RIPTIDE

How about go inverted after weapon release and then level off with forward stick? :D

Cuts wrists to Leonard Cohen...... /cry

I remember years ago Tyger said something like the External fuel tanks also will last about an hour at 260km/h (ergo, 260km range then.) Can't remember exact figures but it was about that.

Hang on.... *looks around* ahh we're in the A-10C section and not FC3 etc. Yeah it works for 'HN' A-10C RWR not A-10A/F-15C. My bad. Back to the salt mines... carry on folks... :doh:

No. It's silent on RWR completely. Unless it intermittently comes through. Try it in SP... "HP" however comes up for the Grisha I think.

PETR VELIKIY does not show up on RWR in 1.2.2 ?

Dive = higher risk.

Sure. I get that. You claimed in post #38 that there was an imbalance. IN #43 you said "A purely equal game simply isn't interesting for continued usage." Unless I'm picking you up wrong...? Sure it does... specifically in this mission, removing the Blue Targets, also removes a Blue SAM Bulkhead on the coastline. The SA-11 which you previously mentioned as part of an imbalance, routinely is destroyed sometime between completion of the First two objectives. It then changes the airwar situation in that area. One compliments the other. But they aren't tucked away.... see above. Granted, you have an old mission version (v16 maybe). V19 is in rotation, V23 is on hold until the patch comes..) Yeah the scripting tools are ace. But for our end, at the moment, today, we're not using any of them. They are superfluous. But we will. This will come when we need to up the immersion level. When we force clients to do what we want, we'll reward them with immersion. As it is now, it's entirely acceptable for someone to come on, say nothing, fly around for an hour and leave. At some point in the future we want people to come onto ALL servers and absolutely expect to team up. We want this in peoples minds. We want those that don't to get their ass kicked in such a way that they don't run away, but change for the better. But not today... if we did that now, we'd have an empty server. Lastly... I didn't consider your comments criticism.. much more of a general commentary that deserved a response.... a response that's not just addressed to you, but the readership. If I thought it was anything less I'd simply tell you to get f'#ked and wouldn't bother. :D:thumbup:

I don't see how this mission contravenes this idea. In fact it reinforces it. You've pointed that out already actually. :D You'll have to look no further than this thread. I give blue progressively difficult ground targets that I lovingly placed on the map. And they go and decide to deviate and attack Beslan instead. For shame. :D Fair points, and again,... look at this mission and what my attempt at the above has caused in this thread. The client usable aircraft carrier in this game, the Kuznetsov is nothing more than fleet defence. Now... the scenario could involve the Kuz and her wing defending a bunch of Molnyias and Grishas from attack. But... THAT requires team play from a multi element A2A flight attacking with multi element A2G flight. Outside of proscribed tournaments, it remains difficult to have clients buddy up until you force the issue. Again... see this thread. They won't buddy up until they are forced. Missions will vary on this.... since we are discussing this mission you'll agree that they are not exactly tucked away. Plenty of Dead Strikers will tell the story differently. It may not look like risks to you.... but again.... look at this thread and the reactions. lol Listen.... the way I see it the clients enter every mission out there and expect a few same things. Change the paradigm too quickly too far and everyone is confused and the idea dies. I'm trying to start something here. As people get pushed into expecting something different slowly but surely, we can move everyone forward. As I said, this particular mission will evolve and evolve.... If we change the bar of what is being offered, people will then come to expect it and accept it.... you can continue changing the entire expectation of the community by doing this.

The R-77... ... MiG-29S+77 vs Su-27+ER? Maybe this is personal bias, but I would rather pic the 27. The R-77 kinematics is so poor that sometimes you could F-pole the target AND gimble defeat the R-77 without losing lock.... it's that bad. IN 1.2.2 of course.

Almost forgot about this. Yep, it's becoming clear that we do need messages for target groups. Back in the day there would be always a few on each side strikers that would know what target area the map was on. Nowadays it's not always the case. SO yeah, we'll look into this. And while I'm here thanks for all the constructive criticism so far, grimes, Hijack etc.

Already done in version 20/21. :D These GRAD batteries were there to replicate the GRAD batteries as they were used in 2008. So sad I had to remove them. /cry

I think it's correct. We added in a few files and folders as we went along and then released this pack. Was updated 4th Feb 2013. http://www.104thphoenix.com/modules.php?name=Forums&file=viewtopic&t=2128 Config/Weapons Scripts/compile.lua Config/Export/export.lua Scripts/Aircrafts/_Common/customhuman.lua

The same opportunities exist BTW for red at the base of Senaki-Kholki. It would not matter what AD we put at Senaki. A KA-50 in theory can fly <10m very easily and destroy the mightiest of sam systems. And some say the KA-50 has no place in a FC3 server. This shows how brilliant it can be.

I like to say that the mission is Asymmetrically Balanced. :D Which means that for every perceived advantage one side might claim, I can counter claim another advantage the other side has somewhere else.

Well, lets hope. Because as it stands, as someone who used to log ~35-40% flight hours with the '27, without the SARH 'Long Arm' there is very little use for that platform now unfortunately.

1.2.2 MP AWACS does not work for client Datalinks....

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/600721/104thINTEGRITYCHECK.rar DCS Modman. :thumbup:

For radar. For IRST it can be more (or less) depending on the target. :thumbup:

Last years news. This years news (1.2.2) is the ER has no advantage except at ~20miles+ and/or high altitude ironically enough (purely because of the 120 broken lofting). IN fact the AIM-7M is a good match for the R-27ER now. https://dl.dropbox.com/u/600721/Tacview-20130221-145645.txt.rar A test with hacked on 120/7M/77 for demonstration purposes.

Looks more like guide vanes...

THere is IFF... your radar screen tells you if something is friendly or not after ECM burn through.

I remember posting something about general rules for a sim before. The particulars of the bars don't really matter. But if they help achieve a certain level of SA feed to the pilot that somewhat approximates the real SA feed to the pilot, then they should stay. If they are vector indicators on Soviet's pics there, then the best thing we have currently is the bars to help guestimate range. To remove them and not put in the range indictors would be taking away from the simulated ability of the datalink, and by extension, the general information/SA the pilot gets. Obviously getting the real thing simulated properly would be great.... :thumbup:

Communist forces? Which ones?

That particular item was fixed ~ 1000 unguided weapons now. I ferried a Su-25T with drop tanks from Sochi to Beslan for a Rearm and destroyed 1 of the Patriot radar installations last night. I went back for a second run and got owned. But it's doable. It is supposed to be difficult if not near impossible. BUT, their target areas in the mission are supposed to be over Guduata - Sukhumi Coastline. Not 200 miles away. Red fighters were ramming Blue on Vaziani last night. :) Although they paid a heavy price in losses before and after to the Patriot. The Red fighters at Beslan are MiG-29S/A. They are supposed to be harassers and only make a difference with numbers and teamwork. They are, just like IRL, short range scrappers. I think what is relevant is forcing the default export.lua file among others.