Why are the most unrealistic servers the most popular?

The Cold War 1947 - 1991 server offers as of now a total of 18 missions with different scenarios covering different parts of the Caucasus and one mission in the Persian Gulf (more to follow). In all missions AG objectives are included. In most missions they're even vital for the outcome of the battle. In some missions it's Blue is attacking and Red is defending (would do more of those if we had the F-4 to perform SEAD missions). Despite of all that, most players on the server still go for dogfights mainly/only.Most of the times I'm the only one going for AG objectives. And quite soon I get jumped by a bunch of bandtis while carrying bombs and rockets.

So I ask around in the chat room for escort. Most of the times no one responds, despite having at least 8-10 players on my side. And if they do, they'd start typing back and forth. They don't want to be on TS or SRS, so where's the joy and effectiveness in that?

So obviously the point I'm making only underlines what some of you have written here; That the average DCS player is merely a "player" due to all the reasons you've mentioned above (some got no time for startup, RTB, off to the furball for some fun, etc.).

Years ago when I started flying DCS I made the mistake of thinking we're all hardcore simers here. No Warthunder-like players or so (not saying Warthunder players are bad or wrong, only of a different mindset that I'd expected the average DCS player not to have). I guess, that was more of a wishful thinking rather than facing the reality. That used to disappoint me, but I had to remind myself that... even DCS... is still only... a game!

For more realism, one should join a squadron, I think.

With the Red Alert campaign I'm trying to create something close to realism consulting good friends, of whom some were in the military.

These so called airquake servers have for the most part detailed objectives, they are cleverly designed missions with the exception of a balanced plane set to attract numbers.

 

Seems strange to me that there are servers out there that fill the requests for realism, but because they are not packed with players the realism purists don't join.

Yet when they are in a server that is packed they complain about getting shotdown.

This is a reoccurring theme I see throughout the community time and time again.

Even when 'realism junkies' get detailed objectives to go after they still brand the mission / server 'airquake' when they get shot down.

It seems to me some people think that realism means no Red Air. So many people including several in this thread have pointed out their displeasure with the 'launch and leave' crowd.

So what happens when you get shot down by someone who has launched from a carrier, flown for 20 mins to get to a tanker, refuelled mid-air, dropped some bombs, then targetted you and shot you down and made it all the way back to the carrier and landed.... you guys still think this is airquake?

The irony for me is the people that constantly complain about realism are the same people that complain about getting shot down by enemy jets.

There is nothing unrealistic about a pilot flying in to enemy territory alone and without support who gets shot down by an enemy jet.

If this keeps happening to you, then you are the problem, not the mission designer.

If you guys can't handle flying against other humans then stick to PvE servers, because as Frostie mentioned there are lots of PvP servers out there with proper detailed objectives for each team to follow, there is no reason why you cannot fly a realistic mission set in these servers.

My average mission length is between 45 minutes and 1 hour in the F/A-18C. I don't take off spam missiles and land.

I launch from the carrier, normally go to a tanker on the way in or the way out, then drop some bombs or shoot some A2G missiles then go A2A hunting if I have the fuel or fly to top off and get more fuel then come back on station A2A.

Get in a fight or two then refuel one more time and fly back to the boat and recover CASE I.

Now I couldn't care how many missiles the enemy shoots at me or how often they respawn. If I kill some targets on the ground and shoot down a bad guy and make it back to the boat then I'm happy. Especially when there are lots of enemy on the opposing side with very talented PvP pilots, this makes the challenge even greater and the satisfaction of completing a sortie is more rewarding.

The Cold War 1947 - 1991 server offers as of now a total of 18 missions with different scenarios covering different parts of the Caucasus and one mission in the Persian Gulf (more to follow). In all missions AG objectives are included. In most missions they're even vital for the outcome of the battle. In some missions it's Blue is attacking and Red is defending (would do more of those if we had the F-4 to perform SEAD missions). Despite of all that, most players on the server still go for dogfights mainly/only.Most of the times I'm the only one going for AG objectives. And quite soon I get jumped by a bunch of bandtis while carrying bombs and rockets.

So I ask around in the chat room for escort. Most of the times no one responds, despite having at least 8-10 players on my side. And if they do, they'd start typing back and forth. They don't want to be on TS or SRS, so where's the joy and effectiveness in that?

So obviously the point I'm making only underlines what some of you have written here; That the average DCS player is merely a "player" due to all the reasons you've mentioned above (some got no time for startup, RTB, off to the furball for some fun, etc.).

Years ago when I started flying DCS I made the mistake of thinking we're all hardcore simers here. No Warthunder-like players or so (not saying Warthunder players are bad or wrong, only of a different mindset that I'd expected the average DCS player not to have). I guess, that was more of a wishful thinking rather than facing the reality. That used to disappoint me, but I had to remind myself that... even DCS... is still only... a game!

 

 

For more realism, one should join a squadron, I think.

 

With the Red Alert campaign I'm trying to create something close to realism consulting good friends, of whom some were in the military.

So the real question is how do you create the atmosphere where SRS and cooperative play are the norm. I pretty much only really see/hear cooperative play and SRS it on GAW, but interestingly not nearly as much on PGAW. And those are PVE servers.

And yes I've seen mostly what you describe on your server when trying to do anything other than dog-fighting. Though in general I find the mig21/F5 opfor set to be the most "Balanced" capability wise, with the edge going to the F5's for "lone wolf" tactics due to their better RWR/radar.

On the SRS thing, I think its worth taking a page out of the GAW/PGAW playbook.

#1 Make having an SRS connection mandatory to spawn, even if people are just listening it probably helps to establish a "comms culture"

#2 have a general Red/Blue freqs (encrypted or whatever so the other side can't hear) as the default start frequency for aircraft. Or two if you want to separate ATC from the "combat" freq. So maybe Ch1 (ATC) Ch2 (combat) Ch3 awacs. Or just skip ATC initially since there aren't that many people on your server at a given time.

The other thing that might be interesting from a "side balancing" perspective is to give Red air more slots than blue for each type of aircraft so that they are outnumbered. I.e. 2 mig21 slots for each F5 slot or something like that.

I wonder how many people steer clear of online servers because they think it's full of the type of people who are complaining in this thread?

Personally, I find it hilarious.

Live and let live. Don't like it? Go elsewhere or do your own thing - no one is stopping you.

because real life isnt all that fun

DCS isn't a real war, it's a game. You seem to have missed that little distinction.

 

Games are pretty much always balanced. It is the most obvious, basic prerequisite.

It's a game? My mistake, I thought DCS was a realistic Combat Flight Simulator. :(

I actually think its a constructive way to look at building servers for a certain demographic. It seems like people want something more thats not currently being offered.

I also think a big part of it is that people don't want to play on empty servers more than anything. I certainly won't log into CW server if I don't see at least a few other people on.

I find that DCS MP community has stepped up quite a bit and we do have everything you desire as it is now in my opinion.

Buddy Spike and 104th are great servers where I find realism or anything else Im looking for.

I find that DCS MP community has stepped up quite a bit and we do have everything you desire as it is now in my opinion.

Which server specifically are you referring to?

Buddy spike = Blue Flag server IP:54.36.126.186:10310 & 104th MP server IP:208.94.240.34:10308

Give them a fear try, use SRS.

Agree with maverick even on red we take off from the carrier A/A refuel, Patrol an area engage 2 or 3 targets and RTB to tanker. Depending on fuel we dont always actually go bombing in for a pvp spam kill, Tact turns are also done as we fly in. And thats on 104th even providing vital CAP and letting viggens smash ships and CAP them back out the AO.

OK. So, we need talented players, mission designers, comms... none of those are rate-limiting steps. The only rate limiting step is deciding when and where. (Because I'm not sure what we want lends itself very well to dropping in...)

So.... 1500z every saturday? I mean, we can fly, or gripe...

I play on the DDCS server now mostly, it's very addictive. It's great when all the regulars are on with the new guy's, it's a good balanced server and had many many great longgggg battles. (I'm talking a month, stuck at one base lol)

This server is great at filtering out the hardcore AirQuake guy's by having the point loadout takeoff system. They generally move on quickly. Most of us sling when out of points, the quake guy's wont. This comes down to working as a team to get the job done, the server is not a squad tho, so the good matches come and go. The weekends can be real fun.

I think it comes down to mission focus and having the "ability" well (8 acquisitions each) to sling and build a decent convoy up. Then protect it on the way to the objective and also provide cas. That way, like IRL "some" do sit behind the convoy and let the ground units and cas take out the sams and tanks. Fighters provide BARCAP close or just behind the convoy etc.

It's going to be interesting with a dynamic campaign and CA.... It could open up a lot of possibilities if severs like this can tap into it and players can use CA also. IA connected SAM traps managed by players etc. Better dynamic base defenses when one team is low on numbers. This can be done now server side, it's just a bit to taxing on resources. Perhaps vulkan will help free this up.

;4006567']

Sadly we do not have enough full fidelity aircraft to properly balance the teams so any realistic East vs West set up would always end up with more clients on Blue than on Red.

What he said... ;)

I setup a server recently and had the full intention of balancing aircraft types realistically. Obviously, it's possible BUT you end up with full definition aircraft on Blue and no full def fighters on Red. I wanted to exclude F15's, SU-27's etc. and all non-clickable CP aircraft on my server but had to include them for red. I eventually ended up supplying F14's to red and blue and Mirage to red just so it wasn't so one-sided. We desperately need a full definition PFM Soviet 80's90's era fighter but I totally understand why this may be problematic given the lack of public domain information on these aircraft types and the location of the ED dev team. (nobody wants to end up in a Gulag)

It's a game? My mistake, I thought DCS was a realistic Combat Flight Simulator. :(

The terms are not mutually exclusive. DCS is a game. And a simulation.

Its not surprising that people with real jobs and real lives want to get to the most fun part of the simulation in the limited time they have to enjoy their hobby.

Just to clarify, it's not that the full fidelity a/c have an overwhelming advantage (the AIM54 is a pain in the fanny but that's a different matter)... if you doubt that, hit Coxy up for a demonstration lol.... it's that not as many people fly eastern block jets, right?

I think there's kind of two questions here.

1. How to incentivize people to show up to play red, and make it fun for them?

2. How to make it so you can just drop by for an hour and have fun?

As for the first, I think you can do stuff with mission design. Very interested in MOOSE and its capability for integrated air defense and AI balancing.

This disincentivizes people to just jump in an F15 and start spamming missiles, you can do that but the AI will out spawn you 2 to 1, winds up being pointless. On the other hand, you can definitely spool up a red coalition aircraft and go hunting, and not find yourself outnumbered 4 to 1, quite the contrary actually. Even the potential to take an F5 out for a spin and get something done if you want.

The problem is, it doesn't lend itself well to just dropping by for an hour, it's just not fun for a solo player on blue side. You can do that on GAW, not very effectively but you can do it. That said, GAW is close, it would be cool if you could hop into a redor jet on that server. But at the end of the day, I think we want at least one side focused on a mission and I don't think that lends itself well to just dropping by

I think the word "public" server was missed. Surely the OP is relating the question to his server list available.

There's incredibly complex squadron servers that are not based on any of the ingredients of the public ones. But they only work when all the participants are willing to put in a certain level of preparation to fly on them. They tend to be complex with a lot of requirements and are not accessible. Random players to the 132nd events would completely ruin them most likely.

Public servers require to be accessible to a majority. Accessibility requires simplicity. Simplicity runs in an opposite direction to complexity.

It's a simple fact of life that we are all busy trying to get food and shelter for families, learn or work for the majority of our time and relaxation comes after. What each person has available for time is a personal thing. I'm convinced there are people who still prefer the accessible servers nonetheless, but it stands to reason, those with the least time available will head for a less complex option. I've done it many times... just too tired for anything serious, headed for a public server that I know has a reputable name. Hence there is a self fulfilling prophecy of how they are used.

I don't think one should judge the existence of these servers as a way to denigrate the players who use them against our own desire for authenticity. Just be thankful you have the time to try out more complex events and find like minded people to fly with, that's all. You'll enjoy public servers when you have no time for anything else one day.

Realism festists do not like people who just want to have fun. There seems to be people who just enjoy flying only. And every color in between ...

I actually think its a constructive way to look at building servers for a certain demographic. It seems like people want something more thats not currently being offered.

 

I also think a big part of it is that people don't want to play on empty servers more than anything. I certainly won't log into CW server if I don't see at least a few other people on.

I could not agree with you more. Definitely some very constructive info here. im still fairly new compared to the OG's of the community who have been hosting for years. I have been like this :book: on this thread.

Q: I also notice the very popular servers can host a great number of players. some with 50+ players (even pve server). So keeping in mind of being realistic, would the number of players also affect realism? And if so, if the popular servers were to switch to something more realistic would they have to worry about losing much of there fanbase?

The Cold War 1947 - 1991 server offers as of now a total of 18 missions with different scenarios covering different parts of the Caucasus and one mission in the Persian Gulf (more to follow). In all missions AG objectives are included. In most missions they're even vital for the outcome of the battle. In some missions it's Blue is attacking and Red is defending (would do more of those if we had the F-4 to perform SEAD missions). Despite of all that, most players on the server still go for dogfights mainly/only.Most of the times I'm the only one going for AG objectives. And quite soon I get jumped by a bunch of bandtis while carrying bombs and rockets.

So I ask around in the chat room for escort. Most of the times no one responds, despite having at least 8-10 players on my side. And if they do, they'd start typing back and forth. They don't want to be on TS or SRS, so where's the joy and effectiveness in that?

So obviously the point I'm making only underlines what some of you have written here; That the average DCS player is merely a "player" due to all the reasons you've mentioned above (some got no time for startup, RTB, off to the furball for some fun, etc.).

Years ago when I started flying DCS I made the mistake of thinking we're all hardcore simers here. No Warthunder-like players or so (not saying Warthunder players are bad or wrong, only of a different mindset that I'd expected the average DCS player not to have). I guess, that was more of a wishful thinking rather than facing the reality. That used to disappoint me, but I had to remind myself that... even DCS... is still only... a game!

 

 

For more realism, one should join a squadron, I think.

 

With the Red Alert campaign I'm trying to create something close to realism consulting good friends, of whom some were in the military.

Sent from my Redmi 5 using Tapatalk

People fly how they want to fly, and how they enjoy playing the game, simple as that. However, the nature of DCS inherently favours the less realistic more casual play styles, and those of us who enjoy more realism based play have to employ a lot of workarounds, outside tools, and compromises to do so.

Ultimately, realistic mission profiles are not possible outside of highly organised, private servers used by either individual or cooperating groups. And even then, DCS can’t do any mission profile in that close to a truly realistic way as there are too many elements of modern aerial (and surface) combat absent.

If you step without organising a lead/wing, a mission objective for the flight and a even minimal gameplan to achieve it, you are missing the basic steps for "realism".

It is not easy to work as a team and therefore it is not the standard on public servers. At the same time working as a team can and is very often highly rewarding.

Building a team of lead/wing is the problem. Squadrons are doing a good job and there are things like r/wingman finder. Multiplayer servers on their own can not really do something about it and the tools ED gives the community are limited.

Like Eddie wrote, it comes down to how people approach their hobby. Are they in the mindset of a person that enjoys a beer in front of TV or are they the person that plays football every Friday at a scheduled event with other players.

I think the word "public" server was missed. Surely the OP is relating the question to his server list available.

 

There's incredibly complex squadron servers that are not based on any of the ingredients of the public ones. But they only work when all the participants are willing to put in a certain level of preparation to fly on them. They tend to be complex with a lot of requirements and are not accessible. Random players to the 132nd events would completely ruin them most likely.

 

Public servers require to be accessible to a majority. Accessibility requires simplicity. Simplicity runs in an opposite direction to complexity.

.

Agree with you totally, which is why I set up my own dedicated server with sandbox type missions, realistic as possible, no FC aircraft, only jets, weapons only restricted by what you can load, SRS if you want to use it, LoTATC if you want to use it.... problem is I don't get many people on it.

The main issue i think actually lies in between the 2 sides of the "argument", at least in my opinion.

I'm one of those who prefer "milsim experiences" rather than the more "casual public server", therefore i joined a virtual wing and grew up with them learning and participating in their activities for the last 12 years, putting 99.99% of my flight sim time into it.

The few times i join "public servers" even with any of my wingmen and plan out a proper mission to achieve whatever objective there is on the server, we end up facing the very big issue of having players on our team that go for that "casual experience".

I fly the A10C almost exclusively and most of the time i find myself over targets with no CAP, sometimes someone (usually 1..) doing SEAD (thanks F18!) missions but that's about it. In the end i need to achieve my objective for the night, deal with SAMs which is not always possible) and also be on the lookout full time for the sneaky russian hunting in EO (kudos to you who manage, i can't for shite! :D ).

That's why i stick almost the entire time to my wing's private server in the "ops nights".