Jump to content

AIM-54 Hotfix PSA and Feedback Thread - Guided Discussion


IronMike

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Csgo GE oh yeah said:

whoa whoa whoa ... now all of a sudden that holy CFD is 'too conservative' ? After all that research by two teams ?
What exactly led to this conclusion ??

I think you missed where we always stated this. It is missing plume effects, lift characteristics, etc. So before you explode, read carefully again: I said slightly. We may re-do the CFD at some point taking the above mentioned effects into account, to make it even more realistic. Just like everyone is dealing with these adjustments now, you will have to deal with them then, and they will likely not make much of a noticeable impact, especially down low. As I said, it is still slowing down a bit too much in a descent at certain speeds, etc, may be lacking (a small bit of) drag reduction during motor burn time (will only be slightly noticeable up high anyway, most likely not at low altitudes)... We will continue to improve it until we deem it most realistic, and if that chips off range or adds range, we do not care, for the hundredst of thousandst of time, CSGO. We do not do this to satisfy either side - you should have understood that by now, after we just drastically adjusted the performance to be more realistic. If you still do not get that, it is your problem, but please stop trying to gaslight fires here that do not exist.
 


Edited by IronMike
  • Thanks 3

Heatblur Simulations

 

Please feel free to contact me anytime, either via PM here, on the forums, or via email through the contact form on our homepage.

 

http://www.heatblur.com/

 

https://www.facebook.com/heatblur/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, BIGNEWY said:

Tacviews are great, but what we need are short as possible DCS track replays to use on our debug build. Thanks

Roger that. I'll try and hunt down some the next time i have a session

Modules: FC3, Mirage 2000C, Harrier AV-8B NA, F-5, AJS-37 Viggen, F-14B, F-14A, Combined Arms, F/A-18C, F-16C, MiG-19P, F-86, MiG-15, FW-190A, Spitfire Mk IX, UH-1 Huey, Su-25, P-51PD, Caucasus map, Nevada map, Persian Gulf map, Marianas map, Syria Map, Super Carrier, Sinai map, Mosquito, P-51, AH-64 Apache

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, RustBelt said:

I think some of the consensus is that the AI knows the Chaff is just a Die Roll, so they unload WAY more Chaff shots than a player would. Every shot is another pass/fail roll of the dice. 

There may also be an issue between PD-STT and TWS, though i'm not sure if it's guidance or behavior induced. The tackview seems to show that the bandit kicks chaff a bit more often when it's being fired upon in STT, but it's not by much. Maybe a 1 or at most 2 CM more for the same time interval. However, in tonight's session, at least 5 missiles went for CM when fired in PD-STT, while none when in TWS.

Modules: FC3, Mirage 2000C, Harrier AV-8B NA, F-5, AJS-37 Viggen, F-14B, F-14A, Combined Arms, F/A-18C, F-16C, MiG-19P, F-86, MiG-15, FW-190A, Spitfire Mk IX, UH-1 Huey, Su-25, P-51PD, Caucasus map, Nevada map, Persian Gulf map, Marianas map, Syria Map, Super Carrier, Sinai map, Mosquito, P-51, AH-64 Apache

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, captain_dalan said:

There may also be an issue between PD-STT and TWS, though i'm not sure if it's guidance or behavior induced. The tackview seems to show that the bandit kicks chaff a bit more often when it's being fired upon in STT, but it's not by much. Maybe a 1 or at most 2 CM more for the same time interval. However, in tonight's session, at least 5 missiles went for CM when fired in PD-STT, while none when in TWS.

Thats because PD-STT AIM-54s operate as a Fox 1 in terms of in game logic an CM rejection, wheras a TWS one is ARH and behaves like ARH; ARH seekers in DCS react to chaff differently than SARH (see R-77 vs ER for exampe; R-77 in NEZ is actually pretty lethal, doing the same snaking/recommit vs notching targets, while ER will straight up go for chaff in clear sky lookup on a hot target lol)

Eagle Enthusiast, Fresco Fan. Patiently waiting for the F-15E. Clicky F-15C when?

HP Z400 Workstation

Intel Xeon W3680 (i7-980X) OC'd to 4.0 GHz, EVGA GTX 1060 6GB SSC Gaming, 24 GB DDR3 RAM, 500GB Crucial MX500 SSD. Thrustmaster T16000M FCS HOTAS, DIY opentrack head-tracking. I upload DCS videos here https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC0-7L3Z5nJ-QUX5M7Dh1pGg

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, captain_dalan said:

This is one of an AIM-54A Mk60, where 3 out of 4 eat chaff. If i get the time, i'll try to produce an AMRAAM replay. No track though, didn't save it, as at the time i had no idea the missiles failed due to CM. 

Tacview-20220206-230334-DCS-BVR F-14A duels VS F-15C.zip.acmi 295.52 kB · 1 download

Only 2 and 3 bit on the chaff. 1 and 4 were notched. It's easiest to tell when a missile bites on chaff if you go to the missile's HUD view in Tacview. The center of the HUD will zero in on a chaff bundle.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, IronMike said:

I think you missed where we always stated this. It is missing plume effects, lift characteristics, etc. So before you explode, read carefully again: I said slightly. We may re-do the CFD at some point taking the above mentioned effects into account, to make it even more realistic. Just like everyone is dealing with these adjustments now, you will have to deal with them then, and they will likely not make much of a noticeable impact, especially down low. As I said, it is still slowing down a bit too much in a descent at certain speeds, etc, may be lacking (a small bit of) drag reduction during motor burn time (will only be slightly noticeable up high anyway, most likely not at low altitudes)... We will continue to improve it until we deem it most realistic, and if that chips off range or adds range, we do not care, for the hundredst of thousandst of time, CSGO. We do not do this to satisfy either side - you should have understood that by now, after we just drastically adjusted the performance to be more realistic. If you still do not get that, it is your problem, but please stop trying to gaslight fires here that do not exist.
 

 

You say you 'just adjusted the missile' , but you seem to forget it has been grossly overperforming for years. 
And it only is adjusted because a forum member (not heatblur) did the math. 

And now, a DAY after said adjustment you are already backpedaling, stating that your own research paper is suddenly wrong. 
 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Csgo GE oh yeah said:

You say you 'just adjusted the missile' , but you seem to forget it has been grossly overperforming for years. 
And it only is adjusted because a forum member (not heatblur) did the math. 

And now, a DAY after said adjustment you are already backpedaling, stating that your own research paper is suddenly wrong. 
 

The AIM-54 has not been grossly overperforming for years. With older guidance on the old API; the missile would immediately bleed tons of energy on initial flyout so the performance profile looked different. Heck, for a time, we even had to limit max-g to avoid this utterly insane energy loss making close shots significantly worse. And no, it wasn't changed just because a forum user did the math- we were already in progress of tuning and moving the missile to the new API, it just moved it to the top of the priority list. 

The CFD is not gospel- no research is. Anyone who knows anything knows that there can be limitations of margins of error to any study, that includes the CFD work done for the AIM-54. The modeling errs on the side of conservative because it lacks key considerations that would make the missile better.

Your attitude are getting silly at this point. Truly.
Take a step back and reassess how you're communicating with us on these forums. Constructive discussion is wonderful, but you're missing the mark every single time.


Edited by Cobra847
  • Like 12

Nicholas Dackard

 

Founder & Lead Artist

Heatblur Simulations

 

https://www.facebook.com/heatblur/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Csgo GE oh yeah said:

You say you 'just adjusted the missile' , but you seem to forget it has been grossly overperforming for years. 
And it only is adjusted because a forum member (not heatblur) did the math. 

And now, a DAY after said adjustment you are already backpedaling, stating that your own research paper is suddenly wrong. 
 

C improvements coming soon 😉

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 2/6/2022 at 4:57 AM, IronMike said:

Oh it still goes for chaff, trust me, I've seen it fairly often in my tests. I believe in the mk60 long tacview it did as well? would have to rewatch it, but while putting them together, it went for it several times when I was testing out tactics.

in my opinion, the effectivity of the chaffs are related with the AI level, with Ace skill the performance of chaffs are awesome!, has no sense such AI honestly, the maneouvers they do are not realistic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sad to see some comments (do not confuse simulation and score). If one day we have proxi fuze, the 60kg of explosives still make some people complain.
Thank you for this quick fix (as always), and I understand that this work will have to be refined in a hurry, for our pleasure.
It only remains to relearn this missile.
I don't post often because my English is so bad, but I had to say it.

thank you HB for your work

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I read a comment in here about losing track with high ping I can confirm this does happen when firing, it happens instantly or within 5 seconds just after launching to hot non evading human pilot with the right launch parameters the PH looses track guidance. I can say as an Aussie on the Eu servers with a ping of 300 is hell for this. Connecting to US server at 150ish has noticeable improvements in this scenario. Home serves with low pings do not seem to have this occur as often. Obviously just another thing to deal with but just want to +1 that point. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, shrimpy_dikdik said:

Sorry dont know where my text went with the above images.

 

This was the the 28nm shot with the mk60 where the missile lost a lot a speed as the F16 dived and turned 90°, from M2.0 to M0.7 in 8 secs.

 

I am not complaining, if this is realistic then fair enough. I had a few multiplayer kills tonight from 40nm and 30k, maybe not as many as a I would have  a week or two ago, but I can live with adapting my style.

That's what I mean, it may be slowing down a tad too fast in very steep high speed dives. But we need to investigate that further first, as according to the CFD it actually slows down still a tad too slowly. However we may be missing a piece of the puzzle here still, be it lift, etc. which we need to investigate first, to have a much more informed answer. Generally though, it is expected to slow down much much faster than an aim120 (as described in the OP), and especially at lower altitudes (in thicker air), so it will be already close-to what it is supposed to be down low. High up the difference may be slightly bigger. But the same is true for the aim120 - even from closer ranges it is still easily defeated in a split-S, because of the above effect. It pulls a lot of G, it gets lower and decelerates faster than up high, etc...

Heatblur Simulations

 

Please feel free to contact me anytime, either via PM here, on the forums, or via email through the contact form on our homepage.

 

http://www.heatblur.com/

 

https://www.facebook.com/heatblur/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, trenchfeet said:

I read a comment in here about losing track with high ping I can confirm this does happen when firing, it happens instantly or within 5 seconds just after launching to hot non evading human pilot with the right launch parameters the PH looses track guidance. I can say as an Aussie on the Eu servers with a ping of 300 is hell for this. Connecting to US server at 150ish has noticeable improvements in this scenario. Home serves with low pings do not seem to have this occur as often. Obviously just another thing to deal with but just want to +1 that point. 

If you could produce a short track for that and post it to ED in the respective bug section for Multiplayer, that would be really helpful. Netcode, etc (and the resulting guidance issues), is unfortunately nothing we can influence, and it is best to provide ED with your findings, so they can look into it. Thank you!

Heatblur Simulations

 

Please feel free to contact me anytime, either via PM here, on the forums, or via email through the contact form on our homepage.

 

http://www.heatblur.com/

 

https://www.facebook.com/heatblur/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have noticed for me that having altitude advantage makes a big difference with Pheonix hit rate now.

Im getting good fps with good image quality, once pilot bodies are released this will be the perfect module, Tomcat has never been better HB 👍


Edited by westr

harrier landing GIFRYZEN 7 3700X Running at 4.35 GHz

NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1080Ti

32gb DDR4 RAM @3200 MHz

Oculus CV1 NvME 970 EVO

TM Warthog Stick & Throttle plus 11" extension. VKB T-Rudder MKIV

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, BIGNEWY said:

Tacviews are great, but what we need are short as possible DCS track replays to use on our debug build. Thanks

do track files work? they were useless fort the tomcat last time i checked

7700k @5ghz, 32gb 3200mhz ram, 2080ti, nvme drives, valve index vr

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, eatthis said:

do track files work? they were useless fort the tomcat last time i checked

best to make a server track, keep it short.

Heatblur Simulations

 

Please feel free to contact me anytime, either via PM here, on the forums, or via email through the contact form on our homepage.

 

http://www.heatblur.com/

 

https://www.facebook.com/heatblur/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, dundun92 said:

Thats because PD-STT AIM-54s operate as a Fox 1 in terms of in game logic an CM rejection, wheras a TWS one is ARH and behaves like ARH; ARH seekers in DCS react to chaff differently than SARH (see R-77 vs ER for exampe; R-77 in NEZ is actually pretty lethal, doing the same snaking/recommit vs notching targets, while ER will straight up go for chaff in clear sky lookup on a hot target lol)

Someone mentioned something along those line a page or two back. That explains it then. Not a statistical fluke after all 🤔

19 hours ago, Callsign JoNay said:

Only 2 and 3 bit on the chaff. 1 and 4 were notched. It's easiest to tell when a missile bites on chaff if you go to the missile's HUD view in Tacview. The center of the HUD will zero in on a chaff bundle.

Ah, nice! Thanks for the tip. Scratch one occurrence 🙂

Modules: FC3, Mirage 2000C, Harrier AV-8B NA, F-5, AJS-37 Viggen, F-14B, F-14A, Combined Arms, F/A-18C, F-16C, MiG-19P, F-86, MiG-15, FW-190A, Spitfire Mk IX, UH-1 Huey, Su-25, P-51PD, Caucasus map, Nevada map, Persian Gulf map, Marianas map, Syria Map, Super Carrier, Sinai map, Mosquito, P-51, AH-64 Apache

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, IronMike said:

If you could produce a short track for that and post it to ED in the respective bug section for Multiplayer, that would be really helpful. Netcode, etc (and the resulting guidance issues), is unfortunately nothing we can influence, and it is best to provide ED with your findings, so they can look into it. Thank you!

Yep will do, I can tell its a netcode bug but didn't know who's end.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, IronMike said:

best to make a server track, keep it short.

This bit makes it somewhat difficult to provide data for high ping related issues.  I wonder if the 104th guys or the Hoggit admins might be willing and able to help with some of their server tracks?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Biggus said:

This bit makes it somewhat difficult to provide data for high ping related issues.  I wonder if the 104th guys or the Hoggit admins might be willing and able to help with some of their server tracks?

This is the crux of the issue.  ED wont accept anything less than a track file, and 50% of the track files you send seem to be corrupt when they try to use em.... that's if you can even get em from a busy server. 

 

I think Hoggit allows you to have your own track file but places like GS, 104, DDCS, Enigmas all block telemetry to prevent exploits. So you dont get a useful track. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure a client track from GAW would probably be as useful as a single player track, ie practically useless.  I don't know for sure, because I've never managed to open one of those tracks without experiencing a crash.

 

Once I set my dedi server box back up, I'd be happy to host a mission here in Australia and send the track files in.  But it would be nice to find an easier option that we can gather data with now vs in a few weeks when I finally get my act together.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello Mike,

the rocket now flies very smoothly and pleasantly. Speed and range also look very good. 

Unfortunately, I have a real problem with the missile because they just don't hit anything anymore. Sometimes they climb straight up to 80 thousand feet like a rocket for no reason, and then fall out of space behind the target and lose lock. Or the target makes a lazy 30 degree turn and the rocket just gives up. 
Even if the missile makes it to the end, it seems like it just gives up and stops working in the last 100 metres. 
I have no problem with a shorter range, a quick loss of speed. But if the missile can't hit the simplest targets, it's obviously useless. I fired a total of 10 missiles last night online on the 107th's server. Mostly over 30 thousand feet. Only one AIM54C hit - in ACM mode. 
If you're in a Tomcat-A and your primary weapon doesn't work, then you don't stand a chance against pretty much any opponent. Even when the enemies can see you perfectly in the night trough the clouds. But that is an ED Problem.

Yesterday I was parachuted in seven times. Even a F4 E took me out with a Sparrow. Thats like you driving a Ferrari and be outperformed by a Ford.  - I turned off the computer, annoyed and exasperated.

Kind regards

TOM


Edited by TOMCATZ
  • Like 1

Born to fly but forced to work.

 

TomFliegerKLEIN.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, TOMCATZ said:

Thats like you driving a Ferrari and be outperformed by a Ford.

 

You do know what the Fort GT was right?

 

For the rest of your post, if this was MP then server desync was the likely culprit.  Lots of tracks lately showing hits on maneuvering targets.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, TOMCATZ said:

Hello Mike,

the rocket now flies very smoothly and pleasantly. Speed and range also look very good. 

Unfortunately, I have a real problem with the missile because they just don't hit anything anymore. Sometimes they climb straight up to 80 thousand feet like a rocket for no reason, and then fall out of space behind the target and lose lock. Or the target makes a lazy 30 degree turn and the rocket just gives up. 
Even if the missile makes it to the end, it seems like it just gives up and stops working in the last 100 metres. 
I have no problem with a shorter range, a quick loss of speed. But if the missile can't hit the simplest targets, it's obviously useless. I fired a total of 10 missiles last night online on the 107th's server. Mostly over 30 thousand feet. Only one AIM54C hit - in ACM mode. 
If you're in a Tomcat-A and your primary weapon doesn't work, then you don't stand a chance against pretty much any opponent. Even when the enemies can see you perfectly in the night trough the clouds. But that is an ED Problem.

Yesterday I was parachuted in seven times. Even a F4 E took me out with a Sparrow. Thats like you driving a Ferrari and be outperformed by a Ford.  - I turned off the computer, annoyed and exasperated.

Kind regards

TOM

 

If this was against AI's on a server, then like @Spurts says, itm must be desync. I know i am one of the guys that complains about parts of the envelope, but to give credit where credit is due, the missile performs very well in some other parts of the envelope. This is me last night in SP, and these are 50NM shots. Mind you, i was also in an F-14A, which in the 4x2x2x2 is still largely robbed of transonic performance, ergo i had a hard time breaking mach 1.1. 3 out of 4 ain't bad under the circumstances and if the wingman hadn't take out #4, it might have even be better. Also, worthy of notice, this isn't a C but a mark60 A. I will make a copy of the instant action with a different load to test out the differences. 

Tacview-20220207-225142-DCS-F-14A_IA_Marianas_BVR_JA11.zip.acmi

Modules: FC3, Mirage 2000C, Harrier AV-8B NA, F-5, AJS-37 Viggen, F-14B, F-14A, Combined Arms, F/A-18C, F-16C, MiG-19P, F-86, MiG-15, FW-190A, Spitfire Mk IX, UH-1 Huey, Su-25, P-51PD, Caucasus map, Nevada map, Persian Gulf map, Marianas map, Syria Map, Super Carrier, Sinai map, Mosquito, P-51, AH-64 Apache

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

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