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

[flask]

For me I plan to try and fly with any KA-50 guy/s with the frog ( then the new A10 when it comes)on the open servers, I have often bleated about the lack of cover for the frog, so now is my turn to practice what I preach,

I forsee a period of adjustment and some loss of control( ie waiting for the KA 50 go ahead order to attack, things of that nature), but IMHO "A" game is not as good till you use all the peices on the board.

To all the dedicated KA-50 guys out there "Hope to fly with you soon"

[zangler]

i voted for the last option...

 

however, i think it is perfectly legitimate to point out the fact that the KA-50 was, in full battle scenarios, to be used with the more modern/higher computing power (if you can put it that way) KA-52...so in many scenarios...we are asking, or get asked to do tasks that were not the primary design of the aircraft...and typically that means it will do it poorly...

 

having a second crew member with the proper equipment...or the presence of KA-52s on the battlefield really would change the effectiveness of the KA-50 a great deal...in many cases it would be more like playing with the labels on...

[Slayer]

I look forward to it as long as the maps aren't "everyone goto wpt 2 and duke it out" The helicopters wont stand a chance if the missions are like that.

 

Also there are some very good BS pilots out there. How funny will it be when they slip past the defenses, start tearing apart the enemys airbase and vulching.

Edited April 24, 2010 by Slayer

[sweinhart3]

I voted for the last one but, but if there are A2A guys flying around trying to take out the heli guys, Im not gonna bother playing Blackshark because they wouldnt stand a chance.

[Frederf]

Also there are some very good BS pilots out there. How funny will it be when they slip past the defenses, start tearing apart the enemys airbase and vulching.

 

Ewwwwww.

[Insanatrix]

I think alot of the problems that arise from joint operations with the KA-50 and the fast movers is how willing people are to accept the role handed to them. If you're in a fighter do you just wanna fly shoot missiles boom boom pew pew or do you want an objective? same goes for ground attacks. I can sit all day long and toss vikhr's at 8 klicks out, It's not rocket science.

 

To me the fun is in the objective not in the big piece of metal flying at a target. When people start working together on TS thats usually when the fun starts. It's also when those objectives come together.

 

If I get my ass handed to me by a fighter I don't sit there and go OMG easy kill I'm so mad!!! I say GK, Because it was. Either my air cover wasn't there or he was good enough to dispatch them and still come after me.

 

Another reason why ground targets should be in the mix is because people who just hop onto a server to pew pew aren't gonna care about objectives. they are gonna fly to WP2 and pew pew it up. I will use the 104th server as an example. The operation liberty map thats up has the KA-50's at opposite ends of the fighting. If someone wants to attack those KA-50's and also the mud movers, They have to make a concerted effort to do so. By the same token if someone wants to defend said aircraft they have to make a concerted effort to do so. So at least if the air combat is taking place over the ground combat if they happen to shoot someone down guess what, They just protected a Ka-50's butt. Sure it might be easier for a fighter to shoot me down however it also is easier for one to shoot him down and so on. It's also alot more hectic for them to scan 50m off the ground and still watch their asses up high.

 

 

Anyways just my 2 cents.

[Case]

To me the fun is in the objective not in the big piece of metal flying at a target. When people start working together on TS thats usually when the fun starts. It's also when those objectives come together.

 

Couldn't agree more. The BS/FC2 combo now gives mission makers the options to get players to work together in a COOP environment. Take MBot's recent mission (http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=54111) as an example where Ka-50's need to mark targets for Su-25's. The targets are hard to see from high up, but rather easy to find with the Ka-50.

 

Yesterday some of us flew this mission, with 7 of the 8 players being on our teamspeak server, both squad mates and people we had never met before. However, the mindset was exactly right to work together and have the Kamov's mark the targets while the Frogfoot's took them out. It was great!

[Boberro]

After while this thread has been created I see option "I want to work closely with other A2G aircraft." won. And I think it is good, recently I have played on 51st server where Su-25 had marked targets before my engagement begun. It was nice athmosphere of cooperate. I like it. Another time I was as Su-25T\A and helped choppers on battlefield.

 

104th server as an example. The operation liberty map thats up has the KA-50's at opposite ends of the fighting. If someone wants to attack those KA-50's and also the mud movers, They have to make a concerted effort to do so.

 

I am not sure, mud movers are quite easy accessible for enemy fighters. But thanks near friendly runway you can run away to Kutaisi :D

[Insanatrix]

After while this thread has been created I see option "I want to work closely with other A2G aircraft." won. And I think it is good, recently I have played on 51st server where Su-25 had marked targets before my engagement begun. It was nice athmosphere of cooperate. I like it. Another time I was as Su-25T\A and helped choppers on battlefield.

 

 

 

I am not sure, mud movers are quite easy accessible for enemy fighters. But thanks near friendly runway you can run away to Kutaisi :D

 

That's kind of my point. They will always be easily accessible without fighter cover. But having them on opposite ends isn't the solution. I'm talking about getting people involved and filling the role's that these aircraft are designed for. It could just be personal preference but shooting down a plane is fun for awhile. Shooting down a plane and protecting my friendly mud movers definitly never gets old. Feeling of accomplishment maybe or sense of purpose.

[104th_Crunch]

That's kind of my point. They will always be easily accessible without fighter cover. But having them on opposite ends isn't the solution.

 

And if you did not have these areas far from the from lines for the ground pounders, you would have ground pounders complain that they can't kill anything because they have no cover. Trust me, we have been there done that with FC1. We may have Ka-50 now, but we have had A-10s and Su-25s since 1995 :)

 

That is not is no to say that there should not be an area along the frontlines that has targets for the ground pounders, but if that is all you have in a large persistent mission, you will be disappointed when you are continually popped by a fighter. Not everyone is willing to work as a team, which they should unfortunately.

[Insanatrix]

And if you did not have these areas far from the from lines for the ground pounders, you would have ground pounders complain that they can't kill anything because they have no cover. Trust me, we have been there done that with FC1. We may have Ka-50 now, but we have had A-10s and Su-25s since 1995 :)

 

That is not is no to say that there should not be an area along the frontlines that has targets for the ground pounders, but if that is all you have in a large persistent mission, you will be disappointed when you are continually popped by a fighter. Not everyone is willing to work as a team, which they should unfortunately.

 

I'm not trying to argue with your point of view because I know first hand what you mean. My post wasn't a poke at your server either I just used it as an example of a mission that has Objectives so far away from one another and spread out.

 

 

This thread though, is about what players expect out of the 2 sims being utilized together and quite frankly that is what I expect. If you don't want to work as a team or hop in Teamspeak with people then why are you playing multiplayer? It's an honest question. Lets face it this isn't a game with 20-30 maps with the objective being to totally go 30 and 0 and pwnzor teh noobs. If you play it like that it gets boring quick. The longevity comes from Playing it as a sim, and working together. Getting shot down is annoying as shit, but take a step back and ask yourself why it happened.

 

It's Really funny when you hop in a server and see 8 people on one side in Ka-50's or A-10's or Su-25's and 8 on the other side in fighters and mud movers and then hear them complain that they got shot down. Obviously they aren't going to toss green lollipops at you.

 

What it has come down to is a mario kart race for ground targets. PEW PEW my vikhr's,mav's,etc... 20 minutes later I'm done rinse repeat. Same thing in the air. There is no objective other than to shoot.

 

Like I said, My 2 cents.

 

*edit* Sorry this post might have come off a little vehement. Bit tired and cranky :doh: I know that not everyone wants to play it like a sim and its cool. Just gets boring the same old over and over.

Edited May 17, 2010 by Insanatrix

[Grimes]

Not everyone is willing to work as a team, which they should unfortunately.

 

You can always try to force them to.

 

I'm not trying to argue with your point of view because I know first hand what you mean. My post wasn't a poke at your server either I just used it as an example of a mission that has Objectives so far away from one another and spread out.

 

 

This thread though, is about what players expect out of the 2 sims being utilized together and quite frankly that is what I expect. If you don't want to work as a team or hop in Teamspeak with people then why are you playing multiplayer? It's an honest question. Lets face it this isn't a game with 20-30 maps with the objective being to totally go 30 and 0 and pwnzor teh noobs. If you play it like that it gets boring quick. The longevity comes from Playing it as a sim, and working together. Getting shot down is annoying as shit, but take a step back and ask yourself why it happened.

 

It's Really funny when you hop in a server and see 8 people on one side in Ka-50's or A-10's or Su-25's and 8 on the other side in fighters and mud movers and then hear them complain that they got shot down. Obviously they aren't going to toss green lollipops at you.

 

What it has come down to is a mario kart race for ground targets. PEW PEW my vikhr's,mav's,etc... 20 minutes later I'm done rinse repeat. Same thing in the air. There is no objective other than to shoot.

 

Like I said, My 2 cents.

 

*edit* Sorry this post might have come off a little vehement. Bit tired and cranky :doh: I know that not everyone wants to play it like a sim and its cool. Just gets boring the same old over and over.

 

Props for using "PEW PEW"

 

I can go on and on about how mission design, player choice, and the overall attitude of players online factors into "how we play the game." You can change one factor, but the other two have the greater impact and are much more difficult to adjust.

 

I think as long as the MP interface of the aircraft selection screen and briefing is setup like counter-strike, it will always be airquake online. Only during events where it is actively encouraged to join comms (ATC weekends) the game transforms itself away from airquake and more toward simming.

[104th_Crunch]

I'm not trying to argue with your point of view because I know first hand what you mean. My post wasn't a poke at your server either.

 

No worries, never took it in a bad way anyway. Debate is always good. Just ask Grimes, sometimes I want to throw stuff at him, but I know we are just having a friendly debate. lol

[Insanatrix]

Yeah debate is good. I think with the addition of KA-50's to the ranks it is alot more frustrating because they are so vulnerable. They require more protection. Having the ground targets away from the fast movers worked without them because even in an A-10 or 25T you get awacs calls and you aren't totally blind. In the 50 it's like argh what hit me!? And you also have alot of people shooting them down for that fact, so it becomes frustrating.

 

I am a firm believer in that mission design and goals can make people work together, kind of how Grimes described. I'm trying to work on a mission that will incorporate every aircraft and still be fun to fly.