Cold War 1947 - 1991

[The_Tau]

Guys vote yes!!! @Alpenwolf

 

 

[Alpenwolf]

2 hours ago, Zachrix said:

Hmm for some reason it seems like all the R60s on Search and Destroy got converted into over 500 R-55s LOL @Alpenwolf

 

Because they've butchered the warehouses again! And I've just finished fixing that! And the ME has been very laggy since the latest update so fixing the bloody warehouses is even more frustrating now.

 

I'm not going to waste more hours AGAIN fixing those warehouses twice in a week. Sorry, folks, but there are limits. Designing missions and hosting a server is one thing and it's really fun. Working around arduous and time consuming bugs that ain't my doing is just frustrating. And at some point the hobby becomes unpleasant.

Can't tell you when or whether I'll fix the warehouses any time soon.

 

Again, I'm really sorry and I hope you understand the above.

Edited April 22, 2021 by Alpenwolf

[ustio]

 

the phoenix are available in Search and Destroy. is this intentional?

Edited April 22, 2021 by ustio

[Get_Lo]

1 hour ago, Alpenwolf said:

 

 

 

I'm not going to waste more hours AGAIN fixing those warehouses twice in a week. Sorry, folks, but there are limits. Designing missions and hosting a server is one thing and it's really fun. Working around arduous and time consuming bugs that are ain't my doing is just frustrating. And at some point the hobby becomes unpleasant.

Can't tell you when or whether I'll fix the warehouses any time soon.

 

Again, I'm really sorry and I hope you understand the above.

Well for whats its worth your server is fantastic and the community loves it. The work you've done is so far above of the standard for DCS Servers that its pretty amazing. Take your time and im sure plenty are willing to help you manage the server if need be.

[CAPT_Kirkpatrick]

Just a heads up lads; I've written a bot for the discord server that gives us the current status of the cold war server. It's stable euro evening but on and off in the afternoon as I'm adding functionality, but if you need to check the status quickly its in the status channel of the server: https://discord.gg/tm9x6Q8Spx

It's accurate to stats within 5 mins as that's the rate when ED update their server list. If there's any problems with it give us a shout, it should be stable and working for other servers by the end of the week.

[Paradox]

9 hours ago, Alpenwolf said:

 

Because they've butchered the warehouses again! And I've just finished fixing that! And the ME has been very laggy since the latest update so fixing the bloody warehouses is even more frustrating now.

 

I'm not going to waste more hours AGAIN fixing those warehouses twice in a week. Sorry, folks, but there are limits. Designing missions and hosting a server is one thing and it's really fun. Working around arduous and time consuming bugs that ain't my doing is just frustrating. And at some point the hobby becomes unpleasant.

Can't tell you when or whether I'll fix the warehouses any time soon.

 

Again, I'm really sorry and I hope you understand the above.

 

Maybe it could be worth entrusting that sort of arduous task to a trusted lieutenant? I'm sure there are quite a few server regulars who would step up

[Alpenwolf]

5 hours ago, Paradox said:

Maybe it could be worth entrusting that sort of arduous task to a trusted lieutenant? I'm sure there are quite a few server regulars who would step up

 

I'm sure of it and some have reached out to me in that regard over the years. I appreciate the offer no doubt. However, many things regarding the missions are saved in my head. Others as pdf files, yes, but for instance the long lists of available weapons and their numbers at each and every airbase are in my head. Besides, they change from time to time. So there's no strict protocol in that regard. As the designer of these missions I know what options, advanced options, setup, weapons, etc. could or should be allowed and what not. I'd have to transfer that data (which is not constant but rather variable) onto paper first for others to know what to do. So it adds even more to the workload I already have with these bugs.

 

Imagine you're CEO of a company who's about to retire. You'd be holding hands with your successor for as long as necessary to make sure he doesn't mess up the work you've done over all those years. You'd be working double time with him to minimise any potential discrepancies he might have compared to your work. It's your company! Your baby! Any radical or sudden changes (even if not intended) would give you even more headache. And I'm certainly not in the mood right now of holding hands with anything connected to DCS. The unpleasant workload caused by all the different bugs and limitations in the ME is one of the reasons why I took a break 5 months ago from DCS. I upgrade the missions, I fix issues here and there, I implement users' ideas, etc. I'm cool with that. And of course I fixed the the warehouses but that was like once every two months or so. Surely not twice a week. And what if there is another update next week that'll mess things up again? With 2.7 being so buggy I'm sure we'll be receiving updates constantly over the upcoming days and maybe weeks. And if that's the case you could only imagine how many times the warehouses will be messed up.

 

I hope you and others understand what I just wrote to you. Sorry for not having a more convenient answer.

[Zachrix]

@Alpenwolf Despite not having R60s, flare pods, or a centerline fuel tank, we at Red are still clapping

Edited April 23, 2021 by Zachrix

[Althar93]

Joined Open range earlier - that fog/weather is brutal.

[Alpenwolf]

12 minutes ago, Althar93 said:

Joined Open range earlier - that fog/weather is brutal.

 

I'll check it out.

[Alpenwolf]

Server News:

 

- The warehouses are still bugged.

- However, instead of the 300+ R-55 missiles that came out of nowhere, it's now 300+ R-3S and some R-13M1 missiles (Less maneuverable than R-60's but bigger warheads).

- Doing that in all the missions took me 15-20 minutes "only". For that I didn't have to start from scratch while redoing the warehouses. The R-60's are simply missing.

- The MiG-21's are still lacking their countermeasures. Fixing this would require the long hours work of fixing the warehouses (starting from scratch).

- All Phoenix missiles were removed.

[The_Tau]

Ye, whole ME weapons storage is buged now. On rearming panel weapons still show in stock even when its 0, or vice versa, weapon doesnt seem to be in stock even though you can load it from pre-set loadout. 

 

@Alpenwolf

I did some tests for F14 missiles and as there are multiple choice of same missiles in ME (like 2 versions of AIM7F, or 2 versions of AIM7M), I found the ones you actually load on F14.

For Aim54C its first position from list

AIM7F its second,

AIM7M is first

AIM7MH is second

 

Of course ED in their wisdom may change that in future...

[CrazyGman]

Where can we let ED know about the constant warehouse bugs with updates issues. I think all of us who play and support this server should take some time to make all of our voices heard, because it's not fair for Alpenwolf to constantly have to correct the same problem time and again

Edited April 24, 2021 by CrazyGman

[Alpenwolf]

10 hours ago, The_Tau said:

Ye, whole ME weapons storage is buged now. On rearming panel weapons still show in stock even when its 0, or vice versa, weapon doesnt seem to be in stock even though you can load it from pre-set loadout. 

 

@Alpenwolf

I did some tests for F14 missiles and as there are multiple choice of same missiles in ME (like 2 versions of AIM7F, or 2 versions of AIM7M), I found the ones you actually load on F14.

For Aim54C its first position from list

AIM7F its second,

AIM7M is first

AIM7MH is second

 

Of course ED in their wisdom may change that in future...

 

Some weapons are for AI. That's why you get two AIM-7F/M types. But it doesn't say which is which so there you go.

 

7 hours ago, CrazyGman said:

Where can we let ED know about the constant warehouse bugs with updates issues. I think all of us who play and support this server should take some time to make all of our voices heard, because it's not fair for Alpenwolf to constantly have to correct the same problem time and again

 

 

It's been reported multiple times by me and other users starting threads in that regard. I appreciate your approach, however, with so many even older bugs that were reported even more often than the warehouse's one are still bugged, I can't help but give up on having any hopes regarding any reports.

[The_Tau]

48 minutes ago, Alpenwolf said:

 

Some weapons are for AI. That's why you get two AIM-7F/M types. But it doesn't say which is which so there you go.

 

 

Ones with no extra text like phoenix or semi active (first from list). And for AIM7F and MH the second ones from list 

Edited April 25, 2021 by The_Tau

[NELLUS]

Not sure I understand why the Viggen has a limited amount of RB24J sidewinders? Is this to force the Viggen to be purely a Striker? This is surely against what the plane actually did in real life. We had both fighter and striker wings for the Viggen. 

[Alpenwolf]

9 hours ago, The_Tau said:

 

Ones with no extra text like phoenix or semi active (first from list). And for AIM7F and MH the second ones from list 

 

 

I figured that out already, but thanks for your effort

 

5 minutes ago, NELLUS said:

Not sure I understand why the Viggen has a limited amount of RB24J sidewinders? Is this to force the Viggen to be purely a Striker? This is surely against what the plane actually did in real life. We had both fighter and striker wings for the Viggen. 

 

Exactly. If you'd stick to 2 missiles or maybe 4 max you should be fine and probably not run out of those any time soon. Taking 6 to spam them all at one MiG like I've noticed that from many players through the tacview files is not the way of doing things right. I know this limits those who treat their Viggen properly but many don't. So yeah, it punishes those who don't have an arcadish approach to it and that's the dilemma I have with some Viggen pilots. Still, I did increase the numbers from ca. 50 to ca. 60 or even 70 x RB-24J's in some missions trying to find the middle way so to speak.

[Get_Lo]

12 hours ago, Alpenwolf said:

 

 

 

 

Exactly. If you'd stick to 2 missiles or maybe 4 max you should be fine and probably not run out of those any time soon. Taking 6 to spam them all at one MiG like I've noticed that from many players through the tacview files is not the way of doing things right. I know this limits those who treat their Viggen properly but many don't. So yeah, it punishes those who don't have an arcadish approach to it and that's the dilemma I have with some Viggen pilots. Still, I did increase the numbers from ca. 50 to ca. 60 or even 70 x RB-24J's in some missions trying to find the middle way so to speak.

You did good with increasing the amount of RB24Js and the reason many viggen pilots asked for more is because they get 0 left after "some people" want to carry all 6 and then crash on takeoff... I play the MiG, F5, and the Viggen and believe that 60-80 is the perfect amount of missiles for the Viggens. it would be nice to place a 4 missile limit on a Viggen but ive heard that it might be hard to do thanks to the scarcity of good scripters

Edited April 25, 2021 by Get_Lo

[Max Thunder]

@Alpenwolf
Thanks again for this Server and your work. So much fun to play. 

Edited April 26, 2021 by Max Thunder

[rossmum]

7 hours ago, Get_Lo said:

You did good with increasing the amount of RB24Js and the reason many viggen pilots asked for more is because they get 0 left after "some people" want to carry all 6 and then crash on takeoff... I play the MiG, F5, and the Viggen and believe that 60-80 is the perfect amount of missiles for the Viggens. it would be nice to place a 4 missile limit on a Viggen but ive heard that it might be hard to do thanks to the scarcity of good scripters

 

2, technically speaking.

 

As for forcing it to be a striker... yes, because that's what it is. The fighter (JA 37) was a different airframe with different physical characteristics (longer fuselage, taller tail fin amongst other things), different engine (additional compressor stage), and different avionics fit (in fact, completely different, a new radar, and with completely different HUD symbology). The version we have is a 90s update (AJS 37) of the strike variant (AJ 37) which was as much a fighter as a Skyhawk or Su-17 - they could carry self-defence IR missiles but had no air to air radar whatsoever and were never intended to intentionally engage in air to air combat. IIRC Heatblur's reasoning was that some systems used in the JA 37 are still classified due to derivatives being used in the JAS 39, but they probably also did the AJS because it offered a niche that nothing else in the game could do at the time. I wouldn't call the AJ 37 a good stand-in as it's as much of a 'totally different aircraft' situation as an F-16A bl 15 vs. F-16C bl 50, if not more... just be glad Alpen's handwaved Swedish neutrality to include it as it is.

[Get_Lo]

4 minutes ago, rossmum said:

 

2, technically speaking.

 

As for forcing it to be a striker... yes, because that's what it is. The fighter (JA 37) was a different airframe with different physical characteristics (longer fuselage, taller tail fin amongst other things), different engine (additional compressor stage), and different avionics fit (in fact, completely different, a new radar, and with completely different HUD symbology). The version we have is a 90s update (AJS 37) of the strike variant (AJ 37) which was as much a fighter as a Skyhawk or Su-17 - they could carry self-defence IR missiles but had no air to air radar whatsoever and were never intended to intentionally engage in air to air combat. IIRC Heatblur's reasoning was that some systems used in the JA 37 are still classified due to derivatives being used in the JAS 39, but they probably also did the AJS because it offered a niche that nothing else in the game could do at the time. I wouldn't call the AJ 37 a good stand-in as it's as much of a 'totally different aircraft' situation as an F-16A bl 15 vs. F-16C bl 50, if not more... just be glad Alpen's handwaved Swedish neutrality to include it as it is.

Wells its not breaking the balance as the F5 is still the premier blufor fighter and i think the viggen adds some fun into the matches, I enjoy diversity and options as long as they dont impede the balance. I enjoy fighting them in my MiG-21 particularly 

[Alpenwolf]

6 hours ago, Max Thunder said:

@Alpenwolf
Thanks again for this Server and your work. So much fun to play. 

 

 

You're welcome. Glad you're having FUN!

 

6 hours ago, rossmum said:

 

2, technically speaking.

 

As for forcing it to be a striker... yes, because that's what it is. The fighter (JA 37) was a different airframe with different physical characteristics (longer fuselage, taller tail fin amongst other things), different engine (additional compressor stage), and different avionics fit (in fact, completely different, a new radar, and with completely different HUD symbology). The version we have is a 90s update (AJS 37) of the strike variant (AJ 37) which was as much a fighter as a Skyhawk or Su-17 - they could carry self-defence IR missiles but had no air to air radar whatsoever and were never intended to intentionally engage in air to air combat. IIRC Heatblur's reasoning was that some systems used in the JA 37 are still classified due to derivatives being used in the JAS 39, but they probably also did the AJS because it offered a niche that nothing else in the game could do at the time. I wouldn't call the AJ 37 a good stand-in as it's as much of a 'totally different aircraft' situation as an F-16A bl 15 vs. F-16C bl 50, if not more... just be glad Alpen's handwaved Swedish neutrality to include it as it is.

 

Interesting thread you posted there. Good to know.

[CrazyGman]

Here's a vid of some MiG-29A action yesterday on "When the Mountains Cry" map

 

 

[rossmum]

Here's a video of the JA 37 cca. early 90s by the way - you get a pretty decent view of the more fighter-specialised HUD symbology. It looks a lot more like what you'd be used to from other fighters of the era, as the AJ's was very specialised towards its strike role.

 

 

Really wish we could've got both. Maybe one day

[Alpenwolf]

1 hour ago, rossmum said:

Here's a video of the JA 37 cca. early 90s by the way - you get a pretty decent view of the more fighter-specialised HUD symbology. It looks a lot more like what you'd be used to from other fighters of the era, as the AJ's was very specialised towards its strike role.

 

 

Really wish we could've got both. Maybe one day

 

Nice turn fight! Thanks for sharing!