Jump to content

Cold War 1947 - 1991


Alpenwolf

Recommended Posts

4 hours ago, CrazyGman said:

So I was wondering is there anyway to prioritize where GCI/AWACS channels fall in the list either individually player to player or for the mission in general.

 

The issue is on maps with the MiG 15. Due to it's old radio it doesn't have frequency 124.00 so there are maps where if you do a boogey dope call with the hot key in the MiG 21 your calling the MiG 15 channel which is useless.

 

As a result, while the blue team can generally always use the hotkey to get a corrisponding awacs, red mig 21 and mig 19 players can't. And instead have to press backslash, then F7, then F2, then F4 to get a boogey dope to the nearest bandit on scope, which is a bit of a pain when i'm banking on the deck brushing the treetops and trying to find bandits.

 

This would also be nice on maps with multiple EWRs as you could prioritize calling the one nearest to you, for both side.

 

I understand that this is just due to how DCS is setup, and it might not be posdible to change. I then wonder if anyone has found a workaround

 

 

I understand your pain. I myself got used to it, I guess. Didn't know Blue had some hotkey for it. Good for them 😉

cold war 1947 - 1991.jpg

Cold War 1947 - 1991                                       Discord
Helicopters Tournaments
Combined Arms Tournaments

You can help me with keeping up the server via PayPal donations: hokumyounis@yahoo.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, Pilot Ike said:

Could you please remove the respawning red EWR at "Prince of Persia"?

 

Respawning how? What do you mean?

cold war 1947 - 1991.jpg

Cold War 1947 - 1991                                       Discord
Helicopters Tournaments
Combined Arms Tournaments

You can help me with keeping up the server via PayPal donations: hokumyounis@yahoo.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pilot Ike said:

Blue killed the EWRs to the northwest. Another EWR spawned east in the mountains of the northern airbase instantly. 

 


That's the MiG-15 EWR. Red can't deploy EWR's for MiG-15's. You take that one out and they're blind for the rest of the mission. And because it's a long mission there is that extra EWR. Other missions (shorter missions) don't have that.

cold war 1947 - 1991.jpg

Cold War 1947 - 1991                                       Discord
Helicopters Tournaments
Combined Arms Tournaments

You can help me with keeping up the server via PayPal donations: hokumyounis@yahoo.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, Alpenwolf said:

 


That's the MiG-15 EWR. Red can't deploy EWR's for MiG-15's. You take that one out and they're blind for the rest of the mission. And because it's a long mission there is that extra EWR. Other missions (shorter missions) don't have that.

 

I see. Normally it wouldn't be a big issue if there was only AI GCI. The thing is that the MiG-15 EWR works for a human Tac Commander / GCI the same way any other EWR does.

 

Would you consider taking out the Su-25T then? Or take away their KH-25-MP/MPU and KH-58U. It adds a SEAD capability for one side that the other doesn't have. The last two missions I saw Su-25Ts killing two blue EWRs and later two HAWK sites in one approach. If team red has respawning EWRs, at least they shouldn't have such an easy time taking down blue EWRs that do not respawn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Pilot Ike said:

 

I see. Normally it wouldn't be a big issue if there was only AI GCI. The thing is that the MiG-15 EWR works for a human Tac Commander / GCI the same way any other EWR does.

 

Would you consider taking out the Su-25T then? Or take away their KH-25-MP/MPU and KH-58U. It adds a SEAD capability for one side that the other doesn't have. The last two missions I saw Su-25Ts killing two blue EWRs and later two HAWK sites in one approach. If team red has respawning EWRs, at least they shouldn't have such an easy time taking down blue EWRs that do not respawn.

 

It looks like we're getting the Su-17/22. That would mark the end of the Su-25T for sure.

KH-58U missiles have never been allowed on the server.

KH-25MPU missiles are available in limited numbers: 8-12 missiles. And only to counter the Harrier's SEAD capabilities. But then again, both aircraft will be removed as I've states that multiple times once we get our hands on something.

  • Like 1

cold war 1947 - 1991.jpg

Cold War 1947 - 1991                                       Discord
Helicopters Tournaments
Combined Arms Tournaments

You can help me with keeping up the server via PayPal donations: hokumyounis@yahoo.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, Alpenwolf said:

 

It looks like we're getting the Su-17/22. That would mark the end of the Su-25T for sure.

KH-58U missiles have never been allowed on the server.

KH-25MPU missiles are available in limited numbers: 8-12 missiles. And only to counter the Harrier's SEAD capabilities. But then again, both aircraft will be removed as I've states that multiple times once we get our hands on something.

You got a source on that Su-17 being added? I can find a guy making a 3d model but nothing beyond that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, LegionCW said:

You got a source on that Su-17 being added? I can find a guy making a 3d model but nothing beyond that.

 

 

cold war 1947 - 1991.jpg

Cold War 1947 - 1991                                       Discord
Helicopters Tournaments
Combined Arms Tournaments

You can help me with keeping up the server via PayPal donations: hokumyounis@yahoo.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/17/2021 at 5:09 PM, CrazyGman said:

Ok. so for ground attack Red has the Ka-50, SU-25 and SU-25T

 

Blue has ASJ-37 Viggen (a bit of a strech for cold war, Harrier(also a stretch), A-10A

And Gazelle.

 

Lets check out some in service dates of the modern jets just to keep any bias in check and address that "bit of a stretch" comment:

(Source Wikipedia)

 

KA-50 - 1995

Su-25 - 1981 (note access to 2xR60m*)

Su-25t - 1990 (note only 8 production aircraft irl and also that the Su-25t has access to 16xVikhr, 2xR60m*, various kh-25 versions)

MiG21Bis - 1972

 

AJS37 - 1992/1972** (Restricted to Rb75a, bombs, rockets. No Bk90, Rb15f or Rb74)

Av8b/Av8bNA - 1981/1989 (NA adds FLIR and cockpit interface improvements, for the majority of CW server daytime missions FLIR is not a usable advantage until it has the target indication which afaik is not yet implemented.)

A10a - 1976 (Restricted to aim9p, 6xaim65)

F5e - 1972

Gazelle - 1973

 

*Granted this is a loadout restriction of sorts and I appreciate the R73 is disabled. Yet in the comparison between airframes it is an advantage. The Su-25 can manage some good turns rates when it is not fully loaded.

**The biggest/most relevant differences afaik between the AJ-37 (IOC 1972) and AJS-37 are the ability to use modern and smart weapons (BK-90, RB15f, Rb74 afaik not available in CW server), Ternav & cartridge (against perfect nav in FC3 aircraft such as the Su25/Su-25t) and ability to carry 2 vs 6 Rb24/Rb24j (probably the most legitimate complaint here).

 

On 2/17/2021 at 8:22 PM, Davey said:

 

 

Thanks for your guys' opinions. Tbh, I forgot how many dang missiles the Viggen can carry. After reading both your comments, I agree with them and therefore have to change my stance.

 

Don't forget the MiG21 can carry up to 8 R60 if it so choses albeit with some performance penalty. Regardless time spent here discussing such things is better spent enjoying DCS and other things in life.

  • Like 1

Ryzen 5800x@5Ghz | 96gb DDR4 3200Mhz | Asus Rx6800xt TUF OC | 500Gb OS SSD + 1TB Gaming SSD | Asus VG27AQ | Trackhat clip | VPC WarBRD base | Thrustmaster stick and throttle (Deltasim minijoystick mod).

 

F14 | F16 | AJS37 | F5 | Av8b | FC3 | Mig21 | FW190D9 | Huey

 

Been playing DCS from Flanker 2.0 to present 😄

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Alpenwolf said:

 

 

 

Good reminder. Had completely forgotten about it, but I feel like with most modules, it's years away. How long's the Flogger been in development? 3 years? Definitely looking forward to it. Just a shame I won't be able to enjoy looking at the external model on the CW server tho 😔.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Althar93 said:

Out of curiosity, is there already, or are there plans for a Discord dedicated to the Cold War server? 

 

No. And never. SRS is the tool for comms.

  • Thanks 1

cold war 1947 - 1991.jpg

Cold War 1947 - 1991                                       Discord
Helicopters Tournaments
Combined Arms Tournaments

You can help me with keeping up the server via PayPal donations: hokumyounis@yahoo.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, LegionCW said:

 

Good reminder. Had completely forgotten about it, but I feel like with most modules, it's years away. How long's the Flogger been in development? 3 years? Definitely looking forward to it. Just a shame I won't be able to enjoy looking at the external model on the CW server tho 😔.

 

The external views are misused on other servers when in a merge with a bandit. Some players are so good it to the extent they immediately hit F2/3/4/etc. the second they enter a dogfight. Also, you could always check out your six quickly like that. You could also use it and check out your aircraft from above to see if any enemy ground units below you are shooting at you or not. And if you are a Combined Arms player, well, external views can help you find enemy tanks hiding behind buildings way too easy.

As cool as it is to have external views, especially when taking off or flying in large formations, the down side of them is vast.

 

With external views, F10 map being a navigational tool, kill messages or any type of reports, damage assistant enabled, hot starts, mid-air spawning, Discord (which would eliminate SRS), etc., battles would become way too arcadish. Most players are the arcade type of player anyway. Giving them these assets would make it worse; hence the restrictions and I know they can be annoying at times. I fee you, mate.

 

See you airborne!

  • Like 4

cold war 1947 - 1991.jpg

Cold War 1947 - 1991                                       Discord
Helicopters Tournaments
Combined Arms Tournaments

You can help me with keeping up the server via PayPal donations: hokumyounis@yahoo.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Alpenwolf said:

 

The external views are misused on other servers when in a merge with a bandit. Some players are so good it to the extent they immediately hit F2/3/4/etc. the second they enter a dogfight. Also, you could always check out your six quickly like that. You could also use it and check out your aircraft from above to see if any enemy ground units below you are shooting at you or not. And if you are a Combined Arms player, well, external views can help you find enemy tanks hiding behind buildings way too easy.

As cool as it is to have external views, especially when taking off or flying in large formations, the down side of them is vast.

 

With external views, F10 map being a navigational tool, kill messages or any type of reports, damage assistant enabled, hot starts, mid-air spawning, Discord (which would eliminate SRS), etc., battles would become way too arcadish. Most players are the arcade type of player anyway. Giving them these assets would make it worse; hence the restrictions and I know they can be annoying at times. I fee you, mate.

 

See you airborne!

 

Is the external view enabling also grouped with all the aforementioned stuff? Can't say I know what everyone else thinks as to why they come to this server: for the immersion of no markers, external view etc; to fly Cold war stuff vs Cold war stuff without having to face modern aircraft (PVE or PVP); or a combination of both.

 

On another subject, what're your thoughts on the trend I see where at the beginning of missions, blue outnumbers red, then red matches the number and starts clubbing blue, blue players leave, then red players leave. Similar thing happened in Eyes in the Desert I think, where we knocked out 2 of their EWR sites very early completely, and knocked out the radars of the other 2 sites shortly after. Half the blue team just vanished after that. Got any ideas? AI to drain the ammo of whatever mob gets the upper hand and starts dominating? Can't say I know the solution, as the AI might also add to the numbers of the side that gets the upper hand. Buuuuut it would also encourage people to join at any time, knowing that there'd always be targets for them to shoot.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, LegionCW said:

 

On another subject, what're your thoughts on the trend I see where at the beginning of missions, blue outnumbers red, then red matches the number and starts clubbing blue, blue players leave, then red players leave. Similar thing happened in Eyes in the Desert I think, where we knocked out 2 of their EWR sites very early completely, and knocked out the radars of the other 2 sites shortly after. Half the blue team just vanished after that. Got any ideas? AI to drain the ammo of whatever mob gets the upper hand and starts dominating? Can't say I know the solution, as the AI might also add to the numbers of the side that gets the upper hand. Buuuuut it would also encourage people to join at any time, knowing that there'd always be targets for them to shoot.

 

I wish there had been something that would force players to choose either Red or Blue upon joining the server. Some games as I hear seem to have such a thing. As a server host you could then determine whether one side is allowed to outnumber the other by x:y or simply keep them completely balanced. If other games have it, why not here in DCS.

So many tiny little things, and frankly implementing all the mods, scripts and workarounds out there becomes too much at some point and as it happens could cause a mission to malfunction, which is something I had (or still do in the mission Springfield). Other missions have their issues but I've managed to keep them intact so far.

 

It really doesn't feel as if ED has always focused so heavily on multiplayer and they never claimed such a thing to be fair. They've only started tenting to the multiplayer community more than ever a while ago (2 years max). Maybe in time we'll see more features.

cold war 1947 - 1991.jpg

Cold War 1947 - 1991                                       Discord
Helicopters Tournaments
Combined Arms Tournaments

You can help me with keeping up the server via PayPal donations: hokumyounis@yahoo.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Alpenwolf said:

 

I wish there had been something that would force players to choose either Red or Blue upon joining the server.

Blueflag servers have mechanism like this, with stats for everyone to see. But you know, being outnumbered also forces you to change your tactics, be more of interceptor, adapt hit and run tactics.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, The_Tau said:

Blueflag servers have mechanism like this, with stats for everyone to see. But you know, being outnumbered also forces you to change your tactics, be more of interceptor, adapt hit and run tactics.

 

You simply nailed it there!

 

Whatever BlueFlag is using is beyond my scripting capabilities. Haven't got the time to dive into it and write my own script. I know I could if time is dedicated to it, but I'd rather spend whatever free time I have on other things.

 

I've never ever in my life preferred getting on the victorious train like everybody else. You see that with athletes who sign contracts with bigger and more successful clubs and you see that with DCS players trying to join big squadrons to have that big and winning name attached to them. You see that everywhere. Nobody wants to pour any effort into anything these days. (Here we go again. Me talking about the world... I couldn't resist...). I've always preferred the challenge over any convenient circumstances. But that's just me.

In the early years of the Cold War server's era Red was always the underdog being mostly outnumbered by 1:1,5 or even 1:2 if not more. I honestly enjoyed that. Because nothing is more satisfying to me than overcoming the seemingly impossible task at hand (in real life too). That's heaven. Especially, when proving your boss or your colleagues or loved ones, etc. that you can actually do it while they're all writing you off. On the other hand, I totally understand players who want balanced teams and I try to do my part through the mission designing itself but it's never perfect. It's up to players to check out the coalitions before choosing one to keep things a bit balanced, but then again if you're in the mood for a MiG-21 (or any other module) then you're in the mood for a MiG-21 (or any other module) and not in the mood of becoming the hero who saves the unbalanced odds, and that's totally understandable.

 

... so there's that dilemma with keeping teams balanced. However, I wouldn't mind a similar (or the same) script of that used on the BlueFlag server. It's not shared like the CTLD script as far as I know and it's undoubtedly their right to do so.

  • Like 1

cold war 1947 - 1991.jpg

Cold War 1947 - 1991                                       Discord
Helicopters Tournaments
Combined Arms Tournaments

You can help me with keeping up the server via PayPal donations: hokumyounis@yahoo.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Alpenwolf said:

 

You simply nailed it there!

 

Whatever BlueFlag is using is beyond my scripting capabilities. Haven't got the time to dive into it and write my own script. I know I could if time is dedicated to it, but I'd rather spend whatever free time I have on other things.

 

I've never ever in my life preferred getting on the victorious train like everybody else. You see that with athletes who sign contracts with bigger and more successful clubs and you see that with DCS players trying to join big squadrons to have that big and winning name attached to them. You see that everywhere. Nobody wants to pour any effort into anything these days. (Here we go again. Me talking about the world... I couldn't resist...). I've always preferred the challenge over any convenient circumstances. But that's just me.

In the early years of the Cold War server's era Red was always the underdog being mostly outnumbered by 1:1,5 or even 1:2 if not more. I honestly enjoyed that. Because nothing is more satisfying to me than overcoming the seemingly impossible task at hand (in real life too). That's heaven. Especially, when proving your boss or your colleagues or loved ones, etc. that you can actually do it while they're all writing you off. On the other hand, I totally understand players who want balanced teams and I try to do my part through the mission designing itself but it's never perfect. It's up to players to check out the coalitions before choosing one to keep things a bit balanced, but then again if you're in the mood for a MiG-21 (or any other module) then you're in the mood for a MiG-21 (or any other module) and not in the mood of becoming the hero who saves the unbalanced odds, and that's totally understandable.

 

... so there's that dilemma with keeping teams balanced. However, I wouldn't mind a similar (or the same) script of that used on the BlueFlag server. It's not shared like the CTLD script as far as I know and it's undoubtedly their right to do so.

 

And about the external view thing, is that enable-able by itself, or is it bundled with all the other markers in the mission settings?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, LegionCW said:

 

And about the external view thing, is that enable-able by itself, or is it bundled with all the other markers in the mission settings?

 

The external views are a separate thing.

cold war 1947 - 1991.jpg

Cold War 1947 - 1991                                       Discord
Helicopters Tournaments
Combined Arms Tournaments

You can help me with keeping up the server via PayPal donations: hokumyounis@yahoo.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Had my first time on the CW server a few days ago and I really like the idea/missions. Having to rely on GCI is really a much more interesting and immersive experience than having DL godseye view and throwing fox-3s at each other then turning around and hoping for a splash. Here, you actually get to see the enemy. The best part was flying a Tomcat off the boat and having some truly dissimilar air combat. I had the better plane but they had us outnumbered, interesting situation.

I would however like to make some suggestions for Seek and Destroy (or any other mission with a carrier) to make flying off the boat a little more enjoyable.

-Please make the carrier move. Landing on a static carrier is awful, not that its too difficult compared to a moving one, but it just feels wrong. I understand that a carrier moving at 25-30 knots for 8 hours might hit a coastline at some point, but you can either place it further out at sea (which will probably make the Tomcat less attractive, furhter reducing its impact on "force balance") or have the carrier go in a box. If there is wind you can set up launch and recovery times where the carrier steams into the wind for 30min or so for every 1-1.5h and then turns back, similar to RL static ops.

-Add a recovery tanker. Preferably an S-3 circling above the boat at angels 11-12. Maybe have it replaced every 2-3h so it doesnt run out of fuel.

-Add some statics to the deck. The old Lockon F-14, S-3 and F-18 models would do just fine without eating to many fps.

-This one is is really not that important, but either enable modex selection in the rearm menu or set the modex numbers correctly (i.e. something between 100 and 120 or 200-220, thats the modex numbers the Tomcat squadrons usually had) in the ME. This way you wont hear any crazy modex numbers (like 864 or something, which no tomcat ever had on the boat) for your plane during carrier ATC comms.

I understand CW is not a carrier ops server and most people probably dont care about the things I wrote above but if you could consider them that would make any tailhook fan (like me) a little happier 🙂

  • Like 3

i5-8600k @4.9Ghz, 2080ti , 32GB@2666Mhz, 512GB SSD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, sLYFa said:

Had my first time on the CW server a few days ago and I really like the idea/missions. Having to rely on GCI is really a much more interesting and immersive experience than having DL godseye view and throwing fox-3s at each other then turning around and hoping for a splash. Here, you actually get to see the enemy. The best part was flying a Tomcat off the boat and having some truly dissimilar air combat. I had the better plane but they had us outnumbered, interesting situation.

I would however like to make some suggestions for Seek and Destroy (or any other mission with a carrier) to make flying off the boat a little more enjoyable.

-Please make the carrier move. Landing on a static carrier is awful, not that its too difficult compared to a moving one, but it just feels wrong. I understand that a carrier moving at 25-30 knots for 8 hours might hit a coastline at some point, but you can either place it further out at sea (which will probably make the Tomcat less attractive, furhter reducing its impact on "force balance") or have the carrier go in a box. If there is wind you can set up launch and recovery times where the carrier steams into the wind for 30min or so for every 1-1.5h and then turns back, similar to RL static ops.

-Add a recovery tanker. Preferably an S-3 circling above the boat at angels 11-12. Maybe have it replaced every 2-3h so it doesnt run out of fuel.

-Add some statics to the deck. The old Lockon F-14, S-3 and F-18 models would do just fine without eating to many fps.

-This one is is really not that important, but either enable modex selection in the rearm menu or set the modex numbers correctly (i.e. something between 100 and 120 or 200-220, thats the modex numbers the Tomcat squadrons usually had) in the ME. This way you wont hear any crazy modex numbers (like 864 or something, which no tomcat ever had on the boat) for your plane during carrier ATC comms.

I understand CW is not a carrier ops server and most people probably dont care about the things I wrote above but if you could consider them that would make any tailhook fan (like me) a little happier 🙂

 

The thing is, I don't own the F-14 and frankly she's not my type of plane so I wouldn't have known anything about the modex issue. And you're the first F-14 player to tell me about all that.

I'll get my head around this over the weekend and see if I can change a thing or two. A moving carrier is more realistic, I know. It's just that the 8 hours of the mission's time what makes it challenging.

 

We'll see.

 

Have fun with those dogfights!

  • Like 2

cold war 1947 - 1991.jpg

Cold War 1947 - 1991                                       Discord
Helicopters Tournaments
Combined Arms Tournaments

You can help me with keeping up the server via PayPal donations: hokumyounis@yahoo.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Helicopters Tournament 13

 

All Ka-50's and UH-1's are taken. A few SA342L's and Mi-8's are still available.

 

3 days to go!

cold war 1947 - 1991.jpg

Cold War 1947 - 1991                                       Discord
Helicopters Tournaments
Combined Arms Tournaments

You can help me with keeping up the server via PayPal donations: hokumyounis@yahoo.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...