Cold War 1947 - 1991

[Alpenwolf]

3 hours ago, Shadow KT said:

Really ?

Red does not have a briefing map, which shows there are tens of units on the other side of the town ? You are entering a contested, combat zone, which people are fighting over for and the reasonable thing to do is to rush forward and stay in a hover, within an extremely close distance from where the enemy is known to be ? Doesn't seem like a good idea to me.

Most people who fly DCS are lazy. There are reasons why helicopters are flown a certain way in combat. Go look at any of the Ka-50/52 footage on youtube, always running in attacks.
 

If you are going to hover, don't just sit there, against the open blue sky. Do pop-ups, shoot, take cover.... I drove 3nm, up to a Ka-50 and shot it with a Vulcan.... pulled up below him. He didn't move a single bit. Stayed there for minute, until I reached him.

You know the enemies are supposed to be in a certain area, you setup a scout/attack pattern and don't sit around to get shot at. That Ka-50 which popped flares, was almost in our "spawn" area and that wasn't AAA, that was the rest of the M1s in my platoon, which started shooting. All the people who I didn't kill, where the ones who were constantly on the move, unpredictable and defended immediately after receiving a laser warning.

Run in, scout, repeat until hostiles spotted, run in, attack, repeat until hostiles destroyed.

If you stop people from being able to sit in a hover for 10 minutes and kill everything on the map, they start complaining. Patience, planning, situational awareness ! 

 

 

 

I wasn't defending the wrong behaviour of flying that close and hovering at the enemy's doorstep. I don't do it myself in the first place so why would I agree with it. Was simply commenting on what I saw telling you it's difficult to dodge tanks and AAA's at such a close distance. At that point it was too late for them which is something that should never have happened.

Now, the fact that you were far away and it took you a while to get to them while they're hovering over the same spot for such a long time is simply their mistake to start with, and an information you just shared. Which is another thing an attack/recon helicopter shouldn't do. Yes, pop up, search for targets, then move away. I don't dispute that. I personally try to hover 2-3 km behind friendly tanks who could give me cover. And then I change my location and the procedure is repeated.

 

And yes, some players are not that patient and simply want to get to action rather than hover around and scope the area from afar. Which is why some players prefer hot starts and even mid-air spawning, which is a bit off topic here but simply to prove the point.

 

No doubt two pilots are better than one. And I don't think I'd have to convince you of that.

[Althar93]

Those F-14s are certainly quite the challenge (that and the fact I am still fairly new to the PVP game in the Mig21).

 

Got shotdown a few times yesterday by F-14s and I never saw them coming. Looking at the TacView, they were able to spot/detect me 40km away whilst I was flying cold & close to the ground. I am sure this is realistic with regards to the capability of the radar but I am going to need a loooot of practice to survive any of this.

[Alpenwolf]

21 minutes ago, Althar93 said:

Those F-14s are certainly quite the challenge (that and the fact I am still fairly new to the PVP game in the Mig21).

 

Got shotdown a few times yesterday by F-14s and I never saw them coming. Looking at the TacView, they were able to spot/detect me 40km away whilst I was flying cold & close to the ground. I am sure this is realistic with regards to the capability of the radar but I am going to need a loooot of practice to survive any of this.

 

Welcome to the PvP world, mate.

 

... and as you have figured out yourself, you need a lot of practice in the PvP arena, let alone fighting a Tomcat in an inferior MiG. Patience, my friend

[m4ti140]

On 2/12/2021 at 12:57 PM, Shadow KT said:

All from last nights Homs session.... Stop hovering in front of the enemy and don't fly in straight lines.
 

 

This is perfectly balanced lol...

[Shadow KT]

2 minutes ago, m4ti140 said:

This is perfectly balanced lol...

 

What do you mean ? What is there to be balanced ?

[m4ti140]

On 2/12/2021 at 9:05 PM, Alpenwolf said:

 

Well, they'd never hover in front of the enemy if they knew he was there. Very tough to check out every tree and house within 5 km just to be sure you're safe. Besides, you can't do much in a helicopter if you're that close. You could dodge IR missiles but AAA's and tanks are just tough to deal with when you're that close even if you knew where they are.

The other Ka-50 pilot was defending well and popping flares. Then AAA got him and you finished him. Pretty much confirms what I just wrote above. Probably one of the reasons why the Russians cancelled the Ka-50 in favour of the two-seat attack/recon helicopter, Ka-52. One pilot flies and focuses only on that while the other tries to give you trouble

What do you expect him to do? Not fire at an attack helicopter that's hunting for him?

1 minute ago, Shadow KT said:

 

What do you mean ? What is there to be balanced ?

Red armor on this server is typically 2gens behind Abrams version we have in game. It doesn't have fancy stuff like this.

[Shadow KT]

You don't need an M1 to do this... if anything, having ATGM is even better against helicopters. No need to lase and give out a laser warning (which most of the Ka-50s ignore anyway) and you can hit further away and faster moving targets, with higher pK.

I've hit Ka-50s at 3-4km away, doing 180kph with T-72 ATGM.

[Alpenwolf]

20 minutes ago, m4ti140 said:

What do you expect him to do? Not fire at an attack helicopter that's hunting for him?

 

Huh? How did you misunderstand my reply like that?!

[m4ti140]

1 hour ago, Shadow KT said:

You don't need an M1 to do this... if anything, having ATGM is even better against helicopters. No need to lase and give out a laser warning (which most of the Ka-50s ignore anyway) and you can hit further away and faster moving targets, with higher pK.

I've hit Ka-50s at 3-4km away, doing 180kph with T-72 ATGM.

I wouldn't agree that 9M119 has a higher PK than M1's main gun in conjunction with ballistic computer, if anything I'd say M1 is slightly better. The missile suffers from the same issue Vikhr does, if you fire it at moving target it will oscillate around LOS and hitting target turns into a lottery. Sometimes it will hit, sometimes you do the exact same thing and the missile will miss. Sometimes you fail to track the target smoothly and the missile hits anyway because it just happened to yeet itself that way. And you only carry 3 of them. The only time I had hits against helicopters with it was when they were literally hovering motionlessly. Against Abrams it's at major disadvantage as long as the Abrams player is proficient and knows how to use the tracking system. Cannon rounds are faster than missiles, and 9M119s have lower PK on hit against the Abrams than the other way around - 1 APFSDS is all it ever takes in the game pretty much. Put skilled players in 1 Abrams and 3 T-72s and the Abrams player has a good chance of turning it around and winning.

 

1 hour ago, Alpenwolf said:

 

Huh? How did you misunderstand my reply like that?!

I understood it the same way Shadow did and I assume anyone else would. It sounds as if you were defending invalid Ka-50 tactics and since I've literally heard you telling people on server to hover and scan on a couple of occasions, when 99% of the time it's the worst thing you can do in environment like this, so forgive me for assuming you were defending those tactics. I had reasons to assume that. You've only jumped to explanations after Shadow did a very thorough explanation why that's a bad idea.

Edited February 14, 2021 by m4ti140

[Shadow KT]

1 minute ago, m4ti140 said:

I wouldn't agree that 9M119 has a higher PK than M1's main gun in conjunction with ballistic computer, if anything I'd say M1 is slightly better. The missile suffers from the same issue Vikhr does, if you fire it at moving target it will oscillate around LOS and hitting target turns into a lottery. Sometimes it will hit, sometimes you do the exact same thing and the missile will miss. Sometimes you fail to track the target smoothly and the missile hits anyway because it just happened to yeet itself that way. And you only carry 3 of them. The only time I had hits against helicopters with it was when they were literally hovering motionlessly. Against Abrams it's at major disadvantage as long as the Abrams player is proficient and knows how to use the tracking system. Cannon rounds are faster than missiles, and 9M119s have lower PK on hit against the Abrams than the other way around - 1 APFSDS is all it ever takes in the game pretty much. Put skilled players in 1 Abrams and 3 T-72s and the Abrams player has a good chance of turning it around and winning.

Agree to disagree. I've tested it and I would go with the ATGMs, if the sole purpose was to shoot helicopters. And it is 6 ATGMs, not 3.

[DrRed]

Sometimes AWACS lets you down and doesn't tell you the MiG is there until after he has fired at you. 

[Alpenwolf]

10 hours ago, m4ti140 said:

I understood it the same way Shadow did and I assume anyone else would. It sounds as if you were defending invalid Ka-50 tactics and since I've literally heard you telling people on server to hover and scan on a couple of occasions, when 99% of the time it's the worst thing you can do in environment like this, so forgive me for assuming you were defending those tactics. I had reasons to assume that. You've only jumped to explanations after Shadow did a very thorough explanation why that's a bad idea.

 

 

"It sounds as if"... Exactly, and no problem if you say so, but I wasn't. And let's not assume that everyone else understood it likewise. You don't know that. Besides, you don't need everyone else to strengthen your argument. I hear you, mate

 

I can hardly recall one occasion of me telling someone "to hover" somewhere. That's not how I talk. Simply not the terminology I use when doing GCI. I do tell Ka-50 pilots (and others) to fly somewhere and LOOK FOR/SCAN/CHECK OUT/etc. possible threats, especially if someone had spotted something somewhere in an area. I certainly don't tell them to hover or fly like this or like that as it is up to them and their piloting skills, and surely not for a long time staying stationary for deadly CA players like Shadow to get their hands on them. And we do have quite some good CA players on the server which is very challenging and exciting to try and fight them. And no way on earth (knowing how some of these players fight as I've fought against them many times through CA or while flying the Ka-50 myself) I'd celebrate the "tactics" of sitting ducks somewhere like that. I could hardly call that tactics to begin with.

 

Sometimes, and when a player is lost and can't see the target after scanning for a while, I might (and as a GCI operator would or even should) start giving more specific details regarding their flight behaviour. Such as: "Fly heading xxx, get behind that building, get some altitude and you'll see the enemy. Watch out for potential nearby threats though!" Just as in giving BRAA's to players and when the picture seems clear I'm always making sure they understand that I don't see any threats. Not saying it's clear!

 

I do this quite often, mate. I know what I say and what I don't. Not really sure where you're going with this though.

[Volator]

On 1/2/2021 at 9:31 PM, Alpenwolf said:

Ka-50*

 

*   Will be reduced in numbers once the Mi-24 arrives.

Once the AH-64D is available, will we also see it in reduced numbers on the CWS, like the Ka-50?

[Alpenwolf]

48 minutes ago, Pilot Ike said:

Once the AH-64D is available, will we also see it in reduced numbers on the CWS, like the Ka-50?

 

In the beginning, yes. Then we'll see how all these helicopters change the outcome of battles and then numbers will go up or down and maybe some weapons' restrictions as well. We'll have to wait and see.

[Snappy]

What again is exactly „cold war“ about the AH-64D? I mean the KA-50 is already stretching it thin with a lot of creative imagination.

But the AH-64D? Sorry no way.

The first prototype flew only in 1992 and I think it entered regular service in 97. Both events definitely well after the end of the cold war and the soviet union.

 

I mean , of course in the end its Alpenwolfs server and he can decide what he wants to do or not, but I really have problems seeing why you want keep calling it a „cold war“ server when there are plenty units and their avionics  that simply didnt exist in any form during the cold war.

Probably it’s supposed to be a cheap stand-in for the original AH-64A, but the capabilities the thing has, even in single digit numbers and the tactics it’s capable of due its avionics simply do not belong into that era..

 

I don’t really understand where the limit is for the cold war definition. At some point its better to drop the cold war pretense and rename the server. Otherwise how about accepting that some shiny new toys just cant be used here and strive for some authenticity instead?

 

 

This is not an attempt at trolling ,just trying to discuss what the sense of a CW server is, when lots of newer stuff is pushed in.

 

 

regards,

 

 Snappy 

 

 

 

Edited February 14, 2021 by Snappy

[Alpenwolf]

22 minutes ago, Snappy said:

What again is exactly „cold war“ about the AH-64D? I mean the KA-50 is already stretching it thin with a lot of creative imagination.

But the AH-64D? Sorry no way.

The first prototype flew only in 1992 and I think it entered regular service in 97. Both events definitely well after the end of the cold war and the soviet union.

 

I mean , of course in the end its Alpenwolfs server and he can decide what he wants to do or not, but I really have problems seeing why you want keep calling it a „cold war“ server when there are plenty units and their avionics  that simply didnt exist in any form during the cold war.

Probably it’s supposed to be a cheap stand-in for the original AH-64A, but the capabilities the thing has, even in single digit numbers and the tactics it’s capable of due its avionics simply do not belong into that era..

 

I don’t really understand where the limit is for the cold war definition. At some point its better to drop the cold war pretense and rename the server. Otherwise how about accepting that some shiny new toys just cant be used here and strive for some authenticity instead?

 

 

This is not an attempt at trolling ,just trying to discuss what the sense of a CW server is, when lots of newer stuff is pushed in.

 

 

regards,

 

 Snappy 

 

 

 

 

 

You got a solid point there and even if it had been trolling I wouldn't take any offense. No worries there. Dealt with way worse than that.

 

It was supposed to be the AH-64A (which is just as a bit off as the Ka-50, but one could swallow that pill and pretend...). UNFORTUNATELY, it's the AH-64D. And when I said "weapons restrictions" plus how it will "change the outcome of battles" I was hoping there for myself as a mission designer to have the options of restricting the helicopter as much as possible to get an A out of it. Probably not going to be the case and you couldn't have known all that as I keep these plans to myself alone, which is why I always write things like "we'll have to wait and see" when asked about future plans for the server. I already know where I'm going with any upcoming modules. It's just that ED or third party developers change their plans from time to time (like postponing the F-4 for so long, like making the AH-64D instead of the A while again postponing the more suitable AH-1, etc.) so I'd rather not share too much information while completely understanding the excitement of players regarding specific upcoming modules. And you and I know the AH-64D will "change the outcome of battles" significantly! And as quite often when there's a new module (like the M-2000C back in the day when it was first released if you were around) I added it to one mission to kind of mix it up. A temporary thing. The M-2000C was then added back 2 years after its release and now it's finally fully replaced by the F-14A (F-14B for quite some time until the A arrived). That being said, I don't think the AH-64D will stay with us that long so there you go. And when I say "I don't think" instead of "I'm sure of" is because of the sudden changes the game sometimes throws at us.

 

Another subject is the Ka-50's RWR, Igla missiles, etc. It was announced, right? Now it seems to be far from confirmed. And if confirmed then I hope as a mission designer I'd have access to say, exclude the RWR for the Sharks maybe. Probably no Iglas at all as they should focus on ground operations only. And if we say yes to Iglas then the SA342Mistral must be added back. And if the latter was giving MiG's a hard time, surely F-5's will suffer the same from Ka-50's flying around with Iglas on board. And all of sudden helicopters become a real threat. But why not have that challenge, some might say, while others would completely be against it. Go figure...

 

And ALL of the addressed issues above (and more) are things for the unforeseeable future. So again, let's just wait and see how all that plays out as I always say. And quite often I had some changes or radical changes that players didn't welcome at all and I ended up implementing their ideas instead. No big deal. Those who've been around for quite a while could tell you that. One of them ideas was bringing back the Su-25T for at least as long as Blue has the Harrier and I did. And the Harrier will be replaced once the F-4 arrives! That was the plan. But ED changed their plans, didn't they? So now I'm stuck with the Harrier and it seems like no one really notices it any more. Kind of sneaked in and stayed with us. But it looks like we're getting quite some modules for Blue this year that will finally take the Harrier's place.

 

Hope the above clarifies things a bit. Otherwise, fire at will! Share your thoughts and critics as you already did

[The_Tau]

can AH 64D use Tow missiles?

[Volator]

@The_Tau

I don't think so.

 

I think it's simple: As long as the Ka-50 is available on the CWS, the AH-64 should be available too (without the Longbow radar, if ED provides that option). I could very well live with both missing on the CWS though.

[Snappy]

@Alpenwolf,

 

 

thank you very much for your in-depth reply and explaining / giving a bit of a look inside your thinking . I appreciate it man! 

I agree, it's "unfortunate" ( in the cold war context that is ) that ED is doing the -D instead of -A Model, or even better the AH-1

(though I guess, even when or if it  comes , it will be one of its newer versions).

 

The wait & see approach is fine for me.

 

In a more general sense, (this is now my personal opinion only) I much prefer having less modules available and more authenticity in regards to cold war era, including the problems arising from that. I mean, whether people like it or not,  Helicopters being a major problem for fighter jets isn't necessarily unrealistic, especially not with cold war technology,

Just look up the results/conclusions from the J-CATCH (late 70s/early 80)s experiment if you haven't already . Pretty eye-opening I'd say. Nowadays it might be different, with improvements in radar & filter computing technology and ability to detect even small targets over ground. But during the cold war things were different.

 

Yes, unfortunately we are far from complete equipment for both sides, so gameplay will always be somewhat affected , but personally I'd prefer to keep it strictly CW- unit wise.
So for helicopters  that would mean  UH-1 for blue, Hind and Mi-8 for red. Yea, I know,  blue 's got a disadvantage with limited attack capability there, but hey then again, they get the F-14A on the jets side , which is a major asset with its radar.

 

Either way, each side likely has to focus on their respective strength and try to exploit the others weaknesses and some advantages can be reduced or offset by quantaty management . I guess you 're already doing good job at trying to keep things from getting to shifted into one sides favor .

 

Well, as I said, in the end its your server, that was just my personal position on what constitutes a real cold war server.

 

On the positive side, it looks like quite a few cold war era aircraft are coming our way, with Mirage F-1 , Mig-23, F-8 and so on. Hopefully that will allow a gradual phase out of all

the non-CW units like the Harrier as you mentioned.

Sorry for the long rambling discourse.

 

 

I'm not that often on the server, mostly due to time constraints on my side, but I very much like that you're  focussing on CW scenarios and find it very re-freshing

compared to all the generic 2000 & post 2000 setups  usually around.

So thanks a lot for your server and the efforts you put in there.


Kind regards,

Snappy

 

[Alpenwolf]

2 hours ago, Snappy said:

@Alpenwolf,

...

Just look up the results/conclusions from the J-CATCH (late 70s/early 80)s experiment if you haven't already .

...

 

 

Of course I'm aware of it! A very interesting read. And I wasn't surprised to read that helicopters managed to shoot down airplanes quite more often that the other way around. Helicopters are really underestimated, especially when having IR missiles on board. And I know that players troll each other and feel ashamed if a helicopter shoots them down. They really shouldn't as you know yourself. It's a flying Strela/Avenger as I always say Very deadly!

 

Thanks for the honest post (especially the first one you wrote) because it kind of gave me an awakening slap to be careful with the upcoming modules. Thinking about it more often now, the AH-64D is way too much. Might just add it to one mission for a couple of days and just out of curiosity to see how effective it can be. That's all.

 

Most of the modules we have are actually Cold War related. Which is why I stated in the first post of this thread that the focus is mainly on the MiG-21 and the F-5 in all the missions and it always will be like that to avoid any confusion. So it's just my own imagination amidst the whole Cold War stage within the limits of my own capabilities of mission designing.

 

And yes, maybe the server's name is a bit misleading. Should've called it Alpenwolf's Cold War or something as most players refer to it that way anyway. Yeah, well... I didn't though

 

So again, thanks for your honesty. I haven't played DCS for 4-5 weeks. A bit busy at work and other things (which is good) so your post put me back on track with where I'm going with the server.

 

God bless!

[BonerCat]

While we're on the topic of new modules, would be cool to know your plans for the MiG-23 (RAZBAM) and Mirage F-1 (Aerges)
More specifically, question if they're gonna get their medium ranged fox-1's (R-23/24 for the MiG and the R.530/Super 530F for the F-1)

 

[rossmum]

On 2/3/2021 at 11:53 AM, Althar93 said:

Just tried "Open Range" in a Mig21-bis. This is only my second time joining the server (ever) but I was having issues using the AWACS (on Channel 0), I could send requests but got no reply ; a fellow Mig seemed to be having the same issue. Is this intentional or beginner mistake on my part?

 

Make sure you're contacting the right EWR. Callsign 1 will only reply to MiG-19s and 21s. Callsign 15 is there to talk to MiG-15s and won't respond to anything else. The MiG-15 operates on a completely different frequency band to anything else on red, so the second EWR is necessary for anyone flying it, but also means that sometimes bogey dope callouts (especially using the shortcut) go to the wrong station. A lot of people never realise they're calling a station that physically cannot hear them.

 

On 2/9/2021 at 10:46 PM, Al-Azraq said:

I have a tactical question for you guys: How do you deal with the deadly Avengers in the Mig-21? I tried to pre flare, jink, cut throttle, etc. but they are all aspect and they always hit me in the face when trying to perform an strike run.

 

Any tips?

 

Stay above 5,000m when you suspect you're near an Avenger. Otherwise, you're already doing all you can. Strikes should be made from >5000m slant range, so naturally they're going to be imprecise but it's just what you have to deal with. S-24s still usually find their mark from a safe range, at least.

 

The Stinger is impact-fuzed, no idea why, but that's also something you have going for you - it has to hit you directly to detonate, and quite often they'll sail by harmlessly or detonate in your burner plume. They're very hit or miss weapons, you either see 4 or 5 of them come right at you but take no damage, or one swats you right away.

 

On 2/10/2021 at 1:01 AM, Pilot Ike said:

 

That's disputable, and we don't have any hard figures.

 

The SA-9 (Strela-1) yes, it's inferior to Stinger. SA-13 (Strela-10) and SA-18 (Igla-S) are on par with Stinger in terms of missile/seeker performance.

 

The only disadvantage of the SA-13 system in-game is that the AI will use radar for ranging and is therefore detectable by RWR.

 

The radar can be turned off if the CA guy knows what they're doing. Take this with a grain of salt as I haven't put the time towards empirical testing yet, but it feels like Strelas are more easily duped by fares (at least, slightly). On the other hand, they tend to hit quite hard and don't need to actually physically hit you to activate the fuze like a Stinger does. Both are scary, but I'm a lot more concerned about Avengers than Strelas, personally (and not just because I mostly fly red).

 

On 2/10/2021 at 12:12 PM, Davey said:

Hey everyone. I'm gonna drop probably an unpopular opinion for the red guys. I've been jumpin between blue and red a bit over the last few months. Imo, I think the R60 is an advantage the MiG-21 has over the F-5 that it just can't compete with, not to mention the ability to carry 4+. When I am in the server, I consistently see MiG-21's in the top 3 or 4 on the scoreboard. Not to take anything away from their skill, but I do believe that the R60 presents an unfair advantage and the scoreboard shows the result. I've made shots with an R60 that have followed a Sabre around a hard 90° turn, a turn that would have dropped an Aim-9P before half that turn was made.

 

Now I don't know if this has been discussed in the past, I tend to not get on forums all that often. But if I had to guess, I'd bet it probably has. I'd bet it has to do with the maneuverability between the two birds. If this server is going toward a more unbalanced setup, I'll drop the matter. If the goal is to have a more relatively level playing field, I believe the R13M1 should replace the R60 as the primary missile. This is just my two cents.

 

I would be absolutely behind this... if anything blue had could fire earlier (like, 9D/E) Sidewinders. If you take away the R-60 you then just flip the advantage the other way, because the AIM-9P is a vastly superior missile to the R-13M1 and the ability for the MiG to carry four is more of an idiot trap than an advantage. The R-60 definitely makes shots other missiles won't, and sticks to a target quite well through manoeuvres, but you're paying for it with a much shorter range and small warhead, as well as bad flare rejection. I also don't really think the average blue player will benefit much when the F-5's signature move is to dump both missiles at under half their minimum range, panic, and then complain about the 9P being garbage only to ask "what's uncage?" when someone asks them if they did it or not.

 

The setup we have now isn't so much skewed towards the MiG as skewed towards people who know how missiles work, IMO. F-5s who launch at the proper range, with uncage, will have no trouble deleting MiGs at ranges where the R-60 won't cut it. They just need to make sure they keep that little bit of buffer distance between them, so their weapons are still effective but the R-60 isn't. Getting into a low-speed 1 circle fight with a 21 is a really stupid idea, but that doesn't stop a lot of them from doing it anyway.

 

As it is, I sit in GCI and watch some MiGs dump 4, 5, even 6 missiles at a single fleeing target who is clearly out of range. A few weeks ago I spotted one absolute hero launching his entire supply of R-60s from more than 10 kilometres away. New players will slowly learn with experience like we all did, or they'll fall into the second category: you can't fix stupid.

 

On 2/13/2021 at 10:55 PM, Althar93 said:

Those F-14s are certainly quite the challenge (that and the fact I am still fairly new to the PVP game in the Mig21).

 

Got shotdown a few times yesterday by F-14s and I never saw them coming. Looking at the TacView, they were able to spot/detect me 40km away whilst I was flying cold & close to the ground. I am sure this is realistic with regards to the capability of the radar but I am going to need a loooot of practice to survive any of this.

 

The key is to try and build a mental picture of where the 14s are, and then use that to stay away from their nose and ideally out of their radar's view. Most of them tend to fly quite high and try to crap down Sparrows from the heavens, so you can use that against them and terrain mask off to one flank, then use the contrail as a visual reference not just for position, but where they can and can't see. If the 14 spots you over open terrain, you're going to have a bad day - but the AWG-9 is pretty easily notched, especially by a small target like the 21, so just hang a hard turn perpendicular to their radar beam and dump altitude. As long as you're below them and do that, they will almost always drop lock and their Sparrows will go stupid. For longer shots, where that may not be as much of an option, remember that the Sparrow only has a limited manoeuvring potential before its fins lock up and take advantage of that.

 

The 14 is far superior in any kind of turn fight, so your best bet is to approach from a blind spot (at least, what passes for one, with Jester) or hope they get distracted by something. Pairing up with another MiG is a huge benefit against a Tomcat and will usually result in one of you getting the kill.

 

E - As for the AH-64D - it's going to have capabilities that couldn't even be dreamed of in the 1970s/80s, even more so than the Ka-50, and knowing ED you will not be able to lock those features out to at least try and simulate an A (even though you can't anyway, just from the jump from analogue to digital interfaces). Razbam remain the only dev I can think of who seem really keen on giving mission makers the tools to adjust an aircraft's capabilities to fit different time periods or scenarios, ED show no interest at all.

 

Personally I don't think either the Apache or Ka-50 should be in, or the Kiowa (again - analogue to digital is a quantum leap, there is no 'well it's close enough' when dealing with that), but then we're left with the situation of red having flying artillery while blue only have a light scout with a couple of HOTs. I really, really, really wish it'd been an AH-1S or 1P. Hell, even some of the A-10's weapons are a bit sketchy, the TV displays are far clearer and easier to work with ingame than the actual things were in the old days, and the 25T was built in single-digit numbers and only employed in limited conflicts years after the USSR collapsed. I know it'll make air to ground a lot more challenging, and probably frustrate a lot of people, but honestly it would be a godsend to have a ground game that is in step with the air game - people having to work together, be talked onto targets, and employ less sophisticated weapons effectively to get things done. Currently the air game plays like a mid 1980s confrontation between second rate powers while the ground game plays pretty much like any other server, just without the added headache of JDAMs and JSOWs.

 

On that note, the M60 needs to be player-controllable and I honestly don't know why it isn't... ED strikes again. Controllable T-55, a perfect fit for our time period and setup, but no M60 to match it, so we're left with T-72Bs from the mid 80s fighting M1A2s from the 90s.

Edited February 15, 2021 by rossmum

[Alpenwolf]

Server News:

 

- Operation Sukhumi - The Beginning is offline.

- Instead, operation Search & Destroy is back online (will go online today/tonight).

[Althar93]

12 hours ago, rossmum said:

The key is to try and build a mental picture of where the 14s are, and then use that to stay away from their nose and ideally out of their radar's view. Most of them tend to fly quite high and try to crap down Sparrows from the heavens, so you can use that against them and terrain mask off to one flank, then use the contrail as a visual reference not just for position, but where they can and can't see.

 

Thanks a lot for all of this sound advice. I guess the difficulty (especially as a relatively new DCS player with just under 100h & far less in PvP) is in knowing those F-14s existed in the first place & being able to build this spatial awareness and anticipate where aircraft are or going. I just got the F-14 in the Lunar sale, so I'll hopefully get to learn a bit about the capabilities of the Tomcat and maybe get a better feel for how to counter or at the very leasy avoid it.

 

I already find it near impossible to see a contact during a merge, let alone anything beyond the range of radar and/or weapons. I have had targets locked on the radar and pursued until I was at point blank range on the scope which I couldn't visually spot. I imagine this will get better with experience but I am just amazed at the amount of activity and traffic around me when I debrief in TacView after a session and realise just how much I did not see, even at close, and what should easily be "within visual range".

 

Most of my deaths are from ambushes (I'm sure this is the case for a lot if not most pilots) with an IR missile shot at close range which takes me out of the sky unexpectedly, when I thought I was being sneaky running cold with radar off a few feet above the ground completely oblivious to the fact that anyone was around my space at the time.

Edited February 16, 2021 by Althar93

[CrazyGman]

On 2/13/2021 at 4:55 AM, Althar93 said:

Those F-14s are certainly quite the challenge (that and the fact I am still fairly new to the PVP game in the Mig21).

 

Got shotdown a few times yesterday by F-14s and I never saw them coming. Looking at the TacView, they were able to spot/detect me 40km away whilst I was flying cold & close to the ground. I am sure this is realistic with regards to the capability of the radar but I am going to need a loooot of practice to survive any of this.

So as mentioned before it takes a lot of practice with learning to spot plane specs at distances and in building up SA (situational awareness). 

 

Fighting a tomcat out in the open without a 2 to 1 advantage with the MiG 21 is extrememly difficult. Just like it is with a F-5 vs the MiG 29

 

Baiting them to come into the hills and mountains help level the playing field.

As mentioned flying perpendicular to the tomcats radar and below the contact will cause dropped locks and for you to also temporarily fade from it's radar you can then fly low right at treetop level to evade in the hills, hopefully dragging the tomcat into friendlies. Use GCI call outs or a human GCI on srs to help you build SA. If you get a callout 4000m or higher with tomcats availible it is very likely to be them. Also they will be visible as larger specs against the sky at about 40km