The F-15 and MP gameplay

[EtherealN]

Grimes, I do agree that a "realistic" scenario, made in the general scheme that I outlined, would probably have to include F-15's being outnumbered to stay "balanced". Nothing wrong in that kind of balance (so the US was stretched thin across the globe, live with it etc), the problem is partly in finding that balance but mainly in getting people to want to play that kind of "battle" as opposed to airquake as their daily FC2 dose.

[Krippz]

Grimes, I do agree that a "realistic" scenario, made in the general scheme that I outlined, would probably have to include F-15's being outnumbered to stay "balanced". Nothing wrong in that kind of balance (so the US was stretched thin across the globe, live with it etc), the problem is partly in finding that balance but mainly in getting people to want to play that kind of "battle" as opposed to airquake as their daily FC2 dose.

 

I couldn't agree with with you more but the onus is on the community to:

 

1. Make intelligently designed missions

 

2. Have squads run these mission on their servers.

 

Number two takes courage because as you said with respect to FC2 a lot of people are used to "airquake".

[Guest Falcon]

And I guise the jamming evidence is still not available so why making the advantage for F-15, Im happy whit everything I get, And those who could fly F-15 were making most kills in 1.12, now its even better. And all this is based on pure fanboyism.

 

Some of you should grow up your self a litle and try to understand that Im not complaining about the work ED made. Im just whining like all of u did about blinking and Aim-120s not be accuret, I will not even goin to Russian missiles at this point.

 

Hello everyone new guy here, long time lurker. Teknetinium, the funny thing is that EVERYONE was complaining about people blinking ECM on and off, not just the F-15 pilots. It was worst for the Su's, cause their missiles would be thrashed from the start. And then to add the super chaff to that :music_whistling: a lot of them had no chance.

[Teknetinium]

And plz don't underestimate us Multi-players we do fly and test our share to.

[104th_Crunch]

I couldn't agree with with you more but the onus is on the community to:

 

1. Make intelligently designed missions

 

2. Have squads run these mission on their servers.

 

Number two takes courage because as you said with respect to FC2 a lot of people are used to "airquake".

 

Regardless of how you design the mission, it doesn't matter in some ways. The onus is not completely on the mission, it is actually more on the player. For the 999th time in these forums...

It's how you play the mission ® :)

 

Some squad mates and I can fly a mission and set our own goals for a realistic scenario. In the same mission, some lone wolf can jump in their fighter and try to be the number 1 top gun dude. You're not going to stop that. I agree, however, that for those that do want to fly realistically in terms of tasking, the mission is important.

 

Best thing is to join a squad I guess that likes to fly in this manner. You are just not going to get the same experience flying in a preset tasked mission with a squad that you will online in a 24/7 server. Another example is an event like Red Flag. You can't replicate a one off, task oriented event like Red Flag in a 24/7 live server. In a live server, you have to make concessions for players jumping in and out of the mission with multiple lives, lone wolfs etc.

 

Really, my greatest experience in FC was the 51st's Crimean Incident. A continuing, dynamic, resource monitored campaign. It worked because of lots of planning and squad team work. Trust me, you will never get this level of sophistication from a 24/7 server.

 

Some more default tools in DCS for MP I am sure will come to help the situation. The current trigger system was an excellent addition, but it can be time consuming to work with. I also hope that at some time DCS will have a stronger emphasis on Multiplayer. It is no doubt a lot of work for a company the size of ED. The best thing I guess is if the player base would grow. Then you would have a bigger pool of people that wish to fly realistically as well as air quake. I hate that bloody term lol.

Edited August 23, 2010 by Crunch

[3Sqn_TomAce]

All valid points, the only thing I don't like is adjusted 120C loads I think 6 Charlie's are too much let alone anyone who takes 8, those pilots are on the the nose.

[104th_Crunch]

All valid points, the only thing I don't like is adjusted 120C loads I think 6 Charlie's are too much let alone anyone who takes 8, those pilots are on the the nose.

 

Enforced payloads is a good idea, but then you loose the customization for A/G loadouts that Wolverine's Extended Payload Mod etc. gives you. Maybe it is worth the trade off.

[Steel Jaw]

The only question that needs to be addressed is...

 

is the "new" F15 in FC2 realistic or not?

[Krippz]

Regardless of how you design the mission, it doesn't matter in some ways. The onus is not completely on the mission, it is actually more on the player. For the 999th time in these forums...

It's how you play the mission ® :)

 

Agreed if players spent more on their pre-flight briefing and working with friendlies to accomplish their ATO and less time scrambling to take off and joining the virtual rat race the multiplayer experience would be a bit more worthwile. But in my opinion the scope of the mission dictates how SOME players play which is what I was getting at.

[3Sqn_TomAce]

If squad seniors/leaders manager their pilots to try and work on what Evontroy is saying that will start to bridge the gap. Personally from now on when I have squad mates with me I'll do my best to get our group on Server Coms to start the briefing/teamwork.

[MoGas]

One solution, 80's only scenarios....., I miss that anyway!

 

cheers

[Fahhh]

+1 for 80's only scenarios :) SARH duels/fights are so much more fun. What is more, often the fights end up in close air-combat = even more fun! :)

[Pilotasso]

Seen the ECM and loadout posts on previous pages and would like to point out a few things.

 

-Firstly, ECM is not the average of signal strength, i.e. radar output VS jammer output. It is frequency hoping and other smart tricks that are not simulated in Lockon. Hence the criteria ED announced for FC2 as ecm is not supposed to be 100% effective. F-15 and Su-27 burn through is the same (even though their radars aere very different so this might be a balance issue until DCS: jet fighter comes along). Only the mig is left with a shorter burn through range and that is considering the smaller and weaker radar it has (again, not entirely correct but the code at this time doesnt allow better).

This makes the supposed F-15 advantage a total misconception in the actual scene of things concerning the SIM.

 

-Secondly, Regarding loadouts. If the loadouts used online are standard ones in real world prctice it makes no sense to say it makes no sense to carry them (you following me? ;) ). On the other hand people are quite happy to take 6 R-77's (which was never practiced actively in RuAF let alone Ukraines) so why not 6 AMRAAM's? If that bothers people so much, then yes an 80's mission would be a good idea.

 

-thridly, there is no evidence that F-15's are getting better results online. They may rack up kills fast but the kill ratio of 99% of people is close to 1:1 anyway. What the stats are showing is that few people are getting away with impunity and need to adjust tactics t the new reality for better results. I have seen many many people switch to F-15's only to see them getting same results as they had with the mig.

The claims that F-15 is somehow being superior online seriously lacks evidence.

 

Getting good results form F-15 requires every bit of skill as the other planes require. You may want to use superior weapons at will but without propper tactics you will not enjoy better results.

 

Lots of people really need to stop complaining and open their eyes. Mind you that Im not just talking about this thread but many others on this forum and others. hate it when bruised egos degenerate into conspiracy theories and trolling arround. ruins the fun.

[MAD MAX]

Pilotasso! IF in game we have ECM like a real life, and she worked like a real life with 5 points of work, you never lunched the rocket AIM-120 from 50 km!

Your tactics and Mustang is fly on 12-15 rm and lunch AIM-120 from 50 km in TWS! Then back home. Thats why i think in game 15 sec, not 3.

[Grimes]

. Another example is an event like Red Flag. You can't replicate a one off, task oriented event like Red Flag in a 24/7 live server. In a live server, you have to make concessions for players jumping in and out of the mission with multiple lives, lone wolfs etc.

 

Really, my greatest experience in FC was the 51st's Crimean Incident. A continuing, dynamic, resource monitored campaign. It worked because of lots of planning and squad team work. Trust me, you will never get this level of sophistication from a 24/7 server.

 

 

Uh oh. I might ramble more truth about MP again. :music_whistling:

 

Theres plenty one can dream about for implementation to enhance the MP experience. But lets look at what is technically possible via the current triggers... and for the sake of arguement I'm including the already built in features that are lacking in the editor that Blindspot is doing such an awesome job of implementing the way they should have been. (read "or" statements)

 

To be honest I can't look at many other MP games out there and not think of how to adapt whatever they are playing into FC2. Aside from the more advanced subgames within ARMA or Starcraft 2 we can pretty much do everything. The only really tricky stuff to create has to deal with shifting spawn locations and getting the needed new information to the player. Shifting spawns doesn't exactly work unless the mission killed everyone and forced them to choose a new player slot and "rebuild" the field of play. Which if you are gonna do that you might as well make it load a whole new mission. The point is if you can think of it, its probably possible to build. The only issue is figuring out how to do it.

 

It's how you play the mission ®

I suppose the question is "what is your mission?" I tend to think there is a difference between "shooting down a mig" and "shooting down a mig as part of your CAP." Generally its the same difference between airquake and an objective. One thing I've realized is that making the conscious decision to react to an event is far more powerful and rewarding than searching and destroying the nearest enemy that will just respawn anyway. I suppose the task at hand is to figure out how to make it worthwhile for someone to make that decision.

[Pilotasso]

Pilotasso! IF in game we have ECM like a real life, and she worked like a real life with 5 points of work, you never lunched the rocket AIM-120 from 50 km!

Your tactics and Mustang is fly on 12-15 rm and lunch AIM-120 from 50 km in TWS! Then back home. Thats why i think in game 15 sec, not 3.

 

It depends on radar agility and pod adjusting agility and other tricks. If my radar changes frequency faster than stobirkya pod then ECM has no effect. 50km shots or even longer are perfectly possible with potent radars. Its also possible to fire at that distance with HOJ mode, but right now its broken ingame, too bad.

 

And yes, we wont come closer to give the oponents a chance. The only way to kill more often than die is to shoot first and at the same time stay away from a return shot. This is ABC of air combat.

 

If your flying Mig and Su-27 your best weapon is not R27ER or ET not even R-77 or RVV-AE, its the RVV-surprise. ;)

Edited August 23, 2010 by Pilotasso

[MoGas]

Pilotasso, MiG drivers don't know, that we have not a silent kill on HOJ anymore. ;)

[ФрогФут]

Pilotasso knows everything on soviet and russian ECM systems.:D

[Pilotasso]

Tell me something that I said was wrong. :)

[ФрогФут]

I didn't tell you are wrong in theory. I said, that you know everything in soviet and russian ECM systems. When reading between the lines, you might read something, that never was ther.;)

[Pilotasso]

Well then, what did I worte between the lines?

[ФрогФут]

You reed me between the lines.

[Teknetinium]

You reed me between the lines.

 

Changing the burnthru is pure F-15 fan boy inputs. There is claims where MIG-21 BISON sneaks much closer whit jammers on then 45km.

 

At First It was F-15 having better turning-rate then Su-27, Pilotasso and GG had evidence even for that discrepancy, whit claims that its totaly realistic. Trying to explain the power of the engines to me :) Good testing by the way.

 

After whining about the blinking ED tried to solve this problem, Thank you for that. What i suspect is that the F-15 fanboys had way to big influence, Changing the jammer range or increase the jammer to 15 sec cool down is pure F-15 advantage, Funny thing is that there is no evidence still that Su-27 jammer would give this opportunity to F-15, still they are implemented. Taking only F-15 TWS in account forgetting how Su-27 get effected in this jamming scenario is pure nonsense.

Edited August 23, 2010 by Teknetinium

[Boberro]

People vote. So far most agree "Its fine the way it is, people need to grow a pair and adapt". So it seems most don't think F-15 has been uber upgraded and don't think it is unfair.

[Teknetinium]

I voted its fine the way it is, jammers are not.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!