Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


About Tippis

  • Rank
    Senior Member
  • Birthday 01/01/1870

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. True enough. That's probably also a major reason why it's been around for so long: there's just no telling where and when it will strike, and no reasonable method of reproducing it has ever surfaced.
  2. …and also that “Stable” rarely is much more stable than the beta branch — it's more that its… ehrm… quirks are a known entity, whereas the beta may change from one month to the next. So there's very little reason to use stable to begin with.
  3. The reason it's not mentioned is that it's has been a universal problem for ages now. Just about every update will create conflicting binds, binds that no longer work for a specific device, binds that get lost, or binds that just no longer work because the underlying action definitions have changed in some way. Binding in general is just one of the most brittle pieces of the entire game, and it's good practice to make it a part of your post-patch run-through to check them and fix anything that got broken (if you wait too long, it will just add more diffs end exception
  4. There's also isometric view (I think that's what it's called in the binds?) — free look, and while weapons will follow the view as best they can, the looking around is not tied to or limited by them.
  5. Whaaaa?! Are you saying that these constant threads of his asking to be given tools to dictate how other people play (or don't play) the game sit in sharp contrast to this one, where he is upset that other people dictate how he gets to play (or don't play)… and that this is a <scare chord> pattern?! I am shocked! Shocked, I tell you!
  6. If you don't want to be banned from a server, how about following the server owner's rules rather than wishing you could go cry to ED about something they have nothing to do with.
  7. Also, while we're at it with the ship damage stats… MOAR DATA MINING! Ship hitpoints FFL 1124.4 Grisha 1,600 FF 1135M Rezky 1,800 CGN 1144.2 Piotr Velikiy 6,500 CG 1164 Moskva 5,200 FSG 1241.1MP Molniya 1,100 CV 1143.5 Admiral Kuznetsov 7,000 FFG 11540 Neustrashimy 2,180 Type 052B Destroyer 2,700 Type
  8. It still has its own missile parameters that it will rely on for firing, and I'm not sure the Sborka really offers any benefit other than early detection, as opposed to whatever degree of actual location the Tunguska needs to fire. That said, I have seen Tunguskas fire without any threat indication so it is possible for it to just go on some internal “I know the target is here, so I can look there, so I can now fire and guide the missile” logic. For missile defence in particular, the Sborka is… less than helpful regardless, due to its relatively high target size limit: it simply won't detect a
  9. Yes, on its own, the SA-19 isn't terribly capable as far as detection goes. It has optical (which takes ages to do a full sweep) and its search radar (which is not very long range and not the best against small targets), but if it gets help to detect anything using other sensor units, it will happily fire at just about anything it now knows about. This makes it an even bigger surprise-bleep-you unit than the SA-13: it doesn't really use its own radar (because it doesn't have to) and thus doesn't get targeted, and suddenly when everything should be dead already, you get an optically
  10. On land, the Patriot, SA-10, and SA-15 have sensors good enough to detect the missiles. Technically, all IR systems can too, but they rarely have the range and reaction speed needed for it to do any good. At sea, the HHQ-9, HQ-16, Phalanx, RAMs, Sea Sparrows, SA-N-6 (navalised S-300F), SA-N-9 (navalised Tor-M1), SA-N-12 (navalised Buk-M3), and SA-N-20 (navalised S-300FM) can do it, but the way ships work, they're pretty useless to waste ARMs on even in cases where it really should work.
  11. Going by the numbers… It's all about the comparison between the missile's “reflection” stat (essentially nose-aspect cross-section) in relation to the weapon system's and/or radar tracker's “reflection limit” — i.e. how small a target it can acquire. Missile sizes (“reflection”) Kh-41 Moskit / SS-N-22 “Sunburn” 0.8m² P-500 Базальт / SS-N-12 “Sandbox” 1.2m² P-700 Гранит / SS-N-19 “Shipwreck” 1.5m² AGM-84A / S / E 0.08m² (compare AGM-8
  12. Tippis


    It could probably be done with sufficiently advanced triggers and scripting, but it would not really rely on any actual communication or accurate spotting/lasing/smoking targets. It would rather be a matter of having lots of individual vehicles that are set to be invisible to the AI unless you run through the scripts and put smoke in remotely the right spot at which point the target becomes invisible and the AI does its standard attack against it without any further help or guidance from you. It would mostly just be slow and rote and not at all related to how well you do your thing
  13. It allows the selected units (infantry, transport, armored, and cargo units) to be transported by helicopter. However, not all units respond well (or at all) to the embarkation task, and the task itself is largely broken and hopeless to get to work in any interesting or useful way. By and large, it can be ignored — anything you'd want to use that flag for is infinitely better done using scripting.
  14. Those are all accurate. NS430 hasn't received any substantial updates for three years now, and even before that, none of the advertised base functions worked properly. There is no comms or nav integration, contrary to what the sales blurb suggests. The GPS navigation isn't working properly. Its only real functionality is to act as a moving map in aircraft that don't have that. It has been like this since its first release. It is very generous to even call it beta stage, and there has been no indication that it will leave its current abandoned state any time soon.
  • Create New...