Capn kamikaze
-
Posts
1394 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Capn kamikaze
-
-
13 minutes ago, bkthunder said:
Check what state the module is in, if you're happy with it buy it, otherwise wait longer. That's the harsh reality.
That would be fine, except this situation would not be avoided by doing that.
-
1
-
-
39 minutes ago, Exorcet said:
There are a whole host of things that can happen to "unfinalize" your product. This could range from the company you bought it from running out of a money to an asteroid destroying the Earth tomorrow. There is always risk. It's unfortunate but true. At least in this case the risk was labeled on the package that you would be spending money on something that was not in a finished form.
I'm not saying that you have to be happy about things going wrong, or that we shouldn't try to come up with a better system. But thinking that you should get the final product no matter what and never have to think of things that might get in the way of that is extremely unrealistic.
When I say final, I mean in what ever state it ends up in, and my access to it in that state not being hindered or limited.
I am not demanding it be made into the "release" version no matter what, just that what I have should not be taken away like the Hawk was. -
If my purchase is final, then so should my product be.
-
6
-
-
Ditto, I want my money back!
4 hours ago, cfrag said:Wait - you married your girlfriend because she told you four times that Razbam isn't continuing work on the Mudhen?
The short answer is 'no'. The long is "Caveat Emptor". And that is irrespective of what Raz is going to to in the future. We are all grown ups here and make grown-up purchasing decisions.
If we have to be "grown up" then we have to expect the same of the companies that take our money, they need to either provide the product they made a contract with us to provide, or they need to give us back our money.
Demanding one or the other isn't "childish", childish is taking someone's money for a job, and then not delivering.-
3
-
1
-
-
This is the Hawk BS all over again!
-
6 hours ago, Chenstrap said:
I am a week or 2 late but I have been doing a lot of tinkering with SEAD flights and SAMs and want to give my 2 cents on their behavior. That said I generally want to echo @Exorcet in that the current behavior is more realistic then what is being proposed.
To expand on SEAD tactics a bit, generally SEAD flights will only want to shoot at 2 targets: Search radars and tracking radars, so things like Early Warning Radars and communication/C2 vans arent engaged by these sorts of weapons. The purpose of a SEAD flight is to suppress air defenses to allow time for strikers to ingress, bomb targets, and get out. Because they carry a small number of anti radiation missiles, they generally cant afford to shoot multiple missiles at one battery since they often need to keep a window open for 10+ minutes against multiple potential threats. An SA-11 battery with 4 TELs and a snowdrift STR isnt 5 threats; its 1 threat, because the SA-11 TELs are reliant on the Snow Drift SR to search for targets.
As for the behavior in DCS, right now aircraft firing anti radiation missiles (This goes for flights with task SEAD or any A/G task where you give them ARMs) only shoot at active radars that the aircraft have detected on RWR. IE if you put a radar unit in the mission but have its radar off (AI off or emission off triggers do this), aircraft wont shoot at it because it is not actively emitting. Another example of this is the SA3. The Flat Face search radar is picked up on RWR further out than the Low Blow tracking radar (This is true for Player and AI flights). As such AI SEAD flights will engage the search radar from max range, but they will only engage the tracking radar from ~15 miles out because that is when the radar is picked up on RWR.
This explains whats happening with the SA-11 in the given example from @Capn kamikaze . The SA-11 Fire Dome TEL does have onboard radar, but its a fire control/tracking radar ONLY, it doesn't do search which is the job of the Snow Drift. SEAD aircraft wont shoot at the TEL unless has locked onto a target and launched a missile because thats the only time the radar is emitting. However thats unlikely to happen seeing as HARMs have a longer range then the SAM does and by the time the SA-11 can shoot a missile the Snow Drift SR has already eaten a HARM and the TELs never had a target to engage.
@Flappie if you have already pushed a ticket regarding this thread I ask you amend to it as the behavior being asked for by Kamikaze is less desirable then the current behavior by the AI SEAD flights. With that said, there ARE features for AI SEAD flights that need to be added in. Namely, AI SEAD aircraft currently can not perform pre briefed HARM shots (Players can do this already). As I described above they will only shoot at actively emitting radars. This post has already gotten quite long, but if you like I can provide more details on what sort of features would be really nice for pre briefed HARM shots.
This isn't about HARMS this is about the KH-31P, and these were being fired on the edges to 80% of the SA-11's range, and the TEL's are emitting.
Just because you like things as they are does not mean something isn't wrong. -
7 hours ago, Hiob said:
Insulting half the forum in the headline and then asking questions, that you should know, nobody can seriously answer. Makes me wonder who exactly is tiresome and juvenile?
Don't get you knickers in a twist, grow up.
-
How far off roughly are we speaking... unless it is actually two weeks that is....
Are we talking weeks or months? -
Glad to see it's not one of those problems specific to me lol.
I'll try that work around
-
The only way I can get them to all fire in a single pass at all targets is to have them as individual flights of 1, using the follow command to make them look like a single flight, stop following, then independently attack specific units, then re-follow.
It shouldn't be this difficult... -
This is a long standing issue, I have a flight of 4 Su-24's each armed with 2 Kh-31P's attacking an SA-11 group that has a CP, SR and six launchers, the launchers are spread over an area of a couple of square miles, they're all pointing generally in the direction of the incoming flight.
The flight will only launch a single missile, rather than sorting all the SA-11 systems, and firing on multiple targets, even the lead won't fire its second missile at an alternate launcher, there's basically no point in those wingmen even being there.
I've tried this multiple ways, either telling the flight to engage in zone, specifically targeting the individual units as a "start enroute task", but they basically do nothing other than the lead firing on the SR.
If I jump in and fly something like the F/A-18 or F-16 and do the same thing with them, I see the SR and multiple launchers on the RWR, and can fire off missiles at different threats, but the AI don't do so. -
I'm unable to place ships in areas like near to the port at Novorossiysk, you can place them in the port, but the area from the edge of the port to about 4 nautical miles is not usable, DCS says that's too shallow, if you copy and paste the unit a few dozen times you can come up with a line that shows the edge of the area.
The port shows passenger ships in there, and I would have thought something like a Slava would have no problem getting in there, playing about with the units, some ships are effected others are not, if the Slava won't go, then I'd expect the Forrestal to have problems, but that goes in no fuss.
Also the area between the Crimea and Russia is not passable, however that may be realistic.
Not tested anywhere else, but I would not be surprised if it's an issue with other ports aswell.-
1
-
-
Not seeing any checkbox called "Uncontrolled", there's late activation, which I normally use for triggers, but nothing labeled as you say.
I found the issue, it only works from a cold start, and does not work for client, the tick box is removed for clients.
What I would like to acheive is for the aircraft to be shown as waiting there and it's like a client can jump in them and start them, it just looks better to have the aircraft there from the start rather than just popping in out of the ether.
Uncontrolled seems to be there for helicopters though, just not fixed wing. -
10 minutes ago, Capn kamikaze said:
I'll give that a try, thanks
That doesn't work, can't set them as uncontrolled, and there isn't a "start" command.
-
18 hours ago, rob10 said:
2 - set aircraft as UNCONTROLLED and use START command in trigger to start it up when you want.
I'll give that a try, thanks
-
So where did they get that 150km from in the encyclopedia, and why is the P variant there, but not the A, did that variant get pruned or something lol
3 minutes ago, razo+r said:I know wiki is bad but there it says the A has a range of 70km (38nm) and is defined with 60km in the files, so it seems correct?
But they fly a different profile, so while the missile is the same, the range differs due to them flying in different dense air.
That's true.
-
Just did a test with a Su-30 attacking a ship, the launch conditions were 30,000ft, 991 knots.
It didn't launch until approximately 33nm from the target, the encyclopedia for the P variant, the A seems to be missing, says this missile has a range of 150km, since aerodynamically there's no difference, and the motor is the same, they should have the same kinematic performance.
So is the encyclopedia wrong, or is the missile in game wrong, doesn't seem to matter what parameters I try, it doesn't even come close to 150km. -
If you tell them to attack a particular unit they will attack other units of the same type, for example a couple of Su-30's are to attack a particular patriot site using the Perform task/attack group command, but will also attack others even when the "SEAD" command is removed from them, and you set the ROE to "only designated".
Also, when you set it to use all of their weapons, and group attack, they do not do this.I expect both Su-30's to fire all their Kh-31P's at that one target group, yet one fires both its missiles, and the other goes after another site about 40nm away.
-
^ What that says...
-
1) Could we have the option to remove static objects we have placed, eg a helicopter by user flags etc.
2) Could we have the ability to show aircraft before they're activated, or occupied by a client.
3) Could we have the option of telling aircraft where to park when they're landing and refueling, this option is currently only available for their final landing.
4) The ability to set the type of approach, eg straight in, or circuit, and the direction the runway is operating.
Thank you.
-
Unfortunately the ATC menu for them is totally blank, all I can do is go back to spectators and then get a new plane, only problem is going through the damned restart proceedure again.
Probably some server side comms mod screwing with it. -
In MP when trapping back aboard the carrier, I can re-arm and refuel, but I can't launch again, the deck crew ignore me, I can line up perfectly into the position to get their attention, but they don't move to their positions and begin the launch process.
SP is fine, it's just in MP, not sure if the server is running mods that would be causing this, I have the supercarrier module, this has only started happening since the last update, noticed it in the F/A-18, not sure if it effects other modules. -
Having this still in 2023 nearly 2024, twice tonight on MP on the Hornet, the plane rolled back as usual, and it just wouldn't drop the wire.
-
The ingame FPS monitor is showing the game is CPU limited, but task manager is showing only about 25-30% utilisation by DCS, something doesn't seem right there...
Refund on the F-15E
in Payment and Activation
Posted
Exactly my plan, no more third party modules for me, they can't be trusted now.