Jump to content

Modelling of stationary air defenses


VFA15-Juliet

Recommended Posts

Well ME is good enough as long as there are assets specific to terrain / country. Besides placing SAM battery on a flat texture and without masking doesn't add to simulation at all. Think about stationary positions with revets, bunkers or simply terrain elevation modified by and for the purpose of military. Iran is pretty straight forward with its fortifications...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi. Thanks. I know all that. You kind of missing the point here...

 

If we missed the point then you haven't thoroughly nor clearly presented your "point" or intent to your audience.

Win 10 Pro 64Bit | 49" UWHD AOC 5120x1440p | AMD 5900x | 64Gb DDR4 | RX 6900XT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

An image is worth thousand words ...

 

You still leave it open for interpretation. ED doesn't add these assets to the map; you as the mission designer add assets to the map as you so chose.

 

Why would things be different on the Persian Gulf Map versus others? Why do you want to be restricted to having assets at fixed locations on the map for every possible scenario you could think to have?

 

ED has already indicated that they are working on SAM assets for Iran... You will be able to place then at your leisure...

Win 10 Pro 64Bit | 49" UWHD AOC 5120x1440p | AMD 5900x | 64Gb DDR4 | RX 6900XT

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was nothing permanent in that picture. Just some sand berms, and a few dirt track ways with a few mobile SAM units does not a permanent emplacement make.

 

I would like to see something like a full SAM site modelled, but definitely baked onto the maps. Perhaps some berms designed for specific SAM assets, and the ability to overlay tracks and camouflage overlays would be great.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think the people with 8GB of RAM would thank E.D. for hard baking SAM sites in WAY over the other side of the map.

 

I do think some place-able revetments would be a good idea though...

 

I have difficulties to think why does any ground unit really require more RAM...

 

  • You don't need to load all the assets data to RAM until player is near the area
  • You don't need to do checkings for units before player is near area.
  • You don't need to even run full AI logic before player is near area.

 

Lots of the things should be simulated by average numbers, instead really running them.

 

It was amazing what old simulators did at 90's with a far more units on dynamic campaign.

Because many more basic things were done to save the complex tasks where it matters.

Like if a SAM site is 70km from your location, there is no need to model almost anything. Maybe a smoke trail, that likely no one would see anyways. No 3D models popping up. No rotations etc.

Just follow the logic of timing of the launch. So when in playback then it is loaded correctly. If there is observer, they get it on their screen but not on pilot.

 

If 100km from the A to B route there is colonna of 20 units driving, there is not a reason what so ever to model those units before player is anywhere near. Just have the map show some symbols in the simulated time position and spawn models and AI logic there only if it is really required. But now if you add units there, every unit is doing the scanning of surrounding, line of sight, speed, terrain shape and form, checks for the scripts etc. So add some units and quickly CPU starts to scream as so much is wasted for the "It is there".

 

 

So the world map should be possible be filled with tens of thousands of ground units, without really impact to the performance as all that is just a information before started to render and to do the more complex calculations when required.

i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 2080S SLI 8GB, Oculus Rift S.

i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 65" HDR 4K.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi. I wonder if stationary air defences such as SAM site in the vicinity of Havadarya afb will be included ?

 

Couple of reasons I think they won't implement it:

 

 

1. They'll always have to include a naked map variant, for those of us who want to create hypothetical campaigns.

2. Since point 1. is kind of a given: hardware space and hardware specs: you can't make a template for stationary SAMs everywhere on the map, that would kill all PC's.

3. Given point 2, a possible solution would be to create a template for 2 specific nations at war right? But now to create every possible template, you'd way increase the shipping size of the Hormuz map.

4. User preference: I'm guessing 50%+ of the users would edit the sam placement in a template, all that dev time gone to waste.

5. Dev resources. Building all those templates? I'd rather have more extensive tutorials, or DLC campaigns. -> They do research on SAM sites they might as well go the full mile and build a campaign around it, that way they actually get payed for the effort.

 

Anyways, these were just my thoughts and ramblings on the subject, but I very well understand your view, I've created a few SAM mission templates of my own!

T.16000m HOTAS + Pedals || TrackIR5 ||

Win10 64bit || 120+500GB SSD, 1TB HDD || i5 4440 @3.3GHz || 16GB RAM @ 1600MHz || GTX1070 G1 ||

FCIII, L39ZA, AJS-37, Normandy '44, Persian Gulf, Channel

F/A-18C, Bf-109 K-4, WW2 Asset Pack, CA, P-47, F-16

Link to comment
Share on other sites

•You don't need to load all the assets data to RAM until player is near the area

•You don't need to do checkings for units before player is near area.

•You don't need to even run full AI logic before player is near area.

 

You're wrong on all counts.

Maybe true for F4 & its 'bubble' simulation & roll of the dice AI interactions outside that bubble, not true for DCS, in which all of the world is 'live'.

 

If you put a SAM at the edge of the map, it will search the area it can search unless you turn it off through the ME.

 

You could make a mission to distribute as a template with all the assets added, and set to both late start and visible before start, but that isn't how the map will be coming.

 

(edit: re-reading your post I realised that given your comments about "90's simulations with dynamic campaigns" you already knew this.

If all you wanted to do was voice your opinion that you disagree with how E.D. handle their theatre area simulation, simply saying it outright would have been straighter.)


Edited by Weta43

Cheers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have not dug into the mission editor yet. Is there a way to add static objects to simulate a dug in SAM site? It seems like most of the objects I get killed by are mobile.

____________________________________________________

PC: ASROCK Z370 Gaming K6 | Intel i7 8700K | GeForce 2080TI | 32GB GeSkill 3200 RAM | GeForce 2080TI | 500GB Samsung 850 EVO M.2 | 1TB Samsung 860 EVO M.2

____________________________________________________

FLIGHT STUFF: Rift S | Warthog Base | Virpil Base | Hornet Grip | A-10 Grip | Cougar Grip | Virpil F-14 Grip | Cougar MFD's | A-10C UFC | Saitek Flight Panels | MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have not dug into the mission editor yet. Is there a way to add static objects to simulate a dug in SAM site? It seems like most of the objects I get killed by are mobile.

**in my limited experience**

You CAN add static objects like dugouts by hand, but it's a bit time-consuming and you can't really save a template of them + the SAM battery AFAIK.

At the moment you can only save a template that belongs in the same group. A particular SAM formation can be saved. However, static objects like dugout covers can't really be 'grouped up' in a template since they all belong to their own unit 'group'.

 

Static air defenses are really falling out of favour, only the strategic/long range SAMs have static emplacements for longer periods of time, and they can have wayy too much range to be 'fun' in a DCS mission (depends on the situation ofc).

Nexto to that, the reason why you're mostly seeing mobile AA threats is because AFAIK, only the S-125/SA-3 is modelled as an immobile unit in 'ground vehicles' tab. (not sure if the S-300 launchers can move after being placed, this might me a second one)

 

They're currently working on the SA-2 Guideline//S-75 Dvina radar and launcher models to be added in the near future, this would be a second/third static SAM for REDFOR.


Edited by Lithion
Added disclaimer

T.16000m HOTAS + Pedals || TrackIR5 ||

Win10 64bit || 120+500GB SSD, 1TB HDD || i5 4440 @3.3GHz || 16GB RAM @ 1600MHz || GTX1070 G1 ||

FCIII, L39ZA, AJS-37, Normandy '44, Persian Gulf, Channel

F/A-18C, Bf-109 K-4, WW2 Asset Pack, CA, P-47, F-16

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you Lithion. Good info right there.

____________________________________________________

PC: ASROCK Z370 Gaming K6 | Intel i7 8700K | GeForce 2080TI | 32GB GeSkill 3200 RAM | GeForce 2080TI | 500GB Samsung 850 EVO M.2 | 1TB Samsung 860 EVO M.2

____________________________________________________

FLIGHT STUFF: Rift S | Warthog Base | Virpil Base | Hornet Grip | A-10 Grip | Cougar Grip | Virpil F-14 Grip | Cougar MFD's | A-10C UFC | Saitek Flight Panels | MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...
Hi. I wonder if stationary air defences such as SAM site in the vicinity of Havadarya afb will be included ?

 

deff not, if they did that they'd have to include the extensive Iranian s300 air defenses too and you wouldn't be able to just mess around on the map free of threats cuz the every 2 seconds an s300 would be painting you.

 

map will deff come without air defenses and mission creators will have to populate the map.



 

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

HP OMEN 880-130 - Windows 10/Intel Core i7-8700K/2TB HDD/ 1TB SSD/32GB DDR4 RAM/GTX 1080 Ti

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 weeks later...

Good news guys, The last Patch gave way to making templates of Static objects. Could be that they're looking into SAM fortifications so you can make a fortification and SAM template to mix :) Here's to hoping :D

T.16000m HOTAS + Pedals || TrackIR5 ||

Win10 64bit || 120+500GB SSD, 1TB HDD || i5 4440 @3.3GHz || 16GB RAM @ 1600MHz || GTX1070 G1 ||

FCIII, L39ZA, AJS-37, Normandy '44, Persian Gulf, Channel

F/A-18C, Bf-109 K-4, WW2 Asset Pack, CA, P-47, F-16

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

Alas, the 'saving of static templates' they added recently is just a separate way of saving a template mission.

 

Still hoping for either saving a static group, or for ED to add some sort of SAM dugout fortification to regular ground vehicles. (There are immovable ground vehicles anyway).

T.16000m HOTAS + Pedals || TrackIR5 ||

Win10 64bit || 120+500GB SSD, 1TB HDD || i5 4440 @3.3GHz || 16GB RAM @ 1600MHz || GTX1070 G1 ||

FCIII, L39ZA, AJS-37, Normandy '44, Persian Gulf, Channel

F/A-18C, Bf-109 K-4, WW2 Asset Pack, CA, P-47, F-16

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I don't get it

 

Alas, the 'saving of static templates' they added recently is just a separate way of saving a template mission.

 

Still hoping for either saving a static group, or for ED to add some sort of SAM dugout fortification to regular ground vehicles. (There are immovable ground vehicles anyway).

 

Hi

 

How does saving a static group going to allow building fortifications? There are no 3D objects to do that.

 

We are still placing SAM sites, artillery, radars and other stuff on a flat textured table if not placed within areas with some vegetation, but these are rather close to settlements.

 

Camo netting, dugouts and trenches would be a nice to have, but I think current graphics engine does not allow that..

 

Would be nice to get developers to chime in here whether it is at all possible.

Intel i7-13700KF :: ROG STRIX Z790-A GAMING WIFI D4 :: Corsair Vengeance LPX 64GB ::  MSI RTX 4080  Gaming X Trio  :: VKB Gunfighter MK.III MCG Ultimate :: VPC MongoosT-50 CM3 :: non-VR :: single player :: open beta

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi

 

How does saving a static group going to allow building fortifications? There are no 3D objects to do that.

 

I fully agree, though I don't think it's necessarily that difficult to implement SAM fortifications and the like. Judging how the hightened FARP bases have collisions as well (though the targeting points are another matter)

 

I would judge that as less difficult to fix than a core ME editor feature like saving a particular static template, if that's ever possible.

Though we've seen some more ME improvements lately so here's to hoping they're looking at it, indeed some confirmation either way would be nice.

T.16000m HOTAS + Pedals || TrackIR5 ||

Win10 64bit || 120+500GB SSD, 1TB HDD || i5 4440 @3.3GHz || 16GB RAM @ 1600MHz || GTX1070 G1 ||

FCIII, L39ZA, AJS-37, Normandy '44, Persian Gulf, Channel

F/A-18C, Bf-109 K-4, WW2 Asset Pack, CA, P-47, F-16

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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