Jump to content

Breakshot

Members
  • Posts

    731
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Everything posted by Breakshot

  1. Export.lua is perhaps THE most important one of them (btw, you can always replay the track and generate Tacviews later if you really need it :smilewink:). However, with no integrity checks on this file anyone can write a script to do anything they want in a very "discreet" fashion, unlike other files whereby a cheat will be obvious... For example I can edit Yodas "ERI radar Mod" export.lua code by adding two slashes in front of one of the lines, and make his already "debatable" random ECM ranging give me PERFECT ECM ranging EVERYTIME... and nothing can prevent me from doing so if the server doesnt check this... Not to mention the already available number of other mods which can be used against pilots without their knowledge (even if the mods are public and open source). Just to give you an idea.... Here is a quote i got from someone who flew around recently and "tuned in" to comms in situations where such mods were used on a public server... just so you know what can, and IS already being used against you on servers that DONT check export.lua NOTE: above comms did not involve any 104th pilots, just pilots who were flying on their server at that time and happened to be using LEAVU datalink and other tools against others around them... I think you understand now why export.lua can indeed be very important, especially for public servers where you want to provide a FAIR environment for everyone! Of course its still up to the server moderators to set the Integrity rules on these things... but its always best to be informed on whats possible, dont you think? IMO, after all the cheating accusations of FC1... better safe than sorry!
  2. Nope! No new 3d models are affected by those checks! :)
  3. Here is what i posted on the RU forums exactly on the same subject... I hope that helps with some of the critical files that need to be checked... Cheers!
  4. Yes, and no... Everyone will need to install the same export.lua (with LoATC addon) and then Integrity Check that file, only then its possible... But obviously those with no ATC mod will not be able to pass the Integrity Check... So if everyone agrees first, and installs the same export.lua then its ok... Sound.cfg does not affect game options. You can adjust sound sliders like you want! This file only affects configurational settings the way the sound is played in the game, such as "Radius of effect" etc etc.. so no problems here!
  5. All I can say is wow, Tomcatz! Amazing job! Now a silly question... where can we download this beauty to test it out?! :)
  6. Yes you got him at Rmax and it worked, but more often than not you have to get much closer... def well within the envelope to have a decent chance (which usually becomes much less than 8km at SL which is peanuts IMO for a missile of the size of ET) Also remember that the Rmax u got is based on the low perfomance of the ET which we are discussing. The Rmax parameters represent that too...
  7. Привет народ! Я соглашаюсь что ето очень важная тема... и поделюсь с опытом на <51>Dedicated In network.cfg мы проверяем папки/файлы таким способом: server = { integrity_check = {"Config/Weapons", "Config/Export/export.lua", "Bazar/Modellod.txt", "Scripts/Aircrafts/_Common", "Sounds/Sound.cfg"}, disable_events = true, Config/Weapons - Self explanatory to prevent weapon parameters cheating (defaulted by ED) Config/Export/export.lua - to prevent custom made scripts such as LEAVU datalinks, unfair F15 Radar mods, and other potentially harmful export tools (such as live ACMI/ATC, etc etc), or other not yet known export cheating possibilities Bazar/Modellod.txt - to stop people from changing visual properties for aircraft by tweaking LODs to give them better visibility Scripts/Aircrafts/_Common - this folder is checked to prevent perfomance/aircraft speed hacks, which are btw easily possible!! Also stops altering peoples "Rearm" payloads Sounds/Sound.cfg - to stop people from changing sound settings to "hear" aircraft and missiles from long range (known cheating possibility) Мы тоже используем ServMan! Cheers!
  8. True true... however when do bomber pilots ever get "exactly" what they want, in RL? I mean just look at combat sorties flown by Su-25s in recent conflicts... You fight with what you get, and more often than not its just Rocket Pods and mabe a few dumb bombs, hardly a handy payload... Id say that mission designers should just pay more attention to bomber loadouts, thats all that can be done i suppose...
  9. Guys quick question! Is it still possible to adjust "client/server timeout" settings in some network file (like in FC1) just to prevent dropouts caused due to slow loading times, etc etc...? If so, then what file does this? I still remember that doing wonders for many of those people with FC1 timeout problems... As far as netcode is concerned, i havent noticed anything major to indicate any problems... the only thing is that sometimes the "loading map" screen can take quite a while on joining servers with heavy missions... which btw, could be a cause for a timeout?
  10. And regarding the ERs debate... I would say Borchi you are overreacting big time! Try a test in Su-27 against an F15 both at med-high altitude, one fires a 120C the other an ER at the same time.... Not only will the ER get there first, it will still have more energy in kill zone as compared to 120... Also by the time the Eagle has to make a defensive maneuver to run from the ER his actives arent yet in pitbull range which creates a high chance for him to drop track and completely trash those actives... as long as the Flanker pilot isnt dumb enough not to "clear datum" The only advantages i see for the 120 is the fact that you dont have to go out of your way to keep lock/track (in a flanker you gotta be smart enough and get into a good position not to loose it), and of course the ability to engage more than just one target in a more "silent" fashion... Im not saying things are peachy for the Su-27, its def harder now to fight F15s... but its not "hopeless" as some seemingly attempt to portray it here... As far as ranges and speed are concerned, the ER still is the better missile... Oh and do note the trajectory the ER takes in FC2, it really does fly a great ballistic path... the 120 on the other hand seems to do it in a more "shallow" manner... In fact my biggest concern in FC2 for the Flanker is the ET issue that i posted above... Considering the missile no longer has any chance of a standoff maddog capability, the least it could have is proper kinematic range when you do get into a chase position... something id love to see considered for a patch, unless of course there are specific reasons for why the ET lacks legs this way...
  11. There is one question raised bout the ET that im also wondering about... just out of curiosity... The ET does indeed still act as an "airbrake" in FC2. And if fired alongside an ER in maddog style for test purposes, with both missiles just flying dead straight (without any smart trajectory to target, etc). The ET dies about half way to what the ER can fly to... IMO that seems odd as both missiles have the same motor and theoretically should have almost identical kinematic range.... Yes perhaps the ET might have slightly more drag due to a rounder nose tip, but i dont think that would have SUCH a drastic effect on perfomance... as it stands now its close to 40% less than what the ER can do... which IMO just doesnt add up.. What do you guys think? Perhaps something that was missed out in FC2 missile revamps? Could be good to have the ET do what it was meant to do in rear aspect, and actually "catch" bandits as it should... because right now, in a chase scenario they still lack the legs quite bad due to the above issue...
  12. I would say in overall performance they comparable to FC1, however they seem better at reaquiring dropped targets, and taking into account that ECM blinking is no longer at play you are bound to keep a better track, also the burnthrough has been moved out to about 40km (on F15s) which allows some nasty long range HOJ shots, and of course chaff resistance is def better, so id say their effectiveness/employment opportunities have been increased marginally, certainly enough to not take them for granted.... In simple terms, they are decent, as long as you get in a good position and stay there to guide them in... :)
  13. I beg to differ! As a Flanker pilot i would NOT want to have unrealistic P77s hanging on my wings, or even worse, having others who have no clue about how to fly Flankers join the "LOPE" bandwagon and spam around those missiles making the game some sort of CS active missiles fest... Dont the Migs and F15s do enough of that already?! :music_whistling: If some arent happy with how the flanker performs, fly the above planes that have actives, cmon! I say this especially because i feel ERs do the job just fine... given enough experience and practice with them... Id rather have the "Time To Impact" timer on HUD in the Flanker as it has in RL! Now that would be a nice thing to have... I say screw the whole P77s on Flankers nonesense, its just lame and not a solution by any means... Learn to fly them as they are, comrades!
  14. We have not flown in FC2 enough yet to say for certain if there is any new specific "tactic" that would work... however from all testing so far, its not much of a change IMO to affect how the engagements play out, even if the F15 is slightly more "Dangerous"... Besides, any good pilot knows that there is no "holy grail" tactic, but rather all around experience that makes the difference... I can say this much however, in the flanker you have to depend on your wingmen for the most part because you dont have the luxury of going "Rambo" as with other planes... :smilewink: Obviosly due to the fact that you got no active missiles to cover you back... So i would say, patience, discipline, and lots of tactical training... And as for fight tactics... well lets just say F-Pole with a proper defensive execution is key... Oh and did i mention good teamwork...? :) @Fahh: Thanx for the kind words... 51st regards the 2IAE in the same light! Cheers
  15. Sorry for the delay... here you go guys! Unzip this into your Bazar/Effects folder... remember to backup original OVERCAST folder thats located there! Enjoy Overcast Mod.rar
  16. Perhaps something for ED to consider adding now that its clearly defined and illustrated to be there!? Surely it shouldnt be hard to adopt such a timer... Or are there reasons for not doing so? Would be nice to at least have some new, even something as little as this feature added on Su-27, considering the huge boost the F15 just got, and to some extend the Mig with its 6 P-77s... Especially now that ERs are pretty much our most vital weapon and hanging on to it for too long or not long enough is the difference between life and speedy ARMAAM death... :) Surely that would make lots of RuFOR flanker pilots feel alittle more appreciated!
  17. The simple answer is NO! And as stated above, why would you want an unrealistic spotting range? That was the story in FC1 which led to ridiculous and completely unrealistic "Dot hunting" style of flying for both A2G and A2A alike... FC2 however has taken a realistic approach in this sense, which is great IMO, and i hope it stays that way! :) But regardless, even if you wanted to tweak around, its not possible in FC2 AFAIK as some of the key parameters in "graphics.cfg" file that used to affect this are now hardcodded into the sim... For example, "ObjectFogMultiplier" is no longer there, which used to be one of the main culprits for "dot hacks"... In other words, all objects should blend into the fog at range designed by ED now... :thumbup: Besides, do you think you could spot a camouflaged tank from more than 3-4km? I think not! Thats why many Anti-Tank platforms have FLIR systems or A2G radar for doing the "spotting" work for you... All this in mind, it kinda gives u an idea how hard it is flying a vanilla Su-25 now and in RL... Just look at real Su-25 videos from recent Georgia war and compare... You'll note how bad the SA and targeting was on some of those attack runs... Some of them were more like "spray and pray" dives than anything...
  18. I have a feeling the issue is indeed related to "MP Stuck Chat" bug! The fact that no controls apart from ESC key responded point in that direction. Given the fact that you did not "fix" the chat bug (By hitting ALT+ENT or ALT-TAB), but rather decided to reboot the whole PC meant that some files must have gotten corrupted upon next load... @ED: I have no idea how this chat bug slipped through beta testing, but this should be a BIG priority to be fixed in patch! With that said, im backing up my FC2 as we speak to avoid the same fate as Case, because my chat gets stuck quite often...
  19. Yes, the FC1 overcast mods dont work anymore in FC2, not without some file adjustments... But you guys are in luck! I have converted an overcast mod for FC2 to fix the problem... Seems to work great so far, and with less artifacts than the default one... :) Will post it once i get back home!
  20. Indeed! Just be sure to back up your original export.lua or you might fail integrity check on servers with "cheat prevention" measures... So, you can run tacview in SP, but revert to default export for MP... And then if you want to review your MP flight in Tacview, just replay the recorded track from your "FC/Temp" folder later on with the edited export.lua again....
  21. Yes! We intend to have Tankers on the <51>Dedicated server missions that have Su-33s! Same goes for F15s too, KC-10s will be in the air as needed...
  22. As long as you have realism settings set to "full real" the refueling should be good! Just tested this in MP and you gotta do it "manually" all the way just like it should be... Actually works like a charm i must add... baskets no longer disappear as in FC1...
  23. Guys! False alarm... my bad The problem is with the mission... once realistic settings are on, Refueling works fine! :) Tested in MP as well!
  24. Hmmm, i guess nobody cares about this... what a shame! cmon guys dont you find this issue disappointing?
  25. Hmmm, is it just me or did you guys notice that ED has taken step backwards in making the Su-33 refueling "Scripted" again in FC2... Why do this?! The refueling was great in FC1, even with a minor MP bug it still worked good enough... Why screw it up now? @ ED: Is it possible to change this somewhere to make it realistic again, or perhaps introduce an option to switch from scripted "nub" mode to proper "manual" one...? Because this is a big game downer IMO for those who enjoy some nice Carrier Ops and Su-33 flying! Cmon guys! This needs a fix! Lets discuss below...
×
×
  • Create New...