Bug?

[combatace]

Explanation:

 

It's joke. You're supposed to laugh along with taking a little hint regarding manufacturer's datasheets.

 

Well I was so much engulfed in the debate mood with you that I almost forgot to laugh.

 

But seriously dude weight and diameter of many missiles and bombs need to edited. Jokes apart how come diameter change on any factors or conditions

Edited April 7, 2010 by combatace

[GGTharos]

You mean in the in-game database that you can view and browse?

Diameter changes drag.

[combatace]

You mean in the in-game database that you can view and browse?

Diameter changes drag.

 

Yes in the game database. I went through the files and found many mistakes as I said earlier AGM-65k is 297Kg and not 360 Kg, AGM-65H is just 211KG not 360kg some missiles diameters were also different. I found some bombs weight different than those datasheets. And dude mind well this time datasheets can't be wrong. Also AIM-120C7 has 178mm diameter which is in game 160mm and its weight is 161.5Kg and in game it is 157Kg and if you are talking C5 mass is 152Kg that too not correct.

Edited April 7, 2010 by combatace

[GGTharos]

There's no C7, only C5.

 

I'll repeat again: Leave parameters in the game files alone. They are not necessarily used quite as 'straight up' as you might expect.

 

Also AIM-120C7 has 178mm diameter which is in game 160mm and its weight is 161.5Kg and in game it is 157Kg.

[tflash]

I just cannot believe that I am reading this utter nonsense thread. Are we going to reply to anyone who has read some pages on the web?

[Groove]

I just cannot believe that I am reading this utter nonsense thread. Are we going to reply to anyone who has read some pages on the web?

 

Yes. :book:

[combatace]

There's no C7, only C5.

 

I'll repeat again: Leave parameters in the game files alone. They are not necessarily used quite as 'straight up' as you might expect.

 

I have tried them and used them in sim as well and as much as I experienced I can find them making a lot of difference. And you yourself said diameter will increase drag and ya well it does it very well.

 

And if there's only C5 than too dia remain 178mm and weight 152Kg and not anything else. Try to change them and try out you are in the test team so you will find it out better.

Here's the difference, by mistake I wrote 16 instead of 160 as the dia and the R-27ER went and struck C-17 at more than 4000Kmph at around 100Km distance.

Edited April 7, 2010 by combatace

[combatace]

I just cannot believe that I am reading this utter nonsense thread. Are we going to reply to anyone who has read some pages on the web?

 

If you have not invested in FC2 you don't need to be worried about.

[GGTharos]

And if there's only C5 than too dia remain 178mm and weight 152Kg and not anything else. Try to change them and try out you are in the test team so you will find it out better.

 

I guess you really don't understand, so I'll repeat again: Leave these parameters alone. They are calibrated to work with the game's physics, not with what you think they should be.

[combatace]

I guess you really don't understand, so I'll repeat again: Leave these parameters alone. They are calibrated to work with the game's physics, not with what you think they should be.

 

Thats what I'm trying to tell you. These wrong parameters are working wrong physics with the game. How can you say that any of the AGM-65 weighs 360Kg and run away saying that you are right. How can you say KAB-500Kr weighs 520Kg and not 560kg, KAB-1500Kr weighs 1500Kg and not 1525Kg and say that you are right? You are telling me to believe what is the mistake as right and move on. I am not uneducated and I know that if you weigh 70Kg than you weigh 70Kg and I cannot say that you weigh 69Kg or 71Kg. If you can get any of what I'm talking in your head than it is good or GOD help me.

 

And more I have decrypted many of your files so to an extent I know what those parameters do OK.

Edited April 7, 2010 by combatace

[GGTharos]

Thats what I'm trying to tell you. These wrong parameters are working wrong physics with the game.

 

Since you still are not getting it, I'll say it once more: These parameters are calibrated to get the desired result in the game, not what you think they should be.

 

 

How can you say that any of the AGM-65 weighs 360Kg and run away saying that you are right.

 

Sure, for player's 65's they can be looked at.

 

How can you say KAB-500Kr weighs 520Kg and not 560kg, KAB-1500Kr weighs 1500Kg and not 1525Kg and say that you are right?

 

Do you know how much a game bomb weighs? Nothing.

 

If you can get any of what I'm talking in your head than it is good or GOD help me.

 

No, you are still not getting it. Leave the in-game parameters alone.

[Total]

What he is saying combat is that you did not write the engine so you have no idea how it runs it's calculation algorithms.

 

Take for instance the Unreal engine. 1 unit of gravity in that engine does not equal 1 unit of gravity in reality. If you know the offset value to relate to 1 unit of realistic gravity in the Unreal engine, then you can adjust parameters accordingly. If you do not know the offset, then you will be guessing with every variable you adjust.

 

You start adjusting these missile parameters and you are adjusting blindly. You will be adjusting variables for an equation that you do not know. Forget what the equation should theoretically be. This is a game engine, not a scientific calculator, so the equations will be structured differently.

Edited April 7, 2010 by Total

[GGTharos]

Thank you, you said it best.

[Ven]

Thats what I'm trying to tell you. These wrong parameters are working wrong physics with the game. How can you say that any of the AGM-65 weighs 360Kg and run away saying that you are right. How can you say KAB-500Kr weighs 520Kg and not 560kg, KAB-1500Kr weighs 1500Kg and not 1525Kg and say that you are right? You are telling me to believe what is the mistake as right and move on. I am not uneducated and I know that if you weigh 70Kg than you weigh 70Kg and I cannot say that you weigh 69Kg or 71Kg. If you can get any of what I'm talking in your head than it is good or GOD help me.

 

Calm down. None of us know how the game physics work since none of us have access to the source code. But we know that it's not real life. Things like drag and aero may be factored into the physics but I can tell you for sure... it ain't real life physics but a "simplified" and "simulated" physics. And as stated by many here, actual performance may vary depending on conditions so what the developer rely on is the actual performance data in combat situation rather than manufacturer data sheet.

 

For example... I'm not a dev so I'm just making up an example but if a missile performance in the game is not matching that of real world counterpart because some of the physics are not calculated, they may tweak such values as weight and diameter to "simulate" the real world performance. We have no way of knowing the reasoning behind all the decisions made.

 

In short, the game physics engine is not a real world physics and simply punching in the data doesn't make them perform the way the real ones do.

[combatace]

What he is saying combat is that you did not write the engine so you have no idea how it runs it's calculation algorithms.

 

Take for instance the Unreal engine. 1 unit of gravity in that engine does not equal 1 unit of gravity in reality. If you know the offset value to relate to 1 unit of realistic gravity in the Unreal engine, then you can adjust parameters accordingly. If you do not know the offset, then you will be guessing with every variable you adjust.

 

You start adjusting these missile parameters and you are adjusting blindly. You will be adjusting variables for an equation that you do not know. Forget what the equation should theoretically be. This is a game engine, not a scientific calculator, so the equations will be structured differently.

 

I told you, I decrypted their files so I have some guesses though not much.

[GGTharos]

You didn't decrypt anything.

[Frostie]

From my own experience, the AIM-120 is under-modeled. Actually, the capabilities of the F-15C with it's combat electronics suite is under modeled. If it were modeled correctly, it would probably be the dominant aircraft in the game. For the sake of balance, I am thankful it's under modeled.

 

Now, all of that said - a great combat pilot in a lesser aircraft can come out on top of a mediocre pilot in a far superior aircraft. You can give a person every system capability, but if they are not proficient with it, then they are not superior ;)

The FC1.12 F-15 was the most dominant aircraft in the game, just that most didn't know how to use it to its full. Add to that the AIM-120 was undermodeled in some areas but overmodeled in others as were many missiles.

Basically a recipe for a poor excuse for losing.

We could sit here for quite sometime discussing the amount of technical aspects missing, overmodeled and undermodeled of all the aircraft and missiles in the game but still not come to any conclusions. To say one should dominate is pure speculation.

[combatace]

You know we have kind of a simulator which simulated the motor parameters like current, flus, EMF, magnetic attraction, eddy current losses, copper losses, wind-age loss, friction loss, torque generated by rotor, torque received at motor shaft, etc, etc. And you know how does the simulator work you put in the data real one and it calculates every parameter above on the bases of the real physics equations and not any other factors no errors, no neglecting long digits after decimal and no rounding off the figures. Thats what I call a simulator. If Lockon can't do that than surely I'll never call it a simulator but a game.

[Ven]

You know we have kind of a simulator which simulated the motor parameters like current, flus, EMF, magnetic attraction, eddy current losses, copper losses, wind-age loss, friction loss, torque generated by rotor, torque received at motor shaft, etc, etc. And you know how does the simulator work you put in the data real one and it calculates every parameter above on the bases of the real physics equations and not any other factors no errors, no neglecting long digits after decimal and no rounding off the figures. Thats what I call a simulator. If Lockon can't do that than surely I'll never call it a simulator but a game.

 

Can you show some screenshot from that simulator? How much is it and where can I buy it? Can you not distinguish between consumer product and professional application? In consumer product, they have to make sure it runs on low end systems that are out there. Not to mention implement graphics, inputs, etc. Can you name any other flight simulator that you can simply enter values and perform as in real life? You are making some stupid arguments here.

Edited April 7, 2010 by Ven

[combatace]

You didn't decrypt anything.

 

Think as you wish, I don't bother.

[combatace]

Can you show some screenshot from that simulator? How much is it and where can I buy it? Can you not distinguish between consumer product and professional application? In consumer product, they have to make sure it runs on low end systems that are out there. Not to mention implement graphics, inputs, etc. Can you name any other flight simulator that you can simply enter values and perform as in real life? You are making some stupid arguments here.

 

I'm not criticizing ED or anyone and that I have said in advance. There are lots of professional simulators that do thousands of node calculations on todays systems the PCs itself and if you don't know that than its your problem.

 

Any by the way I like this game a lot for the near real life experience it gives, so shut your mouth off and don't call me stupid again.

 

If the game engine has some different physics than why is that these parameters of only some objects are not matching real life one. Many have their real life specifications set to them. And I'm sure they have not iterated every object differently because than if you say it would require professional computing power.

Edited April 8, 2010 by combatace

[159th_Viper]

Think as you wish, I don't bother.

 

And why would you.....posting unsubstantiated submissions with little or no regard to attempts highlighting the error of your opinions/statements.

 

With you Tanking your own credibility, I take solace in the fact that your opinions, however misguided, will find no relevance for the powers-that-be, apart from the obvious irritability-factor.

 

You really need to attempt to be more open-minded......There is the possibility that the Dev's/Testers just might know what they're speaking about. If you continue to push their patience, they just might refrain from indulging you - wouldn't want that, now would you ;)

[Ven]

I'm not criticizing ED or anyone and that I have said in advance. There are lots of professional simulators that do thousands of node calculations on todays systems the PCs itself and if you don't know that than its your problem.

 

Any by the way I like this game a lot for the near real life experience it gives, so shut your mouth off and don't call me stupid again.

 

If the game engine has some different physics than why is that these parameters of only objects are not matching real life one. And I'm sure they have not iterated every object differently because than if you say it would require professional computing power.

 

I don't have to say it really... you're displaying it plenty here. Does FC 2.0 calculate every equipment? Does the laser rangefinder's heat build up actually calculating output of the laser? No. Does it have to calculate every aspect of every equipment and weaponry? Or better question would be... is there a consumer grade computer that can handle all that calculation? Perhaps... in about one frame per 30 minutes.

 

Professional simulators do not have to calculate in real time with pretty graphics. I do know their existence and I also know that there is none that calculates in real time with a graphic engine. Not knowing this seems to be your problem.

I find it funny how people in this thread talk like they know how the source code is really written. Truth is that none of you know because the source code hasn't been released. I say let ED respond to this thread.

[Total]

Erm, reference post #62 and #63 of this thread ;)