Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 481
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

There are such models, yeah. You can count the operational airframes on your fingers, though. ;)

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Daniel "EtherealN" Agorander | Даниэль "эфирныйн" Агорандер

Intel i7 2600K @ 4.4GHz, ASUS Sabertooth P67, 8GB Corsair Vengeance @ 1600MHz, ASUS GTX 560Ti DirectCU II 1GB, Samsung 830series 512GB SSD, Corsair AX850w, two BENQ screens and TM HOTAS Warthog

DCS: A-10C Warthog FAQ | DCS: P-51D FAQ | Remember to read the Forum Rules |

|
| Life of a Game Tester
Link to post
Share on other sites
@aaron886

I'm sorry but i don't see his point.... Fact is if the flanker wasn't built to be an air superiority fighter, then why would china have the biggest fleet?

Fact is that they are both tremendous aircraft...

 

China used the flankers they bought as engineering samples; this in no way invalidates your point, of course.

 

and another fact is that F-15's have always met aircraft in the sky that were at least 1-2 generations behind it and not to mention poorly trained pilots, hence you have such a high K/D ratio on the F-15.

 

It doesn't matter. Even the Su-27SM is behind the F-15C in technology. The S/P/SKs are horribly outdated.

Projected exchange ratios last I saw (and it was a while ago, so don't quote me on it) were 6:1 in favor of the Eagle.

Most western pilots seem to think that the flanker would have a hard time getting a shot before an eagle was already completing its a-pole. But that again, is opinion.

 

Now that doesn't take away from its capabilities as an aircraft, but you can't in the same stroke say one is better than the other. As it stands in FC2, the Eagle completely outclasses the Flankers.

 

And it should.

 

 

I fly the Eagle its great and I'm giving and unbiased opinion, but in the interest of fairness and allowing people on both sides to enjoy the game, our =RvE= server will allow the r77 adder on the su27 for the flanker drivers.

Yes i know the su27sk carries it, but since the cockpit is the same and its just an avionics upgrade we are allowing it.

 

The SK does not carry it. The SK has no means nor provision for such; certain customers have upgraded or bought different FCS packages that permit the use of an R-77 however.

 

Again whole point of us all to be a part of this community is to enjoy the time we spend here, and if some of our brethren who fly other aircraft are not enjoying it, we should maybe cater to their needs, so that their experience is better.

 

Sure, but are all flanker pilots not enjoying it, or just a few?

 

Edit: one thing that would save a lot of this controversy is if ED just decides to add china to the game with access to the su27sk. Problem solved.

 

Peace!

 

That's the same Su-27 as the Russian baseline. The indigenous Chinese flanker is a completely different and far more dangerous bird. AFAIK, the PL-12 out-classes the R-77 as well, but that's half wild guess and half someone-said-something.

 

Russia seems to be skipping upgrading to the most current generation right now, and waiting for PAK-FA. Similarly they seem to be waiting on their new active AAM, rather than investing in the R-77.

[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 post
Share on other sites

Let's just ask for an Su-35. (I wouldn't mind getting to fly one).

 

In any case though, why not get together and make some 70's Cold War scenarios, limit F-15 to AIM-7 to even things out (you can do this in online right?)

 

I would participate, using each plane.

 

Also, I support EtherealN's idea on the ET. It got me a kill on a runner moving at 1000+ km/h today. R-73 never would have caught him, and ER would have alerted him that I was still chasing and forced me to keep following into enemy territory. ET has also given me some WVR kills as well. I won't take off without it.

[sIGPIC]http://i280.photobucket.com/albums/kk187/Exorcet/F-15singaturebaseACOmodifiedcomp-1.jpg[/sIGPIC]

Win 10 i5-9600KF 4.6 GHz 64 GB RAM RTX2080Ti 11GB -- Win 7 64 i5-6600K 3.6 GHz 32 GB RAM GTX970 4GB -- A-10C, F-5E, Su-27, F-15C, F-14B, F-16C missions in User Files

Link to post
Share on other sites
RedTiger,

I just ran a test in FC2...

 

D'oh! :doh: I should have realized that the launch authorization also took into account the potential energy of the missile. I'm glad you tested it. That makes complete sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites
@aaron886

 

I fly the Eagle its great and I'm giving and unbiased opinion, but in the interest of fairness and allowing people on both sides to enjoy the game, our =RvE= server will allow the r77 adder on the su27 for the flanker drivers.

 

LOL! Am I seeing what I think I'm seeing? Balance just won over realism in Lock On?!

 

You guys can do whatever you want on your server but I'm surprised by this. Can someone opt out and just use SARHs? What are you guys going to do if the DCS series ever models these fighters? Not play DCS sims I assume?

 

Not only will you not be able to add fictional payloads but you're going to have a lot more to put up with in terms of workload on those Russian fighters. Lets pretend its F-16 vs. MiG-29. Even if you "cheat" and map all the Fulcrum's dashboard stuff to your HOTAS, there's still going to be more to do to get from NAV mode to radar locked on and ready to fire than what the western fighter will have to do. Not to mention the nearly total lack of automation and reliance on your GCI/AWACS controller having their crap together. Will it be F-16C blue vs. F-16C read all the time then? :P

 

This is where I think Black Shark had the good fortune of being only co-op multiplayer. You have a very limited air to ground helicopter with fairly limited mission roles and almost no chance of surviving anything except those roles...even then...you can't expect miracles. For example, no one complained about how unfair it was that you couldn't operate at night. Probably because there weren't any players in those ground units with thermal sights to actually get into an e-peen measuring contest with. You just didn't operate at night...because you couldn't. No one cried about that, it was just accepted. You didn't feel like you were being unfairly beaten by a bunch of nasty human players laughing at you and high-fiving each other in their tanks as they drove around in the dark unopposed.

 

This is yet another reason why I keep my flight sim time single player and I keep all my multiplayer stuff in actual multiplayer games where balance doesn't have to be based on reality. That way if I want to cry about something, no one can just point to reality a smirk at me. :D


Edited by RedTiger
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see what all the fuss is about, these turkeys die just the same as they did before, except there is no whining this time/yet. :D

 

ET's kill pretty good in a BVR engagement but im not going to reveal too much info or else more balls might get chopped in the next patch and we'll be flying Su-2.7's with R-60's next time.

"[51☭] FROSTIE" #55

51st PVO "BISONS"

Fastest MiG pilot in the world - TCR'10

https://100kiap.org

Link to post
Share on other sites

holy crap! 44 pages in 2 days? my eyes are like saucers trying to read all this! Ungh! i cant keep up LOL Jeez guys! :P

 

Edit*** oh never mind.... 2 months.... i'm freaking stupid as he11 LMAO


Edited by graywo1fg
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
LOL! Am I seeing what I think I'm seeing? Balance just won over realism in Lock On?!

 

You guys can do whatever you want on your server but I'm surprised by this. Can someone opt out and just use SARHs? What are you guys going to do if the DCS series ever models these fighters? Not play DCS sims I assume?

 

Not only will you not be able to add fictional payloads but you're going to have a lot more to put up with in terms of workload on those Russian fighters. Lets pretend its F-16 vs. MiG-29. Even if you "cheat" and map all the Fulcrum's dashboard stuff to your HOTAS, there's still going to be more to do to get from NAV mode to radar locked on and ready to fire than what the western fighter will have to do. Not to mention the nearly total lack of automation and reliance on your GCI/AWACS controller having their crap together. Will it be F-16C blue vs. F-16C read all the time then? :P

 

This is where I think Black Shark had the good fortune of being only co-op multiplayer. You have a very limited air to ground helicopter with fairly limited mission roles and almost no chance of surviving anything except those roles...even then...you can't expect miracles. For example, no one complained about how unfair it was that you couldn't operate at night. Probably because there weren't any players in those ground units with thermal sights to actually get into an e-peen measuring contest with. You just didn't operate at night...because you couldn't. No one cried about that, it was just accepted. You didn't feel like you were being unfairly beaten by a bunch of nasty human players laughing at you and high-fiving each other in their tanks as they drove around in the dark unopposed.

 

This is yet another reason why I keep my flight sim time single player and I keep all my multiplayer stuff in actual multiplayer games where balance doesn't have to be based on reality. That way if I want to cry about something, no one can just point to reality a smirk at me. :D

 

Some more notes from me in this crazy thread :D

-Game balance bad, realism good

-LOFC2 - limited resources and a survey sim. Priorities taken on what to model best

-DCS will be about study sims and when fighters come out, if some one mentions the words game balance, I am going to puke on my throttle.

Link to post
Share on other sites
holy crap! 44 pages in 2 days? my eyes are like saucers trying to read all this! Ungh! i cant keep up LOL Jeez guys! :P

 

02-04-2010, 03:58 PM

 

That's when the thread was started - two months ago. ;)

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Daniel "EtherealN" Agorander | Даниэль "эфирныйн" Агорандер

Intel i7 2600K @ 4.4GHz, ASUS Sabertooth P67, 8GB Corsair Vengeance @ 1600MHz, ASUS GTX 560Ti DirectCU II 1GB, Samsung 830series 512GB SSD, Corsair AX850w, two BENQ screens and TM HOTAS Warthog

DCS: A-10C Warthog FAQ | DCS: P-51D FAQ | Remember to read the Forum Rules |

|
| Life of a Game Tester
Link to post
Share on other sites

What im curious to know is why is everyone trying to "simulate" realism in a game when everyone treats it as a game.

It has a FEW realistic factors in it, but a lot of factors pertinent to war are not there and or are missing. You want realism in war time scenario, even a pinch of it.... Fly falcon. What you can hope to do is try to simulate realistic aspects of combat by introducing those conditions in FC2, currently the entire Lockon series plays like an arcade game (Air quake), hence mission developers and server hosts can only hope to overcome this by adding conditions so that their clients/players conform to their "idea" of realistic

 

In any war scenario, the first objective is to take down the enemy Air defense network and radar stations, how often do you see this in any game in lockon? If so... how much priority is it really given? Nil or next to nil... Its all just one gigantic never ending air war to bolster individual pilot/squad egos with an end result being a stale mate, and after a while players get demotivated to fly the same thing over and over due to repetitiveness.

There is no mentality of team work, where one side competes vigorously and tactically to out do the other side.

God help any of you if you think war is conducted anywhere near how its done in Lockon.

 

eg. If you have been eating rice all your life, you wont know what bread tastes like ;-)

 

^ Some will get that some wont, to those who get it, apply it, be creative in your mission making!

 

Peace


Edited by =RvE=FuSiOn
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is so bad it gave me cancer

... it was cool to see someone get banned though! Top effort there!

 

Fusion - gotta agree. Want total, complete and utter realism? Join the defence force. Can't? Well, make do with what you have.

AMD Phenom II 965 BE @ 3.8GHz, 8GB OCZ AMD BE RAM, ATI HD5970 2GB XFX BE @ 875/1215, TM HOTAS Cougar, TM Cougar MFDs, TrackIR 5, CH MFP, GoFlight Switch Panel, iMo Mini-Monster Touch, Mimo 720S, Saitek Pro Flight Headset

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's the same Su-27 as the Russian baseline. The indigenous Chinese flanker is a completely different and far more dangerous bird. AFAIK, the PL-12 out-classes the R-77 as well, but that's half wild guess and half someone-said-something.

 

If you are using the same code for the aim120c and the r77 in lockon then realism doesn't matter does it?

Link to post
Share on other sites
If you are using the same code for the aim120c and the r77 in lockon then realism doesn't matter does it?

 

Or if Israel and Russian are in a coalition against United States, Ukraine, and Georgia.... all of which are fielding Ka-50 helicopters. Then realism doesn't much matter. But I reckon that is partly why we play this game anyways.

The right man in the wrong place makes all the difference in the world.

Current Projects: Scripting Wiki, Something...

Useful Links: Mission Scripting Tools MIST-(GitHub) MIST-(Thread), SLMOD, IADScript, Mission Editing Wiki!, Mission Building Forum

Link to post
Share on other sites
What im curious to know is why is everyone trying to "simulate" realism in a game when everyone treats it as a game.

It has a FEW realistic factors in it, but a lot of factors pertinent to war are not there and or are missing. You want realism in war time scenario, even a pinch of it.... Fly falcon. What you can hope to do is try to simulate realistic aspects of combat by introducing those conditions in FC2, currently the entire Lockon series plays like an arcade game (Air quake), hence mission developers and server hosts can only hope to overcome this by adding conditions so that their clients/players conform to their "idea" of realistic

 

In any war scenario, the first objective is to take down the enemy Air defense network and radar stations, how often do you see this in any game in lockon? If so... how much priority is it really given? Nil or next to nil... Its all just one gigantic never ending air war to bolster individual pilot/squad egos with an end result being a stale mate, and after a while players get demotivated to fly the same thing over and over due to repetitiveness.

There is no mentality of team work, where one side competes vigorously and tactically to out do the other side.

God help any of you if you think war is conducted anywhere near how its done in Lockon.

 

eg. If you have been eating rice all your life, you wont know what bread tastes like ;-)

 

^ Some will get that some wont, to those who get it, apply it, be creative in your mission making!

 

Peace

 

I am not talking about realism in terms of everything overall. Obviously that is beyond the scope of FC currently. What I mean is, for what is modelled in the sim, model it realistically.

 

As for the type of flying you see in a MP server. That is dependant just as much on the player as the mission. Join by yourself and fly airquake, or create a goal and try to achieve it with your squad mates etc. (The old Airquake comment is really an old argument) As for the mission's end of giving a player a sense of a goal, well we all know that triggers help that situation. You just have to wait while the community pumps out some missions since FC2 just came out 2 weeks ago. The stock MP missions that came out with the sim have some good examples. Just remember that the more scripted a mission is, the more linear and repetitive it can be, where as in a static mission a players options are more open, Again, it is all how you make it. I guess we need DCS:GTA :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
If you are using the same code for the aim120c and the r77 in lockon then realism doesn't matter does it?
Last time anyone checked, the laws of physics were the same for both missiles, so why couldn't the code that simulates them be?
  • Like 1

There are only 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and those who don't.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Or if Israel and Russian are in a coalition against United States, Ukraine, and Georgia.... all of which are fielding Ka-50 helicopters. Then realism doesn't much matter. But I reckon that is partly why we play this game anyways.

 

Of course a gameplay concession, but can be looked at like a hypothetical situation, not a lack of realism. What ifs. Also, I can't compare caring about how realistic the flight performance of my simulated jet is for example, to caring about the ability of Ka-50s being used by a non RUS country.

Link to post
Share on other sites
What im curious to know is why is everyone trying to "simulate" realism in a game when everyone treats it as a game.

It has a FEW realistic factors in it, but a lot of factors pertinent to war are not there and or are missing. You want realism in war time scenario, even a pinch of it.... Fly falcon. What you can hope to do is try to simulate realistic aspects of combat by introducing those conditions in FC2, currently the entire Lockon series plays like an arcade game (Air quake), hence mission developers and server hosts can only hope to overcome this by adding conditions so that their clients/players conform to their "idea" of realistic

 

In any war scenario, the first objective is to take down the enemy Air defense network and radar stations, how often do you see this in any game in lockon? If so... how much priority is it really given? Nil or next to nil... Its all just one gigantic never ending air war to bolster individual pilot/squad egos with an end result being a stale mate, and after a while players get demotivated to fly the same thing over and over due to repetitiveness.

There is no mentality of team work, where one side competes vigorously and tactically to out do the other side.

God help any of you if you think war is conducted anywhere near how its done in Lockon.

 

eg. If you have been eating rice all your life, you wont know what bread tastes like ;-)

 

^ Some will get that some wont, to those who get it, apply it, be creative in your mission making!

 

Peace

 

Well, u should start to make a MP map, that we can see how realistic it can be. (R-77 on Flanker's) ;)

Link to post
Share on other sites
Well, u should start to make a MP map, that we can see how realistic it can be. (R-77 on Flanker's) ;)
Don't worry, he's already making such a map.

There are only 10 types of people in the world: Those who understand binary, and those who don't.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Depends on what flanker version you are modelling. I believe most RvE hosted missions will

allow R77s on flankers, it makes the game so much more interesting :)

 

For example there could be 4-6 oldschool flankers and 2-4 upgraded flankers in a mission,

visible in the multiplayer join screen which are which.

 

Same goes for for example red flags, you could lock the payload for a few planes available

and someone lucky gets to fly them, maybe some get a mig29A, some get an F-15 without

amraams, someone gets something else, payloads assigned to whatever is the task.

 

You could for example make "Red side has N of weaponX, M of weapon Y" and then the coalition

must decide for themselves which planes get what weapons. Then everybody is integrity checked

for a blank rearm.lua for that specific event and can only rearm the default mission payload :)


Edited by =RvE=Yoda

S = SPARSE(m,n) abbreviates SPARSE([],[],[],m,n,0). This generates the ultimate sparse matrix, an m-by-n all zero matrix. - Matlab help on 'sparse'

Link to post
Share on other sites
Depends on what flanker version you are modelling. I believe most RvE hosted missions will

allow R77s on flankers, it makes the game so much more interesting :)

 

For example there could be 4-6 oldschool flankers and 2-4 upgraded flankers in a mission,

visible in the multiplayer join screen which are which.

 

Same goes for for example red flags, you could lock the payload for a few planes available

and someone lucky gets to fly them, maybe some get a mig29A, some get an F-15 without

amraams, someone gets something else, payloads assigned to whatever is the task.

 

You could for example make "Red side has N of weaponX, M of weapon Y" and then the coalition

must decide for themselves which planes get what weapons. Then everybody is integrity checked

for a blank rearm.lua for that specific event and can only rearm the default mission payload :)

 

That limited weapon and aircraft scenario you describe has an incarnation called "Crimean Incident" - produced by 51st Bisons. Currently it is being adapted to FC2.0. Would be nice to see lots of other teams participating in this wonderful campaign.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
What im curious to know is why is everyone trying to "simulate" realism in a game when everyone treats it as a game.

It has a FEW realistic factors in it, but a lot of factors pertinent to war are not there and or are missing. You want realism in war time scenario, even a pinch of it.... Fly falcon. What you can hope to do is try to simulate realistic aspects of combat by introducing those conditions in FC2, currently the entire Lockon series plays like an arcade game (Air quake), hence mission developers and server hosts can only hope to overcome this by adding conditions so that their clients/players conform to their "idea" of realistic

 

In any war scenario, the first objective is to take down the enemy Air defense network and radar stations, how often do you see this in any game in lockon? If so... how much priority is it really given? Nil or next to nil... Its all just one gigantic never ending air war to bolster individual pilot/squad egos with an end result being a stale mate, and after a while players get demotivated to fly the same thing over and over due to repetitiveness.

There is no mentality of team work, where one side competes vigorously and tactically to out do the other side.

God help any of you if you think war is conducted anywhere near how its done in Lockon.

 

eg. If you have been eating rice all your life, you wont know what bread tastes like ;-)

 

^ Some will get that some wont, to those who get it, apply it, be creative in your mission making!

 

Peace

 

Yeah, so like I said, Lock On multiplayer at large isn't where its at. Your argument is kinda proving my point.

 

The tools to do all of what you described are all available in FC 2.0. You want a real war? Flamming Cliffs can do it AND do it better than Falcon in some ways. Much of Falcon's realism ends at the cockpit canopy. Even the original developers in the original manual admit that Falcon is "hyper realism" and not at all true to the 90% routine, 10% sheer terror reality of war fighting. Lock On might not have all the button pushing or a sandbox campaign to play it, but it will reward you if try something realistic -- especially now! (I cite GG's A-pole/F-pole example)

 

If whoever sets up these servers doesn't want to use the tools, that's their perogative. If they don't set up an air defense network and don't task some F-16 AI to kill it while YOU the player are part of the package to sweep the area clean, who's fault is that? If those tools are used to set up a reasonably realistic scenario and players don't like it and just want Air Quake, have at it, but don't blame the sim.

 

Again...dedicated multiplayer game, anyone? I love Lock On to death, but its multiplayer is a blank canvas at best. Unless you have two squads who only play with each other in some sort of Red Flag scenario, who are in complete agreement on everything (which is exactly what some do), there will be some disagreement.

 

One way to fix this is to force hard-set goals on each side with some sort of time limit. These goals can and will funnel even a disorganized group of strangers into some sort of organization with the understanding that if they do not complete this goal in a certain amount of time...they lose completely. All the ego-driving stuff is a means to an end and will be meaningless unless you actually use it to win. Then you need a ranking system that ranks you on winning and actually completing goals. Example: If the F-15 pilot wants a high rank he needs to ensure no one in the strike gets killed and the target is actually destroyed, not worry about kills.

 

IMO, this is all out of the scope of what ED is willing to do. They're making sims, not games. ;)


Edited by RedTiger
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...