Operation "Blue Flag" - 24/7 PvP Campaign - ROUND 9

At this point how can one have any hope?

 

These lag issues have been around for literally years, have they not?

 

Maybe it is just a blue flag thing, who knows.

 

As much as I disagree with the 104th's mission design, I've found my self playing there more than BF simply because it actually works.

 

Last couple of sorties on BF have been just depressing with the amount of lag.

 

I want to like the server so bad. Me and my friends every day check, see that there are a bunch of people on, hop on, and then quickly are reminded why we usually stop playing. Players teleporting and flying all over airfield when we are shut down and fueling. I mean come on.

After $patch by ED there was a time last summer/early autum where blueflag ran perfectly stable with more clients then now. Literally no lag, it was amazing.

Then I was absent due to uni for basically 2 months. I just heard from squadron chat that lag was apparently bad. When I came back I actually was full WTF what did ED do.

Its literally rollercoaster and the buddyspike is at a mercy of ED changes.

In such a big event with a single threaded engine small changes can break performance pretty substantially.

Maybe it is just a blue flag thing, who knows.

I see a lot of lag in other server too. But blueflag usually tops it.

Like this, a few hours ago here on BF (with a buddy, on a decent connection).

At this point how can one have any hope?

 

These lag issues have been around for literally years, have they not?

 

Maybe it is just a blue flag thing, who knows.

 

As much as I disagree with the 104th's mission design, I've found my self playing there more than BF simply because it actually works.

 

Last couple of sorties on BF have been just depressing with the amount of lag.

 

I want to like the server so bad. Me and my friends every day check, see that there are a bunch of people on, hop on, and then quickly are reminded why we usually stop playing. Players teleporting and flying all over airfield when we are shut down and fueling. I mean come on.

You miss the point its ED's netcode, Its actually never been this bad up until the last few patches, Yes there were glitches where fired upon you could alt+Tab and avoid a missile, Its not the server, But ED's netcode is so poor right now, And as stated tests were run the other week and found several issues in MP

You miss the point its ED's netcode, Its actually never been this bad up until the last few patches, Yes there were glitches where fired upon you could alt+Tab and avoid a missile, Its not the server, But ED's netcode is so poor right now, And as stated tests were run the other week and found several issues in MP

Just you wait when friday just a news report no patch and still screwed with current. That is why since 2013 and up ED lost alot of hard core sim pilots that were high doller customers and sim turns into a game with these FC3 and higher end airplanes its like inviteing X-Plane 11 and Prepared3D to a sim then you invite Call of Duty into the sim now becomes a game then a sim. so question is why pour money on ED when they cant fix the game since Lock on Modern Air Combat.

Just you wait when friday just a news report no patch and still screwed with current. That is why since 2013 and up ED lost alot of hard core sim pilots that were high doller customers and sim turns into a game with these FC3 and higher end airplanes its like inviteing X-Plane 11 and Prepared3D to a sim then you invite Call of Duty into the sim now becomes a game then a sim. so question is why pour money on ED when they cant fix the game since Lock on Modern Air Combat.

I did say not that bad, Does not mean it was not perfect :) Im not sure what FC3 X-plane and P3D has to do with ED netcode? As for the patch we just have to wait and see thats all nobody knows, Question is whens the next round ready?

Literally unplayable after 1.5 hours.

I heard from first hand how BF team want's to induce todays standards with keeping high number of slots and large scale campaign, and I understand that, but the cost for lagg and server crashes is too big for my opinion. ED doesn't care it seems after all this time and I'm really surprised that BF doesn't do any compromises that would lean towards a better quality simplay. After all it doesnt make me angry anymore, just sad as hell. Despise all I still have huge respect to BF developers and all they've done for this sim community.

Btw, do EWRs stil work? It didn't seem to help at all after deploying it yesterday.

i am loving this server especially with the use of simple radio. Cant wait to get home from work and have another go.

Thumbs up for that... But are you actually promoting nescafe? If yes, I hope it's unlegal here and just for general intel the owner of that company would take drinking water away from people. And this is coming from a huge coffie fan. And no é bs please...

You could also use the general frequencies, that are definied for both sides as well as east and west, for that.

 

 

Where did you hear that? :huh:

SRS is for brevity and that general frequency is the GCI freq

has anyone noticed 'time to lives reset' bug ? example: I join the server right after restart, so I have three hours of play ahead, 'time to lives reset' shows two hours left (less than one session), but at the end of the session lives are still not reset and showing (for instance) 1h 30min left ... as if 'time to lives reset' elapsed much slower than the server/real time...

once I joined at 30min to lives reset time, but actually had to wait for more than an hour and a half for them to reset ...

I was flying recently on 104th server, and R-27ER is allowed there, while ET is banned. That seems pretty fair to me.

I was flying recently on 104th server, and R-27ER is allowed there, while ET is banned. That seems pretty fair to me.

That was proposed few weeks ago ET or ER to be allowed in BF, and here we are :D

Are we still on this? If you want to use those overpowered missiles, grab a SU-33.

Which a lot of players in the RED team already do (a lot). If every single SU-27 gets to use them, the server becomes a rape fest for RED.

And don't give me the "the 530 has the same power as ET and ER so we should have them". Because it hasn't.

If it was as "balanced" as some of the REDs has been claming in this thread, people wouldnt be flying in SU-33's for over 200 miles.. but just grab a Mirage.

Example: The entire blue team (except for 2 loners) is working the Beslan / Tbilisi area, but for some reason, red has 3 SU-33's that have to fly over 250 miles to get to the AO.

They must really love to fly them for that many miles. Because surely, the missiles aren't grossly overpowered compared to what blue has.

Give them to MiGs at least. And yes, 530D is better.

Are we still on this? If you want to use those overpowered missiles, grab a SU-33.

Which a lot of players in the RED team already do (a lot). If every single SU-27 gets to use them, the server becomes a rape fest for RED.

 

And don't give me the "the 530 has the same power as ET and ER so we should have them". Because it hasn't.

If it was as "balanced" as some of the REDs has been claming in this thread, people wouldnt be flying in SU-33's for over 200 miles.. but just grab a Mirage.

 

Example: The entire blue team (except for 2 loners) is working the Beslan / Tbilisi area, but for some reason, red has 3 SU-33's that have to fly over 250 miles to get to the AO.

They must really love to fly them for that many miles. Because surely, the missiles aren't grossly overpowered compared to what blue has.

 

1. The performance of the 27ER is closer to the 7M than the 7M to the 27R. So when this is a rape fest for you, you should try the SU27,

2. Red doesn't fly the SU33 because the missile is a little bit better than the 7M, they fly it because the missile is way better than the 27R.

3. Not everyone flies the M2k or like to. What's the point on flying on the Red side when everybody just has to fly the M2k which is on both sides.

And before you blame me about my bias, I'm flying on blue and never touch the SU-33 because I can't stand the FM.

In my opinion there shouldn't be any ammo (type) restrictions. Every nation should carry what they have originally but if you want to make some restrictions then reduce numbers of missiles on airfields because now they are big and I mean 1000 missiles of each type is really big number.

Just leaving that here:

R27R max speed 1760kts

AIM7 max speed 1550kts

R27ER max speed 2280kts

Thats avg across altitudes.

R27R effective range ~8nm

AIM7 effective range ~10nm

r27ER effective range ~12nm

Just leaving that here:

 

R27R max speed 1760kts

AIM7 max speed 1550kts

 

R27ER max speed 2280kts

 

Thats avg across altitudes.

 

R27R effective range ~8nm

AIM7 effective range ~10nm

 

r27ER effective range ~12nm

You are not taking chaff resistance, maneurability and other things into account.

Indeed I dont and I cant really there is no good data out there on it.

To consider though:

10 000ft ASL

AIM7M falls under 1000kts after nearly 6NM

R27r falls unter 1000kts after 5NM

R27ER falls under 1000kts after 10NM.

Obviously the AIM7M is better, but the ER is like absolutely not more comparable to the AIM7 then the AIM7 to the R in terms of flight performance.

Just leaving that here:

 

R27R max speed 1760kts

AIM7 max speed 1550kts

 

R27ER max speed 2280kts

 

Thats avg across altitudes.

 

R27R effective range ~8nm

AIM7 effective range ~10nm

 

r27ER effective range ~12nm

This is nonsense. Re-test against a moderately maneuvering target. The R is a concrete block if it has to manoeuvre AT ALL. In this regard the 530D, 7M and ER are much closer together in performance.

Are we still on this? If you want to use those overpowered missiles, grab a SU-33.

Which a lot of players in the RED team already do (a lot). If every single SU-27 gets to use them, the server becomes a rape fest for RED.

 

And don't give me the "the 530 has the same power as ET and ER so we should have them". Because it hasn't.

If it was as "balanced" as some of the REDs has been claming in this thread, people wouldnt be flying in SU-33's for over 200 miles.. but just grab a Mirage.

 

Example: The entire blue team (except for 2 loners) is working the Beslan / Tbilisi area, but for some reason, red has 3 SU-33's that have to fly over 250 miles to get to the AO.

They must really love to fly them for that many miles. Because surely, the missiles aren't grossly overpowered compared to what blue has.

 

Great picture but you draw a totally opposite conclusions:

1. BLUE gets the F-15, star-fighter missile truck with uber radar, which can just spam opposition with missiles without a need to manage systems whatsoever. First thing that only blue can bring to the table.

2. Su-27 and 27R can only eat chaffs. Generally the Su-27 is close to being useless at the moment. So a big minues for RED.

3. Red could get the ET. It is after all a real thing that would be used in a real scenario. But no, for a sake of gaming balancing lets remove it. First example when distinctive feature is removed from red to make it easier for blue.

4. Blue gets the A-10 which obviously is extremely capable striker. Su-25T is good but A-10C it's just better especially that it comes with a full systems modeling

5. Su-25T distinctive feature is that it can do a DEAD. Hold on - it has a distinctive feature - it can't be red only then, blue needs to get it. Please spare comments that Georgia has it. First Georgia has as much as 11 of Su-25 where actually 6 are upgraded. This doesn't matter anyway as a real usage is something that BF takes into consideration on the bottom of the priority list.

6. Transport helicopters - At least the Mi-8 is fast and can deliver final punch to the airport when AA defenses are gone. Wait.. did I just write that its a bit better in BF application then Huey, no it has to be on both sides then. Again, red can't get even a slightest advantage. Yes the Mi-8 serves generally everywhere but again at least for BF it could be a red distinctive to give this 0,1% of something better.

7. Ok then, the Ka-50, now this one is red only and actually can deliver a punch that blue don't have a counterpart for. Can't be this way, lets give Gazelle ability to transport troops and spam call the bombers! Yeap, another red distinctive feature obliterated in a spectacular way. Now its "fair" as blue has a platform that can take a whole AB on its own!. Take mortar squad, call bombers, drop mortar and kill remaining things. Ka-50 in good hands can deal a lot of damage but come on, it's not able to capture a target on its own.

And then coming back to point no 1 - try to go higher than 5-8 meters above the ground in Ka-50 = missile from F-15 to your face.

8. MiG-21 vs F-5 - the second at least has a working RWR which makes a big difference when flying in a sky full of modern jets. MiG-21 can use radar to lock targets, but hell yea - turn your radar on = missile from F-15 to your face.

9. Red has the M2kC and Viggen but the only reason for it was to bring people to the other side, not to give any advantage.

10. Eastern block generally has more and better air defenses in terms of SAM systems. Nope, both sides have to have the same.

Sorry but the complains about red having an advantages are just ridiculous. Blue gets a higher numbers, better and actually working equipment while all distinctive features that red would have in real scenario are either just disabled or mitigated buy giving them also to blue. On the other blue keeps the advantages only for their side.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not some red fanatic. When I play BF I generally switch between teams for different rounds. But the complains that blue is in a disadvantage compared to red team is just absolutely crazy.

Aside of everything above. DCS should be about a simulation after all, which in reality will always have an asymmetry. All of this gaming balancing is just hurting the experience. It still has to be reasonable so that both sides have chances (that is again not a exactly given by default in real word) but it doesn't mean that it has to be purely just gaming balancing that brings the DCS closer to the Battlefield than simulation.

In my opinion there shouldn't be any ammo (type) restrictions. Every nation should carry what they have originally but if you want to make some restrictions then reduce numbers of missiles on airfields because now they are big and I mean 1000 missiles of each type is really big number.

:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:

Attacking an aircraft that is moving 30 degrees off the nose.

 

Launch parameters

6000m (20,000 ft)

Mach 0.9

 

R-27R hits at 30km max

AIM-7M hits at 41km (22nm) max

R-27ER hits at 44km max

530D performs better than the 7M. Need I say more? There is no 100% equal matchup, but the closest is ER vs 7M vs 530D.

This is nonsense. Re-test against a moderately maneuvering target. The R is a concrete block if it has to manoeuvre AT ALL. In this regard the 530D, 7M and ER are much closer together in performance.

In what way is it nonsense, based on what data is it nonsense ?

I am aware that the r27 series of missiles suffers from a big drag penalty in the DCS modelling.

But thats just incredibly hard to reliably quantify and measure, so I am not providing data on that.

Thats why I especially said I am not including them, so I am very interested in your explanation why anything of what I said is nonsense. Only thing I could probably have done better is said kinetic flight performance instead of just flight performance.

Afaik the biggest most coherent dataset of missile flight performance I am basing my numbers off:

https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/de/files/1363666/

I didnt even judge if the combat effectiveness is more comparable in DCS, again I have no data on that. We could ask mav if they hold mission independant weapon sorted statistics on that. There is iirc a aim7m vs r27ER setup isnt there ?