S77th-GOYA Posted March 20, 2006 Posted March 20, 2006 Kuz will often lock but not fire on attackers in MP ARH maddog warning is too short small SAMs ignoring >Mach1 targets 15 TWS locks not centering on primary SAMs with more lock range on a receding target than an approaching target US AWACS needs to be reworked. It's more of a hindrance than a help. Textures not appearing soon enough in magnified seeker/Shkval MiG-29 can reach Mach 2.4 when max should be much slower F-15 can't reach Mach 2.5 or 2.4 for that matter MiG-29 should be able to carry 6 R-77s A-10 loadout should be corrected Tunguska is available to Ukraine only in MSB 1990, not as a single unit In F-15 TWS mode, target reappears in the position in which it was first locked if lock is broken. F-15 is missing its IFF interrogator mp_log.txt lacks complete debrief info and mission goals And for a change, I'm not even going to mention the F-15 navigation bug. :D
Pilotasso Posted March 20, 2006 Posted March 20, 2006 -The AMRAAM should be further tweaked so it wont be virtualy blind when looking down. Right now the Sparrow outclasses it in this scenario. -TWS should have the antenna automaticaly centered on target within its gimbal limits. This is what is causing the "disapearing act" by the targets, because if you are skillfull and fast enough you can maintan the target locked in TWS mode under 10 miles in look down. Its very tricky and shouldnt be a burdain as it is now to operate it. .
Kindred Posted March 20, 2006 Posted March 20, 2006 All the above, but also, the annoying TrackIr bug.
Gazehound Posted March 20, 2006 Posted March 20, 2006 EOS/Radar logic needs updating so you can prevent radar coming on if heat signature is faded (if you want). VVS504 Red Hammers
Outlaw24 Posted March 20, 2006 Posted March 20, 2006 -The AMRAAM should be further tweaked so it wont be virtualy blind when looking down. Right now the Sparrow outclasses it in this scenario. -TWS should have the antenna automaticaly centered on target within its gimbal limits. This is what is causing the "disapearing act" by the targets, because if you are skillfull and fast enough you can maintan the target locked in TWS mode under 10 miles in look down. Its very tricky and shouldnt be a burdain as it is now to operate it. I'm in total agreement, the problems with the 120's really needs to be addressed, currently they're almost useless, especially when encountering ground clutter. Spoiler: MSI Z790 Carbon WIFI, i9 14900KF, 64GB DDR4, MSI RTX 4090, VKB STECS Mk ll throttle, VKB Gunfighter Ultimate MCG Pro w/200mm Extension, Winwing Orion Rudder Pedals W/damper, Wingwin Monitors/MFD's, UTC MK II Pro, Virpil TCS Plus Collective, MSI 34" QD-OLED @240Hz monitor, Samsung 970 Pro M2 2TB (for DCS), Playseat Air Force Seat, KW-980 Jetseat, Vaicom Pro, Tek Creations panels and controllers.
Prophet_169th Posted March 20, 2006 Posted March 20, 2006 ARH maddog warning is too short It has been suggested that this is too long for AMRAAM. The AMRAAM turns active as close to the target as possible. small SAMs ignoring >Mach1 targets Possibly too fast for the small SAMs? Tunguska is available to Ukraine only in MSB 1990, not as a single unit I think this is because the Tung is set in the Complex Unit. The UKR is not assigned the Tung, but is assigned the MSB1990. I am not sure which is correct.
Brit_Radar_Dude Posted March 20, 2006 Posted March 20, 2006 The UKR is not assigned the Tung, but is assigned the MSB1990. Had a quick search on t'InterWeb, found a site that said Ukraine has the Tung.... [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Sorry Death, you lose! It was Professor Plum....
bflagg Posted March 20, 2006 Posted March 20, 2006 What about the TWS or SST with a 120 will miss more often than just a releasing the 120 without radar on? Fly the 15 quick mission --the two 23 coming at you from 9'oclock --go to TWS mode, bug both (if you can).. wait till 7-10nm to fire. ...........it will miss a high percentage of the time (both usually miss if you can bug both targets) Same situation for SST mode. Now... don't turn on radar... visually line up the shot... *use tws for range, then shut it down once in range (same as above)*. now fire the 120. == you will shoot them down.... ... at least more often than above... I would figure with a SST lock at 10-15nm the probability of a kill would be good.... or even so with TWS. But both at shorter range missing alot?..... somethings wrong.... Thanks, Brett
Shepski Posted March 20, 2006 Posted March 20, 2006 What missile slider setting are you guys using in these findings?
bflagg Posted March 20, 2006 Posted March 20, 2006 Hi shep.. usually from default to 3/4 up..... Thanks, Brett
Trident Posted March 20, 2006 Posted March 20, 2006 LOL! ED needs to get rid of that missile effectiveness slider IMHO - I don't think it ever worked as advertised and caused many a bug headache.
Shepski Posted March 20, 2006 Posted March 20, 2006 LOL! ED needs to get rid of that missile effectiveness slider IMHO - I don't think it ever worked as advertised and caused many a bug headache. I agree completely... I wish it wasn't there either. bflagg... I just ran a quick test(3 engagements)... missile slider at defualt(I have never moved it ever) F-15 quick start mission... TWS bug of both Su-17s... launch at 8.0nm(top of RTR) 1 - 2 kills 2 - 2 kills 3 - 1 kill Those seem like pretty good results to me... I would never expect 100% on each and every eangagement because the AI evasive maneuvers are different with each engagement.
Outlaw24 Posted March 20, 2006 Posted March 20, 2006 What missile slider setting are you guys using in these findings? I'm using the default setting. Spoiler: MSI Z790 Carbon WIFI, i9 14900KF, 64GB DDR4, MSI RTX 4090, VKB STECS Mk ll throttle, VKB Gunfighter Ultimate MCG Pro w/200mm Extension, Winwing Orion Rudder Pedals W/damper, Wingwin Monitors/MFD's, UTC MK II Pro, Virpil TCS Plus Collective, MSI 34" QD-OLED @240Hz monitor, Samsung 970 Pro M2 2TB (for DCS), Playseat Air Force Seat, KW-980 Jetseat, Vaicom Pro, Tek Creations panels and controllers.
Shepski Posted March 20, 2006 Posted March 20, 2006 I'm using the default setting. What are you testing your ground clutter bug theory against? If it's the missile itself then it should be very weak against any target in a look down situation correct? I just did a test... Me at 7000m 3 IL-76 at 1000m I fired one AMRAAM at each target in TWS mode all from well outside RTR and got a hit on all 3 Candids. That tells me it's not the missile. If you are having problems against fighters then it's the evasive maneuvers and notching that are defeating the AMRAAM.
D-Scythe Posted March 20, 2006 Posted March 20, 2006 The problem is, though, that it's either the notching or the chaff that is defeating the AMRAAM in LOMAC. IRL, the only way to defeat an AMRAAM is notching and chaff combined. In fact, this is an issue with all doppler radar missiles. It's a major issue that should be fixed, as it affects gameplay adversely. And it doesn't seem to me to be a particularly hard fix either. I don't know why ED doesn't do anything about it.
bflagg Posted March 20, 2006 Posted March 20, 2006 I agree completely... I wish it wasn't there either. bflagg... I just ran a quick test(3 engagements)... missile slider at defualt(I have never moved it ever) F-15 quick start mission... TWS bug of both Su-17s... launch at 8.0nm(top of RTR) 1 - 2 kills 2 - 2 kills 3 - 1 kill Those seem like pretty good results to me... I would never expect 100% on each and every eangagement because the AI evasive maneuvers are different with each engagement. Hi shep.. I never get these results, unless I let the 120 fly with out tws or sst lock... I'll make a trk file when I get home and post it.... (btw.. thanks for doing this...) Thanks, Brett
Dudikoff Posted March 20, 2006 Posted March 20, 2006 small SAMs ignoring >Mach1 targets What do you mean by "small SAMs"? I know there's often the max. target speed quoted for shoulder launched SAMs. It's between 300-400 m/s usually, depending on the missile system. It should be fine-tuned, though, and not the fixed value for all shoulder-launched SAMs. i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg. DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?). Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!
Shepski Posted March 20, 2006 Posted March 20, 2006 Hi shep.. I never get these results, unless I let the 120 fly with out tws or sst lock... I'll make a trk file when I get home and post it.... (btw.. thanks for doing this...) No worries... what missile slider setting will you use? I'll make a track too.
egaRim Posted March 20, 2006 Posted March 20, 2006 Hi shep.. usually from default to 3/4 up..... he already said it :)
S77th-GOYA Posted March 20, 2006 Author Posted March 20, 2006 What do you mean by "small SAMs"? I know there's often the max. target speed quoted for shoulder launched SAMs. It's between 300-400 m/s usually, depending on the missile system. It should be fine-tuned, though, and not the fixed value for all shoulder-launched SAMs. http://forum.lockon.ru/showthread.php?t=13523
Boneski Posted March 20, 2006 Posted March 20, 2006 ? If IRL means In Real Life... then you know something that a lot of people don't know. It's a major mistake to even try to compare game dynamics to real world dynamics. The 120 is a good stick... but the 7 is far better... as it should be. The problem is, though, that it's either the notching or the chaff that is defeating the AMRAAM in LOMAC. IRL, the only way to defeat an AMRAAM is notching and chaff combined. In fact, this is an issue with all doppler radar missiles. It's a major issue that should be fixed, as it affects gameplay adversely. And it doesn't seem to me to be a particularly hard fix either. I don't know why ED doesn't do anything about it. My mission is to fly, fight, and win. o-:|:-o What I do is sometimes get a tin of soup, heat it up, poach an egg in it, serve that with a pork pie sausage roll.
D-Scythe Posted March 20, 2006 Posted March 20, 2006 If IRL means In Real Life... then you know something that a lot of people don't know. It's a major mistake to even try to compare game dynamics to real world dynamics. Yeah...it's called DOPPLER ;) Look it up. The 120 is a good stick... but the 7 is far better... as it should be. Considering that the AMRAAM is designed to be superior to the AIM-7 in every single way possible, I fail to see how this is the case. LOL, AIM-7 is far better...as it should be. You crack me up :D
Shepski Posted March 20, 2006 Posted March 20, 2006 small SAMs ignoring >Mach1 targets I think, in regards to any optically guided and Mk 1 eyeball acquired IR SAM, if you approach supersonic, by the time the little Igla dude or strela operator would realize you were there you'd be gone by and he wouldn't have a hope of acquiring you. A shilka's limited acquisition range would also be too short to pick you and react while blowing by supersonic. It's possible that Eagle is taking into account these factors. Imagine yourself... a supersonic jet approaches you low level... you would have no clue it was there until it had blown over and was far gone... not to mention the complete disorientation you'd experience including the shockwave effects and pain of blown ear drums. :)
Recommended Posts