Jump to content

jugasa77

Members
  • Posts

    86
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

jugasa77 last won the day on May 28

jugasa77 had the most liked content!

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
    http://
  • ICQ
    0

Recent Profile Visitors

2,342 profile views

jugasa77's Achievements

Newbie

Newbie (1/14)

1

Reputation

  1. NEW AIR COMBAT SYSTEM: I wish that a single airplane could engage only one target at a time. For example, CG Ticonderoga can engage 8 targets, BCGN Petr Velikiy can engage 6 and CG Slava can engage 4 at the same time. A single airplane would engage 1 target at the same time although it can fire salvos of 1, 2 or more missiles at the same target. SARH missiles need the plane to engage the target until it hits or miss. Mid-course guidance missiles need data-link to fly towards the target until it can detect it itself. What is the range of terminal guidance? In my experience, both groups of planes destruct themselves with few survivors at the first shoot. IR short-range missiles are frecuently useless. The idea is to have some casualties before groups engage in a dogfight.
  2. I don't know if that is what I am looking for. I am looking for a tool that allows to set formations in rings like land/sea groups or bases: Main Group, AAW, ASW, pickets. What's the name of that toolkit? Where can I download it to probe it?
  3. And the target arc in relation with the course of attacking missiles could be like this: TARGET ARC DATA x x 20 x x 10 x x 0 x x 0 x x -10 x x -20
  4. The afterburner tool could be like this: We have been targeted by enemy missiles. Should we change group altitude and speed? Yes No
  5. The export dll menu I imagine should be something like that: ATTACKING SPEED ATA 0 250 -30 251 500 -25 501 750 -20 751 1000 -15 1001 1250 -10 1251 1500 -5 1501 1750 0 1751 2000 5 2001 2500 10 2501 3000 15 3001 3500 20 3501 4000 25 4001 30 DEFENDING SPEED DATA 0 125 -30 126 250 -25 251 375 -20 376 500 -15 501 625 -10 626 750 -5 751 875 0 876 1000 5 1001 1250 10 1251 1500 15 1501 1750 20 1751 2000 25 2001 30 So players can edit the values like we can change values in the formation editor.
  6. Anyway, I don't really like this scenario I have created because neither the Russians nor the English have aircraft carriers powerful enough to perform their assigned tasks. But it has been good for testing.
  7. Hello, I haven't finished the scenario and I am testing it. The Battleset is GIUK2003 and the version is 2021.006. If you want to take a look I attach the files. Thanks. OperationGauntletProbe.rar
  8. Hello, I am testing an user scenario called Operation Gauntlet. I have some questions. First, what is the difference between fighter, attack and bomber for the AI. AI have 24 attack F-16AM with a initial loadout of intercept duty. When AEW detect my red fleet some attack planes reload their loadout and attack my ships instead of continue with the intercept loadout. Why? I think this is based on the type of aircraft. I suppose that AI uses its planes depending on the type: fighters always fights against aircraft and bombers fights against ships or bases. Attack planes fights with both: planes and ships or bases. Am I correct? I suppose that fighters don't change their air to air loadout nor bombers change their air to ground loadout. But attack planes change their loadout depending on the objetives detected. Correct? Second, enemy attack Tornados GR4 based on Keflavik and Kinloss attack my red fleet when it is detected. Why fighters Tornado F3 don't attack my naval Su-33 nor my helicopters? I am not sure if F-35 from both CV Queen Elizabeth carriers attack surface objetives or air objetives because they can carry Storm Shadows and Meteor at the same time. Third, why the AI doesn't attack my land bases? I always have to program launch air missions in order that AI bombers attack my bases and I haven´t seen enemy bombers in an oportunity attack against my bases. Am I correct? Fourth, I would like that when we order a launch air mission (attack, ferry or patrol) we could set different waypoints instead of only one. For example, we have some Backfire at Murmansk base that can´t reach enemy fleet without flying over Orland airbase exposed to be shoot down by blue F-16AM attack planes. I would like my Backfires to fly east and attack blue fleet from the north instead of attacking it from the east.
  9. And with afterburner there would be another EXPORT DLL. When targeted by enemy missiles it opens a windows that could say something like: Unit has been targeted by enemy air to air missiles. Should we change the altitude and speed. There could be two icons saying yes or no. Clicking yes would open the altitude and speed window. But clicking no there would be no changes in altitude and speed.
  10. Like happens in Doctor Strangelove, the target plane can do some evasive manouvers to avoid long range air to air missiles. If the attack comes from the rear it is easier for a missile to hit its target although it can be run out of fuel like in Firefox movie. Maybe that somebody can make another EXPORT DLL like in the firing arc of a ship mount with different arc. We should look at the different between attacking course and defending course. It is the same idea of not modifying the original rules. Calculations could be: Arc of 330º to 30º a bonus ATA of 15% (front). Arc of 301º-300º and 31º-60º a bonus ATA of 10% (front starboard and board). Arc of 271º-300º and 61º-90º a bonus ATA of 5% (starboard and board). Arc of 241º-270º and 91º-120º a bonus ATA of 0 (starboard and board). Arca of 211º-240º and 121º-150º a malus ATA of -5% (rear stardboard and board). Arc of 151º to 210º a malus of 10%. This bonus and malus can be adjusted. Also, in an EXPORT DLL.
  11. Hello, I think that there is something unrealistic in this 30% bonus to ATA depending on the target speed. If the target speed is 999 knots there is a bonus of 30% and if target is 1000 knots there isn´t no bonus. I think that a difference of 1 knot between a bonus of 30% and nothing is too high and unrealistic. I ask if there would be an EXPORT DLL that modifies the actual rule because I think it is hard coded. An EXPORT DLL because the idea is not to modify the original rules if you don't want to like happens with altitude and turn ratio. An alternative way of calculating could be: Target speed of 0-125 knots then ATA bonus of 30%. Target speed of 126-250 knots then ATA bonus of 25%. Target speed of 251-500 knots then ATA bonus of 20%. Target speed of 501-750 knots then ATA bonus of 15%. Target speed of 751-1000 knots the ATA bonus of 10%. Target speed of 1001-1250 knots then ATA bonus of 5%. Target speed of 1251-1500 knots then ATA bonus of 0%. Target speed of 1501-1750 knots then ATA malus of -5%. Target speed of 1751-2000 knots then ATA malus of -10%. Target speed of 2001-2500 knots then ATA malus of -15%. Target speed of 2501-3000 knots then ATA malus of -20%. Target speed of 3001-3500 knots then ATA malus of -25%. Target speed of 3501-4000 knots then ATA malus of -30%. I ask if somebody can do an EXPORT DLL to reflect this project. You can adjust the speed and ATA bonus and malus the same way we can adjust the range of the rings in a formation menu. Also, there could be some bonus or malus depending on the missile speed (or the airplane speed when using guns) to reflect the energy power of the attacker. Firing speed of 0-125 knots then ATA malus of 30%. Firing speed of 251-500 then ATA malus of 25%. And so on.
  12. jugasa77

    Scramble

    Hello, I have been editing an user scenario and I have only the intercept option when an enemy air stack is detected. I would like to have also an scramble icon when an enemy air stack is detected. The idea I have got in mind is very similar to launch air icon. For example, playing blue side, I have 24 norwegian F-16AM detached at Orland airbase. I have a pair of AAW patrols composed by 4 fighters each, 1/3 of the total air wing placed in Orland. 8 fighters at AAW duty, 16 fighters at reserve duty. Then, some planes (24 Su-27, 36 Su-24) approaches to attack Orland airbase. The 8 fighters set at AAW patrol duty are few to intercept and shoot down all of the russian planes. So, if there would be an scramble icon we can order the 16 fighters at reserve duty to take off and scramble the enemy air wing of 24 fighters and 36 attack planes. It is like launch air icon so you can do it manually. Why do we want another icon of scramble duty? Playing with the red side, fighters shoot down every fighters (8) at AAW patrol but there isn´t another patrol launched from Orland airbase because I AI didn´t perform the intercept duty. The blue AI doesn´t launch any fighter group to intercept the attacking group. Although you can do it manually but the AI can´t do it. The problem is that it is too easy to attack an enemy group or base with overwhelming air stack. So the AI side needs an scramble/launch air option more than human side.
  13. Hello, I am playing an user scenario. When an air patrol is set to an intercept duty the AI repeat the air patrol launching another patrol of the same fighter with the same loadout. But when an air patrol is shot down by enemy while it is set to patrol duty the AI doesn´t repeat the air patrol. No patrols take off to replenish lost ones and you should set another air patrol manually if you want to. So the AI doesn´t repeat patrols for the AI side.
  14. Hello, why do I wish to have this new tools that only exists in my imagination? Because I think that medium-range radar missiles are too letal. I have been playing an scenario with 8 norwegian F-16AM falcons fighting against 8 Su-27 flankers escorting 12 attack Su-24 fencers, Falcons wear 4 AMRAAMs and Flankers 6 or 8 Alamos. What is the result? It is both sides anihilated. That is frustrating. There is few times that F-16 can approach enough to use short-range IR missiles against fighters. I think if we make medium-range combat more difficult to hit, fighters would have the chance to fight with short-range IR missiles. If fighters can start a dogfight with the enemy they can engage the enemy from the rear instead of a front to front medium-range radar missiles. I suppose that short range combat is more letal than medium range combat. Don't you think so?
  15. Hello, in relation with the 30% bonus when target speed is below 1000 knots I would like to have a tool or dll that set the bonus in relation with airspeed. For a target speed of 0 to 250 knots, there will be a bonus of 30%. For a target speed of 251 to 500 knots, there will be a bonus of 20%. For a target speed of 501 to 1000 knots, there will be a bonus of 10%. For a target speed of 1001 to 2000 knots, there will not be a bonus nor malus. For a target speed of 2001 to 4000 knots, there will be a malus of 10%. For a target speed of 4001 to 8000 knots, there will be a malus of 20%. For a target speed of 8001 knots or more, there will be a malus of 30%. Also, I would like to have a tool or dll that modifies the bonus or malus depending of the fire arc. If the arc is beetween 315º and 45º (at the rear of the objetive) there will be a bonus of 20%. If the arc is beetween 270º-315º and 45º-90º (at the side-rear) there will be a bonus of 10%. If the arc is beetween 225º-270º and 90º-135º (at the side-front) there will be a malus of 10%. If the arc is beetween 225º and 135º (at the front of the objetive) there will be a malus of 20%. If the attacking airplane is pursuing the target from the rear it will have more probabilities to kill.
×
×
  • Create New...