Dusty Rhodes

Nevermind, I did some testing and posted my results in the Bug/Problem forums.

OK, further testing met some positive and negative results. I put up an AWACS for the MIG 29 and put nothing else on the map. Wham, 40 seconds went past, the MIG took off, entered the landing pattern and landed. That needs to be fixed. It shouldn't be taking off if nothing is in the targetting zone. This happens when set to take off from runway or take off from parking area (Which was inside a hardened bunker hanger) However I then put an A10 in the targetting zone doing CAP loops and 40 seconds went by, the MIG took off and then the MIG intercepted the Hog successfully. Kewl, that worked like it should. I then had the HOG fly from outside the targetting zone and into the targetting zone, 40 second went by, the MIG took off and successfully intercepted the HOG. Kewl, that worked great. I then had the HOG flying CAP loops about 15K outside the targetting zone and 40 seconds went by, the MIG took off and successfully intercepted the HOG when it should have never taken off at all because nothing was in it's targetting zone. That needs to be fixed. The targetting zone was set at 25000 meters and the zone started about 10KM away from the airbase. I then tried Intercept from both runway takeoff and parking area take off. With the AWACS up and an A-10 doing CAP loops in the targetting zone, successful intercept. Successful intercept when the A-10 flew in the targetting zone from outside the targetting zone. But then I put the A-10 flying CAP loops outside the targetting zone and the MIG took off, entered the pattern and landed when it never should have took off. I then took the A10 off the map and it did the same thing, took off, entered the landing pattern and landed. So GAI and Intercept work partially but there is work to be done to keep the MIG from taking off when it shouldn't.

Pilot rating was set to Excellent, BTW.

For GAI, I set up a MIG-29 on GAI with a loadout and a 25K Targetting Zone with "Planes" checked to attack. I didn't put anything else on the map except the MIG 29. I set it up first to take off from Runway. After 40 seconds it took off from the runway for no reason, entered the landing pattern and landed. Nothing else on the map and it did this. Then I set it to Take off from Parking or whatever it is called. After 40 seconds it started taxiing to the runway, took off, immediately entered the landing pattern and landed. Then I put an A10 in the mission flying from one end of the MIG 29's targetting zone, to the other end. The MIG 29 did the same thing, took off, entered the landing pattern and landed. GAI is broken. I then tried the same thing with Intercept to see if I could get it to work. The MIG 29 did the same exact thing with the A10 on the map and without the A10 on the map. I think Intercept is broken also, though I am not sure what the difference between the two are, I am sure it isn't to just take off and immediately land when there is a target in your targetting zone. May have already been reported, but if not, here it is. If it has been reported, sorry for the wasted post.

Thanks for the offer Bum but I have the forum right here to post my findings. I have spent an embarassingly good amount of time going thru this sim and testing things, I call it Intel gathering. It is time for me to fly now and just see how the patch turns out in March.

Bump for any help on making the GAI mission work? Testers can ya help out here?

You can already make templates of units, and you can make templates of missions also. What template are you asking for?

Turkey invades Georgia for harboring Kurdish Insurgents. Turkey battles Georgia, Insurgents, and Russia comes to the aid of Turkey, while US, UK, etc come to the aid of Turkey. Very doable.

Yes it can be done. Turkey has KA-50's in the sim and is part of the map so you could pit turkey against Russia, thru Georgia.

Downloaded and will try tonight or tomorrow. Thanks for your efforts

Can someone else run the mission and let the AI fire the missiles and see if they get the same results to confirm this or tell me I am crazy? I just ran it again and of 12 shots at a lineup of 12 Challengers, the KA-50 hit once and the rest were 10 25 meters short. This doesn't happen with any other tank.

Thanks Bumfire and yeah that is the data I was trying to get, when does a certain entity ID and enemy and attack. I have conducted tests from the front of the colum and the rear of the column: The A-10 ID's and attacks within 6KM range (or Mk1 eyeball range as it is presented in this sim) both from the front and the rear. The Frog T ID's and attacks within 15KM range both from the front and the rear. With these tests I made sure the Sensor was in play and could detect targets. What it appears is that they have made calculations for the sensor on the Frog T, but the game doesn't take into effect the loadout of the HOG and if it has the Maverick on it so it can be used as a sensor as it would be in real life. I would think the ID and attack range would be greater then within 6KM if the game calculated the Maverick TV as a sensor, which it doesn't. So there you have it. Take it for what it is worth. Valuable information for the mission/campaign builders who want to make sure things work in their missions and need to know what is going to do what at any given instance it is put in the sim mission. You can agree with the ranges or not, that is up to you. My only wish is that the sim took into consideration the HOG having a Maverick in it's loadout and therefore it has a sensor to lengthen it's range of detection for the AI.

It wasn't a miscalculation but it was the angle that I had the aircraft flying to the attack waypoint. Sometimes it was too much for sensors and some times it was within. These tests I just did were no doubters.

Well GG, I was OVERCONFIDENT in my findings. My previous findings were a mix of in sensor range and not, so my results from the first tests were not correct in what I was looking for. The testing data I was looking for could not be found the way I did it previously faulty tests and for that I apologize. With that in mind I ran a NO SENSOR POSSIBLE, Mk1 Eyeball only, from the side of the column, test and both the HOG and Frog had Mk1 capability inside 6 KM. They ID'd from inside 6 KM and attacked. So then I did a series of test of FOR SURE SENSOR DETECTION, from the side of the column, and found the Frog to ID and attack from inside 16 KM and the Hog inside 6 K or the same as Mk1 Eyeball range, even with Mavericks loaded so the pilot had use of the TV. I will do tests from the front for Sensor detection and from the rear sensor detection and post the results but right now I am eating a little crow for posting faulty data on the tests I ran before. I am now very confident, however, in what I found above and each person can make of them what they will. BUMFIRE, in my tests, the Frog attacked from Max Firing range. The Hog got off what it could from the inside 6 KM is possible and then extends out and fires from Max range with great effectiveness. The AI attacks are logical and as they should be. It is the distances, which I ask that you read above, that was the data I was looking for. I still have to do rear and front tests, which I will get to in a while.

GG, I am going to run the tests again and make sure the optics are out of the picture for ID'ing the target. If I get the same results then YES, there is something wrong. I am confident I will get the same results.

Just to be clear, I purposefully made it so the aircraft being tested had to turn to attack so I could tell when it was attacking. So it wasn't flying parallel to the target but at least a 45 degree angle to it prior to turning to attack. It was at such an angle that you couldn't use the optics to find the target. Since I am meeting skepticism, I will run the tests again today just to make sure the optics were not available to detect the target. If they are not, then the ranges should be the same, and I am confident that my first set of tests were set up so the optics couldn't be used. But I will run them again and post my findings.

Majesco, sorry I wasn't clear, let the AI fly the KA-50 and see what happens.

I was using the T in my testing. Now even if the T is spot on, and like I said, I had no problems with it's numbers, I have a problem with the numbers for the HOG. They should be much better then that though maybe not as good as the Frog-T.

While doing some testing on MBT's vs Helo AT missiles I found a bug with the Challenger II MBT and the VIKR missile. The Challenger is impervious to the VIKR and as a matter of fact it is almost like there is a force field around the Challengers when the VIKR is fired at it. The missiles always fall short by 25-50 meters. The AI fired over 100 missiles from the front and the sides of the Challenger column and there were a grand total of 2 hits on the Challenger but no kills and not other hits. I have attached a mission where you can watch what happens. This is reproducable every time. I tried the MI-28 with the Sprial missile and everything was fine with it. Just the VIKR. ChallengerMBT Bug.miz

Well I did some testing on Main Battle Tanks and Anti Tank Missiles fired from Helo's and here is what I found: From the front, back, or side, the Hellfire is one bad dude from the Whiskey Cobra, the A Model Apache, and the Longbow Apache. The only descrepincies here is that the frontal shot on the T-80 was 8 shots, 8 hits, and 6 kills and the frontal shot on the T-72 was 8 shots, 8 hits and 5 kills. Otherwise the Hellfire was perfect from the side shot. The TOW, fired from the Whiskey was atrocious. Out of 16 missiles fired at 8 T-72's, then 8 T-80's, There were 11 hits, 5 misses, and 4 targets destroyed. I am a former TOW man myself with the ground unit and I remember how cranky that wire guided missile was. I think the hits and kills should be 50/50 but it is pretty close from what I can tell and my knowledge of the TOW system. With the Black Shark the AI firing the VIKR scored 12 shots, 12 hits, and 6 kills on the M1A2 from the front and the side shots. On the Leclerc, it was scored 12 shots, 12 hits, 5 kills from the side of the column and 12 shots, 12 hits and 6 kills from the front. On the Leopard 2, it was scored 12 shots, 12 hits and 5 kills from the front of the column and from the side of the column. On the Leopard1a3, it was 12 shot, 12 hits, and 10 kills from the front and 12 shots, 12 hits, and 9 kills from the side of the column. So plan on shooting 2 missiles at the modern MBT and one for the older MBT's. I will report my findings on the Challenger 2 in a bug report I will be posting.

No adjustment needed? You think the ranges the HOG ID's at is OK compared to the SU-25 and the Helo's? I solidly beg to differ GG.

Well I just finished testing the Helo's Attack and engagement distances and what I found was pretty interesting. The Helo's have a greater distance they ID and attack the targets from than the HOG and Frog. Here is what I found. The Black Shark ID'd and attacked from 15 Kilometers and engaged from 7 Kilometers from the sides, front, and rear of the tank convoy which was stopped. The MI-28 ID'd and attacked from 15 Kilometers and engaged from 5 Kilometers from the sides, front, and rear of the tank convoy which was stopped. I did not test the Hind. The Apache A Model ID'd and attacked from 15 Kilometers and engaged from 9 Kilometers from the sides, front, and rear of the tank convoy which was stopped. The Longbow Apache mirrored the Apache A Model. The Whiskey Cobra mirrored the Apache A and Longbow and when loaded out with TOW missiles, it engaged at 4 Kilometers. So what we have here is helo's that have greater ID and Attack ranges and greater engagement ranges then the HOG and FROG. Again all tests were done using the same exact perameters for each helo and using the long range tank killer missiles of each country. It should also be noted that I used the M1A2 as the target for the Russian helos and it usually took 2 missiles to kill an M1A2. I used the T-72 and T-80 for the American targets and they blew up with just one hit except with the TOW missile which sometimes took 2 hits. I hope ED takes a look at my test results and makes some adjustments, especially to the A-10. It has been short changed BIG TIME. Now to test how many hits it takes for each Main Battle Tank in the sim from the Anti Tank Missiles. :)

Well I exchanged the Hog for the Frog and got a totally different story. From the front of the column, the Frog ID"d and attacked from 11 thousand meters compared to the HOG's 3500 meters From the rear of the column, the Frog ID'd and attacked from 10 Thousand meters compared to the HOG's 2500 meters. From the right side of the column, the Frog ID'd and attacked from 11 thousand meters compared to the HOG's 4500 meters. From the left side of the column, the Frog ID'd and attacked from a whopping 12 thousand meters, compared to the HOG's 5500 meters. For both the HOG and Frog, the settings, speeds, altitudes, everything was identical except each had their own CAS Loadout with long range weapons aboard. It seems the HOG got shafted pretty bad in a head to head comparison. And the HOG's distances just don't seem right considering the HOG's equipment and the pilots tactical knowledge of where he is on the battlefield. I agree with the Frog settings because of the same reasons I disagree so vehemently with the HOG's settings. I hope this can be addressed and straightened out in the patch. On to the helo's. Apache A and Longbow and Whiskey Cobra vs. Blackshark and Hind. Lets hope there attack distances are good to go.

Well uping the rating to EXCELLENT did nothing. In some cases the ranges got shorter and some longer but definitely not in increments you could say was effected by the pilot rating. So now I am going to exchange my A-10 for an SU-25 and see what happens. This should be interesting.

Share with us how you solved the problem so others will know too.