topol-m Posted April 30, 2009 Posted April 30, 2009 (edited) Hi guys. I never knew what a useful tool tacview was, now that i use it (thanks to GGTharos) a number of questions begin to arise, related to the several missile firing tests i`ve done. I`m uploading 2 short tacview files that will make the things clearer: 1. Missiles G. Why the missiles are pulling so little G? In the second file 4 R-77 are fired at 2 F-16 and all missed - I`m aware that distance, altitude, etc., etc. are a factor, thats not the point - what is happening is that in this particular test the missile has enough energy to make a direct hit but in the moment of impact it is pulling just 4-5G, when at speeds aprox. 1000kmh it should pull much more. Also, R-77 is supposed to attack targets maneuvering with 12G and the missile itself can maneuver with way more than 20G - a number i`ve never seen in the game. And its not a problem just of the R-77 but I suspect of all the missiles in the game (more tests needed). 2. Why are missiles so easy to deflect using counter measures (in the second tacview file you will see a Mig-31 firing all his missiles at a single target, at different ranges with no effect Crazy!!! ). Particulary SARH and ARH missiles. Any info about CM effectiveness in reality against Amraam, R-77, R-27ER (in the game i find this one a pretty stupid missile), R-33, R-40R, Aim-7...The missile is flying and suddenly, when several km away from the target (Visial range) it decides to chase some birds instead. WTH? Its too costly to use 3-4 missiles for the same target or to bring some Tu-160/B-1 to fire 10-15 at a single fighter... 3. This question is AI related. Is the AI in the game capable at all of attacking 2 or more targets at the same time (of course with a fighter that in reality allows such actions - Su-30, F-15, Mig-31, etc.)? The "Mig-31 vs 3 F-16 armed with Aim-9M only" test scenario showed me several things. The real Mig-31 is capable of attacking 4 targets simultaneously. The one in game attacked 1 F-16, and he continued firing missile after missile at the same enemy completely ignoring the other 2 targets that were closing in and flying directly towards him (while the attacked 1 was maneuvering trying to evade the missiles - successfully), until he got blown to pieces (the mig). 4. There is an option in game to increase the missiles hit probability. How exactly is this happening? What stats are changed to achieve that and can the % of increased effectiveness be determined?Tacview.rar Edited April 30, 2009 by topol-m [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
Wilde Posted April 30, 2009 Posted April 30, 2009 1. The ability to do extremely high G maneuvers is usually unneeded. For a good shot you try to avoid it, because it costs a lot of energy which is limited for every missile. To actually see the R77, or any missile for that matter, doing some 20 G you'd probably have to set up a launch, that is rather unlikely in real fights. 2. This is hard to tell. Try to avoid missiles by CM only without maneuvering or using any "cheat" against radar bugs. You'll notice, that they aren't extremely effective really. No idea though how it is in real life. 3. The AI is retarded and über at once. They always know where everything is, including heaters launched at their six. But they aren't applying any logic to their flying and fighting. And I've never seen the AI engaging multiple targets simultaneously ever. Neither the F15/F16 nor any other fighter. They only care for their primary. 4. missile effectiveness cheers
GGTharos Posted April 30, 2009 Posted April 30, 2009 Hi guys. I never knew what a useful tool tacview was, now that i use it (thanks to GGTharos) a number of questions begin to arise, related to the several missile firing tests i`ve done. I`m uploading 2 short tacview files that will make the things clearer: 1. Missiles G. Why the missiles are pulling so little G? In the second file 4 R-77 are fired at 2 F-16 and all missed - I`m aware that distance, altitude, etc., etc. are a factor, thats not the point - what is happening is that in this particular test the missile has enough energy to make a direct hit but in the moment of impact it is pulling just 4-5G, when at speeds aprox. 1000kmh it should pull much more. Also, R-77 is supposed to attack targets maneuvering with 12G and the missile itself can maneuver with way more than 20G - a number i`ve never seen in the game. And its not a problem just of the R-77 but I suspect of all the missiles in the game (more tests needed). A missile may need to pull 5 times the G you are pulling to hit you, if you do an out-of-plane maneuver. This is why they have 40-50-60g limits. If you don't do an out-of-plane maneuver, it needs less, sometimes a lot less. Also keep in mind that tacview gives you an average captured over 0.1sec timeframes so you might never see peak g for the missile - same for your aircraft. The missiles in LO often exceed 15g in maneuvers, but realize also that they are limited usually to way less than their real counter-parts for programming reasons. The highest limit, IIRC, belongs to R-73 at 40g+ in the game. ;) The real R-77 is actually rated for 9g target. Anything higher is probably extremely short-range. 2. Why are missiles so easy to deflect using counter measures (in the second tacview file you will see a Mig-31 firing all his missiles at a single target, at different ranges with no effect Crazy!!! ). Particulary SARH and ARH missiles. Any info about CM effectiveness in reality against Amraam, R-77, R-27ER (in the game i find this one a pretty stupid missile), R-33, R-40R, Aim-7...The missile is flying and suddenly, when several km away from the target (Visial range) it decides to chase some birds instead. WTH? Its too costly to use 3-4 missiles for the same target or to bring some Tu-160/B-1 to fire 10-15 at a single fighter... Known issue ... the CM effectiveness was tuned for the patch and it didn't work out well. 3. This question is AI related. Is the AI in the game capable at all of attacking 2 or more targets at the same time (of course with a fighter that in reality allows such actions - Su-30, F-15, Mig-31, etc.)? The "Mig-31 vs 3 F-16 armed with Aim-9M only" test scenario showed me several things. The real Mig-31 is capable of attacking 4 targets simultaneously. The one in game attacked 1 F-16, and he continued firing missile after missile at the same enemy completely ignoring the other 2 targets that were closing in and flying directly towards him (while the attacked 1 was maneuvering trying to evade the missiles - successfully), until he got blown to pieces (the mig). 4. There is an option in game to increase the missiles hit probability. How exactly is this happening? What stats are changed to achieve that and can the % of increased effectiveness be determined? There's no TWS or multi-targeting of any sort for LOMAC AI. And no, you can't fix any of this. [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
topol-m Posted April 30, 2009 Author Posted April 30, 2009 Ok thanks for your replies, is there any chance these problems to be fixed in a future patch (if there is going to be one at all) or in some future add-ons of DCS? [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
GGTharos Posted April 30, 2009 Posted April 30, 2009 These will be addressed in DCS at -some- point. No word on a LOFC patch for now. [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
Sulman Posted April 30, 2009 Posted April 30, 2009 (edited) Tacview changes the game, doesn't it? What a wonderful tool. I spend as much time in it as the cockpit, and it teaches you loads. I've devoured just about every post here on missile effectiveness, and - with the caveat I don't play online (yet) - while it has problems, it is very unlikely it will be fixed, I really don't mind it, and I certainly prefer it to the Flanker 2.0 standard of incredibly potent SAMS, SARH's and ARH. Anybody remember all the training material and forum posts devoted to defeating the AIM-7 and R-33? If you play realistically and don't 'game' the Amraams with last-ditch pulls etc, they're still pretty scary, albeit slower than their real life counterparts. The biggest bugbear I have is the AI ESP, with regard to close range heaters. Chaff is effective, but sometimes you just can't have enough of it. There is also another consideration; and that is the sandbox factor. Virtual pilots can put many hours into replaying the same scenarios repeatedly, an advantage real world pilots may not have; being perfectly prepared and being able to predict missile engagement outcomes - because you've done it 100 times before - is going to present performance that can be seen as flawed; the PK debate for example. Edited April 30, 2009 by Sulman [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
topol-m Posted April 30, 2009 Author Posted April 30, 2009 Oh no several years of waiting till the real fighter add-ons for DCS... [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]
104th_Crunch Posted April 30, 2009 Posted April 30, 2009 Here is an intertesting article mentioned before in this forum http://www.scribd.com/doc/7774389/Rand-StudyFuture-of-Air-Combat When I read it is seems to imply CM is not as ineffective as one might think.
Recommended Posts