Pilotasso Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 So another Question that never was answerd was "Why was the 120 downgraded" in the first place? Thanks, T:pilotfly: ED added noise interference to seekers, in 1.1 Lockon version. Before they were 100% immune to chaff and clutter (it was possible 20 nill kill ratio with 120's). In 1.1 it was too sensitive, and it was tuned for 1.12, but its still insufficient. It will be fixed for 1.2. AMRAAM FM has always been undermodeled, Im not aware if ED plans a different FM for the AIM-120C (leaving the AMRAAM we have now as the B version) but consider that this SIM is russian, if it had equaly well modeled planes and missiles for both sides it would be the first time any SIM would do so without any bias, hurting its main market base. After all we also had scores of western SIM's where Teen F's were portrayed as superplanes as well. [sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic] My PC specs below:Case: Corsair 400C PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T) RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4 GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S77th-GOYA Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 It will be fixed for 1.2. Where did you get that information? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geier Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 Where did you get that information? From ED:music_whistling: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilotasso Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 YEs, it has been mentioned By Sythe and GG several times, infact the new and improved AIM-120C already exists in the beta. [sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic] My PC specs below:Case: Corsair 400C PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T) RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4 GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S77th-GOYA Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 Anytime anyone asks about fixes to the current game it is met with the "ED is concentrating only on the Ka-50" mantra. I've never seen anyone post that the radar missiles will be fixed. Plus the fact that rumors that BS will be standalone have never been officially denied. If I've missed a post confirming a radar missile fix, please point it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilotasso Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 Anytime anyone asks about fixes to the current game it is met with the "ED is concentrating only on the Ka-50" mantra. I've never seen anyone post that the radar missiles will be fixed. Plus the fact that rumors that BS will be standalone have never been officially denied. If I've missed a post confirming a radar missile fix, please point it out. Not radar fix, sensor noise sensitivity fix. ;) Its possible the heat seekers maddog capability get corrected as well, but this is in the "no promises" category. [sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic] My PC specs below:Case: Corsair 400C PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T) RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4 GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
centermass Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 I've seen where the "betas" have indicated the missiles and G modeling are a problem and they are going to fix them the upcoming patch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 Adjust...not fix. Then again, I'm pretty pedantic about what 'fix' means to me. There's a number of things that are on the list for a patch, including G-Modeling, F-15's high-altitude thrust, counter-measure sensitivity for missiles, etc. As indicated before, no promises - it all depends on ED's workload in the future. [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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S77th-GOYA Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 There's a number of things that are on the list for a patch, including G-Modeling, F-15's high-altitude thrust, counter-measure sensitivity for missiles, etc. So, correct me if I'm wrong here: The things listed above will NOT be included in 1.2 but will likely be part of a unconfirmed patch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 No, I won't correct you one way or the other. [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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tflash Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 We have been maddogged, decoyed, beamed, unTWSsed and above all pO0wned by an alien ET missile. We only want justice. May the Seeker be with you, Amraam! [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cool_t Posted October 10, 2007 Author Share Posted October 10, 2007 nice! YEs, it has been mentioned By Sythe and GG several times, infact the new and improved AIM-120C already exists in the beta. So with the fix no one can call me "Spam_T" any more. It will take one or two AIM-120s instead of all 8 to kill one bandit? Nice, :helpsmilie: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilBivol-1 Posted October 10, 2007 Share Posted October 10, 2007 And I would like to see the data that ED used to base those decisions on. Maybe EvilBivol can find out?Do you think that would settle anything? I’ll let you know if I do though. I’m sorry, but for now all we can say is what has already been said: ED is currently focused on Black Shark and any work on missiles outside of what is related to it will probably have to wait for a possible patch, which ED hopes to be able to release when more resources are free. That statement isn’t smoke and mirrors, but an honest reply about current prospects for everything not related to the helicopter. There truly is an interest in a patch and as GG mentioned, the topic was brought up on the beta forum (by ED) to address the demands of the community. However, ED has other obligations and projects outside of Flaming Cliffs and there is such a thing as privileged company information. We’ve also said that an official update explaining the features included in BS should be made available soon. Yes, it has been delayed, but regardless - until it is made, we aren’t able to discuss what is and isn’t included in the product. Believe me, we don’t enjoy answering questions without being free to answer them fully. - EB [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Nothing is easy. Everything takes much longer. The Parable of Jane's A-10 Forum Rules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dr. Shocker Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 TBH it would show good faith if Eagle patched Flaming Cliffs first. There are many people on the fence about buying it. Considering the rumor is that it will be stand-alone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weta43 Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 It's a bit cynical, but it seems to make more sense as a commercial decision to release a patch for BS after BS's release that 'adjusts' seeker functions & perhaps FMs in BS (thereby ensuring that even people with no interest in the KA-50 have something to be gained by buying BS) than to patch up the last itteration of LO just before you release the next ??? Cheers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EvilBivol-1 Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 No, it's much simpler than that. As I said, the bit about ...a possible patch, which ED hopes to be able to release when more resources are free.isn't smoke and mirrors. You can take that statement quite literally to mean that all hands at ED are currently occupied with other projects, including BS and to work on air to air missiles (or any other unrelated aspects) would require pulling programmers off these projects, which isn't an option when you consider projects have dates and budgets and patches do not. - EB [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Nothing is easy. Everything takes much longer. The Parable of Jane's A-10 Forum Rules Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cool_t Posted October 11, 2007 Author Share Posted October 11, 2007 Light Bulb time! No, it's much simpler than that. As I said, the bit about isn't smoke and mirrors. You can take that statement quite literally to mean that all hands at ED are currently occupied with other projects, including BS and to work on air to air missiles (or any other unrelated aspects) would require pulling programmers off these projects, which isn't an option when you consider projects have dates and budgets and patches do not. Why cant ED just put LOMAC 1 AIM 120s back into FC- copy-paste- DONE-Deal. I will take about 8 hours to set it up test it then set the patch free. We have waited a long long long long time for this. If ETS can just "LOCK" with out activating the seaker head we should have LOMAC 1 AIM-120s back to normal. Its only fair and us EAGLE DRIVERS deserve it. So Evilbivol1 WHY WERE THE 120s downgraded in the first place? I have no clue to why would a Flight Sim Developer would do such a thing when ED and other people know that there are alot of "Us"-"Consumers"-who know there stuff and do there home work about "de-classified" info on Combat Air-craft and Weapons. Why Was the 120 Downgraded in the first place? :pilotfly: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S77th-GOYA Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 Do you think that would settle anything? I’ll let you know if I do though. It very well might, depending on the data and its source. And a lot of us would appreciate it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilotasso Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 Why Was the 120 Downgraded in the first place? Have you forgotten what we wrote 2 pages ago already? [sigpic]http://forums.eagle.ru/signaturepics/sigpic4448_29.gif[/sigpic] My PC specs below:Case: Corsair 400C PSU: SEASONIC SS-760XP2 760W Platinum CPU: AMD RYZEN 3900X (12C/24T) RAM: 32 GB 4266Mhz (two 2x8 kits) of trident Z RGB @3600Mhz CL 14 CR=1T MOBO: ASUS CROSSHAIR HERO VI AM4 GFX: GTX 1080Ti MSI Gaming X Cooler: NXZT Kraken X62 280mm AIO Storage: Samsung 960 EVO 1TB M.2+6GB WD 6Gb red HOTAS: Thrustmaster Warthog + CH pro pedals Monitor: Gigabyte AORUS AD27QD Freesync HDR400 1440P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cool_t Posted October 11, 2007 Author Share Posted October 11, 2007 Right Have you forgotten what we wrote 2 pages ago already? Pilo, yes I have read the info. But why was te 120 created that way in the first place? Who made such a stink that ED actualy downgraded the 120. I guess I shold of been more clear; The comunity? ED? Next question, why was the 120 "To real"? EVIL, ED, copy paste code for 120 real simple, done. I can remember when I first started playing LOMAC on Hyper Loby and went face to face with "GOYA' he was prity deadly even back then but some of his 120s did miss and I also learned how to evade. :joystick: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kula66 Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 The planned upgrade of the AIM-120, the AIM-120D, is to have a much greater (+50%) range Is the 50% increase in range caused by a 50% increase in volume? If not then your simple comparision of the 77 is bigger therefore has longer range is not valid ... there are obviously other factors involved. A bigger missile will have more drag and therefore loose energy quicker A heavier, bigger missile will burn more energy to change course. Those potato mashers will have more drag. The electonics package will take up more of the missile, therefore less for fuel etc etc The AMRAAM could be smaller, carry less fuel and yet due to other factors (which me or anyone less using UC info) can't know! One thing we do know the UASF, with billions of $$$ of budget is happy with it (not an organisation that is know to scrimp on equipment) ... sure they would like something better, but its good enough for purpose. PS> Sorry, this isn't an attack on you ... just the info isn't available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geier Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 Some words to add. First. 120C is needed to be fixed. Because you usually spend >4 AMRAAMS on RTR range and even one of them can hit the bandit... Second. Beside the other AA missiles in the LO AMRAAM seem to be the worst one... If the ED says that our main aim is realism + balance they should to review the situation with it... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geier Posted October 11, 2007 Share Posted October 11, 2007 They should just model the AMRAAM to where you can launch it only on a TWS or STT We have already got this. But of course you can fire it in Maddog mode in rel life;)... this is modelled in LO:) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cool_t Posted October 12, 2007 Author Share Posted October 12, 2007 Right But, We we all agree when the fix comes? It will be nice to have a much lighter and faster AIM-120 that does not go wild right after it leaves the pylon. Sorry about the music. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geier Posted October 12, 2007 Share Posted October 12, 2007 There is NO WAY that an IR missile would be more accurate than an AIM-120. Not right. There's the 2 different ways of pointing. Direct to the engines and RC to the prospective place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts