169th_DedCat

If you hit the 1 key repeatedly you'll see the HSI has four modes. They are in order: 1: En route mode (defaults to waypoint 1, unless you're right on top of it). 2: Return mode. 3: Landing mode. 4: Blank (call it what you will). ...then it repeats If you watch the HSI while you hit the 1 key you'll notice one of the modes does not move the course and heading needles at all, that's mode 4, you can use it as a reference for which mode you wish to be in. You can also tell you're in landing mode because it queues up the ILS needles. There is no other indication of what NAV mode you are in in the vanilla Su-25. The best way to know when you're about to land is to not fly your waypoints blindly. Try to know where you are on the map, where you're heading, and where your airfield is. You can do this mentally by studying the map and paying attention to your course and bearing and it will greatly improve your overall situational awareness, or you can do it the easy way and enable the map view and your little white dynamic aircraft icon. Just be careful not to hit the ~ key while you are in landing or return mode because it will switch to another airfield. Unless you know and can keep track of how may airfields there are in the game, the only way to get back to the appropriate one is to call "Inbound" when in sight of it.

Your comment is incorrect IMHO. It has been my experience that anything below 350 ms provides rock solid 0 warping gaming on my server. Pings in that range certainly never have disconnect issues anyway. I don't think Cobra's ping was the issue anyway, there seemed to be some other network problem at play (dgram from 4: invalid address) and that's what I'm trying to figure out here.

What's going on here? I just observed a client being dropped from my server several times over the past 15 minutes. He appeared to have a completely stable connection. He had a ping of only 302 ms. It happened spontaneously in mid-flight or while he was taxing for no reason. I've cut and pasted the text that seems relevant from \\Lock On\Temp\AsyncNet.txt. Does anyone know what "dgram from 4: invalid address" means? There were A LOT of these appearing in the log around the time he was getting disconnected. I assume "from 4" is a reference to client 4, which was his connection at the time. occasion 1: ... dgram from 4: invalid address dgram from 4: invalid address accepting connection from XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX/1054 append: client 4 client[4] is ready to start 1 clients ready to start. spawning... spawning client[4] client[4] started [5] kicked: timeout exceeded (>10.000000s) remove: client 5 [4] kicked: timeout exceeded (>10.000000s) dgram from 4: invalid address remove: client 4 dgram from 4: invalid address dgram from 4: invalid address ... occasion 2: ... dgram from 4: invalid address dgram from 4: invalid address dgram from 4: invalid address dgram from 4: invalid address accepting connection from XXX.XXX.XXX.XXX/1058 append: client 4 client[4] is ready to start 1 clients ready to start. spawning... spawning client[4] client[4] started remove: client 4 ...

Overall I like the missile logic in 1.1 better than 1.02. Missiles were too scripted, and too perfect in 1.02 IMHO. They could use some tweaking still, but I'm hopeful we'll get that in a patch or at the very least in 1.2. However, I too have seen some occasional strangeness as Cali describes when missiles do completely unexpected and illogical things. As I recall Cali's Eagle wasn't able to connect with anything that evening, even with good aspect and a target within the no escape range. Everyone had great pings, but perhaps there was some sort of weird connection issue at play. My and everyone else's missiles were working as I would expect at the time. And no, I've yet to see this issue with the R-27ER, but the AIM-120 and R-77 seem to act pretty much the same.

Yes and no. Ground vehicles are much easier to spot from a distance now, they appear as a dark spec in the distance much earlier than before I find. It's almost too easy to spot them really. Static vehicles don't do this, you won't see a trace of them until you're much closer. I have had a few people complaining about seeing through fog. I've created a bunker busting mission for the Su-25T with the lowest amount of fog present possible, and people complain that they cannot see the bunkers until they are literally right overtop of them. I was told I was using "unrealistic fog settings", when really they were set to the minimum thickness and density. As the host I can watch them from externals and see the bunkers much MUCH earlier than they can. Rather than fade in slowly from a distance they just seem to pop-up out of nowhere when you reach distance X. At first I thought this was a haze graphic setting issue, as Basic Haze does not do the fade-in effect, but as it turned out these people did have Advanced Haze enabled. Perhaps it is some sort of issue with being the client instead of the host.

All ED has to do is make the PDT flash from a star to a circle when you have a friendly locked and that problem disappears. It would be nice if they could improve the contrast of the circle and rectangles in TWS mode too.

Hmm... looks like you're right, but they are ridiculously faint. There is no reason they need to be that faint. I know there certainly is no big X on the HUD when you have a friendly in STT. There really needs to be something of that nature, because transitioning to RWS to IFF when you're in close and using your AACQ modes is not a serious solution. See my now edited above post and attachment about the PDT "mipple" when a friendly is designated.

F-15 Iff (edited after Kula66's reply) I had thought there was no IFF in TWS for the F-15, however it looks like I was wrong and that the symbology is there in TWS, but it is extremely faint for some strange reason. However, there still is no way to IFF in STT outside of using the NCTR, which is insufficient when fighting in an environment where the same plane may be found on either side. Here's a scan from an old Jane's manual for reference. Yes this is the APG-70 in the F-15E, but I'm just using it to demonstrate the symbology here. Note the part about a friendly designated target flashing from circle to star.

I've regularly used the A-10 Thunderbolt II to great success in 1.1 against armoured targets defended by Shilka, Igla, Strela-10/Dog Ear, and Tor air defence units. SAMs were too easy before, 1.1 is better. GGTharos is right, if you've stuffed the place silly with SAMs and get your a** shot down, it's your own fault. The Thunderbolt is a front line CAS airplane, and it works extremely well to that end; it was never intended to be used for SEAD or against armed naval targets, it could only be used for that in 1.02 because those units were a pushover in 1.02. Sometimes the best way to avoid getting shot by air defences is to just to avoid them. I get a good laugh out of every time I see LOMAC pilots knowingly fly headstrong into a well defended area, and then complain when they get shot down before they've had a chance to attack the SAMs. If you ain't a SEAD aircraft, don't SEAD! Patient: "Doctor, it hurts when I do this!" Doctor: "Than don't do that!"

That's funny, I got a number of kills with the AMRAAM at the 20 mile range online last night in Flaming Cliffs.

Heh, no... that problem has been around since 1.02. The all seeing maddog. Ice posted a thread in here about it complete with tracks demonstrating it a while back.

If the difference is more than 30 degrees from your centreline for the Russian aircraft, or 40 degrees in the U.S. aircraft, yes. No launch or lock tone. It's in the manual.

I love that we can disable the combat views now, however I still get a few grumbles from pilots about being able to "cheat" with the F6 view and such. It would be great to be able to enable or disable any one view you wish using LUA.

Having a wildly inaccurate HSI 9 times out of 10 is a FEATURE?! Let's be serious, if you're going to model something silly like that than you have to give the user the ability to manually readjust the HSI for a correct bearing. As far as I know there is absolutely no way to do that currently. All this feature has done is effectively made the HSI useless. Any navigational instrument that is regularly off by as much as this gauge now is in the Frogfoot would certainly ground the aircraft. A realistic drift is something on par of a couple of degrees or so. While you're at it, why not add the ability to manually adjust the course needle too?

The topic pretty much says it all. :D How about having a weather option for high altitude cirrus clouds. I think this would add some attractive atmospheric effect to the game. The clouds we have right now can only be defined as low or middle altitude clouds.

I create a lot of full scale multiplayer battle maps for LOMAC. Having an option for ground units to respawn after X minutes of being destroyed would add a lot to these types of missions. The problem I've been having with some of my full-scale multiplayer missions is that many pilots decide to completely ignore their objectives or their target box assigned in the brief, and instead make it a point to join the game and methodically destroy every single emitting radar on the map whether it has any relevance to their real mission or not. Once this is achieved the balance of territory for any pilots just joining the game is thrown way off centre, and IMHO the real-life feel of immersion for the map is destroyed for the side that has now wiped out all the enemy radars. Having a ground unit respawn option would allow SEAD-freaks to still play the game, but it would also allow me to run a dedicated mission of this sort with some well defined Red/Blue territories for very long extended periods of time.

No Score for Static Objects In v1.02 destroying static ground units would count towards your score, however that appears to have disappeared in v1.1. I use a lot of static objects (tanks, jets, helos, bunkers, etc.) in some of my CAS and/or strike missions to save resources. I have already had a few pilots express their disappointment at no longer seeing these objects show up in their score tally.

Nevermind I think I figured it out...

I have a few old 1.02 missions that I am editing for 1.1. My trouble is that I've classified these missions in the past, but I would like to allow pilots to change their payloads in 1.1. Is there any way to permanently declassify a mission? The declassify option only works if you know the password, it doesn't actually remove the password from the mission.

The charts are correct, but I don't think it represents a combat payload. It has been said a few times before that these pylon 3 and 9 TERs CAN carry three mavericks, but it is only done for transport purposes. Actually trying to launch a maverick from the inner post of the TERs can cause unwanted damage to the landing gear system. Pilots tend to not like sabotaging their own ability to get home safely.

Ya that was one of the first features I noticed in 1.1... no more of that silly background azimuth panning, the azimuth limit circle indicators at the bottom now correctly pan right and left instead. Though I still think the elevation limit circle indicators on the left side of the F-15's radar are modeled incorrectly. I think they should represent your relative radar altitude elevation limits, right now they represent your absolute radar altitude elevation limits and climb up the side of the radar as you gain altitude, which is completely redundant since that information is already given by the altitude number in thousands of feet displayed next to them. If they represented your relative limits, much like the azimuth limit circles now do (and used the whole left side of the radar instead of just the top half), it would give you a much quicker understanding of your radar's elevation gimbal limits, and to what degree up or down you radar is currently looking. That's how they worked in all the Jane's sims... the circles' relative elevation position in combination with the absolute altitude displayed gives you more information on where your radar is looking with respect to yourself. Not a major issue by any stretch, but if it turns out to be an easy one to fix, then why not? :D

It's done that since at least 1.01. :confused:

Here's another... The EOS sensor, which now seems impossibly slow to slew up and down (I've no idea if that part was intentional or not) automatically levels itself when you change its azimuth. In other words, if you're looking high and to the front, and then switch your azimuth to the left, you are instantly looking level and to the left.

Here's another that may or may not have been mentioned... In the Russian birds, TWS will automatically transition back to BVR when a jammer strobe appears on the HUD. There is no need to try to lock or bug the strobe, all you need is a jammer appearing within your radar's field of view and you're kicked out of TWS.

This thread is enormous and I don't have the time to go through it all to see if this obvious one has already been mentioned... so here it is again in case you already know. :D The HSI in the Su-25T will often not match the bearing ticker on the HUD by as much as 180 degrees. The HUD bearing appears to be the correct one.