AAR Phase 4

[mwd2]

Role: Blue Ground Commander

 

Good: No disconnection, no freeze. I lost only few ground units on the run. At the end of the mission, the first ground troops arrived the outskirts of Khashuri. But we had not enough enemy CAS pilots!!!

 

Ideas:

- Briefing should be perform on the map screen (server on pause). I think it is helps to deal with the coodinate of air support / ground troups (maybe we add some TV Towers on the WPs for a better understanding)

- Three frontlines to controll is a full time job, in particular when some Strykers are not able to drive proper over bridges :doh:

- We need to think about the Line of Sight, it is to easy for an aircraft to spot ground units, just fly over the map location --> and the Icon pop up (this should not be possible!)

[mwd2]

Problems:

- proper guiding of A-10Cs, Ka-50s and Su-25Ts to the targets. Most of the time, i don`t have a CAS aircraft in the area or i have no Line of Sight to the targets and can`t give marker (smoke or L or IR beam).

 

Any ideas,how we can solve this?

[gregzagk]

Role : Red Ground Commander

 

TACVIEW : http://www.foinikas.org/ftp/public/DCS_World/Chameleon%20Campaign/Mission%204/CHAMELEON%20MISSION%204.rar

 

Problems : Unfortunately we had many freezes as the most of the pilots yesterday. The KA-50's left early as it was an unplayable situation for them .

 

The SU-27's tried to get air superiority but had many freezes too.

 

Mission : Despite the problems the mission moved on with the ground battles being really great.

 

I tried to check all three roads to Kashuri with some recon units forwared and hidden behind buildings.

I got surpised from the first attack as the blue units attacked from the hill and not from the road (dawm you ghost :D ) .Many units lost during these attacks and the destruction continued with the arrival of the A-10's... They gived me hell :helpsmilie:The Ka-50's tried to assist me by attacking the blue units but due to the problems mentioned above they couldnt continue.

[gregzagk]

After the first losses I tried to get all my defence together by withdrawing but it was not enough. In the end we lost all of our defence in these three roads.

 

Well done to the blue guys!

Next mission will be on two weeks hoping with a new fix for the freezes .Stay tuned!

[mwd2]

I tried to check all three roads to Kashuri with some recon units forwared and hidden behind buildings.

I got surpised from the first attack as the blue units attacked from the hill and not from the road (dawm you ghost )

 

:music_whistling: always try attack from the flanks..... after the first red icon was pop up i send troops offroad.

 

the only problem, was i, (better, the AI) in the south spread each units wide over the whole area - you can see it in the TacView replay.

 

 

An Idea for next campaign: a "real" front line, with group in front and the backyard (resupply), CAS area for A-10Cs, Ka-50, Su-25T and CAP with Fighters (if they not give us headach...!)

--> something comparable to http://www.fightercombatsims.net/forum/blogs/red-devil/9-fcs-warfare-stress-test-3.html

 

as always, just an idea :smilewink:

[Endy]

The freeze/crash issues were terrible for FC3 and KA-50 guys on our side. That;'s why we lost most people and in the end it was me and Greg lol (I think Talos as well for some time) against quite a few A10s.

 

Anyway, we need to try to rework the mission from scratch and see if we can get rid of stability issues. That''s the main problem for now.

 

And I seriously think Su-25 and KA-50 guys should be all on red side. I know some probably want to play blue but it's for the sake of balance between player numbers. Red seems to be way less popular for some reason which makes the event not as fun for both sides.

 

I'll try to watch the Tacview and see if I have any other insight but for not the main issue imo was stability...

[mwd2]

...

Anyway, we need to try to rework the mission from scratch and see if we can get rid of stability issues. That''s the main problem for now.

 

And I seriously think Su-25 and KA-50 guys should be all on red side. I know some probably want to play blue but it's for the sake of balance between player numbers. Red seems to be way less popular for some reason which makes the event not as fun for both sides.

...

 

i had not recognized the lost of so many red pilots, only in the last 30min. But you are right, with lost of CAS ability on red side, it was an easy game for blue! :music_whistling:

 

i also agree, to build a mission from the scratch and add step by step more features into it - and see what give the most problems for server and/or clients (we got luck, that the last two times the server not crashed.

 

Greg if you need tester to run stress test give us all a call and i think we will jump on the server and check for problems!

[Endy]

Also, I'd like to come back to the discussion about CBU's. On Tacview you can see whole groups of red units annihilated by the bomblets and I think that made the blue task very easy as well. You can see it especially on the northern road, whole groups just disappearing after one dropped bomb.

 

i had not recognized the lost of so many red pilots, only in the last 30min

 

KA-50 pilots left with pretty much one hour to go. And even earlier it was difficult for them to do much due to blue air superiority in the area - not only fighters, but an overwhelming number of A10's as well. That's why I think red side needs more people, Su-25 and KA-50 pilots to be more effective and provide some opposition to blue. Otherwise it's a walk in the park for the blue side.

[Leto]

I don't mean any offence here, Endy, but what is your intention?

Making it impossible for blue to win a mission?

 

Look at the facts: Mission 4 had no red fighters for 90% of the time over the target area,

and most of the time no Su-25T and Ka-50 due to technical problems.

You said yourself that in the end it were only you and Greg on red side.

 

So with no opponent and all the blue forces doing best as they could

they barely accomplished the mission goal in time.

 

 

Mission 4 with all the FC3 disconnects was a special situation due to technical problems resulting in disconnects.

I don't see the solution for that in cutting down CBU's.

 

 

 

On the other point I agree with you: it would be better to have more pilots on red side.

Maybe Su-25T and Ka-50 red only.

[Endy]

Ok,from my point of view it looks different, you can also ask Greg how his units were slaughtered :) And I can't agree you barely achieved mission goals, I think blue side killed most of the opposition and won comfortably, you can consult Greg on that.

 

 

Anyway, I'm not trying to make the blue side not be able to kill units, trust me, I'm trying to do the opposite. This is why most tanks were removed and there are mostly softer targets now. This is also why we removed most manpads, to make it easier for A10s...I was trying to make the units easier to kill with other weapons, normal bombs, guns etc. So that there is no need to use CBUs.

 

I am just in general against CBU's because they kill to easy and I feel they're not really needed. Just look what Sandman did with his gun on Tacview :)

 

Sorry, I just don't like them. One thing is that there is nothing comparable on the red side but in general, I just dislike weapons which can kill 6-8 units in one button push.

[Endy]

The gun runs can achieve similar results but they take a bit more effort and are more dangerous than just finding a group with TGP and dropping one bomb.

 

I'm not saying the disconnects were connected to CBU's. From watching tacview there is no direct correlation between the two so i'm not trying to put the blame on them.

 

 

 

 

Look, I'm not trying to take out CBU's just for the fun of it. And I don't like arguing with you because I really have no grudge, I don't want you to be offended and this discussion can become very heated again apparently...

 

 

Maybe it was this mission only but please, try to review the recording once again. Perhaps you will see my point. I know what you're trying to say about no red presence in the area but anyway, please just watch it again and perhaps you'll see what I mean.

[mwd2]

as far as i know, Greg, say at the beginning of this, that we will not have equal sides...!!

If a weapon should not be in, it must removed from the Warehouse/Airfield!

 

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

 

But i have an idea, how we can solve the unequal before the mission start (again just an idea):

 

Greg prepare a Mission for...:

 

Blue Side: 1x GC, 2x A-10C, 2x Su-25T, 2x Ka-50 and 2x F-15C (9 Player)

Red Side: 1x GC 4x Su-25T, 2x Ka-50 and 2x Su-27 (or 2x MiG/29S) (9 Player)

==> 18 Player/Slots

 

this slots are fixed and first come first serve!

 

After this, everyone else will be split between red and blue to keep the sides equal - with backup slots which must fill in first ...:

 

1st. to fill: 2x A-10Cs (blue) and 2x Su-25T (red),

2nd. to fill: 2x Ka-50 on red and blue,

3rd. to fill: 1x GC on each side,

... and soon...

[Leto]

@ Endy:

 

The gun runs can achieve similar results but they take a bit more effort and are more dangerous than just finding a group with TGP and dropping one bomb.

 

Ok, for the same reason you will stop using R-73 on A-10s, ok?

[Endy]

It's already been decided we drop AIM120 or R77. This is a concession from both sides. Otherwise A10 and Su25 planes would be slaughtered by the dozens because they wouldn't even know they've been launched on until the missile is close...

FC3 planes on both sides are making this concession easily, losing their most powerful weapons, because it's more fun and less overpowered if we just use semi active missiles. I don't really see your point about R73, it can be pretty easily dodged if you pop some flares... And if i'm in range of R73 i'm also in range of your Aim9, pretty even imo and both missiles are easy to fool.

 

I don't understand why you defend CBUs so much really. I'll ask you this, you really don't think a bomb like that is too powerful in these missions? I'm just asking you to please take a look at ACMI file from last mission.

 

As for freezes, from watching the tacview it seems to be related to when somebody joins the server and enters cockip. Not sure though.

[Endy]

Ah, and we also dropped R27ET. With this medium range IR missile you would also have no indication it's tracking you, can be launchaed using IRST lock, not radar. So as you see we droped quite a few different weapons, both sides to make the mission more enjoyable.

 

And one mroe question. Is CBU really necessary for you to have fun if the scenario is balanced in other areas, i.e. units, air defences, other weapons etc?

 

@mwd2

Good idea. Perhaps limiting player number to 10 per side would help. It's definately worth checking out in at least one mission. Perhaps it would make the mission more stable or perhaps it wouldn't... And there wouldn't be player count imbalance.

[Leto]

Just look what Sandman did with his gun on Tacview

 

I did. He killed 2 units with gun, I killed 16 units with gun. What's your point here?

 

My point with R-73 is about your point with CBU. Your argument is:

The gun runs can achieve similar results but they take a bit more effort and are more dangerous than just finding a group with TGP and dropping one bomb.

Same with R-73: Gun can achieve similar result but takes a bit more effort and more dangerous than just finding an A10 and fire away. With the sensor field of view of R-73 you even don't need to be pointing at the prey. Look at it and fire. Far more easy and effective than AIM-9.

 

But my point isn't about not using R-73. It's just about your argument.

[Leto]

To your question: is CBU necessary? No. But with that argument you can eliminate every weapon till everybody is fighting with guns. But here is why I think CBU-97 is a very valid weapon and should not be banned:

 

Under normal circumstances there is nearly always A/A thread to A10 in target area. You self stated that A10 is easy prey for Su27/Mig29. Even Su25T is by far a better fighter compared to the A10. So by nature A10 must not fly high. GBU-10/12/31/38 need at least 6'000 ft height over target to become reliable. MK-84/82 in an area like yesterday still need 3000-4000 ft height for not damaging the aircraft. MK-82 Air is a joke in precission. You would need lots towed under your plane and that will make you vulnaerable because of the weight. Rockets (HEI-151) do no harm since 1.2. Look at Sandmans Tacview. 7 Hits on one target and still moving.

[Leto]

So under normal "A10" circumstances with A/A thread Gau+CBU had been a very good choice for yesterdays mission. And you always can spread your units to not be an "easy" target where 1 CBU destroys 6 units. Just put more space between them and it will be harder. And don't forget: you set wind already for not make it easy with CBU.

[Endy]

Now that's a hyperbole. You can limit some munitions, doesn't have to be all, please don't exaggerate. I know you do it for the sake of winning the argument but it is simply not a valid point.

I already told you that some missiles are banned (Aim120, R77, R27ET). Does it mean we're digfighting with guns only? No. It just means we dropped some weapons because we thought they would not fit the scenario and would not be fun for any side. No A10 pilot would like to play if they were easily shot down by active missiles or medium range IR missiles with no indication of lock or tracking signal.

 

As you can see, some weapons can be sacrificed in a scenario for the sake of gameplay and I think the same should happen to CBUs. It would imo make for a better gameplay, seeing how whole groups of units just disappeared after their use.

 

 

Anyway, Greg has the same data as we do. He can analyze it himself I guess if some weapon is wanted or not.

[Endy]

I don't really have more arguments apart from what I said so I'll leave it at that.

 

 

PS. off boresight capabilities of R73 are still limited, it's not exactly look at it and fire. You still need to lock the target, it's just that you can do it at a wider angle that AIM9 because of helmet mounted aiming display. I see where you're coming from with the Aim9 because you probably don't see yours hitting much. I'll just say that shooting any missile at the target in front aspect doesn't have a high chance of connecting. Or a target which is moving away from you very fast.

 

 

PS2 Spreading apart could work if Greg reworked placing of units in the editor. The way they're placed now (6 or 8 units in a squad) - you can't spread them apart sufficiently using CA controls. You can't move individual units around using map view, just whole squads, the way they were placed on the map, for example 6 tanks moving as a squad etc. Changing formations doesn't not work well enough.

[gregzagk]

I think the number of aircraft in not what makes the two sides equal. In the second and the third mission the numbers were the same and we were ok .

 

Fighter type ,weapons , ground morphology and most important which side is on attacking status are most important for bringing balance to the mission.

 

When a side is attacking it needs more aircraft and ground units to achieve victory.

On mission 4 Blue side should organize an attack from 3 roads. In these 3 roads there were many red units ready to defend their territory. If Blue guys tried to attack without good tactics they would for sure get slaughtered .

 

On mission 4 there were 17 vs 12 slots reserved. From the 17 blue slots the 10 were A-10's that are considered for CAS missions.

[gregzagk]

So if all turned well I believe we would have a great battle with

the A-10's having to find the targets fast so that they shouldn't be killed ,the KA-50's might get into some Air to Air battles with other Helicopters or A-10's and so on.

 

But nothing goes as its planned. And in our mission we had all these freezes that caused a 14 vs 2 situation... :P

 

So I don't think that the team's selection caused yesterday's problem. I hope we will be ok in the next one.

See you soon :)

 

PS : Also consider that most of the guys fly with A-10 so I think waiting to fill the SU-25's,FC3 and KA-50's slots first would not be possible. Maybe giving some A-10's in the red side would be interesting :)

[Endy]

Someone advised me the following for crashes:

 

add the following lines to your network.cfg file in Saved games:

 

idle_timeout = 0

game_timeout = 0

 

 

I don't know if it helps or not but it's worth giving a try i guess. I'm also not sure where to add it exactly, need to check :P

[gregzagk]

Copy .I will try it thanks!

[Endy]

Ok, found it:

 

put them on their own lines after the last }

 

ie - Globally

 

This will assist on the CTD caused by client disconnects - they will simply never Client Timeout.

 

If you edit the file again after playing, please note that these lines may have been placed elsewhere by the sim in the .cfg file but they will still be global commands - ie, not encased - {}