Jester bandit announcement - request

[Kula66]

Is it possible to reorder the phases used when Jester announces a new bandit in close? I understand this is not a user change, but hopefully maybe a quick change for the devs.
He currently says something like 'Bandit, Mig 29, 2 o'clock, 3 miles' when really the bit I'm interested in is the direction of the bandit! I have to wait a couple of agonising seconds for the key part of the message before I can react. He also sometimes adds pauses and stutters, which is not appreciated.

Thanks,
James

[Spurts]

2 hours ago, Kula66 said:

He also sometimes adds pauses and stutters, which is not appreciated.

 

These are added for realism.

[Kula66]

Thanks, I understand that.

[Spurts]

I can't say I experience all of your problem.  I only get the "Bandit, MiG-29..." portion after I have the target locked up and before the merge.  What conditions are you in?

[Kula66]

Ok, here is the typical scenario: you are in a valley, flying low and Jester spots a bandit visually, somewhere ... out of radar scan, ie. left, right or behind; you want need to wait until he finishes to know which way to turn, ie. wait for his clock call. If he said, '7 o'clock, bandit, Mig 29 ...' you'd save yourself precious seconds.

 

Edited September 13, 2022 by Kula66

[Spurts]

Gotcha!  Yeah I can see how the order of info matters a lot more there.  "Missile!  10 o'clock high!  Break right!" is a lot different in getting info across than "Bandit!  MiG-29, 4 o'clock high, 3 miles"

[Nealius]

In practicality adding the Bandit type at the end (and with the codename for brevity) would be better:

"Bandit 2 o'clock 3 miles, Fulcrum." 

I don't know what Navy phraseology is, but USAF phrasology during training has been so. I recall a video with comms announcing "<callsign> merged, hostile Eagle."

In a lot of ways I wish we could "professionalize" Jester. He sounds like an over-emotional, inexperienced RAG student who has no concept of brevity most of the time.

Edited September 14, 2022 by Nealius

[Spurts]

9 hours ago, Nealius said:

He sounds like an over-emotional, inexperienced RAG student who has no concept of brevity most of the time.

 

I think he sounds like someone who has been flying with you for years and loves busting your balls, who has no concept of brevity most of the time.  But given how "basic" his functionality is compared to a human RIO, you might be onto something.

[riojax]

3 hours ago, Spurts said:

I think he sounds like someone who has been flying with you for years and loves busting your balls, who has no concept of brevity most of the time.  But given how "basic" his functionality is compared to a human RIO, you might be onto something.

No, in combat zero jokes and maximum concentration also few emotions until something goes really bad, and with this the training reduce it to minimum. This means, not to tremble like a chicken when something happens, use brevities on combat and don't be a stupid before take fuel on AAR.

Any other moment, ok, pass me the cheetos bag while we talk about latest sport results.

[Jayhawk1971]

I'd be happy if Jester would at least learn to prioritize contacts based on relevance and threat level. No need to call out the E-2 orbiting 50 miles away.

I get that Jester is compensating for the Tomcat's lack of Link 16, and for SA's sake, HB could hide calling out friendly contacts behind an additional menu item: "Jester, declare friendlies" or something like that.

I find it especially annoying when he keeps calling out contacts that either are friendly, or hostiles 100-150 miles away, while I'm in the process of AAR-ing, or while trapping (both Case I and Case III). I really don't care about a hostile CAP 200 miles away while I'm in the groove.

The latter is also an issue due to mission/ campaign designers often putting the CVBG  too close to shore, and yes, I realize that's a decision made for gameplay's sake. Still, if Jester could learn to determine whether contacts are posing a threat.

BTW, off topic:
 @ mission designers, I for one would welcome a more realistically placed carrier battle group, with longer flight times and mandatory AAR. In most campaign missions I have to dump fuel because I'm always arriving heavy over the carrier.

Edited September 14, 2022 by Jayhawk1971

[Spurts]

19 hours ago, Jayhawk1971 said:

. In most campaign missions I have to dump fuel because I'm always arriving heavy over the carrier.

 

Sounds like you need to spend more time at low level on Afterburners

[Jayhawk1971]

vor 41 Minuten schrieb Spurts:

Sounds like you need to spend more time at low level on Afterburners

I am not an ED AI. 

[Spurts]

41 minutes ago, Jayhawk1971 said:

I am not an ED AI. 

LOL, It's more like how I celebrate completing a mission with fuel to spare.  Love me a supersonic egress.

Edited September 15, 2022 by Spurts