What are Black Shark pilots expecting from BS/FC2 Mulltiplay servers?

[Grimes]

This is a pretty straight forward poll. Simply put, what do Black Shark players expecting when they hop online in a server that has aircraft and threats that are not normally present in current Black Shark online games.

 

Please vote and comment why you voted for what you did. As a mission designer and server admin I am very interested in the results and I am confident other dedicated server admins in Lock On and Black Shark alike are also interested. Information like this can be put to good use in the crafting a positive user experience for all pilots.

[NotiA10]

i think the result of this poll will be the same as for most a2g and fighter pilots - work together as a team / i think that it is the ultimate in terms of the evolution of a virutal pilot, if you have a great simulation platform (eg. lockon and DCS). handling the plane is one thing, working as a team a completely different story altogether. good poll, good questions

 

cheers,

 

NotiA10

[theGozr]

Actually i'm very curious with the SU25T tweaks and tools available.. I think it will be great!! and be with the helicos attack or support!

[element1108]

This will definitely change up the way we play in the black shark. We can rely on fast movers to take out sam threats that act as a huge thread to us (without a RWR) and we'll be able to vector in 25's and 25T's on exact positions of targets so they can spend less time searching and more time killing :). Meanwhile we'll have the fighter jockey's over our heads making sure we don't get bounced.

 

It will be a symphony instead of a solo! ;)

[sobek]

I see the biggest potential in asymmetric coop missions, as on a symmetric battlefield, the Ka-50 has no place.

[isoul]

... We can rely on fast movers to take out sam threats that act as a huge thread to us (without a RWR) and we'll be able to vector in 25's and 25T's on exact positions of targets so they can spend less time searching and more time killing :).

 

Just a thought... given the advantages/disadvantages of both aircraft and helicopters who would be best to suppress SAMS/AAA? I think that in many cases the helicopters can be used cause their ability to fly at low altitudes and use terrain to get in cover (these are the tactics used by Wild Weasel role aircraft in SEAD missions). I 've found in wiki that :

 

During Operation Desert Storm on 17 January 1991, eight AH-64As guided by four MH-53 Pave Low III, were used to destroy a portion of the Iraqi radar network to allow bomber aircraft into Iraq without detection.

 

So SEAD performed by helos has some advantages!

 

I see the biggest potential in asymmetric coop missions, as on a symmetric battlefield, the Ka-50 has no place.

 

Stupid to ask but how do you define symmetric/asymmetric mission/battlefield? I ve heard only about symmetric/asymmetric threats so far and I dunno if the meaning is the same!

Edited January 5, 2010 by isoul

[EagleEye]

I´m voted for the last, Coop only, though. It would be somewhat nice to have fast movers for cover. It must be possible to finish a mission without fast movers, though(if no one joins/or is willing to take that slot).

[astrospud]

I think there would need to be minimum participation from CAP players, CAS players and BS pilots alike.

For example, on FPS ranked servers, there is a minimum number of slots needed to be filled on both sides before a match can commence.

I think even in a co-op mission, at least one slot needs of each to be occupied if the mission contains elements of close air support, air cover and SAM/AAA elimination. I don't think it would work otherwise..

 

Pls correct me if this kind of minimum player requirement already exists in LOMAC/LOFC MP missions, as I don't have these.

[Boberro]

Fifty fifty, I voted for last option, however as lonewolf it is difficult to fly Frog or slower Hog alone against enemies. But sometimes it is funny ^^.

 

Regarding to BS, I think it would be really nice to cooperate with Su-25A\T and A-10A together. But I don't think it would be good idea to create AG task just on the middle of battle area, where is huge AA combat... At least not in every scenario. I would like to have scenarios wher I can safety fly my chopper, quite far from main AA battle.

 

Also about amount of units... it is not good idea to always put 100 tanks, 200 shilkas and 100 trucks and voile, we're happy we made good AG task. Many units will slow down PCs, create missions with not many and not small amount of units. And put them wisely, not 400 units on 10 km^2.

[Case]

Also about amount of units... it is not good idea to always put 100 tanks, 200 shilkas and 100 trucks and voile, we're happy we made good AG task. Many units will slow down PCs, create missions with not many and not small amount of units. And put them wisely, not 400 units on 10 km^2.

So what would you say if you got a specific task in a server, like taking out a bridge, and flying with you would be an other pilot tasked with taking out the air defences near the bridge. Would you be interested in any of that or would you rather go out and kill every unit on the map?

[sobek]

Stupid to ask but how do you define symmetric/asymmetric mission/battlefield? I ve heard only about symmetric/asymmetric threats so far and I dunno if the meaning is the same!

 

By symmetric i meant that the adversaries are about equal in numbers and technology (well maybe not both, but numbers can outweigh technological advantage to a certain point). Simply put, what i meant was an all out war between two coutries militaries, not between military and guerilla forces.

[TAIPAN_]

I voted coop, but I could see the other way working too.

 

Air to air against each other, would need to have some well designed missions.

 

e.g. SideA task ka-50 to kill some ground targets, SideA also has Su-33 fighter cover, SideB has some F-15s, who have to get past the Su-33 before getting to the ka-50.

 

Since servers do not always get enough players, what is needed is a way to change roles without having to close and open programs.

 

ED should make a multiplayer launcher, where you can join a DCS server, and pick from any FC2 or DCS aircraft. If you own that particular game, then you would spawn as that plane in the server. That way, if a target was too far for your KA-50, you could take out the SAMs and then spawn as the Su-25, and then fly and blow the target. This is important if your team mates drop out for instance.

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

I voted "I want my target area to be safe from Air to Air threats". Helicopters are not used where there is a potential AA threat. We have seen that again and again in recent conflicts. Thus, in on/line maps, make a mission and task Black Shark to do a special mission, maybe destroy a vehicle traveling mountain road or a suspect truck in an urban environment.

[liotczik]

For me, all answers are true:

- I don't fly online. From my experiences, it's either empty skies or free for all, neither of which suits me particulary well. And unfortunately currently I can't dedicate myself to a serious virtual squadron nor virtual airline.

- I will fly in Black Shark only servers. Because it would be cool to co-op with other human players using datalink and various clever RL 2-ship and 4-ship tactics.

- I want my target area to be safe from Air to Air threats. As above, with addtion of: "without being harrassed by merciless enemy fast movers".

- I want to be on the front lines in the thick of it. It would be even better, if enemy merciless fast movers were on mercy of our top-cover working with us as a team :D Two different yet linked with themselves battles on one battlefield. Perfect!

- I want to work closely with other A2G aircraft. Let Su-25's take out long range SAMs and weaken a bit SHORAD/MANPADs, then let us finish the rest off, while A-10 FAC(A) controls the whole ordeal and top-cover chases away enemy merciless fast movers and ground pounders threatening our FARP, while we rearm to get the second wave of advancing enemy troops and armour, when suddenly our AWACS picks up a massive... That would be at the same time insane and fantastic.

[ericinexile]

I voted for the last option. But I want few IF ANY fighters in the mission. H2H and A2G don't mix well as the fighters have an obvious advantage and, unlike the real world, air supperiority will never be gained by either side due to respawns. That means that the strike planes will be easy pickings over the battlefield. I can count on one hand the number of successful Su25 strikes I have made on a high-occupancy online server. Yes, that says something about my NOE strike skills but also the futility of striking with fighters over the front. It's just not worth the planning knowing your chances are slim.

[Boberro]

So what would you say if you got a specific task in a server' date=' like taking out a bridge, and flying with you would be an other pilot tasked with taking out the air defences near the bridge. Would you be interested in any of that or would you rather go out and kill every unit on the map?[/quote']

 

Yes, it would be nice. In Lo you can't do such task (I mean triggering especially), but in Lo 2 it would nice to fly example as main task to destroy bunker and close units. But for task like this cooperation between players is needed, this may be a problem. When u set up mission with specific target to kill and add units I guess I will be happy. You can do various missions, in one there are more units and convoys to kill, another coop between Su-25T and Ka-50 is strickly needed (frog against radar sams and heavier SHORAD). Let's see what future of Lo 2 will bring to us. Anyway i feel missions will be much better than now.

Edited January 5, 2010 by Boberro

[Feuerfalke]

4 in combination with 5, because if you really mean 4 like it's supposed to be, you should have 5 included.

[GGTharos]

Just a thought... given the advantages/disadvantages of both aircraft and helicopters who would be best to suppress SAMS/AAA? I think that in many cases the helicopters can be used cause their ability to fly at low altitudes and use terrain to get in cover (these are the tactics used by Wild Weasel role aircraft in SEAD missions). I 've found in wiki that :

 

During Operation Desert Storm on 17 January 1991, eight AH-64As guided by four MH-53 Pave Low III, were used to destroy a portion of the Iraqi radar network to allow bomber aircraft into Iraq without detection.

 

So SEAD performed by helos has some advantages!

 

This was an exception to the rule.

SEAD aircraft will fly where SAMs can see them and shoot them, since the best way to take out a SAM is to throw an ARM at its guidance/illuminator radar.

The sites those Apaches attacked had no real anti-helicopter capability either ... in recent exercises conducted in Germany, a Patriot battery working in conjunction with roving avengers made life extremely hard for a bunch of apaches.

[Grimes]

Thanks for the votes and the responses. Keep them coming!

 

To help aide those who just have Black Shark and have never played in a LockOn server before I will try to explain what it generally is and what it isn't.

 

-Typically Air to Air fighters only exist through human players. Someone has to join the server in order for there to be any real threat.

-A2A aircraft are typically given different waypoints and area of operations when compared to A2G

 

That said there are targets of opportunity where the fighters prowl. On more than a few occasions we in 3Sqn have sent 1 or 2 25Ts to help SEAD where our friendly fighters are in the area while having fighter escort and keeping us informed of the situation.

 

-As long as fighters are in the air on both sides they will try to hunt each other down.

-A2G target areas are accessible to fighters but are slightly "out of their way"

-The AI consists almost exclusively of ground targets. Occasionally there are AI aircraft, usually they are AWACS (and escorts for awacs) or a simple strike package.

-A2G and A2A sometimes operate from different airbases and locations, the a2g a/c usually are closer to their target area and have a shorter flight (due to their speed)

[isoul]

This was an exception to the rule.

SEAD aircraft will fly where SAMs can see them and shoot them, since the best way to take out a SAM is to throw an ARM at its guidance/illuminator radar.

The sites those Apaches attacked had no real anti-helicopter capability either ... in recent exercises conducted in Germany, a Patriot battery working in conjunction with roving avengers made life extremely hard for a bunch of apaches.

 

Indeed the Iraqi Air Defenses weren't that well prepared for defending against helicopters and indeed the SEAD aircraft have more means to engage and defend against SAMS and AAA(HARM, ECM etc.).

 

On the front line I suppose that tank hunters ,like attack helos, has a chance to take out enemy AAA or short range SAM launcher. Greek army uses Apaches against OSA-AK/TOR-M1 scenarios for training purposes but they never tried (for some reason :music_whistling:) to pit them against the Patriot or S-300 SAM systems which are long range.

[GGTharos]

The range of the Patriot and S300 systems doesn't really matter - the Tor will outrange a hellfire easily even at low altitude, and the OSA will end up even or so. More likely you'll be getting well inside its range to attack it anyway.

 

The catch here is that the Apache comes with ECM, the OSA is susceptible to it, and perhaps the TOR is also - but as far as anti-helicopter capabilities go, I'd fear the TOR, and then I'd fear a Tunguska some more because it is specifically designed to deal with choppers and doesn't care quite so much about ECM (the missile is a beam-rider).

 

Always keep in mind that a SAM for a heli is usually a target of opportunity (one that must be dealt with, but more of a 'because it's there' rather than active SEAD/DEAD duty) and the real target is armor and personnel.

 

The Apache is capable of attacking targets from complete concealment given a forward observer - be it another heli - or a guy with a laser gun.

[Case]

Come on guys, please don't take this thread off topic.

 

Grimes is asking for some input that may benefit future BS/FC2 servers.

[104th_Crunch]

to explain what it generally is and what it isn't.

 

-A2G target areas are accessible to fighters but are slightly "out of their way"

 

-A2G and A2A sometimes operate from different airbases and locations, the a2g a/c usually are closer to their target area and have a shorter flight (due to their speed)

 

Designs like this are the key I think. Give an area on the same server where A2G operations can take place far away from the front lines. At the same time, Strikers have the option of going to the front lines to do some damage. The are many possibilities. I think you can mostly satisfy both of the last options in this poll with a single mission using this kind of design. I imagine, however, that there will continue to be dedicated A2G servers.

[zdXu]

98% on open Black-Shark multiplayer-servers you get this expierence:

 

Loop this 7 times...

Begin========Begin

1. Start with cheat

2. Make some mission progress with try and error.

3. Five minutes after start got shot. Die.

4. Go to 1.

End==========End

Leave the server

 

So in contrast to many others on Black-Shark- + LockOn-multiplayer-servers i don't expect any change.

[Total]

Ground pounding while Kuky and Grimes maintain air superiority in the area - that's gonna be fun :)