F-15 is not a hangar queen

[Frostie]

More players in a server can become co-operative occasions, but when few players are in there it is up to the players to make something else happen.

I don't think airquake is such a bad thing, a time and a place.

 

Being co-operative and organised takes time and structure, where as flying just to hone your skills can make airquake welcoming. The problem is that too many people associate airquake as a negative when in actual fact it is the very thing that keeps FC going.

 

I don't want to appear that I don't care for co-operative flying, it is something I do regularly and enjoy very much. But to make a public server of 30,40,50+ players concentrate solely on co-operative flying is impossible. It's been put to the test numerous times with numerous methods, a lot of work goes into making a co-operative occassion, notable cases are GCI events and community events. This can not be kept up as an everyday occassion.

 

The whole basis of a typical online mission is to have far seperated bases (not too far or else the sundayflyers won't show), SAM networks defending said bases to try and prevent vulching, a collection of ground targets(triggered etc.) for strikers to engage, these can be easy targets (close to the frontline on the friendly side) or hard targets (in enemy territory) and an idea of the frontline. The fighters role is to defend strikers and these ground units and attack anything that threatens those. This makes for an entertaining environment for all participants whether they co-operate or not, the key is that the fighters are helping the strikers achieve their goals.

 

When there are few players in the server with no strikers, flying in your own SAM network is just detrimental to the enjoyment of the mission, it creates hungry bored pilots thirsty and stupid enough to go chasing low and deep into enemy territory looking for action, after all why did they join the server.

[Exorcet]

Being co-operative and organised takes time and structure, where as flying just to hone your skills can make airquake welcoming. The problem is that too many people associate airquake as a negative when in actual fact it is the very thing that keeps FC going.

 

I don't want to appear that I don't care for co-operative flying, it is something I do regularly and enjoy very much. But to make a public server of 30,40,50+ players concentrate solely on co-operative flying is impossible. It's been put to the test numerous times with numerous methods, a lot of work goes into making a co-operative occassion, notable cases are GCI events and community events. This can not be kept up as an everyday occassion.

True. GCI weekend was great, but I understand why I haven't seen it again since last year.

 

When there are few players in the server with no strikers, flying in your own SAM network is just detrimental to the enjoyment of the mission, it creates hungry bored pilots thirsty and stupid enough to go chasing low and deep into enemy territory looking for action, after all why did they join the server.

 

Well, I don't usually go looking for fights in enemy SAM fields, but when it happens, I don't see many options except just going along. Maybe the people who have done it to me aren't as good (or bad?) as some others, but I can at least get some shots off on them even if they're camping their base, and AI SAM is pretty predictable. It'll shoot even when chances are high that it's going to miss. It's not an automatic win tactic, and it can be pretty tense, like a dogfight. There isn't really much to lose unless you want to keep your stats up.

 

Not to say that I condone this as being standard of course, I'd prefer a plane vs plane situation, but I don't see anyway out of forcing the average player to come out of the SAM net when he/she doesn't want to leave.

[FLANKERATOR]

CAP mission appears to be the default task for fighters on public servers.

You can't really blame anyone trying to stay alive. However Frostie is right, a CAP mission means pushing forward as much as possible and try to get the upper hand in a given airspace for a given duration !

 

The bubble concept could be the right solution. It means implementing a simple script forcing people to consider 2 parameters when flying air to air CAP's:

TOS (Time over station) and CAP duration : Pilot has to reach the bubble (CAP station) on time, and hold the airspace (not flying outside of the bubble) for a given duration, otherwise he'd get a "tactical" loss on stats and it counts as a regular loss!

 

The bubble could be as wide as necessary to avoid forcing people into suicidal flying. However, it should be outside of the friendly SAM's cover.

 

The script timer should kick in as the pilot takes off.

[Cali]

Wow, this thread is funny. I see the same thing from russian fighters, they stay low in the mountains. Then they complain about the F-15 pilots flying in outer space, while they are mowing the grass. Frostie, all fighters do something that the other doesn't like. It's been like this for how many years?

[Frostie]

Wow, this thread is funny. I see the same thing from russian fighters, they stay low in the mountains. Then they complain about the F-15 pilots flying in outer space, while they are mowing the grass. Frostie, all fighters do something that the other doesn't like. It's been like this for how many years?

Maybe it's my age but turning up in lightly filled servers and wandering around for nearly an hour with no action other than SAM threats is happening too often for my liking. I don't find that funny, I find it depressing.

[GGTharos]

You can't really blame anyone trying to stay alive. However Frostie is right, a CAP mission means pushing forward as much as possible and try to get the upper hand in a given airspace for a given duration !

 

CAP mission is just CAP, you're describing an OCA fighter sweep - just to be clear about the mission type :)

 

TOS (Time over station) and CAP duration : Pilot has to reach the bubble (CAP station) on time, and hold the airspace (not flying outside of the bubble) for a given duration, otherwise he'd get a "tactical" loss on stats and it counts as a regular loss!

 

Now that is a mighty good suggestion. Along with proper logging or export functions, one could have not just kill stats, but also mission score ... I believe in FC3 creating such a zone might be a possibility, but no promises. Essentially in this case this is a bit of a 'king of the hill' zone.

[Cali]

Maybe it's my age but turning up in lightly filled servers and wandering around for nearly an hour with no action other than SAM threats is happening too often for my liking. I don't find that funny, I find it depressing.

 

It's not your age, like I said F-15's aren't the only ones that do stuff like that also. Maybe you just haven't found the right airquake server.

[Vekkinho]

I guess we need DCS: F/A-18D Wild Weasel

[RIPTIDE]

Everyone knows though that there is the FC2.0 'Mission Complication Level Server Participation Inverse Law.' :D

 

Basically, the more teamwork you require and actual thinking and strategy involved in making your side win, the less participation in the server (and by extension, the more nOOb whines.) And that's how SAD it is.

 

The best (or most pathetic) example I can think of was when the 104th used to run Tygers' Op. Rebellion. The mission itself was fantastic. However to greatly increase anyone side to get the job done, a set of things had to be done with co-ordination from at least 2 flights at any given time. Few if ANY ever even bothered. The worst was that there was a clear marked area called the 'Bermuda Triangle' filled with manpads. And I distinctly remember the same A-10A's time and time again taking off and flying through it at <3k AGL, getting hit by MANPADS. Respawn. Get killed again. Same with the fighters. It was a relatively small area and they persistently flew through it, grass cutting. And then of course the whining... 'waaah... too many manpads.... waaaah this sux' and everyone trying to vote the mission out. What happened in the end? The 104th removed it from the server rotate due to unpopularity. It was in that moment that the character of your average MP pool of players became very clear to me: A bunch of brain dead Muppets.

 

There, I had my rant.

[Grimes]

Well partly you can blame the fairly limited navigation systems of the FC2 aircraft, coupled with the fact you can only have 1 briefing image per team in FC2 to convey any importance of mission objective or threat areas, and you have yourself a nice mixture for people to completely ignore the objectives and potential threat areas. The entire sim (DCS included) lacks capabilities that allow players to view what is going on in the airspace and make decisions for their objectives based on what is going on. The best we have are triggered text messages that offer very little insight into whatever is occurring on the battlefield.

[FLANKERATOR]

CAP mission is just CAP, you're describing an OCA fighter sweep - just to be clear about the mission type :)

Now that is a mighty good suggestion. Along with proper logging or export functions, one could have not just kill stats, but also mission score ... I believe in FC3 creating such a zone might be a possibility, but no promises. Essentially in this case this is a bit of a 'king of the hill' zone.

 

There are different types of CAP missions (BARCAP, TARCAP..etc), but the main idea is there : You have to reach station on time and hold airspace for a given duration. If my memory is good, it's possible to do that in an FC2 mission, a script based on triggers does the job well and displays a text message if the pilot fails to reach the station on time or leaves it too early.

You'd just need to link it to the stats and add the "tactical loss" column.

[Frostie]

Everyone knows though that there is the FC2.0 'Mission Complication Level Server Participation Inverse Law.' :D

 

Basically, the more teamwork you require and actual thinking and strategy involved in making your side win, the less participation in the server (and by extension, the more nOOb whines.) And that's how SAD it is.

 

The best (or most pathetic) example I can think of was when the 104th used to run Tygers' Op. Rebellion. The mission itself was fantastic. However to greatly increase anyone side to get the job done, a set of things had to be done with co-ordination from at least 2 flights at any given time. Few if ANY ever even bothered. The worst was that there was a clear marked area called the 'Bermuda Triangle' filled with manpads. And I distinctly remember the same A-10A's time and time again taking off and flying through it at <3k AGL, getting hit by MANPADS. Respawn. Get killed again. Same with the fighters. It was a relatively small area and they persistently flew through it, grass cutting. And then of course the whining... 'waaah... too many manpads.... waaaah this sux' and everyone trying to vote the mission out. What happened in the end? The 104th removed it from the server rotate due to unpopularity. It was in that moment that the character of your average MP pool of players became very clear to me: A bunch of brain dead Muppets.

 

There, I had my rant.

This is pretty much the problem with FC, there are nowhere near enough participants and most of them don't care for realistic scenarios they just want to kill stuff asap. Fantastic missions don't get the love they require to make them work.

I gave up caring about this situation a long time ago, public servers now only really serve as practice for greater occasions which thanks to the few that make it possible, happen quite often. I just hate wasting my time looking for practice when all practice cares about is how good his k/d looks.

[Krebs20]

Sounds like I need to reinstall FC2 and dust off my Su25t. I can take care of the F15's Sam cover. I've done it plenty of times. Will I make it back? That depends on my cover from freindlies and my own luck.

 

But really, fighters hiding over Sam cover is nothing new. If you have some a2g, ask them to run sead for you. If you don't have anyone and its 1v1, your sol.

[Cali]

This is pretty much the problem with FC, there are nowhere near enough participants and most of them don't care for realistic scenarios they just want to kill stuff asap. Fantastic missions don't get the love they require to make them work.

I gave up caring about this situation a long time ago, public servers now only really serve as practice for greater occasions which thanks to the few that make it possible, happen quite often. I just hate wasting my time looking for practice when all practice cares about is how good his k/d looks.

 

Frostie, that has always been a problem with lock on, FC1 and FC2. Most people don't fly as a team or realistically. People don't follow the waypoints most of the time, but then again the waypoints goes straight to the enemy. Flying in BMS is so different and the interface is great IMHO, way better then FC2. I said this before, if we could merge parts between the 2, that would be a dream. FC2 is airquake no matter how you slice it, I realize that now. The events that some squads set up are nice, but they are still missing something. I really wish Ed wouldn't have taken our ability to make our own loadouts in-game. Wish they would look into the BMS interface and add some things to FC3. Like each flight being able to set their own waypoints would be awesome.

 

People get tired of the same ole stuff all the time, which is one reason you started this thread. Same thing was happening before FC2 was released. It brought some life back in FC, FC3 will do the same.....for a while. Until DCS comes out with enough airframes to actually be fun, there is nothing we can do. With each new release of DCS something new is added. I hope they can add some of the features that F4/BMS have.....not the flight portion, but setting up before the flight.

[Speed]

Well partly you can blame the fairly limited navigation systems of the FC2 aircraft, coupled with the fact you can only have 1 briefing image per team in FC2 to convey any importance of mission objective or threat areas, and you have yourself a nice mixture for people to completely ignore the objectives and potential threat areas. The entire sim (DCS included) lacks capabilities that allow players to view what is going on in the airspace and make decisions for their objectives based on what is going on. The best we have are triggered text messages that offer very little insight into whatever is occurring on the battlefield.

 

And when some modder comes up with a solution to make it better, *cough* LEAVU *cough*, then the public servers ban it. Yes, I know that Export can be used for cheating. ED needs to make us a better integrity checker.

[Speed]

Frostie, that has always been a problem with lock on, FC1 and FC2. Most people don't fly as a team or realistically. People don't follow the waypoints most of the time, but then again the waypoints goes straight to the enemy. Flying in BMS is so different and the interface is great IMHO, way better then FC2. I said this before, if we could merge parts between the 2, that would be a dream. FC2 is airquake no matter how you slice it, I realize that now. The events that some squads set up are nice, but they are still missing something. I really wish Ed wouldn't have taken our ability to make our own loadouts in-game. Wish they would look into the BMS interface and add some things to FC3. Like each flight being able to set their own waypoints would be awesome.

 

People get tired of the same ole stuff all the time, which is one reason you started this thread. Same thing was happening before FC2 was released. It brought some life back in FC, FC3 will do the same.....for a while. Until DCS comes out with enough airframes to actually be fun, there is nothing we can do. With each new release of DCS something new is added. I hope they can add some of the features that F4/BMS have.....not the flight portion, but setting up before the flight.

I'm glad you see this. I think it's primarily the problem of no pre-scheduled flights, no fixed take-off times, no limited number of aircraft, a multiplayer server that defaults to giving everyone god-like knowledge of when and whether they have killed someone or not, bad AI aircraft behavior; and the things you mention, like not being able to do proper pre-flight things (like viewing the waypoints, modifying the waypoints, changing loadout, etc), when you take a flight, the missing members aren't filled in for by AI, etc. The biggest problems I see are the first ones I mentioned though. These promote an atmosphere of air-quake, even in DCS. People don't take getting shot down very seriously, and they don't care about the mission either. A contributing factor is that there is no dynamic campaign. What you do today won't effect tomorrow.

 

DCS has a lot going for it that Falcon doesn't, like MUCH better battlefield modeling, better aircraft modeling, a better mission editor, and VASTLY superior modding tools (except that if you team up with the right folks in Falcon, you get the ultimate modding tool, the source code itself). Hell, if ED would just change a SMALL thing or two (like, add a Lua function to kick clients from a slot, but not from the game, or deactivate clients (kick them out of the aircraft to the F10 map), then personally I would get started on fixing some of the above things. But ED hasn't provided enough support to modders, many of whom have left or given up (the only reason I'm still at it is that deciphering ED's Lua without documentation is part of the fun for me). If ED would provide us with a better SDK, I think the modding community could come alive, as these kinds of games tend to attract the interest of technically-oriented folks.

Edited March 18, 2012 by Speed

[Vekkinho]

The main problem here it that we're getting old, I was the " I wanna blow things up" type of player whre I first started MPing. Tactics and teamwork kicked in later on but even today when I go MP I'm flying lonewolf and usually head straigh for enemy without caring whom to work with...

[Speed]

The main problem here it that we're getting old, I was the " I wanna blow things up" type of player whre I first started MPing. Tactics and teamwork kicked in later on but even today when I go MP I'm flying lonewolf and usually head straigh for enemy without caring whom to work with...

 

I don't think so. Knowing that for sure would require you to have accurate data on the ages of flight simmers, spanning at least a decade. I know that I was personally a tactics and teamwork and advanced avionics kind-of-guy right from the start. The day I got Janes F-15 in 1997 (or was it early 98?) was the day that non-clickable cockpits lost their appeal to me. But that's a different subject. The point is, it's been what, 15 years since Janes F-15 almost, and I haven't changed a bit in my flight sim tastes.

[Cali]

I'm glad you see this. I think it's primarily the problem of no pre-scheduled flights, no fixed take-off times, no limited number of aircraft, a multiplayer server that defaults to giving everyone god-like knowledge of when and whether they have killed someone or not, bad AI aircraft behavior; and the things you mention, like not being able to do proper pre-flight things (like viewing the waypoints, modifying the waypoints, changing loadout, etc), when you take a flight, the missing members aren't filled in for by AI, etc. The biggest problems I see are the first ones I mentioned though. These promote an atmosphere of air-quake, even in DCS. People don't take getting shot down very seriously, and they don't care about the mission either. A contributing factor is that there is no dynamic campaign. What you do today won't effect tomorrow.

 

DCS has a lot going for it that Falcon doesn't, like MUCH better battlefield modeling, better aircraft modeling, a better mission editor, and VASTLY superior modding tools (except that if you team up with the right folks in Falcon, you get the ultimate modding tool, the source code itself). Hell, if ED would just change a SMALL thing or two (like, add a Lua function to kick clients from a slot, but not from the game, or deactivate clients (kick them out of the aircraft to the F10 map), then personally I would get started on fixing some of the above things. But ED hasn't provided enough support to modders, many of whom have left or given up (the only reason I'm still at it is that deciphering ED's Lua without documentation is part of the fun for me). If ED would provide us with a better SDK, I think the modding community could come alive, as these kinds of games tend to attract the interest of technically-oriented folks.

 

I agree, if Ed could add some of these features to DCS, then it would be great. The DC is BMS is great, I love flying it, even if it's by myself. As I said before, with all the radio chatter you don't feel like your flying alone anyway. It is sad that some of the modders stuff wasn't well received like LEAVU. I know the code was open so other people could add stuff to it. The only problem some people saw with that is adding something that shouldn't be there.

 

I thought that in DCS people would take getting shot down more seriously then in FC2, because of the start up alone. That's how it is in BMS, just getting in the jet takes some time. At first I wasn't a fan of the briefing in BMS, but it's very helpful, useful and without it you'd be lost. Ed has their hands full, wait, overflowing with projects as it is.

 

The main problem here it that we're getting old, I was the " I wanna blow things up" type of player whre I first started MPing. Tactics and teamwork kicked in later on but even today when I go MP I'm flying lonewolf and usually head straigh for enemy without caring whom to work with...

 

That's the big difference between DCS and BMS. I haven't had a flight in BMS were the guys I was flying with said screw it and flew air quake style. They always fly in a way to try and make it back to base, that is a goal and a reward, not a hope. I don't see FC2 like I use to see it and doubt I will ever see it like that again. The log book is another thing that is a nice feature. It records everything you do, single player and multiplayer. Normally in FC2, people don't get on comms, where in BMS they do. I have always taken the approach of trying to fly realistic, maybe not all the time, but that is one of my goals.

[RIPTIDE]

Hey Cali, I know you like sometimes fly the Su-33. What's that like in BMS?

 

 

 

:D

[Boberro]

Normally in FC2, people don't get on comms, where in BMS they do. I have always taken the approach of trying to fly realistic, maybe not all the time, but that is one of my goals.

 

Regarding comms - it is nice feature to meet at specific radio's frequency ^^ I am enjoyed when I am settin' UHF & VHF up and hear my teammates talking a bit changed voice.

Such small thing but give you more happiness.

Edited March 18, 2012 by Boberro

[Cali]

Hey Cali, I know you like sometimes fly the Su-33. What's that like in BMS?

:D

 

Not bad, but it's the Su-30, F-18, A-10, F-15, M2000 or the many different verisons of F-16 (block 10,15,20 +) Some have the same pit as the F-16 and some don't. Kinda like flying a F-18 or F-16 in FC2. Both games have there ups and down's.

 

Regarding comms - it is nice feature to meet at specific radio's frequency ^^ I am enjoyed when I am settin' UHF & VHF up and hear my teammates talking a bit changed voice.

Such small thing but give you more happiness.

 

Little things do make a big difference. I also like how easy it is to extract the MFD's, RWR and other things.

[Vekkinho]

 

That's the big difference between DCS and BMS. I haven't had a flight in BMS were the guys I was flying with said screw it and flew air quake style. They always fly in a way to try and make it back to base, that is a goal and a reward, not a hope. I don't see FC2 like I use to see it and doubt I will ever see it like that again. The log book is another thing that is a nice feature. It records everything you do, single player and multiplayer. Normally in FC2, people don't get on comms, where in BMS they do. I have always taken the approach of trying to fly realistic, maybe not all the time, but that is one of my goals.

 

this is true, I don't go BMS but I do lots of OF and i feel about the same about it, guys are simply more pro!

[WildBillKelsoe]

Why is it becoming a grind in servers against F-15's?

About 70-80%** of seasoned F-15 pilots spend most of their time in servers camping over their own SAMs, what is it with these guys do they really think having good stats makes them a good pilot. You join a server to try and have some A2A 1 on 1 only to find you've got to try and dodge Tor's, Buk's etc. just to get them to engage you.

You guys are making this very boring.

 

There is no greater sight in FC at the moment than a server full of Serbs, at least then I know i'm in for some action. ;)

 

**not an accurate figure, just purely based on my level of wtf

 

In my book, a camper is some hobo extending their arms for a cheapshot :D

 

Even in BF3, when you play with youger audience, and they spam the spawn in aircraft, and you literally have to hold down the spawn key to get inside the A-10 or the Su-25. :mad: And those that spawn camp.. JESUS!!! :cry:

[MTFDarkEagle]

That's the big difference between DCS and BMS. I haven't had a flight in BMS were the guys I was flying with said screw it and flew air quake style. They always fly in a way to try and make it back to base, that is a goal and a reward, not a hope. I don't see FC2 like I use to see it and doubt I will ever see it like that again. The log book is another thing that is a nice feature. It records everything you do, single player and multiplayer. Normally in FC2, people don't get on comms, where in BMS they do. I have always taken the approach of trying to fly realistic, maybe not all the time, but that is one of my goals.

That completely depends on who you're flying with..