Jump to content

Flying in the mountains in FC3 - is it wack?


vicx

Recommended Posts

I don't dogfight online but recently I am watching a lot of videos on youtube of action from DCS multplayer servers.

 

It seems to be that the jets pop up in the mountains, get lock, fire and then it gets silly.

 

Jets start flying defensive but in a very unrealistic "looking" fashion. They do CRAZY angles over the terrain, scrape paint on polygons and flying inverted with less than 5m metres of clearance over peaks into 45 degree inverted dives into very short valleys on the other side.

 

I know that in real life pilots would use the terrain BUT would they they do it like it is done in DCS. Or has the simple triangle terrain in DCS created this wacky style of flying which doesn't exist IRL.

 

Triangle shaped mountains don't have much variation which means the angles are fairly simple and predictable to fly which leads to quite unrealistic forms of terrain hugging. Agree or disagree?

 

Or is that that the speed of the aircraft is such that adding more detailed geometry would not change the angles much at all.

 

What would happen if you added more geometry to mountains. If there were subpeaks, spurs, ridges, rocky outcrops, hillocks and valleys with more twists; would people still be flying the same angles?


Edited by vicx
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Virtual flying will always differ to some extent to real tactics because you have the minor inconvenience of respawning rather than the larger inconveniece of being dead when you push your luck. vpilots are not averse to dancing with the virtual grim reaper, whatever the context.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]



64th "Scorpions" Aggressor Squadron

Discord: 64th Aggressor Squadron

TS: 195.201.110.22

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am guilty to this sort of flying. (please Blaze don't slap me :p) But that's more because we are playing air to air death match instead of long range interdiction strikes. Or CAP with a meaning. Until we get semi realistic multiplayer scenario's i just see this as good fun.

Go in close, and when you think you are too close, go in closer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Back in the early 90's I watched two pilots from the Jaguar Conversion Unit doing low level runs through Glen Beanie. When they had to cross a ridge their method was to roll inverted and pull g into the valley over the top of the ridge before going 90 degree bank angle into the valley and then rolling back upright. It was so low I could look up and see the knee boards on the flight suit, certainly lower then 200ft off the ridge. I was told that this method minimsed their exposure time to threats when they had to cross the ridge and meant they pulled g rather then a g pushover. Was bloody impressive to watch.

 

Check out some of the Mach Loop videos on YouTube of the RAF flying the Welsh valleys. It can get pretty extreme. You havn't lived until you've seen a C130 flying below you in a valley :-).

 

Also some of the GR1 pilots in Desert Storm flew operationally down to 20ft through sand dunes. That their TFR couldn't detect. Balls of steel required for that.


Edited by dotChuckles

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Humm does this look like what you watched on dcs youtube?

 

 

 


Edited by pr1malr8ge

For the WIN

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

If your desired effect on the target is making the pilot defecate his pants laughing then you can definitely achieve it with a launch like that.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Humm does this look like what you watched on dcs youtube?

 

Great video! Thanks pr1mal. That is what I was looking for.

 

*edit* Just watched the F-16 video ... wow it seems like he takes forever to hit those trees after lining them up but on second view that tree is on a rocky outcrop and it does stick out a bit from the ridge outline. Interesting ... *edit*

 

That first video shows that the flying techniques are the same in principle. The digital flying for the most part is more extreme due to the "no respawns" in real life idea that Rage mentioned. It seems like adding extra geometry to the mountains in DCS would increase the height that people fly by a small factor (20-40m on average maybe) and take a few more scalps. I think it would change the player experience in subtle way. Only a small thing but adding some extra randomness.

 

So overall mission design and server settings are much more important but maybe enhancements to the terrain add some extra elements that you have to account for.

 

I think for online fighters - a dedicated linux server (on the DCS roadmap after version 2.0 is released) and enhancements to mission scripting for multi-player purposes are more important than new maps but maybe higher detailed terrain will turn out to be interesting.


Edited by vicx
Just watched F-16 tree hit
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't dogfight online but recently I am watching a lot of videos on youtube of action from DCS multplayer servers.

 

It seems to be that the jets pop up in the mountains, get lock, fire and then it gets silly.

 

Jets start flying defensive but in a very unrealistic "looking" fashion. They do CRAZY angles over the terrain, scrape paint on polygons and flying inverted with less than 5m metres of clearance over peaks into 45 degree inverted dives into very short valleys on the other side.

 

I know that in real life pilots would use the terrain BUT would they they do it like it is done in DCS. Or has the simple triangle terrain in DCS created this wacky style of flying which doesn't exist IRL.

 

Triangle shaped mountains don't have much variation which means the angles are fairly simple and predictable to fly which leads to quite unrealistic forms of terrain hugging. Agree or disagree?

 

Or is that that the speed of the aircraft is such that adding more detailed geometry would not change the angles much at all.

 

What would happen if you added more geometry to mountains. If there were subpeaks, spurs, ridges, rocky outcrops, hillocks and valleys with more twists; would people still be flying the same angles?

Are you serious? Do you really think fighter pilots is flying low and still counts the rocks on the ground? No, the ground will look quit narrow and blurry in 600 knots I bet. The pilot will not see any details at all.

 

Regarding the evasive maneuvers in low altitude you must take in to account that all fighter pilots in peace time have restrictions on their flying. In this SIM all pilots are at WAR! The will do whatever possible to survive. That would a pilot in real life also, believe me, every frikkin move he knows and don't know he will use to survive if enemy on six. :thumbup:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The will do whatever possible to survive.

 

Yes gamers and real pilots use every advantage because it is in our nature.

 

This video posted by Primal shows something never would happen in DCS. The profile of the ridge looks OK but the ridge is uneven and a random outcrop with a tree on it catches out the pilot in the F-16. So is clear that in the real world the randomness of terrain creates much more risk for low flying.

 

 

My question is. Would more random terrain in DCS would make flying low harder and make the game better. I'm not talking about things that only affect look ... I talk about terrain features that can explode your plane or give you a near death experience like the pilot of the F-16.

 

Before watching the F-16 video I thought maybe it does not matter if DCS has trees you can fly though and that there are no randomness in the mountain ridge. After watching the F-16 video I think it does matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am guilty to this sort of flying. (please Blaze don't slap me :p) But that's more because we are playing air to air death match instead of long range interdiction strikes. Or CAP with a meaning. Until we get semi realistic multiplayer scenario's i just see this as good fun.

 

What puzzles me is why should anyone feel "guilty" about flying the sim the way they want to fly.

 

To some people it seems very important that others play the game the way they want it to be played. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What puzzles me is why should anyone feel "guilty" about flying the sim the way they want to fly.

 

To some people it seems very important that others play the game the way they want it to be played. :)

 

Probably because exploiting simulation makes more game and less sim.

 

For example if landing without gear down gave you instant refuel, weapons and new gear you'd soon tell the gamers from the simmers.

Nothing related to you or your incident btw. :)

"[51☭] FROSTIE" #55

51st PVO "BISONS"

Fastest MiG pilot in the world - TCR'10

https://100kiap.org

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not really feeling guilty Stuge. But thank you for your concern :)

I don't really care how people think i fly. As long as i and them have fun it's okay to me. I only care about the server rules and not annoying others. But i will start to behave more realistic if the mission will start to behave more realistically. The day that i can enter a MP server, setup a detailed plan and go for a high stake sortie, land and can do that all again with another target in the same mission while everything is moving dynamically, i will burst out in tears and thank the DCS gods.

Go in close, and when you think you are too close, go in closer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As long as i and them have fun it's okay to me. I only care about the server rules and not annoying others.

 

Much like my golf game; do what you want, just don't be a pain to those playing around you.

[sIGPIC]http://i306.photobucket.com/albums/nn266/JINX1391/jinx%20f99th%20sig_zps2hgu4xsl.png[/sIGPIC]

 

"90% of the people who actually got to fly the F/A-18C

module there (E3 2017) have never even heard of DCS

or are otherwise totally undeserving pieces of trash."

-Pyromanic4002

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probably because exploiting simulation makes more game and less sim.

 

For example if landing without gear down gave you instant refuel, weapons and new gear you'd soon tell the gamers from the simmers.

Nothing related to you or your incident btw. :)

 

Lol :)

 

I know what you mean Frostie. But drawing a line between what's an exploit and what's not can be difficult sometimes, and people have differing opinions about these.

 

Personally I have nothing against "powerplaying", using all advantages possible provided by the game, realistic or not, since I lean towards that approach myself. So I'm more gamer, less simmer, so what? :) Powerplaying is not cheating. If there are exploits, using these should be forbidden in server rules. If there is a feature that is not realistic, that is not my problem, just a lacking in the game.

 

Of course even I draw a line somewhere: abusing things like the air refueling bug are obviously out of the question :)

 

And to Winchester I know you weren't serious I just used your comment to make a point :P

 

I don't want to be overly negative but the fact is many people who complain about these "exploits" and how they can be unfair and so on... use mods! Mods that affect graphics, visibility, audio, cockpits etc. In my opinion mods can really provide an unfair advantage to players, yet they seem to be perfectly accepted within the community, many going unchecked in integrity checks.


Edited by Stuge
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not really surprising the pilot of that F-16 says he noticed no trim change being required, FBW can hide the effects of minor control/flight surface damage since it automatically will put the control surfaces where ever they need to go to maintain the yaw/pitch/roll rates commanded.

 

Still it's amazing that his engine kept running, if the rumours are true about an F-16 module in the works I wonder if they'll include the hide light damage nature of FBW.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welcome to the world of flying online, where normal rules don't apply and people do unrealistic stuff all the time.

i7-4820k @ 3.7, Windows 7 64-bit, 16GB 1866mhz EVGA GTX 970 2GB, 256GB SSD, 500GB WD, TM Warthog, TM Cougar MFD's, Saitek Combat Pedals, TrackIR 5, G15 keyboard, 55" 4K LED

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People do unrealistic stuff because it works. The leading cause of death in DCS online is eating a slammer you didn't notice until it went pitbull, so many guys tend to fly low and stay in the mountains to deny F-15 drivers their advantage in BVR, especially those who fly russian jets. They aren't constrained by realistic tasking, no airspace or HVTs to defend, no strikers to escort, it's just team deathmatch in many servers.

 

I don't think realistic behavior has worked very well in real life for any airforce facing the Eagle in combat, so you're better off trying something different.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In any kind of sim, we all have the luxury of not taking it as seriously as we could or "should".

Even when I was newer to the game way back, I knew that all the really "realistic" gameplay would come from squadrons of people who are all looking for it, but when it comes to phoenix server, people just hop in takeoff and get into the fray.

 

Also it's sort of everyone just wanting combat and kills, when I first played online on phoenix I flew in a more reasonable manner I suppose, higher altitude. But after getting killed by a couple spamraams from f-15s peaking over mountains firing off one or two actives then using terrain for cover I eventually joined in the mountain dog fighting.

Mind you not everyone does this, there are plenty of people flying at high altitude (And usually in a squadron, who woulda thunk it?) That will go around hunting ground strikers or anything that gets in their way.

 

Personally I don't mind the mountain flying, it gets a bit old I suppose, but for servers that absolutely anyone of any skill level can hop on and fight, it's kinda expected that mountainous flying is from the birth of gamer intuition. (Or incompetence possibly?)

 

It also evens out the playing field for aircraft that suffer more in BVR compared to the eagle. (For now)

Why F-15s even go mountain flying is beyond me, close range is su-27 territory, although personally I like to see if I can outmaneuver something that is much more agile than I.

 

But funnily enough real "turn fight" dog fighting in mountains is pretty rare, it's usually the pilot whoever has the greatest awareness, meeting the pilot who is unaware, and then the aware pilot proceeds to fire a heater up their butt. To be fair though, mountain fighting is pretty unpredictable and intense seeing as enemies can pop up from anywhere from any direction and you'll have to visually identify them before they kill you. It's almost like combat in that area is sort of RNG.


Edited by IJN Nagato
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...