snomhf Posted March 23, 2006 Posted March 23, 2006 GGT, So are you saying that this TWS behavior that Kula is citing is not necessarily a bug but an anomaly (beam, jam, etc) and would be something a RL pilot would expect to see? In the cases I've seen, leaving the cone just does not seem a reasonable possibility. My SDT was at 32k when he disappeared and my range was at 40 showing 5-42 [i'm guessing a bit here but I think I'm close] He was pretty close to 32k when he reappeared. I cannot believe he climbed 10k in the few seconds he was gone from the scope and would come back to that alt upon reappearing. That leaves beaming or jamming I suppose but if he were jamming, wouldn't I be able to see that? I didn't think I could break a lock by simply beaming unless I was able to fly outside the cone. This really doesn't make sense to me. I'm not meaning to argue with you here, just trying to understand. ---------- Click here for details ---------- Abit AV8 MB, AMD Athlon 64 3200+, 1.5 GB DDR, GeForce 6600GT/256MB AGP, CH Fighterstick/Pro Throttle/Pro Pedals/Throttle Quad/DT225 Trackball, TIR4
Cosmonaut Posted March 23, 2006 Posted March 23, 2006 You can break a lock by beaming.. Also in TWS mode you can loose a target that has suddenly changed direction, speed, alt, etc. .. has to do with the refresh time between scans.. not saying its part of the original posters query though… Cozmo. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Minimum effort, maximum satisfaction. CDDS Tutorial Version 3. | Main Screen Mods.
GGTharos Posted March 23, 2006 Posted March 23, 2006 Well, if he didn't leave the cone that leaves jamming and beaming. If he started beaming, you should be able to tell (you would see him turning to the perpendicular. He could have -also- turned around, and you cannot pick up a tail-on fighter at 40nm, IIRC - if you were below him he cannot beam you, but he can take on an espect that still makes it impossible to track him, depending on range. Jamming can break the lock, and you might not see it ... esp. with an SDT ... it's another small issue to do with jamming, though not -entirely- unrealistic from some things I've heard (and at the same time, not entirely realistic either) ... mind that I won't go into detail on the jamming part as it results in annoying online behavior; let's just say there's a lot more to it than what I've said. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
Rhen Posted March 23, 2006 Posted March 23, 2006 Yep ... it's a PITA. Potential work-around for now: Reduce the azimuth to get a faster scan rate and re-establish your contact faster. Thanks for the suggestion, I've tried this, but unfortunately it's only a "decently functional" workaround, as some of the guys I fly with pince on occasion and that would require me to drop targets at my gimbal limits - especially the good ones who are at both gimbal limits (I hate committing early ;) ). I have adjusted other tactics, as you say. Going co-altitude is also a "decently functional" workaround as the look-down/shoot-down capability of the F-15 radar isn't as poor as it is in LOMAC (but of course, it's one of the strengths the Eagle is known for). When "properly" employed, the Eagle usually stays "above it all" and doesn't have to get down to the bandit's level to ensure target lock(s) and guidance of missile(s). It' just is disheartening that "real world tactics" require much modification in this Eagle, all of these modifications put the Eagle in greater jeopardy, thus equalizing the fight (obviously no good fighter pilot wants an equal fight - he wants an unfair fight in his advantage).
GGTharos Posted March 23, 2006 Posted March 23, 2006 I know that eagles 'go down there' when they need do but yes, you'll get no argument from me here. I want the eagle and the missiles fixed up also ... I merely understand why a bunch of that isn't happening. I can assure you though, that it isn't about an equal fight. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
Rhen Posted March 23, 2006 Posted March 23, 2006 GGT, So are you saying that this TWS behavior that Kula is citing is not necessarily a bug but an anomaly (beam, jam, etc) and would be something a RL pilot would expect to see? In the cases I've seen, leaving the cone just does not seem a reasonable possibility. My SDT was at 32k when he disappeared and my range was at 40 showing 5-42 [i'm guessing a bit here but I think I'm close] He was pretty close to 32k when he reappeared. I cannot believe he climbed 10k in the few seconds he was gone from the scope and would come back to that alt upon reappearing. That leaves beaming or jamming I suppose but if he were jamming, wouldn't I be able to see that? I didn't think I could break a lock by simply beaming unless I was able to fly outside the cone. This really doesn't make sense to me. I'm not meaning to argue with you here, just trying to understand. Unfortunately in LOMAC you've got a lot to do in managing the radar - it's almost a full-time job! As the contact gets closer he's either flying out of the upper elevation limit or the lower elevation limit of the radar cone. Next time you design a mission, lock up a target at range - oh let's say 60nm, and then cycle through the range displays at 80, 40, 20, & 10 and observe the elevation limits of each display. This is what the bandit's taking advantage of for you to break your lock. YOu've got to constantly fine-tune the display to maximize the cone elevation limits when you're searching for something, then you can either fine-tune it so the bandit's painted more often thus increasing your updates, but also risking the possibility of not seeing his wingman who's lower and now not in your cone, ready to slap you with a heater. It's all about using what you've got to work with. The pilot workload in this Eagle is much higher than IRL.
Rhen Posted March 24, 2006 Posted March 24, 2006 I know that eagles 'go down there' when they need do but yes, you'll get no argument from me here. I want the eagle and the missiles fixed up also ... I merely understand why a bunch of that isn't happening. I can assure you though, that it isn't about an equal fight. I appreciate that, and can only assume you're right about the modeling not being about equalizing the playing field. I just get hot under the collar when it's all left to languish because it's "decently functional". While I advocate for the Eagle, I'm also suggesting that the MiG and Su's get fixed up as well, however my theoretical knowledge of them is much more than my hands-on knowledge when it comes to them. Fighter pilots (US/NATO) of the LOMAC era respected the capabability of their "Soviet" counterparts and knew that the kill ratio had to be in our favor just to survive. If we couldn't kill them 10:1 then by sheer numbers (not just their skill and expertise) we would be in for a serious world of hurt. So, we played to our strengths and their weaknesses. What I'm seeing is that these historic strenghts and weaknesses have been equalized on both sides, perhaps not intentionally, but it's affecting the tactics that we use and making LOMAC overall feel (online) more arcadish rather than like a sim. If i wanted to play a FPS, i'd go do that. I'm more interested in LOMAC and hope that it doesn't become more like a FPS than a place where we can learn what it's like to be/re-live/or practice real-world tactics against thinking, breathing human beings of like-minded thought.
Prophet_169th Posted March 24, 2006 Posted March 24, 2006 Ok, "decently functional" huh? It's like saying the LOMAC F-15 is just like the real one - just like the F-22 is just like a piper cub with an AK-47, but that's an exaggeration to make a point. If I can employ the F-15 just like i would if I jumped into the real thing and flew a 4-ship, using the same tactics, and came out successful then I'd agree. However "decently functional" is hardly acceptable. While I will still continue to fly the F-15 and use the slammer in online combat, despite the faults inherent in the Eagle and the continued deterioration of its radar systems and it's ability to perform to its historic strengths -which are diminishing rapidly with each patch, eventually I'll move on. But until then, I'll still be one of your statistics who haven't realized that flying the Eagle is futile. I can only hope that it's lack of data link, which allow adversaries to stab it in the back, or the fact that I can get better kills from firing maddogs rather than providing guidance to the missile until it can go active, thus negating it's strength in maintaining it's adversaries at arms length - i must invite people into the phonebooth to fight, where I get to practice my body position for ejection and PLF as i hit the ground in the silk elevator. I'd like the F-15, Su-27, MiG-29 become more capable to their inherent strengths, so that they may be utilized the way a real pilot would employ their weapons. Sorry, but "decently functional" = "it's good enough for you" and then why should ED improve on anything within the sim; It's all decently functional, right? Yeah, they just shouldnt have even made it..... Like I said. Its a Flanker Successor. The F15 is completely different than the Su27. By decently acceptable I mean you have the main systems available. You have a more than functional HUD, you have a functional radar with most of the available modes, you got the system stores on the other. Like GG said, "I merely understand why a bunch of that isn't happening"
Kula66 Posted March 24, 2006 Author Posted March 24, 2006 Yeah, they just shouldnt have even made it..... I presume that comment is tongue in cheek ... they did a great job! But from a great start, not much has been added to the 15 over the various patches/upgrades ... and now ... Its just frustrating when a patch/upgrade brakes something so fundamental as the primary operating mode of the sensor in the only Western fighter ... My original question still stands ... if or hopefully when is it going to get fixed? This really really needs fixing ED!
bflagg Posted March 24, 2006 Posted March 24, 2006 as you can see... it's been just over 2 weeks and no response from ED. I think it's safe to say ... it's not going to get fixed and they are focusing only a BS. Thanks, Brett
Kula66 Posted March 24, 2006 Author Posted March 24, 2006 Yes ... thats my feeling too ... great shame :(
Rhen Posted March 24, 2006 Posted March 24, 2006 Yeah, they just shouldnt have even made it...... Well! What a witty reply! I'm quite impressed by your humor.... Thanks for the DUH! moment. I can appreciate that - at least.:p Look, obviously you aren't one of those people who fly the Eagle - which is fine since if everyone flew the Eagle, then we couldn't fly against the MiGs or Su's. But liberally slathering your comments with bull and blowing sunshine up my posterior sphincter with your wonderful comments on giving us a HUD (how gracious!) or a way to view my stores (wonderful!) or the fact the at the F-15 has a radar (marvelous!) and wings for that matter (Stupendous!) and I should live with that? Well, ok. I guess i have to, but that doesn't stop me or YOU for that matter in complaining about something that's not modeled appropriately or inhibits your enjoyment of the sim. The sim is a product, and while i am enamored with the product overall, I nevertheless will continue to point out things that are a mutual concern for myself and others who share my disappointment in some aspects of the sim (notice i didn't say game? :) ). So, while I value your opinion and will continue to learn from your knowledge of how things work in this sim, please don't try to mollify me with comments about things being "decently functional" and - paraprasing - "live with it." I'm already living with it, i just wish they would spend some time fixing it too. My opinion - obviously not yours. Like GG said, "I merely understand why a bunch of that isn't happening" That's nice to know. I'm glad you understand. So do we. Does that make us members of the same club now? :p BTW, since we understand why the fixes aren't happening, it still does not obligate us to being happy with it.
zoot Posted March 30, 2006 Posted March 30, 2006 im new to LOMAC 1.12a, but Ive been flying sims with TWS since janes f15 [although f/a18 was my favorite] and I have to say this TWS bug about losing track and having the ghost go to original position and the bug with losing track and not being able to reaquire is seriously disappointing [i am flying with labels so I know I am aiming the radar correctly]. I wish I had checked these board out before I bought it. I'll keep it but I would not have gotten it if I had known about the Radar bugs. as was said earlier-- a SERIOUS PITA :mad:
Recommended Posts