Gryzor Posted December 28, 2005 Share Posted December 28, 2005 Working ground FOG! I reported this on bug section. Nobody answer. FOG worked in previous versions, since 1.02 FOG DOESN´T WORK OBJECTS DISSAPEARS SUDDENTLY, NOT PROGRESSIVE PLEASE TAKE THIS INTO ACCOUNT:mad: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S77th-GOYA Posted December 29, 2005 Author Share Posted December 29, 2005 and a date with the fuel 1500 chick Her? http://www.eleinc.com/erica.shtml BTW, this thread is now officially worthless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bflagg Posted December 29, 2005 Share Posted December 29, 2005 Simple change? ... Ok ... here's one. How about a simple shell/screen that would do all TEXT settings modifications. for example: Force Feedback Yes No Hud Color Value, Value, Value Head View Turning Range - Value, Value LOD ranges (not using modman/loman) Fog ranges..so building fade in..not pop in. \etc...etc...etc.. Thanks, Brett Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
emenance Posted December 29, 2005 Share Posted December 29, 2005 Working ground FOG! I reported this on bug section. Nobody answer. FOG worked in previous versions, since 1.02 FOG DOESN´T WORK OBJECTS DISSAPEARS SUDDENTLY, NOT PROGRESSIVE PLEASE TAKE THIS INTO ACCOUNT:mad: I like fog of war too. Im sure this was a fps hit though. and that brings me to my suggestion. Are the graphic options neglected or no? Asus P8Z68-V GEN3/ 2500k 4.4ghz / Corsair 64gb SSD Cache / Corsair 8g 1600 ddr3 / 2 x 320gb RE3 Raid 0 /Corsair 950w/ Zotac 560TI AMP 1gb / Zalman GS1200 case /G940/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bflagg Posted December 29, 2005 Share Posted December 29, 2005 I like fog of war too. Im sure this was a fps hit though. and that's why it was removed during the 1.01 release if I remember right. It didn't really bother me back then.. but they way the pop in and out now is frankly annoying.. but playable. (this would be another setting choice in the menu screen I was talking about) Graphic setting are also very simplified and should have the user more choices for it's settings. Doing it the M$ way is just .... annoying. Thanks, Brett Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gryzor Posted December 29, 2005 Share Posted December 29, 2005 fps penalty were negligible, in 1.02 I played with dxrenderer.dll file from 1.00, and all was OK, no fps penalty (or very few)... PLEASE DEVS TAKE THIS INTO ACCOUNT:mad: and that's why it was removed during the 1.01 release if I remember right. It didn't really bother me back then.. but they way the pop in and out now is frankly annoying.. but playable. (this would be another setting choice in the menu screen I was talking about) Graphic setting are also very simplified and should have the user more choices for it's settings. Doing it the M$ way is just .... annoying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hogarth Posted December 29, 2005 Share Posted December 29, 2005 Exploded Vehicles , Bridges , FAC and Slow Civ. Vehicles. I don't get the time length on the burns of vehiles or bridges? If u blow up a bridge made of concret it burns for ever and if u blow up a tank with 200 gal. of fuel and ordance it burns less than a minute. Longer burns on all vehiles would be a big help for ground missions, on keeping track of where you are at and where you have been. (I would take the Graphics Hit ) Civilian Traffic: There is no speeding thats for shure. Trains bus and cars 15 mph or less. Military convoy is about 25 mph on secondary roads easy targets. You should see a big difference in speed from military convoy and cilvilian traffic I think or am I missing somthing or has this been over looked for some reason? FAC or Forward Air Controler: I don't know what im talking about here but I do Know every military use them and I thought there could be something done with the AI like the AWACS can be contacted for next air target except for a ground target being sent by a ground observer like the lased targets. Lock On ROCKS keep up the good work just my 2cents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest IguanaKing Posted December 30, 2005 Share Posted December 30, 2005 How about the NAV bug in the A-10? I'm not sure if it exists in the F-15, but the tadpole and the steering cue on the HUD are sometimes at odds with each other. The tadpole (which always seems to be correct) could be pointing 45 degrees to the right, but, for some reason, the steering cue is all the way to the left sometimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Silent Warrior Posted December 30, 2005 Share Posted December 30, 2005 If the third mission in the F-15-campaign still crashes, I'd really like to see it fixed. (Haven't tried for a good long while. Firing LOMAC up takes so damn long on my system it would be more pain than it's worth.) Also, if there is a way to convince my rig that it doesn't have to spend half the day loading a mission, I'm all ears. (Well, it usually only takes 1-4 minutes when all is well and stuff is cached, but still. I have had the time to devour lunch in between clicking Fly! and actually starting the mission.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TucksonSonny Posted December 30, 2005 Share Posted December 30, 2005 F/A-18C AI squadrons try to land on enemy bases (and being shut down by AAA) instead of returning to their carrier. Maybe I am doing something wrong because Su-33 AI does return and land on their carrier. DELL Intel® Core™ i7 Processor 940 2,93 GHz @3 GHz, 8 MB cache | 8.192 MB 1.067 MHz Tri Channel DDR3 | 512 MB ATI® Radeon™ 4850 | 500 GB 7200 rpm Serial ATA | Samsung SM 2693 HM 25.5 " | HOTAS Cougar Thrustmaster | Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwingKid Posted March 29, 2006 Share Posted March 29, 2006 For kinematics we have a program called minizap which we can use to calculate some very generous ballistic trajectories - meaning no interference form guidance systems etc ... it shows us how far a straight, unguided shot would go if it were a point mass ... the real ranges are actually somewhat shorter, but it is accurate for the first 30 seconds of flight or so. The applicaiton is written by SwingKid. Just to clarify, "we" = me and GG, for "what if"-discussion purposes only. The values generated by miniZAP have not (AFAIK) been used to develop missile range in Lock On. I think that miniZAP actually agrees with Rhen's estimates better. If you'd like to try it: http://www.ecf.utoronto.ca/~pavacic/missiles/minizap.zip -SK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted March 29, 2006 Share Posted March 29, 2006 Yep, minizap is a very nice tool to help with evaluation. It is -important- to realize however that minizap has no seeker model of any sort, it is porely a ballistic calculation, so the range you see is what you would get /if/ you tossed a missile that flew PERFECTLY to your target, no deviations whatsoever. A /lot/ of parameters are taken into account, but minizap results ought to be viewed at a 100% /BEST CASE/ scenario. SK, please correct me if I am wrong here. [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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SwingKid Posted March 29, 2006 Share Posted March 29, 2006 Yep, minizap is a very nice tool to help with evaluation. It is -important- to realize however that minizap has no seeker model of any sort, it is porely a ballistic calculation, so the range you see is what you would get /if/ you tossed a missile that flew PERFECTLY to your target, no deviations whatsoever. A /lot/ of parameters are taken into account, but minizap results ought to be viewed at a 100% /BEST CASE/ scenario. More precisely, even that range might be wrong. What it's best used for (IMHO) is comparisons. If miniZAP says missile A flies 10 km and missile B flies 20 km, but in the real world, missile A flies 15 km, then it's a fair bet that in the real world, missile B flies 30 km (not the 20 km that miniZAP quoted). It can estimate roughly how much better one missile's aerodynamics should be than another's, because unlike our sims, all missiles in miniZAP at least follow the same physical rules (regardless of the correctness of those rules). Most missiles in our sims mainly follow individually-tailored scripts, AFAIK. So, we can make observations like - "wow, AIM-120 has longer range that AIM-7 AND R-77!" - without even knowing for sure, what that range should be. Very useful IMHO for capturing the correct "combat balance" and developing realistic tactics. -SK 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted March 29, 2006 Share Posted March 29, 2006 Thanks SK. I do recall that what you told me about the aerodynamic parameters used for the missiles there. Either way minizap has indeed been very useful in the examination of various weapon velivery profiles, from bombs to SAMs to AAMs and arty :) (Ok. Admittedly I haven't really try bombs) [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 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmonaut Posted March 29, 2006 Share Posted March 29, 2006 Here's two; 1. Make "ForceFeedbackEnabled = false;" the default setting in the producer.cfg file! I would bet that a lot of people, that have never turned it off, would think that the new AFM’s were added. 2. When you set helicopters to land on the Kuz they use that landing zone that blocks the fixed wing landing area of the carrier, effectively shutting it down for traps. It would be great if you could set, or by default have them land on the take off ramp instead .. this would just be more flexible for mission building. Cozmo. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Minimum effort, maximum satisfaction. CDDS Tutorial Version 3. | Main Screen Mods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fishy Posted March 29, 2006 Share Posted March 29, 2006 The pilot log has problems: It is not tallying kills correctly, there is no breakout of vehicles and missle units, and it does not count any buildings. It aslo misses some missions, just flat will not tally them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cosmonaut Posted March 29, 2006 Share Posted March 29, 2006 The pilot log has problems: Ahh .. just remembered.. Please make it so our pilots are invincible! That way we can actually use our logs instead of just ignoring the entire Pilot Log facility. Cozmo. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Minimum effort, maximum satisfaction. CDDS Tutorial Version 3. | Main Screen Mods. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brit_Radar_Dude Posted March 30, 2006 Share Posted March 30, 2006 Please make it so our pilots are invincible! A resurrect button would be fine, annoying to have to either a) create nother pilot or b) manually edit the pilotlog file to resurrect him. Also fix the F-15 cockpit showing 0083 as the mode 3/A code. I'm sure I am the only one who is bugged by this (maybe IguanaKing too as he fixes transponders). [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Sorry Death, you lose! It was Professor Plum.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest IguanaKing Posted April 2, 2006 Share Posted April 2, 2006 Actually, I don't usually fly the Eagle, but an A code of 0083 is a silly one indeed, especially since "8" is not even possible...with C1, C2, and C4 all high, it would be 7. Since we don't have SSR operations in LOMAC, the LEAST they could do is have it set to 1200. I'll have to check the Hog pit, now that you mention that BRD. :cool: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts