Cold War 1947 - 1991

[Alpenwolf]

4 hours ago, Conker4 said:

For those people who like an easier and more casual forum for talk about the server, we have made a discord for the server https://discord.gg/vNzrVgAkZ7 

 

Still, you guys will have to be on SRS for in-game comms, please. And if you are a GCI operator SRS is the tool and not Discord.

[Rover]

On a different subject I was wondering about the possibility to replace some of the FARP helipads with "invisible farps", perhaps using white tires marking landing zones?

 

Especially on the flat desert scenarios.

 

 

Edited April 8, 2021 by Rover

[The_Tau]

16 minutes ago, Rover said:

On a different subject I was wondering about the possibility to replace some of the FARP helipads with "invisible farps", perhaps using white tires marking landing zones?

 

Especially on the flat desert scenarios.

 

 

 

would be awesome a capability to create "small" FARPs to rearm small helos in field like gazelles,  like move ammo truck there and you can rearm there

[rossmum]

Some sort of marking for the road bases would be nice. The red one on When The Mountains Cry is very hard to find, which is a little bit suboptimal during a fuel emergency... in real life road bases would have RSBN and other radio nav aids set up, but since we don't have mobile RSBN stations in DCS we'll have to make do with visual marks. Maybe (neutral-coloured, orange/purple/green for instance) smoke nearby and then white tyres alongside the road?

[Volator]

On 4/6/2021 at 4:20 AM, Zachrix said:

there is an additional EWR for red that the MiG 21 pilots cant reach

 

Human Red GCI can and do make good use of both though. Add to this the fact that those MiG-15 EWRs are made to respawn by Alpenwolf in case they are destroyed by Blue...

Edited April 8, 2021 by Pilot Ike

[Zachrix]

1 hour ago, Pilot Ike said:

 

Human Red GCI can and do make good use of both though. Add to this the fact that those MiG-15 EWRs are made to respawn by Alpenwolf in case they are destroyed by Blue...

 

 

I am aware of this. There's nothing else you could say other than Red has its advantages....sometimes?

[Alpenwolf]

8 hours ago, Rover said:

On a different subject I was wondering about the possibility to replace some of the FARP helipads with "invisible farps", perhaps using white tires marking landing zones?

 

Especially on the flat desert scenarios.

 

 

 

 

I did that already in the mission When The Mountains Cry. And the plan is to do 'em all like that! I'm just not into DCS these days is all. Took a break 4-5 months ago and don't feel like coming back any time soon. I fix things here and there if necessary but that's it. Everything else on my to-do list is on hold.

[The_Tau]

On Price of persia, in A10A on al Ain there is very annoying telegraph sound in the background. Doesnt seem to stop at any time

 

Seems like its freq 261

Edited April 8, 2021 by The_Tau

[Alpenwolf]

1 hour ago, The_Tau said:

On Price of persia, in A10A on al Ain there is very annoying telegraph sound in the background. Doesnt seem to stop at any time

 

Seems like its freq 261

 

 

It's 124 MHz by default as it is the case with FC3 planes. But then you change it to 251 MHz to listen in to your EWR/GCI. Why 261 MHz?

[rossmum]

The MiG-15 EWR usually co-locates with the 19/21 EWR, so it's not providing extra coverage in most missions (if any). As for it respawning... the only EWRs we can sling with CTLD are on 124MHz and as far as I'm aware there's no way to change that, so destroying the 15 EWR would otherwise leave anyone flying that aircraft blind without a human GCI. I suspect if some of you spent as much time actually in the air fighting as you do looking for literally any excuse to say red has an unfair advantage, blue might win a lot more. It gets very tiring reading the same things over and over again, or hearing some Pepe Silvia-level justification why this or that all-aspect missile or standoff guided weapon is needed, but only for one team.

 

I mean, if you guys really want, how about Alpen gives us a week where all aspect missiles make a comeback, all EWRs and mission-start SAM sites are invulnerable, airframes are unlimited again, and the full range of air to ground weapons are unlocked? At that point perhaps we can change the server name to "Growling Sidewinder 1947-1991".

I understand frustration when one team is stacked and the other team can't effectively offset the numbers advantage, sure. That'd be somewhere where I'd be looking to kill EWRs to blind them, or crater secondary airfields to delay the incoming waves, but you can still do that to a decent enough extent. A couple of weeks ago blue was heavily outnumbered but thanks to a good GCI and some good F-5 cover while the Hueys set up a monstrous amount of IR SAMs and a couple of Hawks, red were unable to make much headway. A week or two later, we had a mission where right from the start, red aggressively claimed airspace over the entire battlefield and blue barely challenged it. Whichever team plays better on the day usually wins, the number of times a team wins due to a difference in available units, an extra EWR, etc. is pretty minimal. It comes off as grasping at straws. I can tell you that most times I've flown red and we've lost, it's either because of a total lack of comms, capable pilots joining too late in the mission, over-focusing on the air battle while ignoring the ground game, or being massively outnumbered at the same time we don't have anyone on comms. The only real 'mission design' loss I can think of recently was when S&D literally wasn't spawning a single red ground unit on the objectives, and when Behind Enemy Lines only had like 2 Mi-8s for us so we couldn't sling (and even then we won that one a few times with what we had at mission start).

[Zachrix]

2 hours ago, rossmum said:

The MiG-15 EWR usually co-locates with the 19/21 EWR, so it's not providing extra coverage in most missions (if any). As for it respawning... the only EWRs we can sling with CTLD are on 124MHz and as far as I'm aware there's no way to change that, so destroying the 15 EWR would otherwise leave anyone flying that aircraft blind without a human GCI. I suspect if some of you spent as much time actually in the air fighting as you do looking for literally any excuse to say red has an unfair advantage, blue might win a lot more. It gets very tiring reading the same things over and over again, or hearing some Pepe Silvia-level justification why this or that all-aspect missile or standoff guided weapon is needed, but only for one team.

 

I mean, if you guys really want, how about Alpen gives us a week where all aspect missiles make a comeback, all EWRs and mission-start SAM sites are invulnerable, airframes are unlimited again, and the full range of air to ground weapons are unlocked? At that point perhaps we can change the server name to "Growling Sidewinder 1947-1991".

I understand frustration when one team is stacked and the other team can't effectively offset the numbers advantage, sure. That'd be somewhere where I'd be looking to kill EWRs to blind them, or crater secondary airfields to delay the incoming waves, but you can still do that to a decent enough extent. A couple of weeks ago blue was heavily outnumbered but thanks to a good GCI and some good F-5 cover while the Hueys set up a monstrous amount of IR SAMs and a couple of Hawks, red were unable to make much headway. A week or two later, we had a mission where right from the start, red aggressively claimed airspace over the entire battlefield and blue barely challenged it. Whichever team plays better on the day usually wins, the number of times a team wins due to a difference in available units, an extra EWR, etc. is pretty minimal. It comes off as grasping at straws. I can tell you that most times I've flown red and we've lost, it's either because of a total lack of comms, capable pilots joining too late in the mission, over-focusing on the air battle while ignoring the ground game, or being massively outnumbered at the same time we don't have anyone on comms. The only real 'mission design' loss I can think of recently was when S&D literally wasn't spawning a single red ground unit on the objectives, and when Behind Enemy Lines only had like 2 Mi-8s for us so we couldn't sling (and even then we won that one a few times with what we had at mission start).

Can we not pls

[Rover]

8 hours ago, Alpenwolf said:

 

I did that already in the mission When The Mountains Cry. And the plan is to do 'em all like that! I'm just not into DCS these days is all. Took a break 4-5 months ago and don't feel like coming back any time soon. I fix things here and there if necessary but that's it. Everything else on my to-do list is on hold.

Ok that's fully understandable, haven't had that map in a while but will sure take a look when I do.

[The_Tau]

11 hours ago, Alpenwolf said:

 

It's 124 MHz by default as it is the case with FC3 planes. But then you change it to 251 MHz to listen in to your EWR/GCI. Why 261 MHz?

I think 261 and 266 are blue farp frequencies and they emit that telegraph sound, its not hearable for other planes as you have to tune in to those freqs, but in FC3 planes you hear all freqs at once

[LegionCW]

@Alpenwolf Gotta say I thoroughly enjoy 'When the Mountains Cry' for the ground attackers as the targets are reasonably large, in a slight clearing and assuming you can use the map to figure out which lake you're attacking, you don't friendly fire your ground units. On other ones such as Prince of persia (where the objective is basically kill the enemy mobile ground forces in highly urban environments, if the commander hides all the ground units near the AF behind walls, inside buildings and under roofs, it becomes practically impossible to dislodge enemies. Kinda renders the ground attackers useless. I've always found mission-targets that are static to be the most balanced, as a team without a commander that captures things leaves almost all their ground units in the open. Similarly, a helicopter can just drop a single igla dude, control him and walk indoors/similar hide and seek rubbish that contests the airfield.

[Alpenwolf]

10 minutes ago, LegionCW said:

@Alpenwolf Gotta say I thoroughly enjoy 'When the Mountains Cry' for the ground attackers as the targets are reasonably large, in a slight clearing and assuming you can use the map to figure out which lake you're attacking, you don't friendly fire your ground units. On other ones such as Prince of persia (where the objective is basically kill the enemy mobile ground forces in highly urban environments, if the commander hides all the ground units near the AF behind walls, inside buildings and under roofs, it becomes practically impossible to dislodge enemies. Kinda renders the ground attackers useless. I've always found mission-targets that are static to be the most balanced, as a team without a commander that captures things leaves almost all their ground units in the open. Similarly, a helicopter can just drop a single igla dude, control him and walk indoors/similar hide and seek rubbish that contests the airfield.

 

True. But do we want all missions to be like When The Mountains Cry with stationary ground objects to destroy?

Try deploying a JTAC unit. It finds enemy ground units and even marks them with smoke! So if you're a striker (especially a Blue one with fire and forget missiles) life becomes a bit easier that way. So again, use the assets at hand and make something out of them combined. Forces of all sorts should work together anyway and you know that.

The JTAC's detection range is 10 km. Easily outranges any ground threats.

CA operators are quite often online but not always. Can't have things so perfect and always smooth, mate

[LegionCW]

3 hours ago, Alpenwolf said:

 

True. But do we want all missions to be like When The Mountains Cry with stationary ground objects to destroy?

Try deploying a JTAC unit. It finds enemy ground units and even marks them with smoke! So if you're a striker (especially a Blue one with fire and forget missiles) life becomes a bit easier that way. So again, use the assets at hand and make something out of them combined. Forces of all sorts should work together anyway and you know that.

The JTAC's detection range is 10 km. Easily outranges any ground threats.

CA operators are quite often online but not always. Can't have things so perfect and always smooth, mate

 

I know about the JTAC strat, I'm talking about line of sight to the target itself. Quick example attached. Bear in mind the T-72 gets one shot by an Abrams yet the Abrams one shots in return frontally, it's not hard to park an Abrams in a spot with high walls and only the front exposed. And I wouldn't say every mission suddenly becomes When the mountains cry, as you can imagine putting some big static targets near the airfields on Prince of persia would naturally encourage teams to capture nearby airfields, facilitating rearming for the ground attackers. After all, I find Open range decent fun (kinda boring fighting over a flat area of terrain though), and that involves killing specific static targets, yet doesn't feel at all like WTMC, and in that mission, you'll find people organically reinforce the FARP and objectives with defences, even though it isn't a mission objective. Visualise if you will, if in OR, the targets were in the same areas as they currently are, but could be moved around by commanders. I guarantee you it'd grind to a stalemate as the commanders would park their vehicles in the nearest town, the densest forest, or even try to partially submerge them and only expose a square inch to prevent drowning, yet that's the only valid part of the hitbox. Again, not very fun for the ground attackers if you combine unpredictable locations due to the several square kilometers a target may potentially be in + dense terrain. Just today, one of the GCIs told me a trick on how to make ground targets phase through walls. 

[Alpenwolf]

On 4/10/2021 at 4:09 AM, LegionCW said:

 

I know about the JTAC strat, I'm talking about line of sight to the target itself. Quick example attached. Bear in mind the T-72 gets one shot by an Abrams yet the Abrams one shots in return frontally, it's not hard to park an Abrams in a spot with high walls and only the front exposed. And I wouldn't say every mission suddenly becomes When the mountains cry, as you can imagine putting some big static targets near the airfields on Prince of persia would naturally encourage teams to capture nearby airfields, facilitating rearming for the ground attackers. After all, I find Open range decent fun (kinda boring fighting over a flat area of terrain though), and that involves killing specific static targets, yet doesn't feel at all like WTMC, and in that mission, you'll find people organically reinforce the FARP and objectives with defences, even though it isn't a mission objective. Visualise if you will, if in OR, the targets were in the same areas as they currently are, but could be moved around by commanders. I guarantee you it'd grind to a stalemate as the commanders would park their vehicles in the nearest town, the densest forest, or even try to partially submerge them and only expose a square inch to prevent drowning, yet that's the only valid part of the hitbox. Again, not very fun for the ground attackers if you combine unpredictable locations due to the several square kilometers a target may potentially be in + dense terrain. Just today, one of the GCIs told me a trick on how to make ground targets phase through walls. 

 

Again, true. But then again, it is quite the same in real life, right? Tanks don't just drive into tanks any more. They rather hide well and send in the helicopters or strikers. Basically, tank battles died with WWll mostly. The longer the range of your weapons is the less mobile you need to be (damn, that actually sounds good ). They had swords. Then arrows. Then catapults. Then small firearms. Then bigger firearms. Armoured vehicles. Then rifles. Artillery. Tanks. Better tanks. Much better tanks. Oh! Flying objects with weapons onboard, etc. You get the picture, I take it. So it is inevitable that armies don't meet on a certain battlefield any more with things being constantly developed.

The T-72 isn't really much protected. Unlike the Abrams. Now, whether it's a bit exaggerated in DCS or not, who knows! I don't think it is exaggerated but I'm just speculating.

Now, as to the bugs in DCS that allow a tank to hide in a wall or drive through trees but get stuck on bushes and small fences. Well, that's beyond me as you certainly know. And with that comes the frustration maybe so we talk about it.

Edited April 11, 2021 by Alpenwolf

[LegionCW]

5 hours ago, Alpenwolf said:

 

Again, true. But then again, it is quite the same in real life, right? Tanks don't just drive into tanks any more. They rather hide well and send in the hecicopters or strikers. Basically, tank battles died with WWll mostly. The longer the range of your weapons is the less mobile you need to be (damn, that actually sounds good ). They had swords. Then arrows. Then catapults. Then small firearms. Then bigger firearms. Armoured vehicles. Then rifles. Artillery. Tanks. Better tanks. Much better tanks. Oh! Flying objects with weapons onboard, etc. You get the picture, I take it. So it is inevitable that armies don't meet on a certain battlefield any more with things being constantly developed.

The T-72 isn't really much protected. Unlike the Abrams. Now, whether it's a bit exaggerated in DCS or not, who knows! I don't think it is exaggerated but I'm just speculating.

Now, as to the bugs in DCS that allow a tank to hide in a wall or drive through trees but get stuck on bushes and small fences. Well, that's beyond me as you certainly know. And with that comes the frustration maybe so we talk about it.

 

True but you forget an important thing. This is a game. And unfortunately, it considers an airfield to be contested by a single igla dude, whereas irl I can probably guess that guy would be surrendering. In reality, that airfield would be controlled by the guy with the most things on it.

17 hours ago, Alpenwolf said:

 

True. But do we want all missions to be like When The Mountains Cry with stationary ground objects to destroy?

Try deploying a JTAC unit. It finds enemy ground units and even marks them with smoke! So if you're a striker (especially a Blue one with fire and forget missiles) life becomes a bit easier that way. So again, use the assets at hand and make something out of them combined. Forces of all sorts should work together anyway and you know that.

The JTAC's detection range is 10 km. Easily outranges any ground threats.

CA operators are quite often online but not always. Can't have things so perfect and always smooth, mate

 

Most of your missions already are like WTMC, revolving around static targets, yet none of them feel like WTMC. Open range has the farps, siege units, water towers, Desert has eyes has static EWR locations and defences, Sukhumi unleashed does involve fighting over that airfield, but have you seen sukhumi compared to Dubai? It's completely barren of almost any obscuring terrain. There's also the mountain antennas and fuel depot one, and probably other missions I'm forgetting. There aren't issues on search and destroy when it comes to the lakes with no concealment, but problems arise attacking the last town where blue can print defences indefinitely and hold it ad infinitum.

[Alpenwolf]

2 hours ago, LegionCW said:

 

True but you forget an important thing. This is a game. And unfortunately, it considers an airfield to be contested by a single igla dude, whereas irl I can probably guess that guy would be surrendering. In reality, that airfield would be controlled by the guy with the most things on it.

 

Most of your missions already are like WTMC, revolving around static targets, yet none of them feel like WTMC. Open range has the farps, siege units, water towers, Desert has eyes has static EWR locations and defences, Sukhumi unleashed does involve fighting over that airfield, but have you seen sukhumi compared to Dubai? It's completely barren of almost any obscuring terrain. There's also the mountain antennas and fuel depot one, and probably other missions I'm forgetting. There aren't issues on search and destroy when it comes to the lakes with no concealment, but problems arise attacking the last town where blue can print defences indefinitely and hold it ad infinitum.

 

The most important thing is that this is a game, yes. And I'm not forgetting that as you said, otherwise you'd many modules wouldn't be included and other or assets would be tipping things in favour of one side constantly.

It's either static objects or mobile ground units. Some missions have both. Some even anti-ship. I can hardly think of any other scenario so yeah, at the end of the day the missions are somewhat similar to one another and yet different. But while we're agreeing on every point so far what's the point?

[TeufelHunden]

has there ever been talk about mission times? maybe the maps that tend to stalemate after so many hours should just have the time limits lowered a few hours to make the missions roll a little quicker? Seems like the server does dry out on certain maps and then comes back to life as soon as the maps roll.

[Alpenwolf]

1 hour ago, TeufelHunden said:

has there ever been talk about mission times? maybe the maps that tend to stalemate after so many hours should just have the time limits lowered a few hours to make the missions roll a little quicker? Seems like the server does dry out on certain maps and then comes back to life as soon as the maps roll.

 

That is correct, which is why I sometimes launch a mission manually around the afternoon knowing the next mission is one that lasts for hours and requires a bigger number of players to get the most out of it. I mostly do that around the weekends or holidays where more players are available and can afford flying for longer hours. I did that yesterday actually. I launched Prince of Persia around 1100 zulu so that Battle Over Sukhumi Unleashed starts around 1900 zulu. And so it was and quite many players were online. The same happened on this last Saturday and Friday.

[LegionCW]

On 4/10/2021 at 7:08 PM, Alpenwolf said:

 

The most important thing is that this is a game, yes. And I'm not forgetting that as you said, otherwise you'd many modules wouldn't be included and other or assets would be tipping things in favour of one side constantly.

It's either static objects or mobile ground units. Some missions have both. Some even anti-ship. I can hardly think of any other scenario so yeah, at the end of the day the missions are somewhat similar to one another and yet different. But while we're agreeing on every point so far what's the point?

 

The point is to not suffer missions susceptible to cheesing, by clipping tanks (or god forbid MANPADs) into buildings that contest the objective regardless of how outnumbered they are. You want mobile units in some missions? Fine. But please make the objectives in relatively open areas then, such as the open lakes on this same mission. Change the north red town and southern blue town objectives to something like capture X crossroads in the open.

[Apok]

Same thing happened just now on Prince of Persia and blue got owned in main town. When they hide tanks like that, their fire cone is narrow. Also they are succeptable of being flanked and picked off from behind. Oddly I find it easer to kill them then when they are in open space.  You just run around town and w8 for them to be located. Also using HE on surrounding buildings to bury them is fun.

Regarding  Abrams being OP compared to T72. Irl armour was weaker on T72 and AP rounds penetration wasnt enough to pierce Abrams turret head on. 

[Alpenwolf]

1 hour ago, LegionCW said:

 

The point is to not suffer missions susceptible to cheesing, by clipping tanks (or god forbid MANPADs) into buildings that contest the objective regardless of how outnumbered they are. You want mobile units in some missions? Fine. But please make the objectives in relatively open areas then, such as the open lakes on this same mission. Change the north red town and southern blue town objectives to something like capture X crossroads in the open.

 

I'm not going to start changing missions, reworking objectives, rewriting the briefings, recreating briefing images and thus lots of triggers and flags just because some jerks decide to cheat and exploit what is bugged in the game. There will always be bugs and there will always be scumbags to exploit them. The last thing I need is to start working around the endless bugs in DCS knowing at some point they'll be fixed or partially fixed, while simultaneously other bugs will emerge or things that used to work perfectly all of a sudden start malfunctioning. I've been doing this for years and had the experience with that in the early stages. The last thing you want is chasing those bugs and constantly work around them. If the game is supposedly not playable or fully enjoyable due to lots of bugs and annoying issues in it, I'm not going to be wasting time to figure out ways to iron things out. Some issues I can and do work around them, but certainly not every bug out there.

 

DCS is a hobby we all share. You don't want your hobby or hobbies to stress you out or feel like a job needs to be done, otherwise you're certainly doing something wrong pushing things way beyond their limits. I understand your frustration and I know many players including myself are tired of those bugs. Nothing we can do except for maybe taking a break from the game before it becomes more frustrating than enjoyable. I did once for 9 months and it helped. And now I'm having another break for the second time. I simply had to and that's totally fine.

[Alpenwolf]

Server News:

 

Operation Tiberias is back!

 

* Hit the link to view the briefing *

 

- Check out the latest post to view the changes in the mission.

- Note that this mission is not part of the regular server's missions as it features modules and assets that are usually not included.

- The mission will go online this Friday, on the 16th of April, starting around 1800 zulu.

- The mission is heavily dependant on teamwork! Use SRS for in-game communications and be a useful teamplayer!

- You can reserve a slot for yourself and/or friends/squadron members. Use the Tiberias thread for that matter, not this one.