TaliG
-
Posts
566 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by TaliG
-
-
Understood.
From the tests I made, the difference in covered distance between the 2 missiles is ~15%.
So if we can assume that the spherical head has a 15% reduction in aerodynamics than the conical,
then we have a pretty good model here and nothing is wrong with ET.
:confused:
-
I made some tests last knight.
Conditions was:
Su33 at 24000feet 500knt
No target, unauthorised ballistic, straight lunch towards the same heading.
Both missiles lunched from the same point (separate missions for each missile)
and repeated the test at least 10 times for each missile.
I measured the distance antil the missiles hit the ground.
Results:
ER: 26nm average from lunch to ground impact
ET: 20nm -//- -//- -//-
These are Ballistic , eg the missiles falls to the ground.
Wikipedia and other sources state that maximum distance at optimal conditions are 130km for ER and 120km for ET. These numbers are impossible to catch even with 2 rocket motors onboard.
What do I have to do to achieve even half the number that wiki states?
-
So at the moment I think ET and ER are performing EXACTLY as they are modelled to perform:thumbup:
:music_whistling:
-
Hi! Please take a look the deferences currently modelled in our sim...
File is located at:
C:\Program Files\Eagle Dynamics\DCS World\Config\Weapons missiles_data.lua
-
A HARM can decelerate at any time, just by turning. There are other criteria for arming fuzes, such as time-to-go, which can be more reliable. However, such methods are not modeled in-game.
That might work :)
Correct... how dump am I ?:doh:
Forget the deceleration..:doh: it will just make the missile useless when fired in closer range, eg it will still be in acceleration mode when it reaches its target...:doh:
-
In terms of SEAD missiles, if people are launching them too close to each other , then I don't know what to say :)
That way, it whould be very possible to kill your aircraft too:inv: HARM missiles are not bullets coming out of a minigun afterall, they are $$$.$$$ worth of amunition that has to be used wissely:thumbup:
I know it is a secret, but for game functionality, HARM fuses can be implemented to become active at the phase of deceleration lets say... (dnt tell anyone, its a secret:megalol:)
Oh, and for people that think they fire a minigun instead of a HARM, just put a ''delay'' rule between lunches (just like Vikr is currently implemented on su25t).
Just a secret thought...:joystick:
-
Is this in multiplayer only?
Is it happening all the time?
Are you able to reproduce this?
Are you losing the radar signal from the SAM after you launch?
It happened to me aswelll.
It was in MP.
It is reproducible.
Radar signal is not lost(eg the radar blinks on and off for a sec)
It happened while I had a couple of AIMs coming at me from 12o clock.
The missiles actually shot their self down . and this is because of the fuse modelling.
Actually we had a laph with the guy that shot at me, he said he intercept my missile in purpose
before he shoot at me.
Anyway.. missiles passed close from eachother. Thats why the detonation...
Problem will be fixed if the fuse will be active , lets say only a sort time before reaching the target...
Having the proximity fuse active half a second from the time it leaves your wing it will be easy to detonate from sources that are engaging YOU...
-
Does anyone know if the bug persists even if the awacs which spotted the targets dies or gets removed? maybe respawning the awacs after a certain amount of time could fix it (dumb idea i know)?
Good point and I think it will narrow the problem a litlle...
Dummies stay there after the awacs is shot down. I can confirm this.
I ll need to check again though... not 100% sure..
On 51st lately ALL people fly with ecm on so its dificult to reproduce it.
-
It would be great if this was sorted, But servers Don't use AWACS that much since F-15 only have GCI compared to Su-27 that have data-link.
The reality is that AWACS never been used that much because for that reason.
It is more vital to sort TWS and EOS for Su-27 rather than fixing something that is not used in multiplayer servers.
If TWS will stay the way it is now, Russian aircrafts will have no choice rather than fly whit AWACS. Which is wrong as well because Su-27 have its own data-link.
Even if this Bug is irritating we can get rid of it by not using awacs which has been the standard on servers anyway.
TWS, EOS, and internal data link on Su-27 is what will make difference, and get appreciated.
You can always ask awacs for ''picture'' and believe me some times he will tell you more picture than he can actually see :smilewink:
so it is useful for ALL players. The bug here is that the TAD gets cluter after time. and this is particularly destructive when in close combat (TAD at 32 or 64k) and you have 10 dumies in your TAD while you try to evade missiles and keep situational awareness in order to return to offensive.
-
well from what I saw there was maybe around 20 datalink contacts (most certainly not 60-70) but also I wonder how do you see contacts 180Km away using EOS ?????
Misunderstanding.. 60-70 contacts was on 51st server after 4 hours of continue 20player always online, airquake. NOT in this .trk . On this trk , as I said you can see only around 10-12 ''concrete'' ones from 10:54 until 10:58.
And this is not my trk.
I ll try get a good one myself:thumbup:
-
Who, me? Nope, no problems at all in v1.2.5, apart from cluster munitions going off maybe - haven't tested yet. But yeah, my FPS stays solidly at 30, which is where I have it capped...
Average FPS is ok...we have sadden ''hick ups'', it is like the game crushes for 1/4 of a second with no reason, not looking towards a particular place, no dropping bombs, no smoke anywhere.
It is like a loading isue coming from hardrive, but others use SSD so this could not be the matter.
But I ll try a defrag from my part and I ll response back soon if the effect stay or leave.
-
alright, got it to run... had to speed up till Su-27 came in... and yes, from all those contacts on datalink some do look like not refreshing their position and heading for long time... some do but some don't so it is likely this bug is still there (was also sometimes occurring in FC2)
Thanks for duble check, I would like to ad that the dummies are clearly shown at 10:54 until 10:58 and you need to forward a LOT, and in this track you can see only 10-12 dumies only...
I was on 51st server and most of the times that the awacs was enabled, afte 4 hours of ''bussy''
server the TAD was FULL of dumies, it was beter to not look at it at all..at least 60-70 dumies overlaping eachother... as said the effect needs time to build up, and in a busy server like 51st that runs 20-30 people for 4 hours, this is the place that you are going to have trouble...
Thanks again for taking the time to check this track, ( I had lanch and coffe untill I get to 10:54 to see the bug) :thumbup:
-
That is the wrong place to do that I would strongly suggest you check out PeterP's post in the mods section and apply his re-worked neck views, snap views is now in saved games change it there or with the next update it will revert back to default.
thanks for the heads up....the neck ''thing'' is fixed in 1.2.5 I ll look again though because my memory is that of a ...you know.. so I may have missed something about FOV over there..
thanks for your time jey :thumbup:
A link to PetersP's thread would be perfect as help, because the forum search is not working ''good''.
Cheers
-
Excuse me, I beg you to answer me.
Since I installed the 1.2.5. I accuse the strange stability problems of the game.
In particular, the simulation "stutters" with sudden loads that block temporarily the simulation ... similar problem with the old flaming cliffs and had been largely resolved with the latest versions of DCSWorld. Since I installed the new update we have these stability problems and not only that, when displaying multiple units (especially aircraft) the frame rate drops sharply.
I remember that these problems until 1.2.4. I had not and since I did the update I suffered these problems, also changing the graphics settings (even the least of the least) does not change one iota.
I would like to know if you have similar problems and accused in this case to do this to ED.
Thank you.
I have temp stutters aswell. For average fps drop I cannot really say something since I never measured what I had before because it was flyable...but the stutters yes...I have them now...I did not have them in 1.2.4
-
If there were such a bar in the Huey, I believe it would be called a blender :megalol:
pull handle!! pull handle!!! :joystick: (eject!eject!) :megalol: :megalol:
-
Guys this situation just became unacceptable. I can't accept it anymore, the further we go the more unstable it gets.
As a programmer i cannot accept it, this project just go against everything that i learned in a big company with more than 250k employers. You can't just develop a software without considerate stability, you can't just upgrade without preserving stability. Signs of really bad engineering.
On one of our projects we had performance issue, what have we done? simple, we worked on tools to analyse where was the performance issue, spotted and restored the performance with a 25+% gain. It was up to us to provide a software with good performance and not up to the customer to deal with bad performance.
This software house act similar to those poor programmer whose blame the user and never its own code (which is the contrary of what most university teach, whenever the user has difficulties those are sign of not enough effort by programmers) in this case they act just like well the game features/effects improves so it gets heavy don't blame us...wrong this is a very bad mentality, typically of bad programmers or bad project engineering.
I was working on a dynamic campaign and it already reached a good point, but i will not proceed with the work because there is not a stable environment. Honestly at this stage, missing dynamic campaign are nothing compared to this big stability issue.
Now i wonder if this EDGE will solve anything, since it is more about terrain. I really don't think that a big part of the issues is due to the terrain engine (i hope so but i doubt). ED should focus on bringing back stability.
It is obvious that they weren't able to handle all this upgrades/modules without messing the engine and if they don't stop further develops to start focusing on stability things will get worse.
To those who will come out saying stop complaining and bla bla bla, i say just SHUT UP. I can't stand it as a programmer no i really cannot, and don't come either with the well instead of criticism you should give solutions (which are harder to come up with), i'd answer....staff change or missing key figures.
If someone like to cheer to a company like a fanboy or a shareholder then good for him, i'm no fanboy for any company and neither a shareholder so i just want to see the final result.....which always get worse.
In conclusion, too easy to destroy the game performance at each upgrade/update and come up with "the game is getting heavier due to new features. We are working on performance and stability but not for this update...we are aware but keep patience (after more than a year of bad update which just make the situation worse), don't complain because we already wrote it in the release note".
+1000
And if EDGE does not change this 10 year bug hunting then I ll have the right to say that we are talking about ''moders'' that try to build skyscrapers over stonehenge ruins.
But I really want to prove myself wrong so mad , because these people hold my hobby in their hands:smilewink:
-
A good customer support for BS2 upgrade buyers would be:
When you buy the BS upgrade and make the first successful online activation then your BS2 upgrade key should be liable for BS2. So next time you only have to install BS2...
Its is easy to do and very ''customer friendly'' in my opinion.
Just a thought...
-
back in 1995 it cost 4000$+ for a 166MHz machine with 24mb ram and a 8mb 3d accelerator....
What did you just remind me...:cry:
My first ''gaming pc'' was a pentium 166mhz (mmx please) with s3 trio virge graphics :cry:
And the race between hardware and software begun after the release of falcon 4.0..
My first ''satisfaction'' with falcon 4.0 came with an amd 1800xp (hell of a beast) bundled with nv ti4200 and the HUGE community upgrade to falconSP... plus a litle bit of ms fs2000.. then
Lock-on nuke arrived:cry: together with an ati9800pro and a litle bit of ms fs 2004 ...I had to change pc again...:cry: But then I had to work to get a new pc..
now... you can easily build a system that could run this game at 60fps+ for 1000$...
computers are cheap...
Problem comes when YOU have to pay for those upgrades and not your parents, my friend...
Because the time will come that you will need a car or a motorbike more than you need a pc to play games...You will prefer to buy presents to wife and kids than buy yourself a new pc to play a game.. But then again there are people that sweat to have something and others have everything without sweating at all...:smilewink:
-
After 1.2.5, I lost another 3 FPS in the Huey, down to 14 FPS from 17 FPS at the runway. Before, once leaving the airfield the FPS used to jump to nearly 30, now it stays around 18 FPS, a 12 FPS drop. Nearly unplayable now.
Come on mate...with 18 FPS, I could get married!!!
Dont worry.. you have plenty of FPS to spend on 1.2.6...(another ~ 8 )
And dnt tell me that you cannot fly with 10FPS...:photo:
Otherwise grab yourself an i7 3980x overclocked to 6gz bandled with 64gb of cas6 latensy:huh: modules and a couple of nvidia Titans and theres your 50stable FPS.
Whats wrong with you guys?!!!
Ohh, I forgot that when EDGE is out, you ll need to call IBM to order a supercomputer for it ..otherwise dnt ever dare to speak about low FPS:tomato:
noob!!!
(jk)
-
No units in track play back using 1.2.5.
I played the .trk and the dummy contacts can be clearly seen from 10:54:33 until 10:58:51.
Please check again from 10:54 until 10:58.
I used 1.2.5 for playback
-
Press Alt+C and scroll the mouse wheel to change FOV
This changes overall zoom, thanks anyway :thumbup:
I can't fly with the wide FOV at all... so I made it narrower with the trick explained below:I changed the red line below and it worked.
SnapViews = {
[1] = {-- player slot 1
[1] = {
viewAngle = 67.452896,--FOV
hAngle = 15.000000,
vAngle = -20.067383,
x_trans = 0.000000,
y_trans = 0.000000,
z_trans = 0.000000,
rollAngle = 0.000000,
You can find the file from:
Eagle Dynamics/DCS World/Mods/Aircrafts/UH-1H/Views
I hope it helps
Thanks for the help!! I tried numbers from 40.00000 to 120.00000 but could not see any difference...
I've changed the 6dof limits and got some nice views though :thumbup:
Thanks for the help guys!!:thumbup:
-
Many times when I am cruising by looking only outside I end up using a LOT of rudder either left or right in order to keep the airframe straight...
When I think I am going straight and not sideways like a crab... I then quickly look at the ball and the ball tells me that I am flying like a crab... I correct my rudder input to bring the ball in center.. then I look outside and I gen the feel that again I fly like a crab and I need to correct again...
Then I think , ok , enough beer for today mate :drunk::megalol:
But a second thought tells me that all this is due to extremely large FOV of the huey...
I ve tried to lower the FOV with no lack (can somebody help on this?)
I really need to try a smaller FOV (the same like viewing from outside would be ideal for me)
so I can explain to myself if it is all due to large amount of ber or it is just the large FOV..
Any one having the same problem? (not with the beer:lol:)
-
Not fixed in 1.2.5 :cry:
I imagine that they are going to be a major FPS killer, just like the su-27s lights in FC3.
They look exactly the same.
Maybe thats the reason they are holding them unpublished. (FPS) Just a thought...
-
It's one thing to complain about things that are not resolved yet, but to complain about announcements that tell you that a bug has been found and is being fixed is utterly useless, frustrating, and frankly, rude.
.
Please accept my apologies.
It was a rough day for me last day, for reasons that have nothing to do with the game or the forum, and I asked a wrong person to ''pay the bill''. Wrong move and I promise I ll try to squish that bug out of my ''beta'' brain..
I hope you all understand.
Apologies again..
No response from Ground Crew for Rearm
in Bugs and Problems
Posted
You need to ask for rearm more politely,
and remember the first time you do it, do NOT ask for many heavy things like large bombs or whatever because those guys are so crazy that may put a timer on one of your bombs and you ll end up taking off with one wing :megalol:
I am not kidding... it allready happened :lol:
http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1824062&postcount=17
And what the F are you doing with the Hog in the mad mate!?
They just call it Hog, its not a real one!!!:doh: