Clunk1001

I knew you were going to ask about the A. Which is why I have exactly the same outcome with the C. Tacview-20220217-161450-DCS.zip.acmi

Tacview-20220217-142609-DCS.zip.acmi 2 F14s, Angels 30, Mach1.1, head on to 3 flankers, launch at around 25-30 miles. Played this same scenario a dozen or so time. Consistently 5 out of 6 phoenix miss (in around 11 out of 12 play throughs). When merging, STT, again Phoenix miss. End up finishing with sidewinders and guns. Jester summed it up nicely in that engagement "The <profanity> missile missed". Any advice as to what I'm doing wrong with the Phoenix would be appreciated. What I found interesting is that the AI level made absolutely no difference. 5 out of 6 Phoenix miss pretty much every time regardless of AI skill setting (SU33, SU27, MIG29 all pretty much the same too). From this track (2:05), the phoenix just run out of speed, the two SU33s don't actually "evade" the missiles - they seem to outrum them: The Phoenix on the left is at M1.30, the Su-33 is at M0.82....2 seconds later and Phoenix is at M0.59 and the SU33 at M1.24

On the subject of wingmen. After DCS repair, I’m at 30000 head on 2xF14 vs 3x su27, Mach 1.1. Both launch our phoenix at 26 miles (all good separate radar tracks of bandits). All 6 phoenix (my 3 and wingman’s 3) miss. 6 phoenix, 100% miss rate. somethings not right - and it can’t be all to do with my flying

I wouldn’t say I’m “not ready” for long missions - I’ve 30 years of flight simming behind me, and long missions are what I do (and am relatively good at). I do fly with wingmen, usually 4 - dcs doesn’t have the wingman mgt that BMS has but it’s usable. And the AI isn’t as good as BMS, and the long campaign isn’t as good as falcon 4 (back in the day). For the purposes of these tests only I went 1 v 4. Like I said - I think there’s something wrong with my install because I’m not seeing what everyone else is seeing. thanks for all the support guys, and thanks ironMike/heatblur.

my tracks are almost identical to those posted on here, I’ve flown just about every profile mentioned, with every tactic mentioned, the difference is that my phoenix missiles consistently sail past their target. 1 in 4 hit rate regardless of range, crank, altitude, mach. Having re-read the thread, I am clearly having the opposite experience to most people. I’ll do a repair to DCS and see if that helps.

I think this is what started my rants on here I'd spend 20 minutes getting to my CAP station, 45 minutes on CAP, meet some incoming flankers, miss with all 4 phoenix missiles at ranges between 20-30 miles, run away, RTB....It wasn't much fun.

I'm not calling for a buff or a cheat. I'm simply pointing out that if an ultra-realistic model of the Phoenix results in an unrealistic outcome with DCS AI (e.g. regular 100% miss rate on missiles) then perhaps the balance is wrong. And I'm sorry, but I do expect third parties to adapt their work around ED's failings to a certain extent - third Party's choose to create their work on top of EDs software, and as such it isn't unreasonable to expect their mods to work as harmoniously as possible with EDs software (flaws and all) and within the framework that they chose to develop in. The bottom line is that it seems to me that a realistic Phoenix results in an unrealistic outcome against DCS AI.......so the simulation as a whole seems, well, unrealistic.

I tend to launch from between 20 - 35 miles in a similar profile to this, but find it the missiles hit perhaps 1 time in 4. If two out of four missiles do hit then yes it's easy to clean up the remaining 2 Flankers in the merge. But I'm finding it's more likely that 3 out of 4 phoenix miss, leaving me with 3 flankers in the merge (or all 4 missiles miss, leaving 4 flankers in the merge). And this is the bit I'm not getting - repeatedly getting 100% miss rate from 4 missiles from within 25 miles head on. I fly a lot of Liberation missions (long missions) and I might be circling on CAP for 45 minutes or so before some flankers pop up, but then to have all 4 phoenix miss?! It doesn't seem realistic, and it doesn't seem fun.

Sorry, I think this is a bit crap. 4 Phoenix, 4 misses, 1 R27 from an SU33 and I'm dead. rinse, repeat. Now, your phoenix might well be 100% accurate, and you can present me all the charts on the phoenix that you like, along with the graphs, manuals, statistics, and even a signed picture from the guy who designed its' mom. My point is still valid - the AI in DCS is not accurate, it knows the Phoenix is coming before it's even off the rails, and has magical avoidance ability when the phoenix eventually arrives (not that it needs to do much to avoid the phoenix now). So we end up with something pretty useless against AI (yes I accept that my flying might be a bit useless too). Surely there has to be a balance between "look at my stats they're exactly the same as NASA's", and having something actually usable in game (it is a game after all). Give me an F18 and I'll happily wipe out 4 AI veteran SU33s. Give me an F14 and I'll watch 4 Phoenix missiles miss their targets.

I’m with you on this. The F14 is to me hands down one of the best things I’ve played in a flight sim for the past 30 years. But I’m getting 100% miss rate with the phoenix in some missions now. 4 phoenix, 4 AI bandits, hot, 40 miles, angels 40, 4 misses. Im having more success loading up with sparrows and sidewinders and merging. I can usually get at least a few migs before dying. But this is pretty much the opposite of what the f14 was for. Im open to new tactics with the phoenix - I’ve read all the suggestions in this post - and today I’m going to try and get Jester to jettison the phoenix stores whilst directly over the bandit at a range of 10 ft or so. joking aside - whilst the goal of hyper-accurate replication of real life phoenix flight and tracking characteristics is understandable (the graphs are really pretty), perhaps it should not be the ultimate goal because the rest of the sim (AI) isn’t at the same level of realism. Perhaps consideration should be given to the simulation of the weapons end result and how it behaves against the rest of the sim. If an ultra-realistic phoenix is next to useless in the game itself I’m not sure I want it. I only play against AI. I appreciate the difficulties here, and I have total faith in whatever approach the heatblur team take. I’ll let you know how my new tactic of ‘Phoenix bonk’ goes…..

Lots of technical data in this post which is way above my head…..I thought I was getting the hang of the f14 and the phoenix, lots of successful missions in Liberation. But now only about 20% of my phoenix missiles actually seem to hit their target…..wheras 90% of enemy missiles hit me. It feels about as useful as shooting a Zuni rocket from 30 miles. I think read that it’s more ‘realistic’ now but were these missiles really that garbage? (Or is my flying really that garbage)?

Amazing job of the lighting in the last patch! The last time I felt this immersed night flying in bad weather over the sea, was when I was flying at night in bad weather, over the sea.

I initially started by creating the packages and assigning targets myself, but now I'm letting Liberation plan everything and it assigns a single player slot to one flight. So now I fly whatever mission Liberation gives me. Night CAS in rain in an F14B wasn't an experience I thought I'd be up there for me, but the challenge of taking whatever mission I'm given is great. I make the assumption that my wingman is going to die (if he actually launches from the carrier). I am thoroughly impressed with this software.

Great, thanks for that. It did make a difference and now I find the enemy CAP roughly where I’d expect it to be. Now I just need to work out how to get around the whole “Two Ejecting… Three Ejecting… Four Ejecting” issue, having stumbles across a couple of Mig29s who wiped out my 4 ship of F14Bs within 60 seconds.

Hi I think Liberation is incredible. But I was wondering if someone can help with a timing issue I'm really struggling with. I have all flights starting COLD, which seems to include enemy flights. Which means, I could launch off my carrier, afterburn low level to an enemy airfield, flatten said airfield, take out the first couple of enemy aircraft who are only just taking off, and be back at my carrier for a smoked kipper breakfast, and medals. I'm finding that the enemy CAP which should have been over my target to stop me bombing it are usually just getting airborne after I've unloaded my bombs. I presume I could set all flights to start in the Air, but then I'm just racing an enemy to the target. I could sit on the carrier for 30 mins, to give the bad guys a chance to finish their morning coffee/vodka, and get their sh1t together. Or another solution to this might be to have random flights start in the air but not necessarily at a base, e.g. CAP starts over/near targets (ground units spawn randomly so why not air units?) which I could do through mission designer (but then I know what's happening and that defeats the purpose). Is there a setting/trick which I'm missing which doesn't involve me waiting 30 mins to start flying? Should I set everything to start in the air except my flight? Thanks

Apologies to everyone else for hijacking this thread and turning it into a discussion on the physiological and psychological pros and cons of white vs red floodlighting..the psychological factors mentioned in the article are quiet interesting (I think that’s one reason why I prefer white), if you’ve ever watched hunt for red October, the lighting of dim white vs red plays an important role throughout the film in setting the mood: calm Vs. not so calm anyway, looking forward to getting my dim white light back, if anything heatblur will include it in the next patch just to shut me up….

That’s fascinating stuff. I thought I was alone in my dim white light approach. I hope they’re not thinking of implementing similar in Amsterdam though.

That makes sense, but a red lit corridor leading to blackness would definitely feel ominous to me …

I know, we had red filter caps which clipped on the end of our torches to make the torch light red too (works well, except that danger areas on maps are generally in red, and so they became invisible when viewed with a red filter on your torch). Not all aircraft had red floodlighting though, I got used to low white (but the more I think about it the more I think I was just afraid of the dark).

Sorry, no offence intended, was genuinely just meant as a light hearted banter. I’m extremely appreciative of the work heatblur are doing, I’m in awe at what they’ve achieved, and I’m aware the lighting issue is very minor in relation to all the other stuff they’re juggling.

Actually, at night, I always flew with a low floodlight on (though this was civilian flying and not in f14 obvs). Has more to do with spacial orientation and emergency procedures. If something goes bang, you don’t want your first action to be trying to find the cockpit lights or fumbling with a torch. If your cockpit is black yes you’ve got better night vision (takes about 20 mins to get), right up to the point the guy next to you (or behind you) puts his torch on to find a sandwich or a switch. A low floodlight always worked for me, thats what I’m used to, that’s why I was a bit upset about the floodlight in the f14b (old habits)….or maybe I’m afraid of the dark?

Case 3 recovery, night, zero vis. On this night, someone had parked a tomcat a little too close to the arrestor wires for my liking, and my starboard wing clipped its nose on landing. The usual excited concern over which wire I caught became somewhat insignificant as I watched my right wing fly off in front of the canopy and my f14b began a series of violent pirouettes across the carrier deck. Like some kind of massive eighteen ton metal hulk of an audition for the Russian ballet, she elegantly spun through about 900 degrees of rotation, and having merrily spread a catherine-wheel like trail of flame across Cats 1 and 2, what was left of my aircraft came to rest pivoting over the edge of the deck, in a scene not unlike that of the Italian Job (wish I’d taken a screenshot). Anyway, after a very long sigh of relief on my part, I hear…. Jester: ”you know…you can go around”. took me a good two minutes to stop laughing. Love this module.

Yes, I know I can absolutely fly at night, but I cannot fly at night properly as the gauges are unreadable: Instrument readability is absolutely key. I know that getting the colour of the flight suit of the cockpit pilot absolutely the right shade of green is important (to some), but I'd suggest there are other priorities which need addressed. I know I'm being harsh. I've 20 years as a pilot, 30 years in various simulators (both home and commercial) and I genuinely think I've had the most fun in Heatblur's F14B Tomcat (at night, in bad weather). It is an absolute masterpiece! but please fix the flood lighting

If that’s the case surely the fix for the B shouldn’t be that big? My bad. I’m fairly new to DCS.

I usually fly at night (or return to carrier at night), so f14 is pretty much unplayable now for me. Its disappointing that bugs like internal lights are shelved, when they are complete show-stoppers for some people who’ve purchased this aircraft. ‘new features’ on new products shouldn’t take priority over game-breaking bugs on existing products. Well, it’s game-breaking for me anyway hope you find time to fix the lights and the autopilot soon.