SATAC 2017

Match info on bracket says that our match against Team China should be on our server, is that correct or typo?

Ive PMd Bushmanni to ask if he can host. If not we can make alternate arrangements.

hmm, after watching the matches, found su-27 is greatly buffed by awacs and IR only round

making game balance is unbalanced

hmm, after watching the matches, found su-27 is greatly buffed by awacs and IR only round

making game balance is unbalanced

Do not blame the rules please.

Do it BEFORE sign up if you want to.

hmm, after watching the matches, found su-27 is greatly buffed by awacs and IR only round

making game balance is unbalanced

We all know Su-27s with 4*R-27ER+2*R-27ET+4*R-73 + AWACS support is unbeatable.

If you sign up, enjoy the match, that's all.

hmm, after watching the matches, found su-27 is greatly buffed by awacs and IR only round

making game balance is unbalanced

Switching between early and late 80s is a realistic approach we can do for a tournament, AWACS is there for all aircraft. Different time frames suite different aircraft's. SATAC 2018 will include active-missiles.

So far the most even match was Team China vs NP, respective teams were flying Su-27 vs F-15 resulting Team China winning in F-15.

Switching between early and late 80s is the most realistic approach we can do for a tournament, AWACS is there for all aircraft. Different time frames suite different aircraft's. SATAC 2018 will include active-missiles.

 

So far the most even match was Team China vs NP, respective teams were flying Su-27 vs F-15 resulting Team China winning in F-15.

well, awacs is fine. but limiting the weapon type is not even at all (as loopback said, with that config, su-27 is unbeatable unless operators are rookies). i know you want to make su-27 has more power to compete with f-15. but IRL, no one will give you such 'even match' in air combat.

also the design of the round makes the match endless: in semi-active round, f-15 sides have benefits from itself, while in IR+awacs round, su-27 has more benefit from the rule not the characteristics of the aircraft/system.

5 hours match, even the live reporter cannot hold on

i don't know who designed the game, but after watching several matches, i prefer 2016 rule

well, awacs is fine. but limiting the weapon type is not even at all (as loopback said, with that config, su-27 is unbeatable unless operators are rookies). i know you want to make su-27 has more power to compete with f-15. but IRL, no one will give you such 'even match' in air combat.

 

also the design of the round makes the match endless: in semi-active round, f-15 sides have benefits from itself, while in IR+awacs round, su-27 has more benefit from the rule not the characteristics of the aircraft/system.

5 hours match, even the live reporter cannot hold on

 

i don't know who designed the game, but after watching several matches, i prefer 2016 rule

Su27 is limited to R+T+73 first round, then ER+T+73 second round. There isn't a round with ETs,

well, awacs is fine. but limiting the weapon type is not even at all (as loopback said, with that config, su-27 is unbeatable unless operators are rookies). i know you want to make su-27 has more power to compete with f-15. but IRL, no one will give you such 'even match' in air combat.

 

also the design of the round makes the match endless: in semi-active round, f-15 sides have benefits from itself, while in IR+awacs round, su-27 has more benefit from the rule not the characteristics of the aircraft/system.

5 hours match, even the live reporter cannot hold on

 

i don't know who designed the game, but after watching several matches, i prefer 2016 rule

There is no right or wrong set up.

Believe me the setup had plenty of long and sometimes heated discussion amongst the organisers as to what it should be with no conclusive decision on what was the best choice.

The idea behind SATAC is to create a competition for all squadrons to help develop themselves tactically, limiting to F15 only is how we felt SATAC was going and while this is a competition we want to encourage all squadrons new and old.

The pros and cons of each aircraft and each set up can be argued forever, the fact is we wanted to have a balanced scenario that would not only encourage more Flanker/Fulcrum pilots but also allow the popular Mirage some prowess in rounds.

Previous SATACs have been dominated by F-15 aircraft and this discourages other squadrons from participating or choosing anything other than F-15, this is part of the decisions behind the setup. That being said it was pretty clear the best squadron won the last event so we hope to run full payload SATACs in the future.

This setup has been put up from the outset, if someone didn't like the look of it or were worried the challenge was too great for them to take gracefully then surely entering was the wrong decision. After entering you can't then go on and complain about it, just knuckle down and get on with it. Future events will have different setups.

As for long matches this was forseen as a possible problem and a tie breaker round is needed, hopefully a good decision can be made on that.

I think the current setup has proven as much a challenge for F15 pilots as well as Flanker pilots, proven by the 2 face offs from 104th v ITGC and China vs NP, both F15 v Flanker matches and both having F15 squadrons as victors, one a straight 2-0 victory and the other a real stalemate until the tie breaker.

With the previous setups I think these would have been two resounding F15 victories so i'm glad that other aircraft can now compete and knowing ITGC thanks to the double elimination format they will look to bounce back.

This is a tournament!!! We have to fly with weapons from same decades. Realistic and simple if we stay to the rule where opponents use weapons from same decade. We don't have any weapons that can match AIM-120C if we dont use R-77 on Su-27. So the realistic approach is to use AIM-120B vs ER-27 or do early 80s and late 80s where all aircraft get benefits.

For SATAC 2017, 51st chose to mix early and late 80s with two consecutive rounds to win in order to benefit all parts and make it as fair as possible. When I say fair I don't mean balance, I mean weapons from same decade!!!

In my opinion this rotating weapon era provides the biggest challenge and balance at the same time. One round the Eagles have a slight edge and then the other way around. I suppose the baguettes are outlaws but then again with 2+2 missiles will prove hard to win a battle. Certainly not impossible though.

The potential infinite matches can be a problem, but it also adds another element to the competition: who can consistently perform even after hours of fighting. You can't always K.O. the opponent, sometimes you have to go through all 12 rounds.

In my opinion this rotating weapon era provides the biggest challenge and balance at the same time. One round the Eagles have a slight edge and then the other way around. I suppose the baguettes are outlaws but then again with 2+2 missiles will prove hard to win a battle. Certainly not impossible though.

 

The potential infinite matches can be a problem, but it also adds another element to the competition: who can consistently perform even after hours of fighting. You can't always K.O. the opponent, sometimes you have to go through all 12 rounds.

Thx for your understanding Blaze.

51st has a solution/rule for matches that might get to long if both teams agree on playing a finale round.

Thanks for the kind words Frostie. We learnt a lot from our bout with 104th and we will surely bring our best.

With regard to the format, its absolutely fine and you guys have done a tremendous job. Its not easy to coordinate with so many people, half of whom don't even speak the same language. Kudos to you guys for an excellent job done !!

Further with regard to the weapon employment. I have never seen any pilot worth his salt complain about the weapon that the opposing teams fly with. Its how you use your own capabilities to the best possible extent to attain your operational Objectives.

I like the rules and I believe a variety (i.e. rotation of rules each year) is good. In the end, regardless of where the advantage may lie in a given year, it forces each squadron to brush up on their tactics based upon the scenario that they will face. Everyone will become a better pilot for having trained and/or participated, which is what is most important.

I, as an certified, dedicated mirage memelord, give the setup my seal of approval as well. :D

The ER really has some prominent flaws over the other missiles [in DCS] which makes it much less the unbeatable uber threat that the overall motor output makes it seem to be.

If AIM-120s are allowed, some will say the F-15s are OP. The organizers are damned if they do, damned if they don't if people keep nitpicking over fairness. Let's just enjoy the competition for what it is and stop worrying about how balanced or fair it is. When is anything in real life actually fair? SATAC 2017 rules bring good balance using the 80s setting that it's down to pilot skills and teamwork.

Excellent Organization, than you for your effort.

The vast majority of the players fought for first time in such an event. We gained valuable experience. We had extensive debriefings to recognize common mistakes.

Many thanks to ITGC and TAW for the excellent fights.

=GR= Panthir (Lock-On Greece member)

Talking about the rules, maybe we have to set a maximum rounds term, like 5 or 7 rounds max, which mean ~4 to ~5 hours for 1 match.

The match may be endless without this.

Excellent Organization, than you for your effort.

The vast majority of the players fought for first time in such an event. We gained valuable experience. We had extensive debriefings to recognize common mistakes.

Many thanks to ITGC and TAW for the excellent fights.

 

=GR= Panthir (Lock-On Greece member)

Thanks to you Panthir !! Your boys fought very well and looking forward to seeing more of you guys !!

We made a lot of friends with our first SATAC so we have got 51st to thank for it again.

Talking about the rules, maybe we have to set a maximum rounds term, like 5 or 7 rounds max, which mean ~4 to ~5 hours for 1 match.

The match may be endless without this.

Yes, 51st had and have a solution for such situations.

Match schedule for this weekend

Saturday

NP vs TAW - 12z S1G Server

36th vs ITGC - 12z 51st Server

104th vs 51st - 14z 51st Server

SF vs Team China - 14z SF Server

Winner of NP vs TAW vs Loser 104th vs 51st - 16z 51st Server

Winner of 36th vs ITGC vs Loser SF vs Team China - 16z 104th Server

Sunday (Note - minor changes - matches now start at 12z instead of 11z - bracket also updated)

Match 17 - 12z

Match 18 - 12z

Match 19 - 13z (optimistic timing I know)

Match 20 - 15z

Edit: SF please confirm if you are able to host your match vs Team China?

hmm, after watching the matches, found su-27 is greatly buffed by awacs and IR only round

making game balance is unbalanced

I didn't know there was an IR only round. I thought it was no et, 27r and 27er rounds. F15 gets to keep their loadout the same.

Sent from my Redmi Note 4 using Tapatalk

I didn't know there was an IR only round. I thought it was no et, 27r and 27er rounds. F15 gets to keep their loadout the same.

 

Sent from my Redmi Note 4 using Tapatalk

The mixed payload of max 2ER round is to end matches the continue into the 7th round. Its a tiebreaker round of sorts. Winner takes all.

ITGC vs 36th Live stream courtesy of 104th Tiger

https://gaming.youtube.com/user/AntonioGR201/live

NP vs TAW live stream courtesy of <51>Moltar

https://go.twitch.tv/m01tar_

If we get long matches the rule still apply as it was for China team vs NP,

If Both teams agree or organizers decide to fly a finale round, mixed payload will be applied for Su-27 = Max 2xER-27.