Jump to content

LANTIRN Control for Pilot


VampireNZ

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 187
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

1. Yeah...so? This is DCS & HB promised this : "JESTER" AI: A new, lifelike AI that fills the role of RIO when flying in single-player or multiplayer mods without a human RIO." go & read the sales page!

Mods in this case means modules like the Tomcat and and other future HB modules that will make use of Jester AI...

 

QuiGon you talk allot about how "cheating" this mod is & you don't want it in MP. But you seem not have any problems flying together with unrealistic, FC3 aircrafts, judging from your banner.....

I'll just leave that here: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=3163139

 

 

All we are asking for is that this mod will be an Option in MP. If you don't like it don't use it ;).

All I ask is to keep MP realistic as it should be in a sim.


Edited by QuiGon

Intel i7-12700K @ 8x5GHz+4x3.8GHz + 32 GB DDR5 RAM + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit

 

DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

 

Tornado3 small.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have the energy to read this entire thread. But to respond to you, specifically:

 

Your position seems utterly nonsensical. Why should the pilot be able to give specific commands down to antenna position to Jester to operate the radar, but not the LANTIRN? Until you explain that, your entire argument is a complete illogical mess.

I think you missunderstood something there. I have no problem with giving specific LANTIRN commands to Jester. I was just wondering how they look like and how well it would work for those that will make use of that.

 

Except they wouldn't have any of said resources, because almost nobody would have bought the Tomcat. Good job

You're making assumptions here. The number of people who use this cheat mod seems pretty slim to me (Yes, I can make assumptions too).

Intel i7-12700K @ 8x5GHz+4x3.8GHz + 32 GB DDR5 RAM + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit

 

DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

 

Tornado3 small.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing about realism in a game is that it’s implementation is always going to be subjective.

 

For example, switching between front and back seat in the Tomcat and/or using the current LANTIRN Pilot solution. Unrealistic, perhaps, but at least you’re still in the *same* airframe. Suddenly choosing to swap to another platform like a Harrier or Hornet in the middle of the match would be incredibly unrealistic. Obviously a pilot may fly multiple platforms over the course of his/her career, but he/she will only be operating one type/model of aircraft at a time, correct?

 

Side note: Can you imagine inviting some of the folks from this thread over for a party? I imagine it would be like this lol :D

 

2080Ti FTW3 Ultra - G.Skill RJ 32GB (16x2) DDR4 3200 - Ryzen 2700X 4.2Ghz OC - Corsair H100i Pro - Samsung 970 EVO M.2 2TB - TMW HOTAS w Delta Sim - F/A-18C grip - 10cm Sahaj - TrackIR 5 Pro - Rift CV1 - MFG CWind - BuddyFox UFC - DSD RK II - Cougar MFDs w/ LCDs - Foxx Mounts - VPC MongoosT-50CM base

 

- Maps: NTTR, Persian Gulf, Normandy

- Modules: FC3, F-14A/B, F/A-18C, AV-8B, A-10C, F-16C, F-86, KA-50, P-51D, WWII assets, and [insert campaign name]

Dreaming of the F-15E / F-14D / Rhino

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't go on parties.

Intel i7-12700K @ 8x5GHz+4x3.8GHz + 32 GB DDR5 RAM + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit

 

DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

 

Tornado3 small.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Side note: Can you imagine inviting some of the folks from this thread over for a party? I imagine it would be like this lol :D

 

 

 

Yes, but a lot less fun :D

---------------------------------------------------------

PC specs:- Intel 386DX, 2mb memory, onboard graphics, 14" 640x480 monitor

Modules owned:- Bachem Natter, Cessna 150, Project Pluto, Sopwith Snipe

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't go on parties.

 

For the record, I did not mention/reference you in any capacity, yet you chose to respond. Nonetheless, thank you for helping to prove my overall point :thumbup:

 

 

 

Yes, but a lot less fun :D

Precisely - it would be awful lol

2080Ti FTW3 Ultra - G.Skill RJ 32GB (16x2) DDR4 3200 - Ryzen 2700X 4.2Ghz OC - Corsair H100i Pro - Samsung 970 EVO M.2 2TB - TMW HOTAS w Delta Sim - F/A-18C grip - 10cm Sahaj - TrackIR 5 Pro - Rift CV1 - MFG CWind - BuddyFox UFC - DSD RK II - Cougar MFDs w/ LCDs - Foxx Mounts - VPC MongoosT-50CM base

 

- Maps: NTTR, Persian Gulf, Normandy

- Modules: FC3, F-14A/B, F/A-18C, AV-8B, A-10C, F-16C, F-86, KA-50, P-51D, WWII assets, and [insert campaign name]

Dreaming of the F-15E / F-14D / Rhino

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Mods in this case means modules like the Tomcat and and other future HB modules that will make use of Jester AI...

 

All I ask is to keep MP realistic as it should be in a sim.

No, it's modes, as in SP/MP mode (I didn't even notice HB's misspelling).

 

You can run your MP server how you want, but why do you care how I will run mine ie. allowing this mod???

 

Do I care if someone uses easy-comms, lables, padlock, unlimited fuel/weapons, full F10 map etc. in MP?....No, I don't give a dime. Do I want those options to vanish? No I don't, coz I know some people benefit from them & they're selectable options in MP server!

But no, you want to force everyone to play MP in your way only, like a dictator, it's very egocentric!

Options is a good thing it keeps DCS diverse!

 

I also bet that this mod will be copied & implemented in one way or another by HB. I don't see HB being able to do anything dramatically different then this mod....if they want a fully functioning Jester LANTIRN that is ;).

i7 8700k@4.7, 1080ti, DDR4 32GB, 2x SSD , HD 2TB, W10, ASUS 27", TrackIr5, TMWH, X-56, GProR.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[/img]

 

I do so get tired of these kind of statements that are just blatantly not true. Sims have always been around and they'll continue to be.

 

---

 

I don't get the whining either, if you'd like to do it so much by yourself why get a 2 man crew module instead of the single seat modules like the A10, F18 to do strike missions with?

 

I didn't get the Tomcat just because of the iconic aircraft it is, it being multicrew and the inclusion of Jester AI if you're people shy or just like to fly solo also had to do with it for me. That my strike missions are currently limited because Jester AI can't use the lantirn yet is ok, I can wait and if I want I could just ask someone to jump in the back to do it instead. Never did it cross my mind that I'd like to take the job of the RIO in my own hands whilst also being the pilot.

 

 

 

Future virtual F15E pilot: Hold my Beer


Edited by Kev2go

 

Build:

 

Windows 10 64 bit Pro

Case/Tower: Corsair Graphite 760tm ,Asus Strix Z790 Motherboard, Intel Core i7 12700k ,Corsair Vengeance LPX DDR4 64gb ram (3600 mhz) , (Asus strix oc edition) Nvidia RTX 3080 12gb , Evga g2 850 watt psu, Hardrives ; Samsung 970 EVo, , Samsung evo 860 pro 1 TB SSD, Samsung evo 850 pro 1TB SSD,  WD 1TB HDD

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All I ask is to keep MP realistic as it should be in a sim.

 

Striving for realism is good. But, speaking as a pilot in real life, I always find amusing the often completely arbitrary distinctions armchair pilots in this community make between what should be realistic and what they'll conveniently ignore. At the end of the day, the reality is we're all just playing our own particular game, no matter what you tell yourself.


Edited by Jester2138
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Striving for realism is good. But, speaking as a pilot in real life, I always find amusing the often completely arbitrary distinctions armchair pilots in this community make between what should be realistic and what they'll conveniently ignore. At the end of the day, the reality is we're all just playing our own particular game, no matter what you tell yourself.

 

Completely agree.

 

And to add to this, (directed at the thread) don't tell others what's realistic and what's not, like you're preaching gospel or facts from an encyclopedia.

Speak for yourself, and don't say the entire sim should be modeled after what YOU like. It should cater to everyone.

 

If all options are available, you have the power to ignore it and play how you want.

If everything is restricted how you want it, it leaves no options for those that don't want to play like you do.

 

Stop being so close minded.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Striving for realism is good. But, speaking as a pilot in real life, I always find amusing the often completely arbitrary distinctions armchair pilots in this community make between what should be realistic and what they'll conveniently ignore. At the end of the day, the reality is we're all just playing our own particular game, no matter what you tell yourself.

Yeah, it's a game but of a simulation kind, more - a combat study sim, that strive for as much realism as is possible with software and hardware given.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combat_flight_simulation_game#Study

 

 

Please tell me, what "they" ignore, and I can help you understand.

 

 

Last time I checked realism is not subjective. It's either more or less real, not related to some feelings.

🖥️ Win10 i7-10700KF 32GB RTX3060   🥽 Rift S   🕹️ T16000M HOTAS   ✈️ FC3, F-14A/B, F-15E   ⚙️ CA   🚢 SC   🌐 NTTR, PG, Syria

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Completely agree.

Speak for yourself, and don't say the entire sim should be modeled after what YOU like.

.

 

So modeling a workaround for "everyone" is something YOU would like, instead of the documented, historical and systematic design attributes of this Aircraft. We'll ignore that the LANTIRN controls on this platform are located in the RIO cockpit. We'll ignore that RIOs and Naval Aviators didn't arbitrarily switch places for the fun of it, since each pit requires a specialist to be combat effective.

 

The part that really blows my mind, is that the HB Tomcat only carries 4 LGBs, yet this seems to be a universe breaking tear in the community. How much control do you really want to exert on finding targets instead of asking Jester to do so. Why add the weight if all you have to do is have a JTAC of FAC do it for you? Or a CAS aircraft in the area that's considerably more effective at A/G anyway?

 

The question is why should a option be included (I've said it every time, what you do in SP is your business. My personal issue is with MP options) that fundamentally strays from the aircraft design, instead of what should be modeled through the RIO as he is the one with the control stick? Yes we can't achieve realism in all aspects due to inherent differences from your armchair sim-pits and the real thing, but why make something integrated that wasn't there to begin with?

 

Look we can split hairs about definitions all day long. And argue using the bottom half of Graham's Hierarchy of Disagreement but you have made up your mind. You have a fantasy of what the Tomcat should be stuck in your head and you are not going to let it go, instead of spending the time to learning how to fly it and find creative ways around the abilities of the Aircraft.

 

Btw, I think most of those arguing for it would be the anti-social lone-wolf individuals at the party who seem to like to do everything themselves, won't to share anything and refuse to talk to another person be it AI or God forbid another human being.

 

I miss the per-release crowd on this forum..The were considerably more appreciative of just getting an A/C that flew instead of nitpicking everything and ran-off the SMEs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, but I want DCS to stay realistic. Like it or not. And no, there are no different and subjective views of what is realistic and what is not. What there is are different and subjective views of how much realism is still fun. DCS is a sim that is orientied to being on the hardcore side of realism compared to other flight sims and I would like it to stay like that.

 

In regards to offering unrealistic features as options that everyone can choose to use or not: I don't care what everyone does on his own, but when it comes to MP he's no longer on his own. In theory it's also fine to give server admins options to choose the level of realism for their server, but in fact this gets more and more problematic, because of how DCS handles that. Options like game mode, unlimited fuel and invulnerability are fine with me, because they can be activated and deactivated in a common menu and the server browser shows the respective settings for each server. It becomes problematic for me though in two other cases, which appear more and more in DCS:

 

1) Realism settings that can't be enforced on the server. Examples for this would be the current LANTIRN mod or the unrealistic A-A missile pipper for the MiG-21.

 

2) Realism settings that are totally intransparent and cumbersome to use. An example for this are the INS drift and alignment settings for RAZBAMs modules (M2000, Harrier), which can be enforced in the mission editor for each single aircraft. That makes it very cumbersome for the mission maker and the players have no insight in how the server has configured these settings.

 

The number of realism settings that fall in one of these two categories is increasing pretty rapidly lately and that worries me a lot.

 

 

Also, on a additional note, where is the limit for such options? Should everything imaginable be made available as an option? Should it be an option to allow AMRAAMs and HARMs for the Tomcat for those that want to use them? DCS is not the jack of all trades. It's a hardcore sim focused on realism. It can't be tailored to everyones needs If you want less realism, play less realistic games.


Edited by QuiGon

Intel i7-12700K @ 8x5GHz+4x3.8GHz + 32 GB DDR5 RAM + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit

 

DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

 

Tornado3 small.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, but I want DCS to stay realistic. Like it or not. And no, there are no different and subjective views of what is realistic and what is not.

 

See, this is what I'm talking about. You have no idea what is or isn't realistic, and what you ask for is arbitrary and ultimately only about what you find fun, not realism.

 

Maybe Heatblur should put Jester AI in command of the aircraft from time to time, just like the backseater often is in real life. He'll tell you where to go, how to fly, who to shoot, when to RTB. I'd love to see whether you're still up for realism then. And ED should probably account-ban any pilot who takes off without a package, because that's realistic. Heatblur should also have every aircraft spawn with a ~60% chance of major systems not functioning, because that's realistic. Also, if you go over your G-limit, you don't get to fly for a few days at least. Because that's also realistic. Finally, we could require a minimum 4-hour briefing in-game going over maps, weather, ATOs, threats, airspace, friendlies, targets, etc. before you're able to spawn in any aircraft, because that would be realistic. This is maybe 1% of the changes we could very easily do to make it more realistic, and also infinitely less fun.


Edited by Jester2138
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Stop being so close minded.

 

no, there are no different and subjective views of what is realistic and what is not.

 

I rest my case.

 

This kind of mentality is why you're getting so much flak. You basically just said "my way is the only way of looking at this. The rest of you are wrong".

 

You need to broaden your horizons a bit and stop trying to shut down opinions that differ from yours.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

See, this is what I'm talking about. You have no idea what is or isn't realistic, and what you ask for is arbitrary and ultimately only about what you find fun, not realism.

 

Maybe Heatblur should put Jester AI in command of the aircraft from time to time, just like the backseater often is in real life. He'll tell you where to go, how to fly, who to shoot, when to RTB. I'd love to see whether you're still up for realism then. And ED should probably account-ban any pilot who takes off without a package, because that's realistic. Heatblur should also have every aircraft spawn with a ~60% chance of major systems not functioning, because that's realistic. Also, if you go over your G-limit, you don't get to fly for a few days at least. Because that's also realistic. Finally, we could require a minimum 4-hour briefing in-game going over maps, weather, ATOs, threats, airspace, friendlies, targets, etc. before you're able to spawn in any aircraft, because that would be realistic. This is maybe 1% of the changes we could very easily do to make it more realistic, and also infinitely less fun.

Of course I don't want 100% realism. I never said I want. I don't want to die IRL when I get shot down in the sim either. So, because I don't wanna die I'm not allowed to advocate for a high level of realism in a sim or what are you trying to say? :huh:

 

I rest my case.

 

This kind of mentality is why you're getting so much flak. You basically just said "my way is the only way of looking at this. The rest of you are wrong".

 

You need to broaden your horizons a bit and stop trying to shut down opinions that differ from yours.

Because what you are doing is something completely different... not.

Intel i7-12700K @ 8x5GHz+4x3.8GHz + 32 GB DDR5 RAM + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit

 

DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

 

Tornado3 small.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

....I always find amusing the often completely arbitrary distinctions armchair pilots in this community make...

 

Ummm....I don’t have a dog in the F14 fight but I’m pretty sure this community is like 98% “armchair pilots.” Since it is a simulator for PCs....

 

Don’t get me wrong, there are clearly wonderful members of the community with RL experience that are great resources for TTPs and systems on particular airframes, or subjects like aerodynamics or even TERPS, and the community is better because they are willing to share. I for one am very grateful for their contributions. But I don’t think deriding the vast majority of DCS players by demeaning their lack of RL experience is constructive.


Edited by tom_19d
Fixed misspelled word

Multiplayer as Variable

 

Asus Z97-A - I7 4790K - 32 GB HyperX - EVGA GTX 1080 Ti - Corsair 750i PSU

 

TM Warthog HOTAS - TM Cougar MFDs - CH Pedals - TrackIR 5 - Samsung RU8000 55”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe Heatblur should put Jester AI in command of the aircraft from time to time, just like the backseater often is in real life. He'll tell you where to go, how to fly, who to shoot, when to RTB. I'd love to see whether you're still up for realism then. And ED should probably account-ban any pilot who takes off without a package, because that's realistic. Heatblur should also have every aircraft spawn with a ~60% chance of major systems not functioning, because that's realistic. Also, if you go over your G-limit, you don't get to fly for a few days at least. Because that's also realistic. Finally, we could require a minimum 4-hour briefing in-game going over maps, weather, ATOs, threats, airspace, friendlies, targets, etc. before you're able to spawn in any aircraft, because that would be realistic. This is maybe 1% of the changes we could very easily do to make it more realistic, and also infinitely less fun.

You failed to understand what is the flight simulator and its purpose. It is to simulate any aircraft and its pilot in any time avoiding the costs and risks of the real flight.

 

But to answer your concerns:

1. I would like an option to have RIO in command or to be a wingman for AI leader.

2. Take off without what? Are we still within sim realms?

3. 60% chance of failure of a major system? Where did you pull the number from? We already can simulate the purposed or random failures in DCS.

4. G damage and effects are simulated and accumulate for a given flight. We don't get an option yet to set it at the start of a mission. Remember the moment you quit the mission you stop simulating that particular aircraft and its pilot!

5. We already do long briefings (in game or pdf, web meetings before MP) if we're serious about the complex mission completion.

 

Any more you're curious about?

🖥️ Win10 i7-10700KF 32GB RTX3060   🥽 Rift S   🕹️ T16000M HOTAS   ✈️ FC3, F-14A/B, F-15E   ⚙️ CA   🚢 SC   🌐 NTTR, PG, Syria

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don’t think deriding the vast majority of DCS players by demeaning their lack of RL experience is constructive.

 

I'm not demeaning their lack of experience. I'm pointing out that certain people's (not referring to the whole community) unilateral and uncompromising declarations of what's "realistic" and what's not to the point of even stating that translating reality to a desktop video game has no room for subjectivity is senseless and useless especially when they have no real-world experience themselves to know what's realistic and what's not.

 

If you find that demeaning, that's your problem and says more about you than me.


Edited by Jester2138
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm not demeaning their lack of experience. I'm pointing out that certain people's (not referring to the whole community) unilateral and uncompromising declarations of what's "realistic" and what's not to the point of even stating that translating reality to a desktop video game has no room for subjectivity is senseless and useless especially when they have no real-world experience themselves to know what's realistic and what's not.

 

If you find that demeaning, that's your problem and says more about you than me.

 

The term “armchair” anything is deragatory and is generally applied to someone expressing an opinion on an activity they don’t actually engage in, so when you use that terminology when talking about a game frequently played from an office chair, it sure looks like a criticism of more than “certain people.” But hey, my mistake if that was a misread on my part.

 

The discussion in this thread has been about gameplay mechanics, which is always going to be a subjective topic. Some people want to see the sim function one way with regards to a fictional AI crewmember, some people want that crew member to perform its duties in a different way, but this is all personal opinion. Certainly a passionate debate at times, but just opinion. The contention that being a real life pilot in some capacity makes an opinion on this topic more valuable is condescending.

 

Now, of course when the topic of proper recovery procedures in the Hornet or Tomcat comes up, or when the issue of how a certain hydraulic system on the Harrier functions is raised, or a debate on how to interpret a given USAF -1 is brought forth, I sit up and listen to the subject matter experts, and do so gratefully. But it has been my experience that the RL military pilots, aircrew, and support personnel on this forum don’t feel the need to denigrate anyone needlessly because they haven’t been there and done that.

 

My only point is that there are places where RL experience is relavent and places where it is not. It would be a quiet forum indeed if RL cred was needed to communicate opinions on the gameplay function of a fictional system.

Multiplayer as Variable

 

Asus Z97-A - I7 4790K - 32 GB HyperX - EVGA GTX 1080 Ti - Corsair 750i PSU

 

TM Warthog HOTAS - TM Cougar MFDs - CH Pedals - TrackIR 5 - Samsung RU8000 55”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The discussion in this thread has been about gameplay mechanics, which is always going to be a subjective topic. Some people want to see the sim function one way with regards to a fictional AI crewmember, some people want that crew member to perform its duties in a different way, but this is all personal opinion. Certainly a passionate debate at times, but just opinion.

 

I 110% agree. But it seems you're not keeping up with the thread:

 

I'm sorry, but I want DCS to stay realistic. Like it or not. And no, there are no different and subjective views of what is realistic and what is not.

 

My initial comment that's gotten you so worked up was addressing his attitude, not you, so I don't know why you're arguing with me about subjectivity. We agree on that.

 

The contention that being a real life pilot in some capacity makes an opinion on this topic more valuable is condescending.

 

I disagree when the topic is realism. If you haven't been there & done that, how do you know if it's realistic? Reading internet debates? For the record, I have never flown a Tomcat. Which is why I'm not sitting here making unilateral declarations of what's realistic and what's not for specifically the Tomcat, and telling everyone that if they disagree with me, they are simply wrong and don't care about The Right Way to play a video game.

 

At the end of the day, the reality is we're all just playing our own particular game, no matter what you tell yourself.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My initial comment that's gotten you so worked up was addressing his attitude, not you, so I don't know why you're arguing with me about subjectivity. We agree on that.

 

 

I disagree when the topic is realism. If you haven't been there & done that, how do you know if it's realistic? Reading internet debates? For the record, I have never flown a Tomcat. Which is why I'm not sitting here making unilateral declarations of what's realistic and what's not for specifically the Tomcat, and telling everyone that if they disagree with me, they are simply wrong and don't care about The Right Way to play a video game.

So your're really trying to tell me that controlling the LANTIRN from the front seat (which is the topic of this discussion) is supposed to be realistic?! I don't think you need to be a pilot to know that it is not. And this is not something to believe in or not. Controlling the LANTIRN from the front seat is not realistic. Period.

You can argue of course, that you want that degree of lacking realism, but I prefer it to stay realistic in that regard.

Intel i7-12700K @ 8x5GHz+4x3.8GHz + 32 GB DDR5 RAM + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit

 

DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing!

 

Tornado3 small.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...