Jump to content

Breakshot

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    731

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Breakshot

    Ракеты в DCS

    in DCS World

    Posted

    073FBBD7-535B-4FEA-9AA3-E1E502B9B84A.png.f61c0ea30ba575db9ac8c82b1f688e9b.png
    31BA867D-1866-4BD4-B0CF-4520C4F6F926.jpeg.7f933bfa6c593e3bb8245e386a1f7649.jpeg
     
    @Chizh Не интересно, что разница между СУВ-27 и диаграммы всегда 20%?
    Все естественно понятно и правильно. СУВ предлагает зону пуска с практическими резервами. Ракета потом летит как на чартах чтобы иметь мин скорость для попадания с запасом маневра. Вот и есть 20%, как для Р так и ЭР. Почему в ДЦС только Рка в норме?

    Или они в вимпеле все дураки какие-то? Чарты на глаз рисуют

    Тут вообще разговор идет о +5-10%. Настроить и забыть....



    Отправлено с моего STV100-2 через Tapatalk

    • Like 4

    Ракеты в DCS

    in DCS World

    Posted

    While we wait for ERs to be adjusted to charts with the correct margins...

    @Chizh when will 120 loft be removed vs ECM? Any timeline? You said it will be done, but when?

    Also when will F16 radar be fixed to realism levels like for the hornet?

    Thanks

    Отправлено с моего STV100-2 через Tapatalk



    • Like 8

    FUEL CONSUMPTION IN ME FLIGHT PLANNING

    in Wish List

    Posted

    So is ED looking into this?

    The hornet is like a super fighter at the moment and outfuels everything without breaking a sweat. No wonder pilots are taking 10 actives in competitions like TACT and just fly around behind till the enemy is out of fuel and weapons... gg wp.

    Ferry range on deck for hornet is also higher than Flanker. How is this possible?

    Отправлено с моего STV100-2 через Tapatalk

    Ракеты в DCS

    in DCS World

    Posted

    I am sorry but I really don't understand, there are numerous charts which all show the same thing, same DLZ shapes.... for multiple missiles, both Russian and NATO. They also clearly demonstrate within reasonable common logic that the ER is still missing some performance in rear aspect at 1km alt.

     

    These charts are the best information we have about these missiles, hence I don't understand why ED is making speculative adjustments that don't match the charts to intentionally tune the missile down, with the excuse now being "they must be not accurate, hand drawn, because.... we dont know 🤣"? So the big question is where are the accurate charts then?

     

    What logic is this?! Just match the charts and be done with it. There is a small percentile that needs to match here. Probably a 10% or less of adjustment.

     

    Is ED that afraid of BLUEFOR salt if ER is actually correctly modelled kinematically?

     

    Just seems a bit odd to me, maybe I'm reading into it too much... 

     

     

     

     

    • Like 10

    Communications menu dissappeared!!?

    in General Bugs

    Posted

    Since the last patch today for some odd reason the comms menu and subtitles are no longer visible for me.

     

    Nothing happens when I hit the / key.

     

    Anyone else experiencing the same issue?

     

    A repair didn't solve the problem....

     

    Отправлено с моего STV100-2 через Tapatalk

     

     

    Ракеты в DCS

    in DCS World

    Posted

    It depends on the target IR signature. If the IR signature is quite small, for example a MiG-21 in military mode, then a few flares will be enough to cover it. If the signature is large, for example a MiG-25 with afterburner, then a lot of flares are needed.
    Are flare rejection coefficients same for Aim9m vs 73/ET?

    Отправлено с моего STV100-2 через Tapatalk

    Ракеты в DCS

    in DCS World

    Posted

    3 hours ago, Chizh said:

    Have you sold a lot of games? If not, then you should listen to those who know this area.
    Western aircraft are sold much more successfully than Russians, all other things being equal.

    Which Russian FF aircraft have you sold for comparison?! Give one a try and then maybe I am proven wrong.... I really hope you guys would do at least a 29.

     

    Anyway, we are here because we care about DCS and would like basic MP dynamics to be fixed and stable, especially most important factors like missiles, sensors and relative performance of aircraft. Simply because its the MP community that notices those things instantly.

     

    No need to take offense. I am sure you have the same in heart. 

     

    Looking forward to next patch with EO bugfix. 👍

    1 hour ago, falcon_120 said:

    Guys you need to understand that FC3 is a closed product with a defined set of features as per the business decission back in the day. Some features we would all love to see will not make it to FC3, period, only some small bug correction for already existing features.

     

    What I hope is that a FC4 or similar it is plan in the future to see at least a better version of the Su27 and F15c. There are several aspects that now start to showe its age: 3D cockpit, damage model... even some lack of features (Link 16 on F15, better datalink in Su27...). I'm quite sure a FC4 version with some new items would sell a lot.

    FC aircraft have some of the best FM in DCS which were brought to standards for a reason. Yes lack of systems modelling is a negative (for those who like cold starts), but in terms of combat they are on the same page with FF modules. Also unfortunately we dont have any competitive RED planes in FF yet. We shall see if Razbam can get the 23 across the line, but even then thats not gonna compete with the current F types in the sim.

    • Like 5

    Ракеты в DCS

    in DCS World

    Posted

    Speaking of Flanker datalink. We found a way to make it work in MP at least partially (no targeting data).

    But yea, I bet it would take ED just a couple lines of code to make it work as intended. Its already half way there.

    Then Chizh saying above that they don't want to fix it because its not fair for F15 which actually should NOT have it (based on proven RL documentation!) is kind of a stab. Where does ED find the historical data from? Lol

    I thought the idea was a simulation, not artificial (im)balance??

    Chizh, don't you guys remember your roots from Flanker 1.5? I played that as your first sim btw. Flanker is what made this company.

    I bet you a FF Flanker would sell way more than F16 ever will, and rightfully so.








    Отправлено с моего STV100-2 через Tapatalk

    • Like 5
    • Thanks 3

    I was fighting F-14 and Notch doesn't work avoiding Aim-7M. What to do?

    in Su-27 for DCS World

    Posted · Edited by Breakshot

    4 minutes ago, dundun92 said:

    The odds are very high, thats the point behind HOJ. And the F-14 jammer certainly works, it just blinks very quickly, which doesnt stop HOJ. Its also possible that some weird F-14 radar memory mode bug existed, but that has nothing to do with the AIM-7 being OP.

    So HOJ is a PK shot with high odds? I guess best not to turn your jammer on the 14 🙂 

     

    This is quite recent after memory/Magic INS was fixed, btw

     

    I was fighting F-14 and Notch doesn't work avoiding Aim-7M. What to do?

    in Su-27 for DCS World

    Posted

    Just now, dundun92 said:

    PN doesnt need range. The myth that missiles go pure pursuit in HOJ needs to die. The loft thing, that is a reported bug. But the bigger issue is that the AIM-7 shouldnt be lofting here, that just hurts its F-Pole

    So is the missile OP or not? What are the odds of an unsupported Aim-7 make 2 kills like that? BTW I dont even know for sure whether that was HOJ, isnt the 14 jammer not working that way?

     

    If nothing is amiss here apart from the loft then I rest my case... 

    I was fighting F-14 and Notch doesn't work avoiding Aim-7M. What to do?

    in Su-27 for DCS World

    Posted · Edited by Breakshot

    17 minutes ago, dundun92 said:

    No. Theres no OP, AIM-7 is absurdly easy to notch, as are all the "BLUE" missiles that are supposedly OP. Your pretty much the only biased guy here. Also, the ER isnt 90s. ER specifically is late 80s but its the same seeker as the R from the early 80s. AIM-7M is mid 80s, MH is actually 90s.

    Of course I am biased, but not in the way you think. I have no issues with 7s or any BLUEFOR missiles. I have an issue with ED always sticking it to red side when it comes to development since Igor passed away.

     

    But now that you brought this up I have seen some ridiculous things with Aim-7s. I have yet to see something like that with ERs, apart from when they miss in the most simplest and best conditions.

     

    Here is one for you to explain virtue of Coxy, enjoy! @dundun92  🙂

    I was fighting F-14 and Notch doesn't work avoiding Aim-7M. What to do?

    in Su-27 for DCS World

    Posted · Edited by Breakshot

    3 hours ago, Skysurfer said:

     

    Yes. The 7M/MH are waaaay more advanced than the Alamo that is a simple fact.

    It is? Based on what analysis? and what documentation?

     

    Lets not talk about kinematics and launch platform. The way it works in DCS is a dice roll for the ER. Aim 7 however is supposed to have new PN modelling. 

     

    EDs priority should be to bring all missiles to parity in this respect.

    • Like 2
×
×
  • Create New...