danilop

You are growing up ... :D Nothing wrong with simulating battle and killing, humans used to do that since dawn of mankind. It's called play, and kids could not mature and grow up physically and psychologically without it. Now, we as humans are in essence very violent creatures, top predators if you wish, with some moral norms which separate us from animals, and as such we conquered the Earth and all other life on it - we hunt, we fight, we kill. Only lately, when we were detached from our natural surroundings and put in the huge cities we started to behave differently. Moral standards changed. Problem is that our brains didn't - we need much more time to adapt to this relatively new, non-violent environment in which most of developed World exist nowadays. So yes, just ignore that politically/morally correct urge you get when playing violent computer games :lol:

Exactly, Pyro :thumbup:, thanks All missiles are bad at the moment, but AIM-120c is better than it should be (relatively speaking, not absolutely). All this whining is meant to improve modeling in final version. In this statistically and logically challenged example of mine I was trying to point out the fact that I saw PK of over 35% for AIM-120c and three times less PK for R-77. It should be less of a difference. BINGO! You should have warned me that discussion about the subject is not allowed after official acknowledgment of FC3 beta problems. After all, this is a commercial forum and you represent the ED. If so, I apologize for string the pot. Feel free to delete any inappropriate post which I've made. :pilotfly:

That would be true if sides had virtual pilots of exactly the same abilities which was never the case. In reality, that would be tuning and equalizing for multiplayer - BTW, the side which dispute modelling of the missiles ATM, is accused of wanting just that! Irony, or what? :)

Great majority of kills were in WVR arena, so advantage in radar department is practically excluded. Have a look at the mission. Run it a couple of times. 16vs16.miz

It's obvious that something is wrong from this four-five examples I've posted. THAT SHOULDN'T HAVE HAPPENED, like ever! I don't want to win Nobel price for mathematics or statistics, just pointing out that something is wrong in the missile department. It's way off, you have to admit that. If AI was equal (it should be) those results shouldn't have happened.

Well, you can do that if you put F-15 against F-15, Or Su vs Su ... One firing AIM-120c - the other firing R77 That's the only way to test missile performance excluding all other parameters.

I think that conditions where everything is random (like aspect, range, speed) are much better approximation of real world chaos during war - there were even couple of friendly kills during test, which I think is fairly realistic in combat.

Yeah I know. It's obvious that this is not scientifically correct or statistically valid model, but only indication that something is wrong. The idea was to exclude human factor from equation. I ran mission about five-six times, conditions were as equal as I could make them with my modest knowledge of the editor and F15-s were way superior every single time. I mean, we wouldn't have such a long thread and endless discussion if everything is as it should be. As we say here, and I think you will understand: "Gde ima dima, ima i vatre!" Maybe after hundred of samples we would have something statistically valid, and I'm pretty confident that final results would not fluctuate to much.

:beer:

Do you think that from 35 fired R77s on average, only four should hit??? That's like three to four times less than AIM-120c PK modelled ATM. Completely unrealistic. No one is denying (slight) advantage that F15c should have over the Russian planes modeled in the game - the problem is that this difference is huge!

Almost all kills are WVR

Well he only mentions SARH vs ARH case and that may be (highly unlikely) true, however in the second case including 120c vs R77 it's obvious that there is significant difference between sides. Some difference is to be expected, but this is way, way to much. As I said before, there are two possible scenarios really - bad Russian AI or modeling of the planes and missiles.

There are only two possible conclusions: 1. Russian AI is worse 2. Russian planes + weapons are inferior Just saying ... Would like to hear from devs on this ...

Look at ARH results ;) Guys, try it ... Create simple mission and try ...

Yeah it's random ... 2nd pass 16:4 for Eagles, same mission with MiG 29s + R77 - 37 shot 4 hits PK 11% 3rd pass 16:8 for Eagles, same mission with MiG 29s + R77 - 46 shot 8 hits PK 17% 4th pass 16:3 for Eagles, same mission with MiG 29s + R77 - 26 shot 3 hits PK 11% Average for four passes 16 F-15c vs 16 MiG 29s only active radar missiles: 16:4 for Eagles, PK of R77 11%

Now it's getting really funny 16 x F-15 only 120c vs 16 x Mig-29s only R77 (all AI excellent) Result 16:1 for Eagles (again, almost all kills WVR)! MiGs fired 29 R77 and managed only one kill, so PK for R77 in FC3 is only 3.5%. :megalol:

OK, kid falls asleep :) ... Now 16 vs 16 is very interesting (only AIM-120c for Eagles) It's 16:6 for Eagles plus 2 lost to friendly fire (AIM-120c going haywire) So Blue fired 58 AIM-120c (majority WVR) and hit 19 targets - 16 Reds, 2 Blues (team kill) and 1 AMRAAM - so PK is roughly 33% in a massive fight including dogfight. Reds failed miserably - their missiles are obviously way inferior. Most of the kills happened in WVR where SU-27 should have decisive advantage.

Don't have time ATM. It was a quick try .... later I'will try with 32 vs 32 ... and all AIM 120c for Eagles.

Really? It's obvious what's going on in software!!!!! F-15 and their weapon systems are unrealistically modeled. Case study only prove well known fact that the Russian pilots are simply better :lol::lol::lol:

Case is probably wrong ... :) http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=1648621#post1648621

Ok guys, Please look at the provided track (I'm on laptop ATM, so excuse me if some views are weird in the beginning of the track) and tell me what's going on! I've made a very simple, quick mission, 4 F-15 vs 4 SU-27 all Excellent AI, no humans (I really don't know the better way to exclude human factor from the equation - we are left with pure software simulation of airplanes and missile dynamics without subjective, human/patriotic/fan-boy factor). Typicall loads, with 8xAMRAAM load for the Eagle. Typical load for SU-27 Result is as following: 4:0 for Eagles :doh: Missiles fired: Blue side: 6 x AIM-120B, 3 x AIM-120C Red side : 4 x R27ER, 1 x R27ET Missiles hit (kills): Blue side : 1 x AIM-120B, 3 X AIM-120C Red side : nill PK: Blue Side: AIM-120B 17% AIM-120C 100% !? :megalol: Red side: R-27ER 0% R-27ET 0% :music_whistling: 4vs4 excellent.trk

True, of course - that's all well known, but Tesla was really into weapons, and only lately the potential of his research is recognized ;)

Ahhhhh .... nothing serious, just some Russian EM pulses discharging around ... :music_whistling: Now, model this :lol: On a serious note, the majority of top secret research going on ATM is based on Tesla's papers.

X52 pro without competition in "not-so-much-expensive" category! However, if you can stretch the budget, go for TM Warthog/CH products with pedals - in the long run it's cheaper because you don't have to upgrade, like ever! CH products are indisputable when talking reliability. TM Warthog all the way if you are A-10c fan.

Maintenance was nonexistent at the time - Yugoslavia was under heavy UN arms embargo since early '90s, and almost all SPO-15s were inoperable in '99. And yes, those which had been working were useless and saturated from airborne radars and electronic warfare going on. So pilots probably shut them off ...