Cold War 1947 - 1991

I cannot speak from own experience, but I heard/read the F-14 is more than a match for any other plane on the CWS in a dogfight. It can certainly hold it's own against the FC MiG-29, that plane doesn't simulate it's real-world counterpart too well. After two turns in AB the MiG-29 will run out of fuel anyway.

 

Also, as you already mentioned, in a direct encounter MiG-29 vs. F-14 the latter will have six mrm at its disposal vs. only two for the MiG. It's obvious that the F-14 has all the aces up its sleeves.

 

 

 

No AWACS is cool, and no problem with the AV-8s in there, but now seeing the MiGs and F-14s deprived of any heaters makes me wonder whether the rear-aspect-only faction does more harm than good to the missions. I know rear-aspect-only is much more fun, but if the thing above is the consequence, I'd give it up happily. What's going to happen if the MiG-23 and the F-14A are available? Are we going to take away their heaters, too?

 

Also, you are not falling for the "the MiGs can only carry two MRMs so they are at the advantage over the F-14" argument, are you?

The 29 advantage is there with 2 MRM’s. Those missiles are pretty heavy and carrying only 2 with you instead of a load of 6 will have an affect on maneuverability, unless the tomcat fires 4 or 6 at ones.. but that would be just odd.

Will the Kiryat mission be on tonight?

The 29 advantage is there with 2 MRM’s. Those missiles are pretty heavy and carrying only 2 with you instead of a load of 6 will have an affect on maneuverability, unless the tomcat fires 4 or 6 at ones.. but that would be just odd.

We are talking about BVR missiles in a 1v1 scenario (basically the only scenario on this server) here. The one with first-shot capability AND higher number of missiles has the advantage here, and that's in all cases the F-14.

I've considered all the above many times over the years and always ended up keeping these planes away from the server. I knew they would only trigger some players and endless discussions would be the result as you can see. You can't maintain balance while keeping things 100% fair. No way. Just keep that in mind. At least not with the limits we have in the mission editor.

The mission Search & Destroy for instance is big and the 4 TA's are scattered here and there. I mean, come on... 2 x F-14's with good but not the best radar missiles are a problem in such a scenario?! Especially, when you have MiG-29's that could counter that? YES, I know, 2 vs 6 missiles. Guess what! The MiG-21 can carry 6 x R-60M's (8 x R-60M's before that issue was fixed back in the day) vs the F-5 with 2 missiles only. Now with the weapons' restrictions the MiG's are down to 4. Why is that no issue? I managed to shoot down 2-3 x Mirages and 1 x F-14 with the MiG's radar missiles over the last weeks. Something the F-5 can't do. So if 2 x MiG's of whatever type intercept the Tomcat with one defending and the other advancing, they have a high chance of shooting down the F-14. That's just one idea. That opens up some new challenges. Some MiG or F-5 pilots might wanna start teaming up and have one goal in mind and that is, intercepting the big boys. Especially, with a GCI operator. Now tell me that's not fun! If not, well, most missions don't feature the 2 airplanes so wait for the server to rotate.

In the mission Open Range (also big but not that big) The F-14's and MiG-29's are way more limited in numbers. A handful of planes only due to the smaller battlefield.

Battle Over Sukhumi Unleashed also covers a large area of the Caucasus region. And still The F-14 and the MiG-29 might be removed (testing some triggers and options still).

... and so on...

I really don't see such a big problem there.

Why do things always have to be convenient, balanced out to the max and live up entirely to our wishes? People don't like to be challenged and have their skills tested any more. Stick with what you know and breaking the routine is somehow an unwanted evil or something. I mean, this is the mindset of most people these days regarding anything in their life. And you see that behaviour in sports, social interactions, work and yes, games and video games as well... OK, I'll stop.

I'm not after hurting anyone's feelings here, my friends, but I always speak my mind. Which is why those who know me in real life tend to rather avoid having an argument with me :smilewink: People don't want you to tell them the truth because it hurts most of the time. Comfortable lies and fake smiles are more welcome.

Alright, alright, I'll literally stop now. This is what happens when I start thinking way deeper than needed. Long posts all over the place.

Give the F-14 some time like you did with the M-2000C. Test things out and from there we take it and adapt. Things get removed, added, replaced or renewed. It's always been like that, folks, nothing's new.

I've considered all the above many times over the years and always ended up keeping these planes away from the server. I knew they would only trigger some players and endless discussions would be the result as you can see. You can't maintain balance while keeping things 100% fair. No way. Just keep that in mind. At least not with the limits we have in the mission editor.

 

The mission Search & Destroy for instance is big and the 4 TA's are scattered here and there. I mean, come on... 2 x F-14's with good but not the best radar missiles are a problem in such a scenario?! Especially, when you have MiG-29's that could counter that? YES, I know, 2 vs 6 missiles. Guess what! The MiG-21 can carry 6 x R-60M's (8 x R-60M's before that issue was fixed back in the day) vs the F-5 with 2 missiles only. Now with the weapons' restrictions the MiG's are down to 4. Why is that no issue? I managed to shoot down 2-3 x Mirages and 1 x F-14 with the MiG's radar missiles over the last weeks. Something the F-5 can't do. So if 2 x MiG's of whatever type intercept the Tomcat with one defending and the other advancing, they have a high chance of shooting down the F-14. That's just one idea. That opens up some new challenges. Some MiG or F-5 pilots might wanna start teaming up and have one goal in mind and that is, intercepting the big boys. Especially, with a GCI operator. Now tell me that's not fun! If not, well, most missions don't feature the 2 airplanes so wait for the server to rotate.

In the mission Open Range (also big but not that big) The F-14's and MiG-29's are way more limited in numbers. A handful of planes only due to the smaller battlefield.

Battle Over Sukhumi Unleashed also covers a large area of the Caucasus region. And still The F-14 and the MiG-29 might be removed (testing some triggers and options still).

... and so on...

 

I really don't see such a big problem there.

 

Why do things always have to be convenient, balanced out to the max and live up entirely to our wishes? People don't like to be challenged and have their skills tested any more. Stick with what you know and breaking the routine is somehow an unwanted evil or something. I mean, this is the mindset of most people these days regarding anything in their life. And you see that behaviour in sports, social interactions, work and yes, games and video games as well... OK, I'll stop.

I'm not after hurting anyone's feelings here, my friends, but I always speak my mind. Which is why those who know me in real life tend to rather avoid having an argument with me :smilewink: People don't want you to tell them the truth because it hurts most of the time. Comfortable lies and fake smiles are more welcome.

Alright, alright, I'll literally stop now. This is what happens when I start thinking way deeper than needed. Long posts all over the place.

Give the F-14 some time like you did with the M-2000C. Test things out and from there we take it and adapt. Things get removed, added, replaced or renewed. It's always been like that, folks, nothing's new.

I totally agree and I would love to see this kind of extra challenge with high value assets, that are very limited in numbers in more missions :)

Server News:

Operation Behind Enemy Lines:

- Instead of 6 hours, the mission runs now for 5 hours.

- And just like in operation Kiryat Shmona or Fight Island, the coalition holding the two airbases of Hatay and Minakh by the end of the mission wins the day.

- So if you capture the enemy's airbase, make sure you hold it to the end while stopping the enemy from advancing towards your airbase.

- The mission will go online tonight.

Operation Sneaky Bastards:

- The mission went online only twice and right after 10-20 minutes it was taken out due to multiple bugs caused mainly by the sound files.

- Fixing the mission is now complete.

- Still running some final tests before I put it back online.

- Reminder: The mission takes place in the Persian Gulf map. 3 hours in the dark and 2 hours in the early morning.

You can't maintain balance while keeping things 100% fair. No way. Just keep that in mind. At least not with the limits we have in the mission editor.

 

[...]

 

Why do things always have to be convenient, balanced out to the max and live up entirely to our wishes? People don't like to be challenged and have their skills tested any more. Stick with what you know and breaking the routine is somehow an unwanted evil or something. I mean, this is the mindset of most people these days regarding anything in their life. And you see that behaviour in sports, social interactions, work and yes, games and video games as well... OK, I'll stop.

Just to make sure: I'm totally with you there! I hope you didn't misunderstand my post. The limitiations you put on the MiG-29 and the F-14B and missiles available are in fact a consequence of people wanting balance in everything.

My point simply was that I think the outcry for balance has reached a point where it becomes ridiculous when you have F-14 and MiG-29 flying around without heaters and people complaining that the MiG had an advantage because it only carries two MRM and thus doesn't "waste" them as quickly as the Tomcat or even being afraid that a MiG-29 could possibly beat a Tomcat in a dogfight. Or that people want rear-aspect-only and now complain that they can't shoot Gazelles effectively enough...

I don't know, maybe a better approach would be to simply create pure rear-aspect-only scenarios where you simply don't have MiG-29 and F-14, and some scenarios where you have them in a very limited number, but then as an all-aspect-scenario.

As for the Mistral vs. KA-50 thing: Once the Hind is available, this should be a thing of the past, both should go, Gazelle -M (or even better Kiowa, maybe Bo-105 some day) vs. Hind will be a great setup.

...

I don't know, maybe a better approach would be to simply create pure rear-aspect-only scenarios where you simply don't have MiG-29 and F-14, and some scenarios where you have them in a very limited number, but then as an all-aspect-scenario.

...

Yeah, I had that in mind. I'm aiming to do that in the next Syria mission.

Snip...

Why do things always have to be convenient, balanced out to the max and live up entirely to our wishes? People don't like to be challenged and have their skills tested any more. Stick with what you know and breaking the routine is somehow an unwanted evil or something. I mean, this is the mindset of most people these days regarding anything in their life. And you see that behaviour in sports, social interactions, work and yes, games and video games as well... , replaced or renewed. It's always been like that, folks, nothing's new.

Snip...

Totally! I've stopped watching football cry babies with hair products. Luckily I have a friend that introduced me to Rugby!

Apart from that. Wasn't the whole point of the cold war: Blue has something badass! Which forces Red to make something more badass, which... Well, off you go!

Haven't had the chance to test your server yet Alpenwolf. But it seems like BADASS! I will one of these days. Thanks in advance!

Cheers!

Sent from my ANE-LX1 using Tapatalk

"Behind enemy lines" today, (blue) tanks were super hard to spot. We killed some SAMs with Su-25 as they gave away their position, but we never noticed any tanks until they parked at Minakh. Just like the other Syria mission this is more for the Ka-50 I guess.

"Behind enemy lines" today, (blue) tanks were super hard to spot. We killed some SAMs with Su-25 as they gave away their position, but we never noticed any tanks until they parked at Minakh. Just like the other Syria mission this is more for the Ka-50 I guess.

My impression is that spotting ground units in the Syria map is really tough. Unlike the Persian Gulf map, the terrain is way more alive with trees and rivers and towns and villages, etc. And that's what you don't get in a terrain mainly dominated by desert and sand as in the PG. Another thing I've noticed today in the Ka-50 is that the terrain is full of small hills in Syria. So tanks could be behind any hill. And you can't risk flying high just to see what's behind every hill, especially when you're close from the TA. There was a Vulcan locking me up and I would turn around and flank and get some altitude for about 15 minutes and still I couldn't find him. Very challenging. I like it!

Just finished flying in the Search & Destroy mission:

Right after mission start two guys grabbed the F-14's with each carrying 6 x AIM-7F's. I reacted to that by taking the MiG-29A with 2 x R-27R's. Shot one down with guns and the second with 1 x R-27R missile.

I RTB'd, refueled, rearmed and went back at it. Same! One guy with 2 x R-27R missiles (the first missile did hit so the second was a waste) and the second guy with guns.

In both cases they did fire some missiles at me. In the second engagement one F-14 fired 3 x AIM-7F's at me head on. I notched and dispensed some chaff and was able to defeat the missiles while my R-27R went smoothly right at him and got him.

I think the R-27R is "much?" better than the AIM-7F. That being said, and after today's experience, I don't think I'd need to add the R-27T missiles. I'm not sure though. Maybe the F-14 pilots weren't the best. Who knows. We'll see.

All of the Aim-7s are bugged, no better than extra weight.

I got a chance to take an F-14 up today. I took 6 AIM-7F missiles, and engaged a two ship. One Mig-19, and Mig-21. The first 7F at the 19 head on from 6-7 nm. The 19 defeated the missile kinematically. It just couldn't turn with him. After maneuvering to his six in long lag I put a second out which did manage to connect. The firing position was such he couldn't out pull the missile this time.

The next engagement was the Mig-21 who had been chasing a Viggen. We were above mach on the deck, took a 5 nm tail shot, but it didn't have the energy to reach him. The remaining three shots were also taken from rear aspect between 1-3 nm. Only one even looked like it tracked for a very short period. Two were completely dumb off the rail. I had to gun the 21.

I have a feeling any chaff still floating in the air is enough to spoof the 7F with little to no effort. I think it the only reason the 7F hit the Mig-19 was because it doesn't have countermeasures.

Also, +1 add the A-4E to "A" mission (not all). You install it to the save games folder, so it doesn't interfere with the base game at all.

My impression is that spotting ground units in the Syria map is really tough. Unlike the Persian Gulf map, the terrain is way more alive with trees and rivers and towns and villages, etc. And that's what you don't get in a terrain mainly dominated by desert and sand as in the PG. Another thing I've noticed today in the Ka-50 is that the terrain is full of small hills in Syria. So tanks could be behind any hill. And you can't risk flying high just to see what's behind every hill, especially when you're close from the TA. There was a Vulcan locking me up and I would turn around and flank and get some altitude for about 15 minutes and still I couldn't find him. Very challenging. I like it!

Yeah, the Syria terrain is much more fun to work with than the other maps we have! In fact, I played an entire round of Search & Destroy driving around in tanks. That was the first time I ever really did that and it was a lot of fun, especially when you coordinate with GCI and air support! :joystick:

Just finished flying in the Search & Destroy mission:

Right after mission start two guys grabbed the F-14's with each carrying 6 x AIM-7F's. I reacted to that by taking the MiG-29A with 2 x R-27R's. Shot one down with guns and the second with 1 x R-27R missile.

I RTB'd, refueled, rearmed and went back at it. Same! One guy with 2 x R-27R missiles (the first missile did hit so the second was a waste) and the second guy with guns.

In both cases they did fire some missiles at me. In the second engagement one F-14 fired 3 x AIM-7F's at me head on. I notched and dispensed some chaff and was able to defeat the missiles while my R-27R went smoothly right at him and got him.

I think the R-27R is "much?" better than the AIM-7F. That being said, and after today's experience, I don't think I'd need to add the R-27T missiles. I'm not sure though. Maybe the F-14 pilots weren't the best. Who knows. We'll see.

Interessting. I have no experience with the 7F (yet), but using the 7M, me (RIO) and my pilot can confidently take on any Fox1 equipped aircraft in the F-14 head on. Looking forward for an opportunity to try that with the 7F.

Here's the thing with the AIM-7F

It's kinda shit (which is good for this server)

If you pull just before it's about to hit you, chances are it's gonna miss, where as the R-27R in the same situation will hit more often than not

It also has a bit lower range than the 27R. Not a lot, but it will matter if engaging a Tomcat

Not gonna touch on some comments around here regarding these 2 in a dogfight, just gonna say it depends on the pilot, as either plane can take out the other. Imho the Fulcrum has the advantage there, thanks to easier high AOA control, but as said, the pilot matters, not the plane.

No, the MiG-29 doesnt have an advantage because it carries less missiles. Unless you mount phoenixes/bombs on the 14, there will be no noticable difference in performance.

The fulcrum does however get a slightly better missile, making it more suitable for taking out high value targets (like the Tomcat), where as the 14 with it's half a dozen fox-1's is perfect for picking out MiG-21's in numbers, while still being capable when dealing with 29's

All that said, you have to remember how each plane was meant to be used

The Tomcat could essentially be it's own AWACS with the powerful AWG-9, but that requires a good RIO. So far i've only seen a handful fully crewed 14's around. Learn how to RIO, or find someone who already can do that, and i promise, the Tomcat will suddenly become a whole lot more fun

The Fulcrum was designed in an age where the plane was a tool in the hands of the GCI controller, not the pilot. Sneaking and relying on GCI will be a much more suitable tactic for that plane. The 14 can't do anything if you give it a Fox-1 from 5 miles behind him. The IRST is a really scary tool if used right. Use it! And if you have a human GCI, make sure he's giving you all the calls you need to make that intercept. Killing Tomcats is not a stroll in the park!

All the fights are highly situational. As long as the situation is to your advantage, you will have an upper hand. Pick your fights carefuly. Having that advantage of terrain you can hide behind, or friendly sam underneath you, or a swarm of planes you're flying with will make it much harder for the enemy to kill you.

Just fly smart guys. These 2 planes are a huge threat to eachother, and everything around them :pilotfly:

I got a chance to take an F-14 up today. I took 6 AIM-7F missiles, and engaged a two ship. One Mig-19, and Mig-21. The first 7F at the 19 head on from 6-7 nm. The 19 defeated the missile kinematically. It just couldn't turn with him. After maneuvering to his six in long lag I put a second out which did manage to connect. The firing position was such he couldn't out pull the missile this time.

I was the 19. I just about crapped myself when I realised you were a 14, and had to scramble to defeat what I (thankfully correctly) interpreted as an incoming Sparrow by watching the smoke trail. It barely missed underneath me.

I thought I got back onto your tail but it must've been the second Tomcat, which I didn't spot - I thought there was only one of you - and I managed to get an R-3S away at him before your second shot killed me. Unfortunately for me, the R-3S did what it often does, saw a flare and went with that instead. It was pretty cool to get a shot away on a 14 in a plane I am woefully bad with, though, maybe there's hope yet...

As for 29/14. When the 23 arrives, it should be able to carry R-3S and R-13M, so you can still have rear-aspect heaters; the F-14A should, at some point, also get rear-aspect heaters. With that said, the problem with all-aspects before was that everyone had them and so merges tended to end very quickly across the board. If only 2 aircraft at a time on each team have that capability, it's not so bad.

Regarding the Gazelle: the FM is only part of the issue. The bigger problem is that the Mistral is an all-aspect missile with an almost instant lock time, and so approaching within a few miles of a Gazelle (whether you know it's there or not) is taking your life in your hands. The only reason it isn't even more of a menace is that Mistrals are comparatively weak in terms of destructive power, and so like the Stinger it often takes two to destroy a MiG outright rather than annoy or perhaps cripple it. They aren't used to escort other helicopters or destroy red's helicopters, they're used specifically to kill MiGs. It's funny the first few times, but the humour does eventually wear thin. Even R-60s were unreliable against them and so now, we generally have to either gun them, or just avoid the general area they're in.

I am totally fine with the Ka-50 losing its Vikhrs. In fact, I'm hoping once the Mi-24P comes out, the Ka-50 goes away altogether. It's a cool machine, but neither Cold War (mid/late 90s IOC...) nor widely produced (what was it, about 120? 130?). Blue definitely needs an attack helicopter, and I hope they get it soon, but until then pairs of Gazelle M/Gazelle L will have to suffice.

Also, +1 add the A-4E to "A" mission (not all). You install it to the save games folder, so it doesn't interfere with the base game at all.

The problem with this becomes that anyone who wants to join during that mission needs the mod, needs to have the same version the server is running, and then the inherent problems with the Skyhawk itself appear: it will be a worse nightmare than the Gazelle is. The FM and damage model are just not where they need to be to put that thing into a PvP environment. It's all well and good to say, well it's a strike aircraft, but I think at this point we all know that it only takes one person to realise how potent it is against other aircraft and suddenly you're back to F-5s running strike missions because all the strike aircraft are off playing Red Baron.

In the future, I hope this is resolved, but in its current state - it's just going to become a future cause of lengthy arguments in this thread and people souring on the missions including it.

One proposal I would make is turning the requirement for pure textures off, as this would then allow use of some of the wonderful retextures the community has created to help breathe life back into Caucasus. I'm sure there are ways to abuse it, but no matter what else we might bicker about here, I don't think any of the regulars would entertain that thought.

My impression is that spotting ground units in the Syria map is really tough. Unlike the Persian Gulf map, the terrain is way more alive with trees and rivers and towns and villages, etc. And that's what you don't get in a terrain mainly dominated by desert and sand as in the PG. Another thing I've noticed today in the Ka-50 is that the terrain is full of small hills in Syria. So tanks could be behind any hill. And you can't risk flying high just to see what's behind every hill, especially when you're close from the TA. There was a Vulcan locking me up and I would turn around and flank and get some altitude for about 15 minutes and still I couldn't find him. Very challenging. I like it!

I would call it realistic, and I like it too :thumbup:

Shots from Behind enemy lines mission:

A PSA about the trees in Syria, by the way: the leaves are very strong. You can't get away with scraping the upper branches like you can on the other maps.

Between that and how well they conceal things (ground units or even aircraft flying low against them), never mind red or blue, I think green is the real enemy here :lol:

Yeah, I had that in mind. I'm aiming to do that in the next Syria mission.

Using only rear aspect missiles was a good idea before the later era fighters were introduced. Moving back to all aspect is not a bad idea, at least the Gen 3 planes will be able to give them a good fight.

In response to some of the posts above:

AIM-7F:

The AIM-7F does seem to be not that good. In addition, most F-14 pilots are probably not used to use it, I guess. And why would they be when all missiles are allowed on other servers.

Remember when I relaunched the weapons' restrictions on the server (2 months ago or so)? We all had to adapt and find out what weaknesses these missiles have and how can we squeeze the maximum out of them. I think, the F-14 pilots will have to adapt a bit. I had a quick debrief with the two F-14 pilots in the second fight who were with me on TeamSpeak. Jester had a tough time finding me or locking me up. So, yeah... A human RIO is way better and deadlier.

And even if the missiles are not that good, you still have 6 of those. You just need to find out a bit more about them. You have more fuel in the F-14 and if the pilot is good enough, he'll gun down any plane on the server in a dogfight.

I think the setup is fine and not all that unfair. I'm open for suggestions though. Always.

Mistral:

So the Gazelle Mistral is worse than I thought? Great! I'll start removing those, I suppose.

Ka-50:

The Ka-50 project was cancelled in favour of the Ka-52. Around 30 or 32 Ka-50's were built. They even had some use for them in Chechnya. And it is an 80's helicopter.

Here's the thing with helicopters in general: They're just helicopters. They add more to the dynamic of the game and pose no real threat for jet planes. Unless they're bugged like the Gazelle then that becomes an issue.

A-4E:

Again, I'm going to have to apologise for not approving of the idea. I can't just force players to download a mod they don't want to. Regardless of how easy that is to do. I myself don't use mods at all. So I understand those who don't either.

Syria trees:

You see that Ka-50 screenshot from NELLUS? I believe that was me seconds before crashing my Ka-50. I merely scratched the leaves of the trees and BOOM! Caused my Ka-50 to plummet into the ground. More destructive than a missile!

Had the pleasure to join Soman yesterday, flying his beloved 19 on the Phone booth mission.

Server News:

- The SA342Mistral Gazelle has been removed from the Syria missions Kiryat Shmona and Behind Enemy Lines.

- Work on a new mission in the Syria map has started today. All missiles will be available except for the nuke bombs.

- In the new mission either Israeli F-15C's or F-16C's or F-18C's will be added. The latter starting from the super carrier as Blue ally forces (not Israeli).

- As for these modern jets, the AIM-7F or M missiles will be available and some type of IR missiles (but not the M or X if possible). Testing will be needed.

- The role for the possible F-16C/F-18C would be CAS mainly! Stop Red T-55's and T-72's crossing the Jordan river.

- To counter that, MiG-29A's will have access to R-27R, R-27T and R-60M missiles.

- If these modern jets turn out to be too much, we simply take 'em out of the mission. No big deal.