 2 Abrams coming from the north. Manually fired one of the T-72s 2-3 times at the Abrams front, nothing. Ai controlled the other 2, and I manually hid the last T-72 behind a corner. The Abrams rolled past and didn't notice me in the last surviving T-72. I rolled out, shot an Abrams point blank into the side and it did nada. It 180s the turret and one taps me in the last T-72. Do we have any updates on what the tanks are getting balanced to? Closest matches I can think of are early T-64(A), T-72(1973) vs M60A3, or T-80 vs M1(not A1 nor A2) Abrams (ie the 105mm one). M60A1, T-64A are mid 60s, the -64B and M60A3 are both bang on 1976.

Edited February 24, 2021 by LegionCW

[The_Tau]

6 minutes ago, LegionCW said:

 

 

Day before yesterday we did fight Island, I moved 4 T-72s north of Qeshm, and all 4 got 1-tapped by 2 Abrams coming from the north. Manually fired one of the T-72s 2-3 times at the Abrams front, nothing. Ai controlled the other 2, and I manually hid the last T-72 behind a corner. The Abrams rolled past and didn't notice me in the last surviving T-72. I rolled out, shot an Abrams point blank into the side and it did nada. It 180s the turret and one taps me in the last T-72. Do we have any updates on what the tanks are getting balanced to? Closest matches I can think of are early T-64(A), T-72(1973) vs M60A3, or T-80 vs M1(not A1 nor A2) Abrams (ie the 105mm one). M60A1, T-64A are mid 60s, the -64B and M60A3 are both bang on 1976.

 

Well in DCS, we dont have T72 but T72B, not T80 but T80U. They are much superior versions to base ones. But I agree, T72B is simply worse than M1A2, worse armour and more significantly Fire Control systems. I think T80U would be better match, its still a Cold War tank and they were present in significant number. 

[LegionCW]

1 minute ago, The_Tau said:

Well in DCS, we dont have T72 but T72B, not T80 but T80U. They are much superior versions to base ones. But I agree, T72B is simply worse than M1A2, worse armour and more significantly Fire Control systems. I think T80U would be better match, its still a Cold War tank and they were present in significant number. 

Not sure what the quickest way to check the list of current DCS tanks is. But yeah, jesus. Just saw we have M1A2s fighting T-72Bs. Alpen may just wanna check the price difference between those two. Somewhere in the realm of more than an order of magnitude difference. Hell, we could have 5-10 T-72B3s(2016) for a single M1A2.

[The_Tau]

3 minutes ago, LegionCW said:

Not sure what the quickest way to check the list of current DCS tanks is. But yeah, jesus. Just saw we have M1A2s fighting T-72Bs. Alpen may just wanna check the price difference between those two. Somewhere in the realm of more than an order of magnitude difference. Hell, we could have 5-10 T-72B3s(2016) for a single M1A2.

Best way to check is to open Mission editor, spawn armour as Blue Task Force and check the list of vehicles :D. Problem is that we only have M1A2 as Abrams version, and rest of NATO tanks is no better, Chally 2, Leo 2A5, Leclerc, Merkava Mk 4. Only Cold War tanks for Blue (not counting shermans) are Leo 1A5 and M60 which is unplayable for CA. I dont think you should compare price to determine balance. T72 B3 I think is too modern and most importantly still unplayable for CA. T80U have better armour than M1A1, and much better FCS, better than any T72 (even than B3).  

[LegionCW]

9 minutes ago, The_Tau said:

Best way to check is to open Mission editor, spawn armour as Blue Task Force and check the list of vehicles :D. Problem is that we only have M1A2 as Abrams version, and rest of NATO tanks is no better, Chally 2, Leo 2A5, Leclerc, Merkava Mk 4. Only Cold War tanks for Blue (not counting shermans) are Leo 1A5 and M60 which is unplayable for CA. I dont think you should compare price to determine balance. T72 B3 I think is too modern and most importantly still unplayable for CA. T80U have better armour than M1A1, and much better FCS, better than any T72 (even than B3).  

Kontakt on the T80 is one-use isn't it? And spotty coverage at best. Abrams I doubt has composite fatigue modeled, ergo it has a constant equal level of protection (source: those 3 shots frontally that did sweet FA within 200m.

[LegionCW]

20 minutes ago, The_Tau said:

Best way to check is to open Mission editor, spawn armour as Blue Task Force and check the list of vehicles :D. Problem is that we only have M1A2 as Abrams version, and rest of NATO tanks is no better, Chally 2, Leo 2A5, Leclerc, Merkava Mk 4. Only Cold War tanks for Blue (not counting shermans) are Leo 1A5 and M60 which is unplayable for CA. I dont think you should compare price to determine balance. T72 B3 I think is too modern and most importantly still unplayable for CA. T80U have better armour than M1A1, and much better FCS, better than any T72 (even than B3).  

 

Leopard 1A3 is player-controllable. Early-mid 70s. 

"I dont think you should compare price to determine balance" - then pray tell what should we balance the capabilities of the CW stuff against? Why are there more -21s than F-5s, or 29s than F-14s? Production? If so, the point still applies.

[Alpenwolf]

3 hours ago, Admiral_ZIPANGU said:

@Alpenwolf

 

Thanks for maintaining a great server.

 

I was playing The Mountains Cry mission and noticed that when my friend boarded the Ka-50 it had an airborne start. Is this a spec for this mission?

 

Also, when my friend was transporting supplies by helicopter, we were discussing that it would be very useful if the helicopter transport could provide additional radar sites. On the Blue side, this could be accomplished by allowing the HAWK search radar to be deployed on its own, rather than the EWR radar. This mission had a lot of small undulations in the terrain that made it easy for enemy aircraft to hide, so the EWR radar alone had limited detection time and GCI had a hard time.

 

Ka-50 spawning in the air - Fixed. (Weird no one cared to report that. Maybe they enjoyed it that way )

 

The CTLD script was written by Ciribob and I tried many times changing essential things in it but without any success. I even asked Ciribob for help and even he told me that it would require him to completely rewrite the script to implement changes such as having 2 crates to set up a Hawk site instead of 4 or things like what you're suggesting, or other things I wanted to have or other players desired over the last years. A great script no doubt. Shame we can't make such changes though.

 

3 hours ago, Lurker said:

 

You don't own one of the most iconic cold war fighters? Heresy....

 

 

Shame on me, I know. A beautiful aircraft no doubt! It's just that I only fly what really gets me somehow. Seems like the Russians know what I want

 

1 hour ago, The_Tau said:

In Search and Destroy, tactical commander can give order to ships to move

 

Fixed. Will be there once the mission goes online again (not right now as the mission is currently online and players are flying).

Thanks for reporting!

 

1 hour ago, LegionCW said:

 

 

Day before yesterday we did fight Island, I moved 4 T-72s north of Qeshm, and all 4 got 1-tapped by 2 Abrams coming from the north. Manually fired one of the T-72s 2-3 times at the Abrams front, nothing. Ai controlled the other 2, and I manually hid the last T-72 behind a corner. The Abrams rolled past and didn't notice me in the last surviving T-72. I rolled out, shot an Abrams point blank into the side and it did nada. It 180s the turret and one taps me in the last T-72. Do we have any updates on what the tanks are getting balanced to? Closest matches I can think of are early T-64(A), T-72(1973) vs M60A3, or T-80 vs M1(not A1 nor A2) Abrams (ie the 105mm one). M60A1, T-64A are mid 60s, the -64B and M60A3 are both bang on 1976.

 

 

Unfortunately, the M60 is not controllable by players. If that had been the case you'd probably see no other tanks in almost each and every mission other than the T-55 and the M60.

 

There are more T-72's than Abrams in most missions featuring the two to kind of balance the odds. The best way is to hit them into the side or even better up their ass. And It did happen to me a couple of time where an Abrams survived a hit taken on the side but never the rear. Obviously, never go head on with an Abrams. Always set up traps, hide well and take them by surprise. That's the only way. If you have a Ka-50 pilot who's hopefully on comms then USE HIM! That's your best asset out there! And as an avid Ka-50 pilot myself I can only thank all the different GCI operators I've had giving me BRAA's regarding enemy tanks, especially Abrams, to get the most out of my Vikhr's.

 

You know what I'm going to say, right?

 

... TEAMWORK!

 

And by the way, haven't seen you in a while. Good to see you're doing well.

Stay safe!

[The_Tau]

1 hour ago, LegionCW said:

 

Leopard 1A3 is player-controllable. Early-mid 70s. 

"I dont think you should compare price to determine balance" - then pray tell what should we balance the capabilities of the CW stuff against? Why are there more -21s than F-5s, or 29s than F-14s? Production? If so, the point still applies.

 

When it comes to balance I think its Alpen, who got the last say in the matter. Sure F14 is more expensive than F5, but its not US vs USSR but more like Blue Coalition vs Red Coalition. Each country would have its own economy and reasons to field X rather than Y airframe. F5 was never a frontline fighter in US service and I think F14 was much more numerous than much cheaper F5 in US colours. Same with Aim54, very expensive and yet it was the primary weapon for F14 and not Aim 7 Sparrow. We dont see this loadout in server for obvious reasons. In the end its a video game and we got limited types of toys given to us by ED, so Alpen need to take some liberties when it comes to balance (and not 1:1 balance but asymmetric as its more fun in my opinion). After all we cant forget about player factor in this. They would take even most improbable loadout to win and thats why in Search and Destroy MiG29s have no IR missiles as ED dont allow R60 to be loaded to it and if Alpen would give R60M then all mig21 pilots would take it. 

1 hour ago, LegionCW said:

Kontakt on the T80 is one-use isn't it? And spotty coverage at best. Abrams I doubt has composite fatigue modeled, ergo it has a constant equal level of protection (source: those 3 shots frontally that did sweet FA within 200m.

its DCS and its modelling so its hits and miss. I did some shooting in DCS and I found out that it is possible to take out m1 from front but you need to aim to weakspots like drivers hatch or gun mantlet. Of course T80 was more accurate than T72 and there is a chance that T80 will survive first shot from M1. 

Edited February 24, 2021 by The_Tau

[LegionCW]

48 minutes ago, Alpenwolf said:

 

Ka-50 spawning in the air - Fixed. (Weird no one cared to report that. Maybe they enjoyed it that way )

 

The CTLD script was written by Ciribob and I tried many times changing essential things in it but without any success. I even asked Ciribob for help and even he told me that it would require him to completely rewrite the script to implement changes such as having 2 crates to set up a Hawk site instead of 4 or things like what you're suggesting, or other things I wanted to have or other players desired over the last years. A great script no doubt. Shame we can't make such changes though.

 

 

Shame on me, I know. A beautiful aircraft no doubt! It's just that I only fly what really gets me somehow. Seems like the Russians know what I want

 

 

Fixed. Will be there once the mission goes online again (not right now as the mission is currently online and players are flying).

Thanks for reporting!

 

 

Unfortunately, the M60 is not controllable by players. If that had been the case you'd probably see no other tanks in almost each and every mission other than the T-55 and the M60.

 

There are more T-72's than Abrams in most missions featuring the two to kind of balance the odds. The best way is to hit them into the side or even better up their ass. And It did happen to me a couple of time where an Abrams survived a hit taken on the side but never the rear. Obviously, never go head on with an Abrams. Always set up traps, hide well and take them by surprise. That's the only way. If you have a Ka-50 pilot who's hopefully on comms then USE HIM! That's your best asset out there! And as an avid Ka-50 pilot myself I can only thank all the different GCI operators I've had giving me BRAA's regarding enemy tanks, especially Abrams, to get the most out of my Vikhr's.

 

You know what I'm going to say, right?

 

... TEAMWORK!

 

And by the way, haven't seen you in a while. Good to see you're doing well.

Stay safe!

 

Been working, trading some crypto, doing GCI more, and also more on the Blue Flag 80s as I rarely get the chance to see missions here with flankers (if ever). Good point about the Ka-50 - as I feel the Ka-50 + T-72 is fairly balanced vs Gazelle + Abrams. The A-10A vs Su-25A argument on the other hand... I think I got 1 KH-29L off before I could do a second pass, but switched to the A-10A and rippled all my fire and forget mavs. It does seem to me you have been adding the 25T to more missions. Looks like the currently active one doesn't though.

[rossmum]

On 2/18/2021 at 3:04 AM, Pilot Ike said:

Of course I am exaggerating a little, but I couldn't resist to see the outcry it would cause amongst some people here who hate to see their way of thinking and discussing turned against them.

 

Their point in regards to helicopters is this:

It's totally ok to have the (non-historical) Ka-50 battle against Gazelles and Hueys, in that case team Blue simply needs to coordinate better via SRS and everything should be fine - if their tanks are obliterated by Ka-50s, it's all their fault, they didn't coordinate properly, and besides, why are they not up to a little challenge?

 

Now look what happens if you write this:

It's totally ok to have the (non-historical) AH-64D battle against Mi-8, Mi-24 and Ka-50s, in that case team Red simply needs to coordinate better via SRS and everything should be fine - if their tanks are obliterated by AH-64Ds, it's all their fault, they didn't coordinate properly, and besides, why are they not up to a little challenge?

 

Hate speech coming in.

 

BTW, this little conversation started because you wrote the F-5E was a better ground pounder than the MiG-21. I begged to differ and gave reasons for my different view. Nothing more did I write, no "this is unfair" or anything. Look at the reactions I got for that. It seems to be a very personal issue for some people here - if you write anything that has a slightest notion against team Red and their equipment, prepare for some drastic examples of people acting on the internet.

 

Yeah! Except the bit where some of us have been saying we would prefer the Ka-50 and Su-25T gone for quite a long time now. Smart weapons turn the ground game into essentially the same thing it is on other servers for red, and force blue to rely almost entirely on the Maverick because they don't have a comparable platform (the Gazelle is hardly an equal to anything packing Vikhrs). But yeah! If you ignore that tiny little detail, you're totally right.

 

Lose the victim complex, it's not a good look. "Hate speech coming in" because you want it to - or you wouldn't put that precise invitation there.

[rossmum]

On 2/23/2021 at 5:10 AM, Sideburns said:

Don't forget the MiG21 can carry up to 8 R60 if it so choses albeit with some performance penalty. Regardless time spent here discussing such things is better spent enjoying DCS and other things in life.

 

It cannot.

 

It can carry 4 R-60 and 4 R-60M. Whether or not this is realistic, I've seen it done twice ever - and that was because R-60Ms were available. With the current weapon restrictions, there is no way, no how you can carry 8 missiles. The loadout menu will allow you to select them, but the ground crew will only load 4 missiles. It's possible this has changed since I last tested it offline, but I doubt it - I certainly have not seen it done with 60s only, and the last time I saw it done with 60/60M mix was a little over a year ago.

 

(excuse the chain posting, I've just moved and have to play catch-up here)

 

On 2/23/2021 at 7:44 PM, Alpenwolf said:

I wish there had been something that would force players to choose either Red or Blue upon joining the server. Some games as I hear seem to have such a thing. As a server host you could then determine whether one side is allowed to outnumber the other by x:y or simply keep them completely balanced. If other games have it, why not here in DCS.

So many tiny little things, and frankly implementing all the mods, scripts and workarounds out there becomes too much at some point and as it happens could cause a mission to malfunction, which is something I had (or still do in the mission Springfield). Other missions have their issues but I've managed to keep them intact so far.

 

It really doesn't feel as if ED has always focused so heavily on multiplayer and they never claimed such a thing to be fair. They've only started tenting to the multiplayer community more than ever a while ago (2 years max). Maybe in time we'll see more features.

 

The big problem here becomes that when one team is mostly composed of players from a different timezone (the classic DDCS problem) or one team loses morale and throws in the towel, you then get a horrible imbalance which nobody can correct, because they're already faction locked. There will also be people who, if you can limit the ratio between teams, will simply leave if their preferred team is already full.

 

On the upside, though, there's a lot less potential for people abusing CA slots to spot units or use SAMs to grief people - which has been happening a surprising amount over the past two or three months.

Edited February 25, 2021 by rossmum
formatting

[Althar93]

11 minutes ago, rossmum said:

 

It cannot.

 

It can carry 4 R-60 and 4 R-60M. Whether or not this is realistic, I've seen it done twice ever - and that was because R-60Ms were available. With the current weapon restrictions, there is no way, no how you can carry 8 missiles. The loadout menu will allow you to select them, but the ground crew will only load 4 missiles. It's possible this has changed since I last tested it offline, but I doubt it - I certainly have not seen it done with 60s only, and the last time I saw it done with 60/60M mix was a little over a year ago.

 

(excuse the chain posting, I've just moved and have to play catch-up here)

 

 

The big problem here becomes that when one team is mostly composed of players from a different timezone (the classic DDCS problem) or one team loses morale and throws in the towel, you then get a horrible imbalance which nobody can correct, because they're already faction locked. There will also be people who, if you can limit the ratio between teams, will simply leave if their preferred team is already full.

 

On the upside, though, there's a lot less potential for people abusing CA slots to spot units or use SAMs to grief people - which has been happening a surprising amount over the past two or three months.

 

 

I think people also have their preferred aircraft to fly, and/or may only own a restricted set of modules. Up until very recently, the only aircraft that I could fly on the Cold War server was the Mig21 so that pretty much anchored me into playing Red (which I'm fine with as the Mig is still to this date my favourite module & I'm yet to properly learn the Tomcat enough to fly it).

 

Time zones are definitely an issue & when you play seems to make a huge difference in terms of the experience you'll get on the server. I'll occasionally log in during the week in the evening but I am usually tagging along 2 other Migs against a swarm of F-5's and we stand absolutely no chance, on those days I rarely stay more than a sortie. On the other hand, my most fun & challengine games have been at the end of the week/weekends where both teams might not ncessarily be quite so balanced but there are GCIs and people communicate & there is teamwork.

 

I think BlueFlag's approach of having AI interceptors does somewhat cater for the occasional inbalance/lack of players but I'm not overly convinved this would help the Cold War server much.

 

DCS is unbalanced by nature & to be fair I am fine with that. I don't mind somewhat unrealistic loads or some artificial balancing to even out the playing field for each team but what makes the experience enjoyable for me is the fact that the respective aircrafts/teams have different advantages/disadvantages & learning how to adapt with every mission. 

[bies]

On 2/14/2021 at 7:35 PM, Alpenwolf said:

UNFORTUNATELY, it's the AH-64D.

 

I thought I'm the only one disappointed it's not classic analog, manual AH-64A with less electronic gizmos but better flight performance.

And far more interesting history.

 

BTW @Alpenwolfthanks for fantastic job you are doing here!

Edited February 25, 2021 by bies

[Sideburns]

1 hour ago, rossmum said:

 

It cannot.

 

It can carry 4 R-60 and 4 R-60M. Whether or not this is realistic, I've seen it done twice ever - and that was because R-60Ms were available. With the current weapon restrictions, there is no way, no how you can carry 8 missiles. The loadout menu will allow you to select them, but the ground crew will only load 4 missiles. It's possible this has changed since I last tested it offline, but I doubt it - I certainly have not seen it done with 60s only, and the last time I saw it done with 60/60M mix was a little over a year ago.

 

 

You are incorrect.

 

Having just hopped on the server it allowed 6xR60 to be mounted, and as you say it is possible to mount 4 R60 and then 4 R60m where these are available in the mission. Probably not a realistic loadout but the MiG21 can currently mount 8 R60 type (i.e. R60 and R60m) missiles.

[BonerCat]

You both are correct
The MiG-21 ground crew will not equip double R-60 racks on neighboring pylons as long as they are the same R-60 type (I.e. No 4 R-60 under 1 wing, no 4 R-60M under one wing). You can however equip a single R-60 on the leftover pylon, for 3 R-60 under one wing, and total of 6
However, if you tell the ground crew to equip different R-60 types, you can get away with 2 R-60 + 2 R-60M under one wing, giving a total of 8 R-60's

It's worth noting that the R-60M is not available to the MiG-21 on this server, so the most you can carry, is 6. However, the game can allow for more

Edited February 25, 2021 by BonerCat

[LegionCW]

@Alpenwolf Just did sling loading on Open Range. Not sure if it's the nature of DCS, latency or desync, but the gentlest hover down still has the crate teleporting around with a radius of 5-10m. I thought CTLD was made/brought in to alleviate the MP issues with slingloading? Hoping we can CTLD capture the airfields like Nalchik to activate the Fulcrums. Isn't Nalchik neutral by default anyway? Why not just have that objective be "Capture Nalchik with CTLD units to activate"? 

 

Currently the slingloading desync reminds me of Gmod... 

 

[The_Tau]

30 minutes ago, LegionCW said:

@Alpenwolf Just did sling loading on Open Range. Not sure if it's the nature of DCS, latency or desync, but the gentlest hover down still has the crate teleporting around with a radius of 5-10m. I thought CTLD was made/brought in to alleviate the MP issues with slingloading? Hoping we can CTLD capture the airfields like Nalchik to activate the Fulcrums. Isn't Nalchik neutral by default anyway? Why not just have that objective be "Capture Nalchik with CTLD units to activate"? 

 

Hmm I slingload on that mission multiple times as Blue and Red. I never had any problems with it, except when I had multicrew in my UH1, but I think its visual glitch only.

 

and Nalchik is red at mission start

[LegionCW]

23 minutes ago, The_Tau said:

Hmm I slingload on that mission multiple times as Blue and Red. I never had any problems with it, except when I had multicrew in my UH1, but I think its visual glitch only.

 

and Nalchik is red at mission start

 

Hmm. I had issues hooking up at Vody regardless. Both sitting infront and hovering above, took about 20 mins for it to finally register/show the cables attaching. Also not straightfoward to tell which is crate 1 and which is crate 2. You run the rick of aligning infront of the wrong one and swinging it into the other. I still think it's more straightforward to just keep it CTLD like the rest of the FARP and unit building.

[The_Tau]

5 minutes ago, LegionCW said:

 

Hmm. I had issues hooking up at Vody regardless. Both sitting infront and hovering above, took about 20 mins for it to finally register/show the cables attaching. Also not straightfoward to tell which is crate 1 and which is crate 2. You run the rick of aligning infront of the wrong one and swinging it into the other. I still think it's more straightforward to just keep it CTLD like the rest of the FARP and unit building.

Top crate in the radio list is the closest one. You can activate crate some distance away and smoke will pop up marking activated crate. To hook it you need to be very close to crate  if landed, like 1-2m or directly above it and hover it for like 5-10s. You can activate sling load "graph" to help you align if hovering. or you can also look out of window. There are bindings in controls for those two options

Edited February 25, 2021 by The_Tau

[Alpenwolf]

You're not capturing anything. Nalchik is Red all the time so no CTLD is required. You're sling loading an ammo box as if to bring missiles for the Fulcrums/Tomcats. You select one ammo box/crate from the radio menu and then it is highlighted by red/blue smoke as it is with sling loading in DCS. No mods, no scripts, no nothing. Simply sling loading.

Edited February 25, 2021 by Alpenwolf

[LegionCW]

2 hours ago, Alpenwolf said:

You're not capturing anything. Nalchik is Red all the time so no CTLD is required. You're sling loading an ammo box as if to bring missiles for the Fulcrums/Tomcats. You select one ammo box/crate from the radio menu and then it is highlighted by red/blue smoke as it is with sling loading in DCS. No mods, no scripts, no nothing. Simply sling loading.

 

 

Ok, can we change it to make the secondary airfield neutral and just has to be captured with CTLD troops to activate them, rather than rely on the oversensitive liberal arts major that is the crate that explodes at the slightest contact microaggression?

[Alpenwolf]

5 hours ago, LoneS said:

You people will never stop crying over the MIG21's 6 or 8 R60's versus 2 carried by the beautiful F5. IT IS WHAT IT IS! That is what these planes have to offer. I'm sure Alp would restrict MiG's to inner or outer pylons only for aa missiles if he could but there is no way in the ME to do that and I just looked at it. With more missile there is the drag issue. With more of that there is this. Less of this there is that......... bla bla bla............... they both have advantages and disadvantages PERIOD amigos! I swear the only way to stop you all from crying is having the exact same aircraft and ground units for both sides and giving each side the exact same airfield with the exact same altitude with the exact same trees and rivers and hills around it. So basically do one side then cut that part of the map with all units on it then paste it on the other side of the mission while reversing directions by 180 degrees. OH let's not forget the weather..... it must be midday all mission long so no one has the sun in their eyes god forbid. and then we must buy the same pc hardware for everyone provide same internet and even the same apartment so no one has any disadvantages. you know what?!!!! let's all meet in my basement which is big enough. we can play there and no one will have it so different. and if someone complains I'll grab my baseball bat...

Now bring your MiG with whatever missiles you want... I'm in my F5 right now with 5:0 kill ratio! yeeehaaa!!!!

 

NOOOOOOO I'm not trolling!!!! I'm only coming down to the level of complaints of some users around here...

 

Don't ban my Alpy I had to write all that...

 

I don't ban people for speaking their mind. NEVER! Not sure about playing in your basement though, however, it would be some interesting feast with 40 plus people

 

1 minute ago, LegionCW said:

 

Ok, can we change it to make the secondary airfield neutral and just has to be captured with CTLD troops to activate them, rather than rely on the oversensitive liberal arts major that is the crate that explodes at the slightest contact microaggression?

 

It's fine, mate. It really isn't that sensitive any more which was the case months ago and got fixed. Unless the bug is back since the latest update? Others will have to share their experience with it first, me included. We'll see...

Edited February 25, 2021 by Alpenwolf