LRM 2.0 Released!

[Case]

Yoda, here's a feature request.

 

Could you implement mission specific payload control?

 

This would allow the server to rotate to a mission that has specific weapons disabled or

enabled, while the next mission in rotation has other weapons disabled or enabled.

 

From what is exported to Tacview I think you could use the mission date and start time to

recognize which mission is presently running, or use the exports to look for a ground units

being at a specific place in the map.

[RvEYoda]

Feels too much like a hack to me... But,

I have given some thought into this feature.

 

What i was thinking is, when you load in, LRM could download

allowed payloads from the server each time he loads in.

This way we might be able to make it mission specific.

 

The export.lua exported to clients is loaded into lockon on first launch,

even though on server end you can actually change it between missions,

clients will still get the original version.

 

 

Example on possible mission specific payload control

Rotator software edits a file for payloads on server in between missions,

when a client requests the payload lists, he does so by making a connection to the host,

asking what payloads are OK for this mission. LRM on server end reads the file and responds,

but it is a bit of work. It is though the only thing i've come up with so far that would

make some sense in the long run.

Edited May 29, 2009 by =RvE=Yoda

[104th_Crunch]

Please don't forget specific weapon per pylon as well. When you have a chance some day.

[RvEYoda]

some day ;)

[104th_Crunch]

:punk: Take your time. What you have done so far is great, thanks.

[RvEYoda]

if you have some guy in your squad that would like to add a vector of pylon numbers to each of my weapons in my weapon list in lrm,

we could make pylon specific control quickly.

[RvEYoda]

After speaking to <51>Case, here are some ideas we came up with.

 

Case suggested we use the mission day/date number as an identifier.

Then i suggested the following.

 

The mission day is default *001*.

The mission day is always a 3 digit number.

 

What if you have

- 10 payload presets, defined by first digit (on top of already fully customizable payload)

- 99 airfield setup presets, defined by the last 2 digits (as an alternative to fuel trucks)

(or 65 if day can be set 001-365)

 

 

This would allow to have a variation of enforced payload rules and airfields, on different missions,

without having to worry about ATZ-10s being taken out (although that option is still there if you

would like dynaimc airfield ownership)

 

 

Payload presets ideas

 

Digit#1

 

0 - Default, no extra restrictions (example Day 001)

1 - no ETs (example day 123)

2 - 80s setup

3 - only Aim7, 9, r60, 73,R27R

4 - Only SRMs (heaters)

5 - guns

6-9, same as 1-4 but also a2g restrictions.

 

 

Mission airfield presets ideas

 

Mission X01:

RED: Khersones/Belbek

BLUE: Krasnogvardeyskoye/Oktyabrskoye

 

Mission X02:

RED: Krymsk/Anapa

BLUE: Dzhankoy/Kirovskoye

 

Mission X03:

RED: Maykop/Krasnodar Pashkovskij

BLUE: Kerch/Anapa

 

 

Pylon specific weapons

- If LRM is ever going to include pylon specific control of weapons, then someone needs to

send me data of what pylons can carry what on what plane. I will not make these long tests right now :)

And yes, i will not only need the names but the type1-4 identifier numbers as well!

If you want to do this work, i can give you a script that prints the details to a file after you load in with it,

for example if you load your flanker with r73s on all hardpoints where it is allowed and then start the game,

if will print the required array to a file with the numbers of the pylons loaded with archers.

Edited May 29, 2009 by =RvE=Yoda

[104th_Crunch]

Yoda, let's hook up and go over Pylon specific weapons. I can do this work np.

[Boberro]

Yoda please update LRM to Shepski mod please :)

Now A-10 can't carry CBU example :)

[DarkWanderer]

Pylon specific weapons

- If LRM is ever going to include pylon specific control of weapons, then someone needs to

send me data of what pylons can carry what on what plane. I will not make these long tests right now

And yes, i will not only need the names but the type1-4 identifier numbers as well!

If you want to do this work, i can give you a script that prints the details to a file after you load in with it,

for example if you load your flanker with r73s on all hardpoints where it is allowed and then start the game,

if will print the required array to a file with the numbers of the pylons loaded with archers.

Any chances of server MEinit.xml parsing?..

[RvEYoda]

Any chances of server MEinit.xml parsing?..

 

unlikely.

Basically i got 10 people pulling me in different directions and I must chose

what I think is most crucial right now.

 

There are some reasons why I do not wish to use the meinit to do this work.

Regarding the A10 and CBUs, just provide me those weapons id numbers

and we can add them. Most so is that you can make certain cheats that

leave meinit alone, but stll gives you for example aim54 on f-15s,

and the server would believe it is an aim120, and then BANG someone

dies no warning way out of range.

 

Meinit.xml parsing could perhaps be useful as a complement, but it would not

make as correct decisions imo as the current control does.

Edited May 30, 2009 by =RvE=Yoda

[RvEYoda]

Yoda please update LRM to Shepski mod please :)

Now A-10 can't carry CBU example :)

 

Give me the weapon id numbers and I can do it.

[RvEYoda]

Release 2.3c3:

- Added support for Lockon Virtual Panel v 1.3 (by request)

- Added support for touch buddy export

- Fixed an issue where roll trim could get added when using alt+2 target step.

 

As usual, server admin can turn off support for the Virtual Panel or Touch buddy, if he wants to

Edited May 30, 2009 by =RvE=Yoda

[RvEYoda]

Release 2.3d

- Solved a possible bug where lrm no longer runs if server assigns player new world ID

- Solved a bug where lrm no longer runs f-15 scripts, caused by target dying at the same time

radar wants to go tws bug

Edited June 1, 2009 by =RvE=Yoda

[Vekkinho]

Mate, I really like Cockpit shake script when pulling high Gs! Now, how bout the same when gear down and airbrake out?!

[GGTharos]

There's no gear down indicator in lua. I don't think there is an airbrake one either.

[Vekkinho]

Aahh, too bad!

[RvEYoda]

Possible issue with the new version :

LotATC fail.

Will deal with it when I get home

 

Release 2.3e:

- LotATC2 now works again

 

 

Ok we're at the point here where I don't really see anything else that can be added to the mod.

I'm waiting for some AB/Flaps data on the mig29, but after I have that, the mod is pretty much done,

as far as I am concerned. Further development may continue, but not by me working alone.

 

For example 169th Crunch has requested we make the payload check pylon specific, so that means

someone needs to gather info on all aircrafts' payload numbers, and their respective weapons.

Edited June 4, 2009 by =RvE=Yoda

[X-man]

Found a payload bug. When selecting the Sps-141 jammer for the Su-25A, you get the illegal payload effect, despite it being available by default.

 

Allowed_Payloads[1+table.getn(Allowed_Payloads)]= {7,4,15,45,30}	-- sps-141

Edited June 5, 2009 by X-man

[RvEYoda]

Found a payload bug. When selecting the Sps-141 jammer for the Su-25A, you get the illegal payload effect, despite it being available by default.

 

Allowed_Payloads[1+table.getn(Allowed_Payloads)]= {7,4,15,45,30}    -- sps-141

 

Is that line that /Temp/Illegalpayload.txt/.log says?

I'm looking at the lrm code here, and this line is not present in the lrm payload code.

If you like, you can add that line yourself to enable the weapon/jammer before I get back and

can make an official update, add it in the payload section where similar lines appear. ( the order doesnt matter)

 

I will update the lrm with this for the next release.

 

You will notice lrm doesnt distinguish 29A from 29S, or 25A from 25T.

There are reasons for this that i'd prefer not to go into here in the forum.

 

thanks for reporting =)

Edited June 5, 2009 by =RvE=Yoda

[X-man]

Rgr, Can you check the /Temp/Illegalpayload.txt/.log what it says?

That is what I posted there :)

 

I will wait for an official update from you as I have no idea of how to put it in myself.

Edited June 5, 2009 by X-man

[RvEYoda]

might take a while,

just put :

Allowed_Payloads[1+table.getn(Allowed_Payloads)]={7,4,15,45,30} -- sps-141

in the list of *Allowed_Payloads*, just make a search in the file and paste

it there :). Basically i made the payload control script such that, if I had forgotten to put

anything in the list/database of payloads, I would just need to copy/paste in a new line

 

the first number, here 7, identifies the aircraft carrying the weapon (here it is a su25(or t)).

The next 4 numbers give the exact payload database numbers in lockon.

4,15,15 symbolize ECM category, and 30 is just the sps-141's number

 

I was thinking of adding another entry in this list. The first 5 already in, are integers, and the 6th

would be an array of integers, symbolizing legal pylons for this weapon. This parameter would

not be required of every weapon in the list. For example it's not that important to tell the game what pylons

the Su27 ECM pods go on (only that you need 0 or 2).

 

Another option is to make this entry #6 an array of arrays, symbolizing if for example:

If you load on pylon 1, you must also load pylon 3.

It could be like this (although i havent written this code yet)

Allowed_Payloads[1+table.getn(Allowed_Payloads)]={Y,4,15,45,X,{{1,3},{2,4}}} -- ECM pod X on aircraft Y

The above line allows to load ECM pod X on aircraft Y only in pairs (no singles), pylons {1 and 3}, or {2 and 4}

Edited June 5, 2009 by =RvE=Yoda

[RvEYoda]

2.3f released:

- Fixes bug with SPS-141 not being allowed for Su-25

[X-man]

Good stuff Yoda :thumbup:

[RvEYoda]

There was reports of possible CTD bugs still present in LRM.

I will look at it more in detail tomorrow. I have some ideas.

I believe the last few things that could be adressed here would be

lockon not always returning non-nil values from LoGet*SelfValues*-functions.

 

Release 2.3g:

- Support for Respawn ON

- Support for lockon returning *nil* on all self LoGet-functions (it already supported it for others)

- Solved possible crashes caused by the above 2

- No more Error messages printed in error.log after dying

 

Finally getting the flaps and Airbrake data for the mig29

Today I spoke to a guy translating for me from a mig29 pilot.

He was unaware of any G limit on the mig29 flaps (they are small compared to su27, the mig

is a very tough built plane and so on). Speed limits, none explicitely, BUT, flying straight (1g)

with flaps out above 800kph, the air flow itself pressured the flaps to retract, the faster you go,

the more the air push em back, AND add G to that, they would be very much affected.

 

However in lockon there is the problem of flaps being a major help if you use them at high speeds to

achieve incredible (unreal) increase in instantaneous turn rates. How do we know not to use flaps in a dog fight irl?

1 - They may break, get stuck, or even worse

2 - You may depart controlled flight

3 - They add more drag

4 - They do not really provide a significant decrease in turn radius.

 

So we asked this mig29 pilot "Would you use flaps in a dogfight? What would then be the advantages? Disadvantages? Risks?"

The answer was a very strong "NO, it only adds drag". "I tried it once in a dog fight, and that was the last time I'll ever do it".

 

Thus we are left with the question. Should LRM flaps/Airbrake script for mig29 :

1 - Limit the lockon mig-29 to not being able to use flaps above a certain speed and G, to limit flight envelope not to include "super flap turn of lockon"

or

2 - Leave it mostly as it is (only adding those real limitations like no airbrake when centerline tank is on)

 

Since it is up to server admin to decide whether to use flaps/brake script, i will probably make it #1.

 

Alternative 1 :

Flaps in above 700 kph or above ~5g (artificial limits to not include the unrealistic super flap turn rate increase)

Airbrake in when center fuel tank is mounted

 

Alternative 2 :

No flaps control

Airbrake in when center fuel tank is mounted

 

After much consideration I've decided:

That the only reasonable and realistic version is alternative 2.

Reason is that the mig29 is already too limited when it comes to low speed maneuvering.

Here it should excel, but it doesn't do this in current lockon flight model, so further limiting

flaps use will not provide more realism. It might be unrealistic to use flaps in a dogfight, but the

mig29 doesnt have the maneuverability it is supposed to have any way, so in the case of the

fulcrum, using flaps in combat in lockon is not such a big deal anyway.

As such the only real limit that will be put on it is no Air brake when center line tank is mounted.

 

LRM 2.4 released:

- Mig29 Flaps and airbrake scripts included (now all fighters are accounted for)

- No more releases of LRM with new features, like stated before, 2.4 will be the last version

- Any further versions of LRM will contain only bug fixes OR small tweaks of existing features. (like performance or specific payload pylon control)

Edited June 10, 2009 by =RvE=Yoda