F15c is not the TANK

[Grimes]

+-----------------+------+-------+-------+
| weapon          | hits | kills | ratio |
+-----------------+------+-------+-------+
| AIM-120B        |   50 |    33 |  66.0 | 
| AIM-120C        |  266 |   156 |  58.6 | 
| AIM-7M          |    7 |     7 | 100.0 | 
| AIM-9M          |   56 |    44 |  78.6 | 
| R-27EM (AA-10C) |   29 |    18 |  62.1 | 
| R-27ER (AA-10C) |  181 |   112 |  61.9 | 
| R-27ET (AA-10D) |  135 |    89 |  65.9 | 
| R-27R (AA-10A)  |   10 |     7 |  70.0 | 
| R-60M (AA-8)    |   11 |     6 |  54.5 | 
| R-73 (AA-11)    |   88 |    54 |  61.4 | 
| R-77 (AA-12)    |   82 |    46 |  56.1 | 
+-----------------+------+-------+-------+

 

Look at the AIM-7. You guys should be complaining about that sucker.... Its just way too good. :music_whistling:

 

Like I said before. Triggered Dead is dead is possible. I just don't entirely agree with doing that as it takes away from some of the "simulated" aspects of the game. I suppose it makes sense for a airquake style mission, but I'd rather have after-death spamming be heavily discouraged and frowned upon.

[Pilotasso]

:megalol:

[X-man]

Not to take away your point but its been the same in FC1. People notice it more because they are being killed at a higher rate in FC2.

Sorry, but I base my experience on internal trainings in the 51st, not public flying. Flying the same way as in FC1 will still give you more hits-without-kill in FC2. Nothing to do with what people notice. However, Im not arguing about different missiles, but rather all of them.

 

But you're right, that this behavior was present in FC1 as well, when pilots got the chance. It's just absurd to have aircraft with both engines out flying around with full avionics and missiles. Obviously, SIM pilots dont need to take care of their lives, so rambo moves is a given...

Edited September 3, 2010 by X-man

[Pilotasso]

Interesting graph there Case!

 

AS I've pointed out AIM-7 seems completely abandoned nowadays, however its kill ratio is magnigicent 100% which brings up "my" theory back again. It's a SARH missile but can perform better than ARH missiles and that's what people in MP tend to forget. Of course the number of Sparrows used is too small to be a solid proof but ratio is good so far.

 

Lots of players in MP equip with what's supposed to work best, can be seen in AIM-120B(182) vs AIM-120C(879) numbers and just keep spamming the skies. Therefore a realitvely low kill ratio with ARH missiles. A player who knows what's he doing may wreak havoc in fleet of Eagles with plain old R-27R.

 

It's not like F-15C is unbeatable in FC2.0 but it's sure more difficult to beat and can sometimes take more punishment than I can deliver with 2*R-27R and 4*R-73 during 30 minute flight...

 

Vek LOL your joking right? If I shoot ONE cannon bullet and it happens to hit and nobody else uses it then its 100% makes it the best weapon??

 

Its not reached a statistical representative usage yet.

 

The difference in AMRAAM version numbers also has to do with allowed quantities to carry, theres no 6 B AMRAAM loads available anywhere. Usually F-15's carry 4 C's and 2 B's, or just 6C's no B's. And its pretty well matched in the stats you just quoted.

 

Whats next vek? :D

Edited September 3, 2010 by Pilotasso

[Vekkinho]

 

Its not reached a statistical representative usage yet.

 

 

It probably never will as people tend to steer away from having it in their payload which is a shame as IMHO it works pretty good in LOMAC/FC/FC2.0 and probably better than it should but just as R-27R has great kill ratios.

 

I'm just saying that acting like a slow, radarless ground pounder 'til within NEZ range is a winning tactic today and AIM-7 and R-27R come handy with that approach. However, it interesting to see after all these years of FC MP how many players forget such threats and get shot by underdogs.

[Case]

It probably never will as people tend to steer away from having it in their payload which is a shame as IMHO it works pretty good in LOMAC/FC/FC2.0 and probably better than it should but just as R-27R has great kill ratios.

Don't be so sure Vex. I am sure the 51st will put an 80's mission into rotation at some point.

[Moa]

As always, excellent work Case.

 

What would also be worth knowing is launches vs hits & kills. There we'll see the spamming vs sniper effect - if there is such a thing.

 

nb. In an earlier post someone mentioned milliseconds for radar. You are three orders of magnitude too high. Light moves 3 m per nanosecond in a vacuum (and essentially the same speed in the atmosphere). To travel 30 km and back is 2 microseconds. Of course there is additional processing time and integration time as multiple pulses are accumulated. But the timescale is short. So, next time prove by doing the math please instead of wildly speculating (which is largely what this thread is about).

 

@GGT: Your 'wet dream' page can be done with the server exports just not with the debrief log that Case (and myself) are using. We just haven't got around to pulling that information out of the export logs yet.

[104th_Crunch]

The talk about missile hits vs. kills is very interesting. The talk about AIM-120s and F-15s being too strong makes me not want to read any of this any more.

 

Why don't people just create a server that features only 1 fighter jet type. Everyone will have equal odds. Problem solved.

[Case]

What would also be worth knowing is launches vs hits & kills. There we'll see the spamming vs sniper effect - if there is such a thing.

 

This is exactly what my plot shows:

Kills are in blue, hits in green and misses in red.

 

I specifically made the table (not yet as a figure) to show the kills vs hits+kills, which removes the pilot bias for spamming missiles, and those figures were more representative for the debate of this thread.

 

From the figure you can clearly see which missiles miss less often than others, but the table shows how many times, on average, you have to hit a target to kill it.

[Frostie]

The talk about AIM-120s and F-15s being too strong makes me not want to read any of this any more.

Reading between the lines of this thread it becomes apparent that the intial claim of the F-15 being a tank was misguided when in actual fact the difference in power at impact or proximity is greater for the AIM-120 than it is for the R-27ER in FC2.

 

This can create the illusion of the F-15 being able to withstand more punishment as getting proximity hit by an AIM-120 is more likely to shut your lights out then getting p/hit by an R-27ER.

I think this means that there was a valid cause for concern in the OP's mind. The bias of how he portrayed his argument should be ignored as most are guilty of that be it attacking or defending a claim.

 

 

Nice to see the ET still pwns all :D

Edited September 3, 2010 by Frostie

[GGTharos]

There's not that much difference in impact power, the explosive was tuned so it could actually do -some- damage at the edge of its fuze. Before that was done, AMRAAMs were exploding near their targets, doing nothing ;)

[Frostie]

There's not that much difference in impact power, the explosive was tuned so it could actually do -some- damage at the edge of its fuze.

With respect, even 1 degree of difference makes a difference. ;)

[GGTharos]

I did not say zero ;)

 

A lot of this is aspect dependent, but we were not able to control that in any way, shape or form. We had to basically tune for the weakest possible hit.

 

With respect, even 1 degree of difference makes a difference. ;)

[Exorcet]

getting proximity hit by an AIM-120 is more likely to shut your lights out then getting p/hit by an R-27ER.

 

Well the fuse is something to consider, but the graph says that the R-27 is more prone to kill than the AMRAAM.

 

Unless you meant literally take out the lights, as in avionics.

[VTJS17_Fire]

That shows, why I like and use the Sparrow - one hit, one kill. :thumbup:

 

 

kind regards,

Fire

[Frostie]

Well the fuse is something to consider, but the graph says that the R-27 is more prone to kill than the AMRAAM.

 

Unless you meant literally take out the lights, as in avionics.

I meant the actual power represented in the files.

 

What I can make out is that the (correct me if im wrong GG)

R-27ER = 39.0 with no multiplier (simplified warhead)

AIM-120 = 22.0 with a multiplier of 3.5 (directional warhead)

 

Because of the lack of frag effect modeling these multipliers are needed to represent proximity coverage.

 

Does this mean that at impact the damage for the 120 would be 77.0?

 

That shows, why I like and use the Sparrow - one hit, one kill. :thumbup:

 

 

kind regards,

Fire

Im sure the 7 sparrow kills were down to most being used at a closer encounter or on a chased down bandit after 120's had missed from further out.

Edited September 3, 2010 by Frostie

[GGTharos]

I meant the actual power represented in the files.

 

What I can make out is that the (correct me if im wrong GG)

R-27ER = 39.0 with no multiplier (simplified warhead)

AIM-120 = 22.0 with a multiplier of 3.5 (directional warhead)

 

Because of the lack of frag effect modeling these multipliers are needed to represent proximity coverage.

 

Correct.

 

Does this mean that at impact the damage for the 120 would be 77.0?

 

Hm, you got me there - I would have to double-check the calculation. This may or may not be linear, I just don't recall. The explosion power itself is calculated inversely proportional to the square of the distance, IIRC.

[Grimes]

I know your making a joke. But when did the pilot fire the AIM-7's to get there kills. To me it looks like they were close and not near Rmax. The AIM-7 is a good missile, too bad most people take the 8x120 or 6x120 and 2xAim-9 loadouts. AIM-7's come in very handy when you have a friendly engaged danger close to a bandit. Case, can you see what pilots fired the AIM-7's?

 

The thought crossed my mind that they were during my mission where the F-15s are armed with a 4-2-2 or 5-1-2 payload. I really love using the Aim7, likewise almost all of the F-15s in my missions come armed with them. Its a very usefull missile to have. I'd rather have a 2 of them vs 2 active missiles any day of the week.

[Breakshot]

^^ Frosties post on top pretty much sums up my argument... Stats aside, we are discussing proximity hits, and that is exactly when the TNT numbers computed in the game will matter... The 120 wins hands down as shown by the numbers posted above... directional warhead or not, the game takes it as just pure TNT power due to its simple logic (which does not correspond to RL)... This is where the dramatic change from FC1 to FC2 takes place (combined with the fuze range of 120). I really dont see an argument here... its a no brainer. 77 > 38! a ratio more than 2:1... while in RL its exactly the opposite... even if we give the benefit of the doubt to the 120 with its directional warhead, i reckon it should be closer to 1:1 perhaps...

 

So with that said, there is no conspiracy theories here, its got nothing to do with the plane itself, be it F15 or Su-27 or whatever... Im just looking at the missile files.

 

Oh and regarding ERs... all my conclusions are from multiple 51st internal trainings (as X-Man pointed out earlier) which were done in a much more controlled environment... The difference between FC1 and FC2 became apparent almost instantly! And it has nothing to do with F15 being a tank, yadi yadi.... all planes will take little damage from an ER proximity hit... its just the way it is!

Edited September 4, 2010 by Breakshot

[SEFalcon]

RIPTIDE:

The messages aren't the issue. What is the issue is your bandit is on fire. His skin is falling off him with burning jet fuel from your 1st hit. Whats the 1st thing he thinks about? Eject?? Nah.. that would be too realistic and only for pussies... he directs his faltering jet around and manages to longitudinal off a couple of ET's or maddogg a few 120's even though IRL his skeleton has been carbonised.

 

Exactly

 

Crunch:

Your F-15 tank statement really shows you have a discrimination for anything but your favorite aircraft. I am really sick of this fanboy stuff.

 

Mate sory if in my post sounds like as discrimination but i dont wanna that. I flying Su27 and on my radar in 90% cases i find only f15c and i only represent my expirience. I believe that happens with the other planes but that must say other pilots. I`m only compare my SU27 vs f15C from my corner. Yes im fanboy, but LOCKON FANBOY with respect to all planes and pilots. We must be honest about damage model or missile power, especialy testers. This problem is not from yesterday, this problem is here from the first day FC2.0 and nothing has changed after many posts about this problem. So now i believe we will fix it soon and all of us will full enjoy in fights.

 

Breakshot:

 

The problem isnt in the F15 itself, or any other plane for that matter, its a problem with Aim 120... It has 2-3x times more explosive power than ER (even though ER technically packs a hell of alot more TNT, in RL), Just go check the missile files and you will see... numbers dont lie!

So, this is obviosly completely incorrect, if we judge by RL numbers... but ED did it to make 120 more deadly against any barrel-rolls, etc... IMO they overdid it big time, the fuze range is already enough if u ask me...

So the reason you "see" F15 being so good, because he can usually take you down with 1 hit, while you, in a Su27, flying with firecracker piss poor ERs might need your whole payload after first hit due to much lower "stopping power". Its really that simple! And those who dont fly Su-27s enough just dont know this...

 

That is the point.

 

X-man:

Still, I would like to see those numbers closer to 1...

 

The damage model is in serious need of correction in order to maintain some sort of realistic air combat, compared to the kamikaze stuff we see today...

...It's just absurd to have aircraft with both engines out flying around with full avionics and missiles. Obviously, SIM pilots dont need to take care of their lives, so rambo moves is a given...

 

:thumbup:

 

... and great job Case.

 

Sory for multiple quote but just wanna keep thread in the right direction and show what i wanna to say. Feel free to ignore my term "TANK", im told that to tickle all. ;)

 

Lets fix the problem in some way and keep Lockon with full enjoying!

[Pilotasso]

Stats aside, we are discussing proximity hits, and that is exactly when the TNT numbers computed in the game will matter... The 120 wins hands down as shown by the numbers posted above

 

 

where is that in the table????

 

 

+-----------------+------+-------+-------+
| weapon          | hits | kills | ratio |
+-----------------+------+-------+-------+
| AIM-120B        |   50 |    33 |  66.0 | 
| AIM-120C        |  266 |   156 |  58.6 | 
| AIM-7M          |    7 |     7 | 100.0 | 
| AIM-9M          |   56 |    44 |  78.6 | 
| R-27EM (AA-10C) |   29 |    18 |  62.1 | 
| R-27ER (AA-10C) |  181 |   112 |  61.9 | 
| R-27ET (AA-10D) |  135 |    89 |  65.9 | 
| R-27R (AA-10A)  |   10 |     7 |  70.0 | 
| R-60M (AA-8)    |   11 |     6 |  54.5 | 
| R-73 (AA-11)    |   88 |    54 |  61.4 | 
| R-77 (AA-12)    |   82 |    46 |  56.1 | 
+-----------------+------+-------+-------+

You'll see that for the missiles that are discussed here the ratios are not that different. AIM-120B is highest at 66.0% (still small number statistics though), while the C is lowest at 58.6%. The ER is in the middle with 61.9%.

So: "stats aside [...] but numbers show[...]"

Holly Bias Batman!!!

 

 

 

you being very selective along with falcon towards whats realistic and whats not, or whatever has been said and shown as evidence in this thread in such a way it seems only yourselves are the victims here.

You are arguing over crumbs in a survey SIM where realism needs to be polished in many aspects as compared to a study SIM, from sensors, to missiles, or unavoidable network issues influencing proximity hits.

If you had a realistic AMRAAM in game you would be crying alot more as AMRAAM should be the most lethal. Consider yourselves lucky.

 

I think you need to come to terms with these facts.

Edited September 4, 2010 by Pilotasso

[VTJS17_Fire]

I know your making a joke. But when did the pilot fire the AIM-7's to get there kills. To me it looks like they were close and not near Rmax. The AIM-7 is a good missile, too bad most people take the 8x120 or 6x120 and 2xAim-9 loadouts. AIM-7's come in very handy when you have a friendly engaged danger close to a bandit. Case, can you see what pilots fired the AIM-7's?

 

 

IIRC, the VJS161 guys, myself too, use the Sparrow very often. In situations, like that one you described, the AIM-7 is very, very useful.

If the bandit turns away or the lock broke, you don't have a "buggy" AIM-120 which looking for the nearest, next target - maybe friendly - sometimes near 80° off boresight. That's why we shoot most SARH in Delouse situations.

 

But payload depends on threats. 1-2 Threats on red, I prefer a 242 or 422. But alone or twice on blue against 3-6 on red, I prefer a 602 or 620.

 

 

kind regards,

Fire

[Pilotasso]

the 90º off boresight bug has never been confirmed to be in Fc2

[Frostie]

 

If you had a realistic AMRAAM in game you would be crying alot more as AMRAAM should be the most lethal. Consider yourselves lucky.

 

I think you need to come to terms with these facts.

Is this a fact or just a random notion?

 

The stats don't necessarily represent the missiles effectiveness, as how they are used and how they make the kill is not shown, i'd wager a lot of AMRAAM hits happen against a target trying evasive maneuveurs while a lot of R-27ER shots are against targets with minimal evasive maneuveurs.

 

Especially when you consider the amount of fired and missed (120C 31% hit, 27ER 19% hit) you would assume from this that most long range ER shots miss, while a larger portion of AMRAAM shots hit, resulting in a greater chance of a proximity hit for the AMRAAM. When you throw in the fact that the TNT in FC2 is bigger for the 120 than the ER this could be where the AMRAAM catches up on proximity hits equaling kills. Therefore producing the figures shown.

 

So with that in mind the AIM-120 is the most lethal of the two.

[Frostie]

the 90º off boresight bug has never been confirmed to be in Fc2

Its not in FC2, its an illusion created from the viewer watching the event in tacview and delaying checking the moment the seeker acquires, 1 second too late and what is actually a 60 deg angle appears to be an 80+ deg angle because the plane is still moving towards the missile (usually underneath) so the missile turns even further creating an illusion that its just acquired a target beyond its gimbals.