Cold War 1947 - 1991 *** 2nd Limited Edition ***

[Zachrix]

Let's not put the password in TS, how about on the forums

[QuiGon]

It was indeed pretty chaotic this time around. I've now came to the point that I think red needs to be nerfed a bit (e.g. less slots, red carrier further away, etc.) for blue to have any chance to win. Given the constant stream of red Gen4 fighters (aided by Fishbeds) over the islands (especially Rota) I'm not even sure a well organized blue team that purposfully sends CAS with SEAD/CAP could make it happen to capture all the islands. But blue is far from being well organized anyways.

Edited September 13, 2021 by QuiGon

[Alpenwolf]

6 hours ago, rossmum said:

...

Overall it seems that when these special, more modern missions run, the side with more of the server's regulars on will win, except in cases where guys like the 104th turn up. More capabilities to play with means more ways to screw up for most people, it seems.

 

Exactly! The side with more regulars wins most of the times. And if we had more and more regulars, and only then, a permanent password for the server would be the ultimate answer. Hopefully, one day!

 

That's why I said that the next round (Operation Tiberias as well) will be locked up for only those who show up on TS. Now, BlueFlag years ago, 104th events up to this day, my events up to this day and many other events always ran/run through TS. People meet on TS, a quick briefing by the organaiser, although all users read the briefing, but mainly to notify the players of a couple of things or highlight some issues/changes and then it's game on. Whether you stay on TS or leave, it's up to you. Most players stay and they're mostly muted. It's used as a backup, especially for those who are having issues with SRS. I know it's a different subject, but my experience with TS has always been like that. A positive one! Easy, calm and right to the point -> Team Speak. For any other purposes there is the forum and the unofficial Discord channel you guys created. Simple as that.

 

1 hour ago, QuiGon said:

It was indeed pretty chaotic this time around. I've now came to the point that I think red needs to be nerfed a bit (e.g. less slots, red carrier further away, etc.) for blue to have any chance to win. Given the constant stream of red Gen4 fighters (aided by Fishbeds) over the islands (especially Rota) I'm not even sure a well organized blue team that purposfully sends CAS with SEAD/CAP could make it happen to capture all the islands. But blue is far from being well organized anyways.

 

 

It was pure chaos! And was thinking the same: Imagine Red had access to MiG-29A's. That would've ended up being another massacre for Blue.

 

I'll keep the MiG-29A's, but reduce the slots and numbers. Same for other aircraft maybe, but not much, because the next round is going to locked up and with that we hopefully have way less chaos.

 

I'll try and get the 104th guys to fly Blue. They're schedule is still full of tournaments and events though.

[QuiGon]

28 minutes ago, Alpenwolf said:

It was pure chaos! And was thinking the same: Imagine Red had access to MiG-29S's. That would've ended up being another massacre for Blue.

 

I'll keep the MiG-29A's, but reduce the slots and numbers. Same for other aircraft maybe, but not much, because the next round is going to locked up and with that we hopefully have way less chaos.

 

[=475FG= Dawger]

2 hours ago, Alpenwolf said:

 

Exactly! The side with more regulars wins most of the times. And if we had more and more regulars, and only then, a permanent password for the server would be the ultimate answer. Hopefully, one day!

 

That's why I said that the next round (Operation Tiberias as well) will be locked up for only those who show up on TS. Now, BlueFlag years ago, 104th events up to this day, my events up to this day and many other events always ran/run through TS. People meet on TS, a quick briefing by the organaiser, although all users read the briefing, but mainly to notify the players of a couple of things or highlight some issues/changes and then it's game on. Whether you stay on TS or leave, it's up to you. Most players stay and they're mostly muted. It's used as a backup, especially for those who are having issues with SRS. I know it's a different subject, but my experience with TS has always been like that. A positive one! Easy, calm and right to the point -> Team Speak. For any other purposes there is the forum and the unofficial Discord channel you guys created. Simple as that.

 

 

It was pure chaos! And was thinking the same: Imagine Red had access to MiG-29A's. That would've ended up being another massacre for Blue.

 

I'll keep the MiG-29A's, but reduce the slots and numbers. Same for other aircraft maybe, but not much, because the next round is going to locked up and with that we hopefully have way less chaos.

 

I'll try and get the 104th guys to fly Blue. They're schedule is still full of tournaments and events though.

We used Teamspeak for a couple decades but moved to Discord for our voice comms earlier this year. Discord has too many convenient features. 
 

Our experience flying Hornets in this last event went as follows.

 

Reds flying in circles over their islands. We flew three SEAD sorties and launched a couple dozen HARMS completely unopposed. 20 people on SRS, very little comms. 
 

Reds did not venture past the area where Blue had no radar coverage. We generally had to get with 10 miles of an island and only then encountered reds in swarm below the radar horizon.
 

AWACS died over and over, indicating it is improperly positioned AND undefended.

 

The operational tempo from Carriers is necessarily much slower than from a land airfield. This alone makes Reds job much easier. 
 

Carriers really arent suited to the willy nilly nature of a multiple sortie event. 
 

I doubt we bother to fly this one again. The reason we fly Cold War is because we find radar and all aspect missiles boring and that was reinforced each time we flew this event.

[QuiGon]

25 minutes ago, =475FG= Dawger said:

AWACS died over and over, indicating it is improperly positioned AND undefended.

 

Although the scripted message said so, it didn't actually die, but instead RTBed all the time for some reason.

Edited September 13, 2021 by QuiGon

[Alpenwolf]

1 minute ago, =475FG= Dawger said:

We used Teamspeak for a couple decades but moved to Discord for our voice comms earlier this year. Discord has too many convenient features. 
 

Our experience flying Hornets in this last event went as follows.

 

Reds flying in circles over their islands. We flew three SEAD sorties and launched a couple dozen HARMS completely unopposed. 20 people on SRS, very little comms. 
 

Reds did not venture past the area where Blue had no radar coverage. We generally had to get with 10 miles of an island and only then encountered reds in swarm below the radar horizon.
 

AWACS died over and over, indicating it is improperly positioned AND undefended.

 

The operational tempo from Carriers is necessarily much slower than from a land airfield. This alone makes Reds job much easier. 
 

Carriers really arent suited to the willy nilly nature of a multiple sortie event. 
 

I doubt we bother to fly this one again. The reason we fly Cold War is because we find radar and all aspect missiles boring and that was reinforced each time we flew this event.

 

Typical behaviour when one side attacks and the other defends. The defender mostly tends to camp! It's more or less like: Who'd you rather had been on D-Day - and apart from any political reference - a German soldier or a US marine? That's why operation Ossetia is not very much favoured by Blue players. Same was the case with operation Supervision, which is why it's been kept offline for at least 2 years now, with many Blue players complaining about it back in the day. I understand your argument well. Such a scenario is risky and could tili towards frustration/disappointment/etc. for some.

 

AWACS is the same AWACS used all missions before I replaced them by EWR's. They're saved and kept as templates and always worked just fine. Not sure what's going on with AI waypoints on the Mariana Islands map. Today, I fixed that by giving the AWACS 50 waypoints for which it would need at least 8 hours to complete. And in case it lands due to lack of fuel (and it did after almost 6 hours while running the test this morning in fast forward), another AWACS takes its place.

 

Well, the carriers were placed 60 km further west, towards the islands, to avoid exactly that. Then Blue players suggested pushing them further east to avoid airquakes while I argued pretty much like you now. Either way there are advantages and disadvantages, but I'm still in favour of moving the ships back east, and I'll do that.

 

Overall, there will be a reduction in slots (and maybe aircraft numbers), especially, for Red to avoid having all these fighters buzzing around like flies.

[Dagger 2-2]

One observation I would like to make about the mission is that due to the state of the SC Kuznetsov, Su-33 pilots really struggle to line up with the wheel chocks for launch. This is because they are directly beneath us and the fact we have no deck crew what so ever, and if you overshoot your line up by a fraction on a meter the wheel chocks when they are raised will launch you aircraft into the air and smack you back down on the deck unceremoniously smashing your under carriage on the deck. Likewise happens if you undershoot your line up as the JBD will launch you into the air as well. Not to mention the aircraft "crashing" onto the deck again causes damage to the carrier .

 

To cut a long story short, is it possible to give the Su-33 pilots external camera views to aid in lining up for launches ?

 

Boiler.

[Alpenwolf]

3 hours ago, Dagger 2-2 said:

One observation I would like to make about the mission is that due to the state of the SC Kuznetsov, Su-33 pilots really struggle to line up with the wheel chocks for launch. This is because they are directly beneath us and the fact we have no deck crew what so ever, and if you overshoot your line up by a fraction on a meter the wheel chocks when they are raised will launch you aircraft into the air and smack you back down on the deck unceremoniously smashing your under carriage on the deck. Likewise happens if you undershoot your line up as the JBD will launch you into the air as well. Not to mention the aircraft "crashing" onto the deck again causes damage to the carrier .

 

To cut a long story short, is it possible to give the Su-33 pilots external camera views to aid in lining up for launches ?

 

Boiler.

 

External views are either for all or no one. There's no restricted option like that. At least not one I'm aware of.

 

I'll add some units on the ship to mark some critical lines and areas.

[Dagger 2-2]

11 hours ago, Alpenwolf said:

I'll add some units on the ship to mark some critical lines and areas.

It's a start, much appreciated.

 

Boiler

[Sizzle]

May I suggest that the schedule for this event gets a sticky post? Maybe edit the first post with the next date/time for the event. I was searching for it in this thread but couldn't find it. It was only when I checked the regular Cold War thread that I found it there: 

 

1 minute ago, Sizzle said:

May I suggest that the schedule for this event gets a sticky post? Maybe edit the first post with the next date/time for the event. I was searching for it in this thread but couldn't find it. It was only when I checked the regular Cold War thread that I found it there: 

 

 

 

Sorry, my mistake. The next event is a totally new thing. I thought it was just another round for this one. 

[Alpenwolf]

1 hour ago, Sizzle said:

May I suggest that the schedule for this event gets a sticky post? Maybe edit the first post with the next date/time for the event. I was searching for it in this thread but couldn't find it. It was only when I checked the regular Cold War thread that I found it there: 

 

 

 

Sorry, my mistake. The next event is a totally new thing. I thought it was just another round for this one. 

 

All good, mate

[ROSS_Pups]

Password?