Terrorban
-
Posts
414 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Terrorban
-
-
And ED knows their work very well.
But since you 'know' so well, go ahead, prove that what ED is doing is wrong.
Are you an ED developer? Do you have any connections with the company? Genuinly curious.
-
I don't think any ED systems are designed to interact with trees. Probably because you can hide them by lowering terrain settings.
-
In RL, yes WMD-7 use image pattern to lock/stabilize.
In fact, it will require x of xxx lines to identify/track target, an easy and very conventional way.
Thank you for your explanation. When that is mixed with turbulance, it makes sense to sometimes lose accurate tracking so a laser is required to compensate. Since laser has a limited range, longer than 40km range will not give the best tracking, especially if lost focus.
ED has a lot to do to get their pod up to date.
-
Sorry to tell you, no game use real image patterns for optic sensors,
all use magic object/area lock.
Image pattern recognition in RL is also done through code. It is not some machenical or analogue process.
Using laser is more accurate but the underlying technology is not some magic. It all depends on how it is set up in this game.
I am asking, is the technology available with WMD-7 as the Litening pod currently behaves like it has this tech.
For the sake of game, they obviously dont want all the processing power to be used up by it so they found the magic method.
Maybe WMD-7 simply does not have the tech and I am alright with that. I just wanted a simple answer. Maybe this question is too close to spywork and wont be answered so in that case I understand as well.
-
WMD7 need laser ranging to ground stabilize, so you can see the LSR often pops out.
40KM is the max range for laser ranging, so it can only get stabilize within that range.
I do not know how the real one works obviously but is it not that laser is used only for identifying range on screen (I know it is also used for weapons)? Should it not be possible to lock onto the hotspots and image patterns with low accuracy like NATO varients?
The camera can see objects like massive ships and other patterns so it should be able to lock to it from farther range.
-
Is it possible to unselect the target without going out of ACM mode?
-
I excepting the weapon the behave correctly when it should, the SFM does not quite care about the AOA of the weapon, so it can keep level flight from M0.8-M0.6 for quite a long time with nearly 0 AOA, as long as the life time is not timed up and laser is on, it can hit the target. Speed just matters how fast it hit the target, does not affect the attitude of the weapon, so it get odded in some case. In fact it can easily hit a target at 7.5NM.
So very long range shots can be expected to be tuned in later patch.
Ah ok. Thanks for the explanation. That makes sense. Hopefully you guys will find a good balance between range and accuracy.
I agree, 7.5nm range is too far for rockets. I have no problem with making them as real as possible. As long as it does not result in a mess we had before this patch.
Looking forward to flying this plane after next patch.
-
Before the patch I was testing these in Active Pause to simulate what these would be like if they were SALH and had the AFM/Spinning Rocket oscillation.
In my testing @ a range of 4.8nm, 300kts release, 6000 ft high only 1 out of 9 BRMs missed hitting the 8 BTR-80s I set up.
They were actually quite accurate, since all they had to do was fly directly down to the target.
They weren't constantly trying to place themselves between the target and myself since I was stationary; that is ultimately what made them suck before.
The Vikhr scheme over-exaggerated the AFM oscillation, which is supposed to be there, just not at the magnitude we were experiencing it at.
Thanks for testing. I was worried since ED has been so critical of JF-17 capabilities lately and Deka remaining quiet or sometimes saying that they wont work on weapons anymore.
I genuinly thought this plane was doomed if left on EDs hands alone. I will wait for the next OB patch to see what Deka really intended these rockets to behave like.
It sure sounds like this plane is becoming capable again.
-
Even though Max1mus sounds like he cares for this game, his reasoning comes from the same logic pot which ED stirs in their community. ED reduced SD-10s performance based on CFD they ran on an ingame 3D model of SD-10 alone which I am guessing was not even laser scanned by Deka. They did not believe in Dekas missile characteristics so they made up their own because community cried enough.
-
The one which is not finalized and not planned for release(should be the same as I tested), has following characteristic:
1.Guidance changed to SALH (FM switch back to SFM, so it basically has a 100% hit ratio, since the FM is simplified, if a better AFM scheme is presented, this will be changed)
2.Drag lower than expected, so it has much longer range than it should.(Expecting the range to be shortened in later patch)
3.Damage power is still under tuned.
What is the rough percentage you are planned for these rockets to hit their target at in the future. You don’t have to be specific but I would like to adjust expectation for future.
I am also guessing the range will be below 5nm and above 4nm like you were saying before.
-
When I flew earlier today, they were damaging MBT but not killing them, and I was hitting them with two at a time. I was killing them after 2 or 3 hits, and some time. I had a lot of misses though due to the hit box problem.
Actually hitting the target was the hard part as it kept landing long (Abrahms). Against non-armored trucks they worked great.
3 Hits on Abrams sounds about correct. I suppose the damage did not change then.
What is going on with the hit boxes? I never had problem hitting targets with Mavs or Vikhrs before. Is this something that is happening only with BRM or DCS in general?
I want to be excited for this change but with all the changes happening without communication, I dont know if the performance will change yet again in another patch.
-
Well, since Deka dont post weapon changes in Changelogs anymore, I am not sure how positive this change is. I don't have time to play this game today. I will check them sometime this week.
How good is their damage? Other rockers are pretty weak and if this change makes them into proper DCS rockets, the damage might have been affected.
-
Not sure if this is for the artist to look at since the JF-17 should have shatter canopy glass, not an ejecting one.
-
So they actually changed the BRM1? Happy days if they are finally not beam riding and hit targets. :thumbup:
-
Deka already gave up on SD-10. What makes you think they will make PL-15? Also, ED now makes all weapons so good luck asking them.
-
Hey TB - have you tried the BRM yet? I had another successful series of sorties with the BRM in multiplayer. Appreciate all the hard work Deka has done to continue to develop the platform. Hope you are having fun and spending less time whining about how you cant employ the weapon!
TJ
Sorry mate. I am not spending what little time I have on this jet. I will pick it up once Deka pulls it out of early access by the end of this year. That is, if it is still an enjoyable module at that point.
I own plenty other modules to keep me busy for my A2G enjoyment. I am glad you are having fun though. I wish there were more people flying this jet.
I have no idea what Deka are doing with this module currently, and like foxwxl said, it is Chinese logic to not communicate their plans. I will just leave them to their secrecy and hope for positive results.
-
Meteor is definitely not coming. Maybe they would like to eventually, but it would basically require a 2019 model. I think they just released that render for the same reason Deka programmer a rudimentary HMD just in case for later:megalol:
Since ED will now be developing all future weapons, EuroF will have all the copy paste Hornet weapons. Unique weapons will probably come 2 or more years later. :D
IF and i am saying IF we got JF-17 Block III they will insult us in MP:megalol::megalol::megalol::megalol::megalol::megalol::megalol:
PL-15 / A-Dart it will be painful for them to handle both of them
Oi stop it. Don't you know that nothing is better than AIM-120C? ED has CFD data which proves it. :megalol:
-
I just wish that ED had more confidence in Deka. They gave in to public outcry too easily. But then again, we didn’t have much material available to us to defend this module other than Deka developer said so.
-
So stop talking about it - clearly you have an agenda you are trying to push. Push it somewhere else.
I dunno brother - pulling up at max G in A2G mode is pretty awesome. Maybe you should try it and stop keyboard warmongering? Have you yet to even fly the JF17 since you've listed it as "ABANDONED"? I have helped further the development of this weapon. What you choose to believe is up to you.
They reverted their compromise. They wanted a laser homing rocket that spun and DCS didnt offer it. So they went one direction while they waited for ED to build it. You chose to take the fight a different direction.
Question for you - what other work was put off, delayed or neglected because you wanted what you wanted and moaned loud enough for it to happen? Do you think like that? You realize this is a small shop with a small # of programmers who cant move the mountain. Maybe your expectations need to be tempered with the human side of the equation? Or can you think that far out?
Enjoy your keyboard warmongering.
TJ is OUT!
Take it easy. I am not sure why you have suddenly taken such a negative attitude towards me. Just because I do not agree with your shortsighted and rather stereotypical views does not mean you have to start attacking my actions. The fact that you keep presenting yourself as the best example to get results is rather comical.
I was not aware it was hurting you this much to read my comments. I have said before but you chose to ignore it and continued to start a petty fight. I will say it again:
foxwxl has finally acknowledged the problem and Uboats has confirmed that it is getting fixed. I see no further reason to continue debating this issue.
I find it funny how you use such big words when describing me. I must have some "agenda". ;)
TB is OUT? I think.
-
If you took this as a petty and off topic fight, I think you need to examine your attitude. This wasnt a fight, I was genuinely curious if you could do it. The way in which you approached your answer said more to me (and Deka) about you than anything else. Clearly you are negative, frustrated and lashing out at something beyond the BRM. I am very sorry you saw it this way.
I dont honestly think the F-16 can do it. Had you looked at the track, acmi or video that I provided and have seen how spread out the map is, and how terrible CBU modelling currently is in DCS, you'd probably have come to the same conclusion I did. But hey, we have characters on a deck that move now.
Like you, I was frustrated with the BRM. But I learned, improvised and adapted to how they currently work. Im still not happy with them, but I can approach Uboats or Foxwxl and have a constructive conversation with them, which in turn lead to them finding two issues (one with point track on some DCS world units and the inaccuracy of the BRM.)
A positive attitude promotes positive results. Try it some time and see if you get a better response.
TJ
Again, I am not looking for a petty fight in this forum. Stop selectively reading my posts. You yourself have a rather shortsighted way of looking at things.
It is great that you spoke to the tester and he taught you how to use the buggy rocket model. You did not help them discover any issues.
It is quite obvious what is going on with this module lateley. We need more clear communication, be it positive or negative. The customers have some right to clarity.
The fact that Foxwxl finally acknowledged that there is something wrong with the rocket's code and Uboats confirmed the change of BRM to 25L like guidance has finally provided a solid conclusion to this issue.
How you choose to understand my attitude is up to you. I have nothing personal against Deka. I followed the development of this plane from the beginning. They had one of the best module release I have ever seen but in the end, I purchased this module and wish to see it working as advertised.
-
Tell you what, if you are interested in proving me wrong Ill provide the same MIZ that I used here and you provide the track of you doing it better with a CBU87. I dont think you can currently as we dont have another capable multirole fighter in DCS. But I love to be proven wrong, so are you up to the challenge?
I feel your pain here, but that is literally why its called Early Access. In this period, we tune airplanes based upon SME feedback from the wild which leads to changes in how the airplane performs overall. I agree 100% with your frustration (I even ranted about it in this thread!), but this is the peril of buying an Early Access product. Other products have faced this same problem:
- Magic radar in the F16
- Magic INS in the Phoenix
- Magic mavericks on the Viggen that could shoot down an airplane and would never run out of energy (this one has been fixed - or nerf'd depending on your stance.)
- Magic mistral missle that never ran out of energy and just blew up (fixed - or nerf'd)
- Magic helo dynamics of the Gazelle
The BRMs are usable in their current state, and Im also happy that Deka is making some changes to improve them even more. Watch my track, acmi or video and see how I do it. Maybe you can find some more enjoyment in this model by adapting your techniques to mine. The plane is a helluva lot of fun!
TJ
Apologies, I am not going to get into petty off topic fights with you. Also, I no longer have access to F-16 to provide example anymore. The CBU on it can level a whole airfield in 3 or so circles.
I bought JF-17 over F-16 because I was more interested in ground attack and this plane was really good with that. It is good with what it has but then again the Hornet is just as much, if not even more capable multirole jet in DCS now with recent changes.
BRM might be useable in current state but definately not logical anymore.
Just because this is an Early Access jet, it does not give them free pass from feedback and criticism. I dont have to sit and take whatever pointless reason developers provide to make significant change.
Ranting and complaining clearly works. Just look at what happened with SD-10. ED has now taken away the development of weapons from 3rd party developers because of it.
Saying all this, I completely understand what you are saying. I am just more passionate about this plane because there is currently no other non NATO jet in the pipeline and the chances of one appearing are looking even less now. This is most likeley the most recent jet we will ever get in DCS and probably the only one to use the latest Chinese weapons.
The fact that BRM is a beam riding weapon in this game is a complete fiction so when Deka try to give us other excuses, they do not make sense since this weapon is currently fictional at the core.
I makes little sense to me that they are spending development time in adjusting a placeholder weapon which will be scrapped as soon as the actual API becomes available.
Their new decision to model it using 25L guidance is more acceptable and I am really looking forward to what it looks like but for now, I will be using Hornet and Viggen for ground strike.
- Magic radar in the F16
-
I scored 17 of 19 hits with the BRM for a total of 28 kills. Name another airframe that can do an hour long sortie and score 28 kills and still have fuel to return home across the channel for dinner?
If you consider any DCS jet that can carry CBU-87, they will do way more kills in half that time.
Anyway, I am glad to hear they are finally going to make these rockets work properly again.
Once BRM work again, I will pick this plane back up. The silent change of SD-10 was annoying enough. I just don't like these sneaky perormance reduction without any initial announcment, evidence or communication.
After Deka gave in to ED pressure, their validity in the DCS online community already took impact. To me, this shows clearly since it is very rare to even see JF-17 on non PVP servers around busy european timezone anymore.
-
no miz, how can we reproduce?
By asking your testers to properly do the testing in different scenarios and present you with the results instead of them trying to teach the community to nose dive into enemy until weapon impact? This is something so many people are experiencing. It cannot simply be just all of us.
Why don't you present your multiple runs around the same area with various enemy types and show that every single rocket hits and that there is no insane movement happening in one take? Make sure to add your examples of what no sharp maneuvering looks like.
I would also like to know why this change was not logged in the patch notes? Furthermore, if it was acknowledged and then fixed in the latest patch, why was this also not mentioned in the patch notes?
The SD-10 change was also not mentioned in the patch notes. Did you guys simply forget to add these significant details on patch notes while mentioning every little other change?
Maybe because I tried it after the release? If you've been around dcs for any period of time you'll know many times we never see patch notes.TJ
Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
I have been in these forums for almost two years. Never seen this much missed patch notes surrounding weapons in such short period of time before.
-
Thank you for the fixes with this patch! Its much more effective!!!
TJ
Sent from my SM-N970U using Tapatalk
Not sure what you are praising him for. There was nothing mentioned in the patch notes and they are not fixed. The rocket tracking is still a mess.
Rockets on podd 3/5
in JF-17 Thunder
Posted
That is a good point. I hope you guys do reconsider. :)