RvEYoda

I partially agree, but in some situations it isn't possible to explain in public bug or issue without fully telling how to tell how it is triggered, but most importantly I believe there is the issue of likelyhood of getting a fix. I agree with AS on this one that these issues should be brought fully into the open, but i'm not going to start another forum war now.

I have informed some working with ED about it.

You know there is an even funnier bug. You can lock stt on one target but have the missile track another ;). (while still keeping lock on the first guy. YES you can Aim7 on two guys at once that are not jamming! - Bad bug!) At this point I have only found it with Aim7, but I rarely fly the ru birds so I would probably not see it for simple probability There are some more funny bugs, like if yoiu fly a flanker, and you fight another flanker, there is a bug which lets you lock him with radar BVR without giving him a warning.

Who knows what future patches will bring, but if some flaws like these will indeed be fixed (nobody knows), but if they are, then I can explain some crazy cheats available in lockon right now. You wouldn't believe how much you can do. Basically, it is possible to set your game up as you press a button, and someone 50km just dies....I'm not kidding. When I last time tried to bring the issue public, I was attacked for showing people how to cheat, so this time i will not explain the mechanics behind, but let's just say (and Im sure many others know a lot more than I do about this) it is possible to make your aim9 go 100km and track like an Aim54 - WITHOUT RWR warning. There is a load of other problems. I only have my word to back up that I aint using these things online. If you dont believe me, go ahead.

indeed, feel the sarcasm ;)

Kuky seriously, what issue do you have against me. Ur running around everywhere screaming "Yoda cheat cheat, the reason LUA sucks is cause Yoda exists....." *Aha a new thread popped up that is remotely related to what I did . What did I do? I made it possible for server admins, should they want to, to implement certain features, and disable others, each could be done separately. I find it poor taste going around saying these things, twisting the truth with your words and stating things like "Fact1, Fact2". (anything including the word LUA is probably related in your opinion) - Bash Bash Bash!* Get your facts straight. The ingame RWR does distinguish between many many different types of threats. The difference is I also implemented a system that allows you not only to get the visual cues (default), but not also get the sound differences. As usual I have made the work public and possible to disable by server. http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=42942 And how do you think tacview works really if not get all coordinates of all objects (yes it gets all objects) in the game, every frame? I guess this is another Yoda conspiracy theory? I guessthere is an entire underground Sith movement! :P

It is mostly because some planes in the game render with a different 3d model at far ranges, and also people tend to disable the haze/fog effect on aircraft models. For example the Su27, Su-33 and F-15 online all have a long range 3d model, while the mig-29 doesnt, this is why the mig-29 (on some systems, like mine) becomes invisible already around 2 nm, while the F-15 can be seen up to 20 nm away, (or more if you mod it even more), the same going for Su-33 and Su-27. In many cases, this in combination with approximately 30-40% lack in missile range, makes radar bvr combat somewhat pointless, as many people do what is sometimes referred to Rwr+dot hunting. There are however ways to make your game somewhat more realistic, although it is tricky. For example you can insert a mig29 model at far ranges by drawing it as a diff aircraft up to a certain level. You COULD even make this change all across the board in a way where you actually get visual ranges comparable to real life. For example we could have the mig show up somewhere around 5 nm or so, and the other planes a little bit farther (talking head on here), but it is a little tricky. I spoke with a mig29 pilot about 2 years back, talking about visual ranges and dogfights and acquiring visual, and I was really surprised to his attitude here, in this case I was comparing the mig29 talking about it in relation to some US jet ( I cannot remember which.). so I made a quick comment *but the mig29 must have an advantage being small and less visible*, and he said something like *pff, i dont rely on that flying the mig, my plane makes so much smoke he is more likely to see me first*

Unfortunately there are some issues with lua exports in this situation. Not all lock types export the required data (some dont export at all). Yes Moa I actually had a variant using this specific data you are mentioning, but unfortunately the export is not consistent on several parts, (This is the main reason why LRM is so many lines, it is basically workarounds for possible bugs in the LUA export.) I can go into more detail if you catch me on msn/icq,.

Hello, I is back from vacation ;)

After I lost my wingman i knew going 1v3 vs 169th was a bad idea, I got ice:d ;P

Please keep this thread to its subject :P I'm out 10 days from now on, and I'd like this thread not to be deleted/locked when i get back. It's always the evil circe. Some guys say "We must have documentation to support mods, cause pilots' word is just their personal opinion". And the other team says "We must have pilots' word, cause documentation is probably fake or too classified". and the third says "we must have war records, cause the rest dont prove anything".... THe truth is you listen to all three, make your own decisions based on it and what others believe, and what mathematical models tell you. And then comes the best situation "We dont have accurate data so lets not change anything". Let's say we have the speed of a missile for example. Current state is "10". Then we get 3 sources, A,B,C, telling us they have experience RL with this system. Source A says 45, source B says 65, source C says 50. Mathematical simulations says 55. it would be absolutely STUPID to keep our value at 10. We could at least make it 40-50. Especially if it turns out that these were sources from different Sides ;) We're not talking about introducing fine tuned flight physics 0.1%. We're trying to bring the capabilities of a system up to at least 60-80% of the real state, compared to a current setup where it performs like 20% And the next rule is you NEVER use Wikipedia as a source for missile data ;)

I'm going to ask the person who I got this data again about the numbers just to be safe, but i believe they are correct. I'll get back to you if it turns out they need to be adjusted. If you don't hear from me, that probably means I got the *they are ok* answer back ;)

This is actually already taken into account ;) Once a target has been processed by the onboard computers to know his status, then the acquasition time until the radar is on him would be the time it takes for the antenna to actually move there. This means, once he is on screen, he is in ram, and his signal definitely hs been processed (Displaying him on the radar scope is likely the last step in such a chain), the only thing left is to "move the radar antenna there" This is in the range of less than half a second. The number ½ second or was said by F-16 pilot to be a good approximation of it in real life, and the Eagle radar (or so I was at least told) has a faster sweep rate than that (but almost the same gimbal limits) The current delay in LRM is a little less than half a second, so I believe this is good enough. However remember that you can make it almost 0.0 s if the antenna is already close enough, and more importantly, in TWS step->bug, there is likely no delay at all, since the antenna is already doing the kind of sweeps necessary to store the track files. In tws mode, most of this kind of data is already in the memory of your system BEFORE you bug him. Bugging him just shows you more information on him and likely tells your systems to keep a closer eye on him for priority/guide amraams. This is different from the F-16s RWS bug or SAM mode where you can bug (not hardlock) the target to create a new kind of radar sweep pattern. This feature is not modelled in lockon, but you can see it in falcon games. LRM doesnt do this. In fact i am not sure the eagle even has/needs such a mode with its so much more powerful radar.

both my lockon and BS kept crashing in Vista64, they only seem stable for me in Xp(32), so I guess this is a common issue. Tried the admin/UAC/compMode dance but no go =(

Does he start on Kuznesov, in air? It is also possible he somehow makes the lockon LUA engine crash, and so never gets to run the lrm scripts. Or maybe he changed the database numbers of the weapons in his game. (this is really not detectable). LRM controls weapons by going by database numbers fro the weapons. There are, however, ways to edit this, for example making Aim-120-ET. But this should not produce the Aim54 kill message on server i think... It is most possible he found some way to insert a "stop payload script" into his lua. Does your export lua on server contain any dofile-statements?

sry i dont have access to that first forum. Goro if you yourself load up with bad weapons, does the payload control affect you? Do you have respawn on or off? (I have tried to make LRM run with respawn on, but there may still be bugs with it) Let's see if we can figure out how he slipped past Catch me on msn or icq Goro!

no just use the manual that comes with the Game ALlied Force. For the mfds. look for the details in the hsd page, but even this is a lil diff from mine. yeah i might make a manual at some point.

Yes, but mostly, you can use the F4 Allied force manual. Some small differences are there

what is your graphic card setup? are you running leavu on a different monitor, if so, are you certain it is ONLY on the second monitor? Third - never alt tab out of lockon after it has been started. This will cause flickering (this is lockon normal, not caused by leavu)

Blue are mine, Yellow, my PDT's

if it is MSVCRT.DLL and similar files, you can try getting the latest Visual c++ Redist, here http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyID=a5c84275-3b97-4ab7-a40d-3802b2af5fc2&displaylang=en , not sure how this applies to vista, there is also a 64bit version somewhere

THE FOLLOWING IS A PICTURE FROM LEAVU 1, and is NOT valid for leavu 2! ,download the export.lua from the main post on the first page and make sure in config.lua that exports are enabled. Update: Further improved the precision of the mark points. They should now be _VERY_accurate ;) Here is my flying a mission

THE FOLLOWING IS A PICTURE FROM LEAVU 1, and is NOT valid for leavu 2! Datalinked Mark points are online!

Uploaded a version that has working mark points included (previous versions got the math mixed up)

THE FOLLOWING IS A PICTURE FROM LEAVU 1, and is NOT valid for leavu 2! Working on MARK points right now. Early MFD design and some settings. comparing MARK points off, and on. (the circle is not the finished mark point design ;) ) THE FOLLOWING IS A PICTURE FROM LEAVU 1, and is NOT valid for leavu 2!