Final planning, online campaign

Jedi Master · Post by **Jedi Master** » 21 Jul 2004, 04:52

I've had good luck using flood mode with AIM-7s. The target doesn't get a launch indicator (as you're not in STT) and you don't have to worry about locking up--if they're in front of you, it will track. Of course, this doesn't work if you have mixed friendlies and enemies in front of you, but if it's one or more enemies only it's fine.

KODIAK · Post by **KODIAK** » 21 Jul 2004, 07:13

Yeah, I'm sure it says that flood mode comes as a recommended method for the Sparrow, but particularly during hectic moments where time is short. So, I'll give that ashot next time - but I need to spend some more time in the training mission to get the switch sequence a little more off-pat.

Grifter · Post by **Grifter** » 21 Jul 2004, 12:56

we all the missile effectiveness in LOMAC is bull@!)#$*! so why don't we lower the missle effectiveness for the enemy or raise our slightly in the options menu. Afterall, the current effectiveness for human pilots is not realistic. Perhaps, if we kicked it up a notch, it would be closer to real missle parameters?

KODIAK · Post by **KODIAK** » 21 Jul 2004, 13:29

Well, I personally don't have an issue with that. But the levels of both will need to be discussed by the whole group for agreement. It would be too easy for someone who is having a hard time to say turn it all the way down, and vice versa for someone having an easier time of it to say, well okay but only a little bit - so we need to put it to a team discussion.
Fact is that you would rarely find an A-10 hanging around an area which had so many Surface 2 Air threats as found in LO-MAC, without there having been a sweep of F-15s, 16s to draw out those type of threats, go beforehand. So when you bring that subject into the fray, it turns a lot of LO-MAC on it's head again. So my point is - realistic missions & mission environments for the relevant aircraft.

Grifter · Post by **Grifter** » 21 Jul 2004, 14:27

Actually, I don't think the SAM and AAA are exaggerated in LOMAC. The AAA and SAM are really not all that dense, at least not in the missions I've played. In any case, I was talking about A2A, migs against US fighters. The AI pilots just have an edge that's ridiculous. I'm convinced that the performance of missles from a player's fighter are grossly underperforming. I'm sure, if we were to go this route, we could agree on some increment to increase the performance of our missles. Say, to the actual performing parameters of the weapons?! That would be novel wouldn't it? :roll:

Hammer · Post by **Hammer** » 21 Jul 2004, 17:33

what about the other way around? does it not work by putting ai missile effectiveness at, say, 60% for example? do they still outperform.

jeez - every time i almost get up the gumption to crack into this game, get discouraged by the findings... makes me like IL2:FB all that much more...

KODIAK · Post by **KODIAK** » 21 Jul 2004, 17:51

Yeah, well the scene over the other side isn't looking too rosy either - I am currently downloading FF3, then I have to get the damn thing to install. But I'll tell you this - if the mod is anything like the guys on the forums over at Freefalcon, well I think it's gonna be a little "patchy"? All they seem to do is bitch each other about something different every thread. I mean, you get someone who has a good point and his way of putting it across is " Just STFU!", and then they expect it not to get the other peoples' backs up. The maturity level over there definitely leaves a lot to be desired with some of them. Spoils it for those in there working hard to get a result for people. To some degree I regret registering, but hope there will be some benefits.

Nemisis · Post by **Nemisis** » 21 Jul 2004, 19:31

EERRMM!

Well as far as A/A goes in Lomac I have only one problem which is that the AI has a sixth sense in that they always know where you are and that includes even if you are still on the taxi way!

But as far as missile effectiveness is concerned I have to say that in all the stock missions I have tried I have been able to get my missiles of the rail first and have a hit ratio of 80%.

I no longer have the difficulties I used to have in the F-15 since they have fixed the radar in the F-15 in Lomac.

I can get a Bandit call from the AWACS turn in the direction of the call and find the enemy bandits at any range and altitide although the Radar does have a reduced ability at below 4000 ft.

I then use TWS mode and "bug" the bandits , then usually try and get an altitude advantage against my targets and will launch my AIM-120's or AIM-7's Sparrows at about 16-17 NM, any further than this and they do not have the energy left to make the intercept when the enemy goes defensive against the missile.

Usually the enemy bandits will launch there missiles within 10 seconds of my launch but i hold my lock as long as possible and usually wait till i get the Kill before going defensive against incoming missiles.

I am very happy with the performance of the F-15 in Lomac and have (apart from the A-10) flown the F-15 exclusively since I got Lomac working on my system about 4 months ago now, and the difference between Ver 1.01 and 1.02 was massive. The F-15 really came to life for me after 1.02 and even on Hyperlobby you stand a much greater chance against the Human players in the Migs than you used to.

I will have to start flying the russian planes soon especially the SU-33 to get a little carrier ops in as i loved Janes F-18 for Carrier landings.

Just my 2 cents.

KODIAK · Post by **KODIAK** » 22 Jul 2004, 02:55

It is clear that I have issues with my HOTAS profile which I must address before judging the abilities of the AI aircraft. I am not getting to my desired position within the avionics and missile set-up, before the AI aircraft reach their own weapon launch parameters. And most of that can be attributed to all the faffing around when I don't get set-up first-time round and have to go through my switch sequence again, by which time they have launched and I must go defensive.
I believe the problem with LO-MAC isn't so much that the AI have a longer reach in terms of weapon abilities, more the fact that they can "see" you before you see them. The AI operate flawlessly, as one might expect if controlled by the computer - their system switching sequence will happen almost instantly, they will complete a full scan in the minimum time required, and miss - NOTHING! They will always find you on a first radar scan, lock you up without problem and fire the very instant you reach their parameters. They are computer-controlled, and they operate flawlessly unlike all of us who need time to think and react. IMHO the disadvantage is probably the AIs' operation of and reaction to their radar, not the weapons!

. It is a simulation, and if you do not build a level of indiscriminate "human factor" into the programming, the computer will do exactly as it is told - perfectly!

Every time!

Jedi Master · Post by **Jedi Master** » 22 Jul 2004, 05:48

As an FYI, I think the missile slider applies to BOTH sides.
So if you increase it, your missiles will hit more but so will theirs!

Hammer_other · Post by **Hammer_other** » 22 Jul 2004, 10:54

I KNOW!

Grifter · Post by **Grifter** » 22 Jul 2004, 14:28

Gee I thought there were two option bars, one for friendly and one for enemy. Guess I was thinking of a different game. Anyway, I agree with Nemesis for the most part, but I'm still convinced that the 120's are not performing to spec. Oh well, I'll get around it one way or another. After all it's the pilot not the machine that wins. It would just be a helluva lot easier if the 120 did what it was supposed too. I have no trouble spotting and negotiating bandits with the radar system in RWS or TWS. It's simply that 120's range IHMO is ridiculously low, putting me in a really bad position, head to head, with the mig when I should've been able to fire it off BVR. But, I don't know, perhaps I'm missing something. Nemesis sounds like he's having success.

KODIAK · Post by **KODIAK** » 22 Jul 2004, 15:49

He does seem to be having a good deal of success, although he admits the advantages are slight and he has little time to deal with incoming. Something else he had an issue with, and thinking about it I noticed this happen to me a few times - he was down to almost 2.5 Km before getting a lock with his AIM120-C against one target. I didn't get the chance to tell him to flick to Vertical Scan Mode, which is what solved my problem - it locked the target infront immediately and allowed me to rip one off the rails.
I have to go through all the A2A modes again with the F-15. That I think is my real sticking point, and when I clear that up I will probably find very little problem with the A2A stuff. But A2G with no labels? Fark! No easy job that.

Nemisis · Post by **Nemisis** » 23 Jul 2004, 05:37

Kodiak i got a lock on the target you are talking about at 30 miles but since he was heading away from me the AIM 120 range paramiters did not show the missile to be within firing range until 2.5KM.

On a Head to Head i can launch at 16>17 NM and the system tells me to launch before that, but i have tested this out and 16>17 NM is about the max if you want the AIM 120 to reach it's target and still have energy to keep wit it as it goes defensive.

But the other night when i was hunting down that AN-50 he was heading away from me for the last 10 NM of the chace (i had already decided he was going to get killed with a gun shot) but the Missile launch parameters did not show that he was within range of the AIM 120 until the last 3NM

this i presume is due to the fact that the target was heading away from me btuhe was a slow AN 50 and surely the AIM 120 can reach a target say 7 NM away even if it is heading away?

KODIAK · Post by **KODIAK** » 23 Jul 2004, 07:24

I suppose that's possible - the calculation takes into account the direction of travel of the aircraft, but that parameter is way too biased in that case.

Grifter · Post by **Grifter** » 23 Jul 2004, 11:23

do sparrows have longer range then?

KODIAK · Post by **KODIAK** » 23 Jul 2004, 12:34

I dunno if it does have better range, all I can tell you without going for a look is that it has the disadvantage of requiring target illumination until impact. But logically the Sparrow must have some sort of advantage otherwise why in the hell are still using it, given today's technologies and weapons.

Hammer_other · Post by **Hammer_other** » 26 Jul 2004, 10:14

Cost? It must be a lot cheaper to have a semi-active radar receiver than the flash transmitter that the AMRAAM has.

KODIAK · Post by **KODIAK** » 26 Jul 2004, 12:28

One B-2 bomber cost what? $2Bn, $10Bn? And you think that's the reason the USA still use the Sparrow? I dunno mate, honestly, there is surely some form of operational advantage in using it.

Madrus · Post by **Madrus** » 26 Jul 2004, 18:58

The AIM-7 probably has less range than the AMRAAM which is good for 20+ miles (but not in LOMAC unless used by AI).

The AIM-7 is only $125K, while the AIM-120 is $386K. So I think cost is one big factor.

Other than cost, I see no operational advantage to using the AIM-7 unless it is compatible with some planes that the AIM-120 is not.

RLGaming.com

RLGaming's Forums

Final planning, online campaign