snoops_213 75 Posted June 18, 2017 Well after some playing around with different sensors here are some things that I have come up with. As someone said a couple of pages back there seems to be a locking range limit around 15+km no matter what the lock range is set to, can we get a fix for this or is this an engine limitation? Data linked weapons need the launcher vehicle to have send datalink active for the missiles to work(duh). Adding the Man sensor component to the blackfish is fucking awesome! I did it and made the sensor tied to one of the gun turrets, so it can't see infront of itself and make the pilot want to strafe instead, and now it's the deadly battle wagon it's supposed to be(and made the 105 round be used by AI against infantry) . AI attack profile is still screwed under certain conditions but at loiter 500m height and 800m radius its (usually if AI plays nice) deadly to all it comes across lol. I still believe that ground vehicles with the report postion datalink enabled should be shown on the map/gps like it is with extended markers on and not on the sensor display especially for ground vehicles such aa units. The problem is rwr and radar and data link info are all sharing the 1 display. RWR/EW should be a seperate screen from the radar screen. And show only radar emitters. And the way air/ground radar works in game shown in one screen i believe should be changed. Contacts shown should be based on either selected weapon ie macer/bombs rockets select ground radar and amraam 9x show a2a radar or have a keybind to select different radar modes manually. Second way would let the gun be used in either role easier too. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
martin_lee 33 Posted June 20, 2017 As far as RWR, radar etc sharing one display, this is the trend for the 5th gen fighter planes. All informations, like waypoints, wingmen positions (datalink), SAM threat circle, radar contacts, are incorporated into one display. This is to make things more intuitive, since you have a bird's eye view of the battlefield around you. F-22 and F-35 are like this, but this is a trend that started to form in the 4th gen fighter like F-16 and F-18. They are both moving map at heart, with other information (wingmen location, marked target, threat etc) superimposed on top. Radar and RWR are still on separate display, though. There isn't a lot of reason for the radar to be on separate display, though. Integrating into a bird's eye view or using the traditional B-scope (x-axis is direction, y-axis is range) still gives you the same amount of information, but integrated display gives you relative position and movement between radar contacts and everything else on the battlefield, thus requiring one less layer of processing in your brain. B-scope is more relevant in the days of analog radar. The only thing I am not sure about is RWR. Direction is never a problem, but this is a passive system and ranging is always a big problem. Whether or not current gen fighter solved the ranging problem is probably classified, and then there is the reliability. What I reckon is that they still have pretty much the traditional RWR display and may not have integrated it into the single display. So currently in Arma 3 where we know exactly where the emitter is is kind of a stretch. I remember when I am playing the VTOL showcase when there is suddenly a blackfoot behind me. It had its radar on and I can see clearly where he is, and easily know how I should manoeuvre to evade, know where to look for him and shoot him down. It would not be that easy in an F-16 flight sim when another fighter suddenly appeared behind me. I could evade his first missile (I only need direction to do this), but what should I do after that? If he is far enough I could just run away or fire a missile of my own. If the range is closer then it's a fight I can't escape. I still need to ask myself, am I now in his missile's kill zone (pray and fly crazy) or am I too close for missile and time for some dogfight (play Danger Zone and put on aviator sunglasses) Just saying this to put things into perspective. Whilst a properly simulated RWR may give a more interesting gameplay, it is probably a very tough job to do. There is also problem with UI cluttering as well (We would then have radar, RWR and GPS but only two displays). 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jerminhu 25 Posted June 21, 2017 Is it that AA IR missiles on CAS jets can only lock targets by using TGP? I can lock AG IR missiles by pointing the nose towards a target and pressing "R", without getting in the the TGP. However, this trick doesn't work for AA IR missiles, no mater how close the target is close to me. I have to get into the TGP, point the cursor to the target and then press "T" in order to get a lock. Is this a bug or a feature? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
S3blapin 15 Posted June 26, 2017 On 23/06/2017 at 8:03 PM, ss9 said: > Would be nice if they updated the jets to have a view of the targeting cam in the cockpit instead of the BS "radar sweep Unless they removed it with the Malden patch, you can have your TGP in one of your Display. > the BS radar sweep What do you mean? I've never had a radar sweep, just static icon that shown area covered by radar. Could you please put a picture of what you have? > And get rid of the stupid 2k view distance. Again, explain a bit more. If you talk about the radar, you can have a 16km display. If you talk about the view distance, you can change it in your option unless the server limit it. > Afterburning engines Already in game. Badly implemented, of course but already in game. > Helmet mounted displays (why don't opfor or indfor jets have those? Those would definitely have them) Because it's something quite hard to do and not every nation can create that. IIRC, there's only 2 or 3 nation that have them today. > Would be nice if the Griphon could carry 4 LGB's in place of 2 LGB's and 2 Mavs. I don't see why that isn't an option. Indeed, the Gripen can actually carry 4 bomb. It was already suggested many times and devs said they will look and maybe try to add it. > I don't see why the targeting pod's range of movement is often so limited. Because Griphon as an old version of the TGP and those one have gimbal limit which are represented in game. > I don't see why the radar range is so limited It depends the vehicle you use. On jet for the DLC you have a radar with 16 km range that look directly in front of you. On chopper, you have a shorter radar but directed downward, to look at the ground. And for SAM site, you have a 360° long range radar. I don't see why you said they are limited since they suit perfectly to their intended role. > I don't see why you can't fire AMRAAMs at datalink radar targets. Never tried that, did you post a ticket on the feedback tracker? > The new OPFOR jet still has Flaps T/O when you fully extend them. > There is no tailhook key. The landing runway on the HUD is still off too when you approach the Freedom. Same, post ticket on the feedback tracker. > The planes are also very twitchy on landing. Might be on your end, I literally have no trouble at landing speed. Everything is smooth. > Would be about a 5 minute fix in a lot of instances. Nothing is only a 5 minute fix. You always have to take account of dozens of other things, like model, hitbox, network impact, performance impact. Everything you change might impact a completely unrelated part of the program. You really can't say it would takes only 5 minutes. 3 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Imperator[TFD] 444 Posted June 27, 2017 It depends the vehicle you use. On jet for the DLC you have a radar with 16 km range that look directly in front of you. On chopper, you have a shorter radar but directed downward, to look at the ground. And for SAM site, you have a 360° long range radar. I don't see why you said they are limited since they suit perfectly to their intended role. While this is technically correct I always find it useful to bump up the display range on the sensor UI so that your RWR is more likely to pick up any active radars which can be detected at x2 the detection range of your own active radar. :) 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
snoops_213 75 Posted June 27, 2017 On 2017-6-20 at 3:20 PM, martin_lee said: As far as RWR, radar etc sharing one display, this is the trend for the 5th gen fighter planes. All informations, like waypoints, wingmen positions (datalink), SAM threat circle, radar contacts, are incorporated into one display. This is to make things more intuitive, since you have a bird's eye view of the battlefield around you. The only thing I am not sure about is RWR. Direction is never a problem, but this is a passive system and ranging is always a big problem. Whether or not current gen fighter solved the ranging problem is probably classified, and then there is the reliability. What I reckon is that they still have pretty much the traditional RWR display and may not have integrated it into the single display. So currently in Arma 3 where we know exactly where the emitter is is kind of a stretch. I remember when I am playing the VTOL showcase when there is suddenly a blackfoot behind me. It had its radar on and I can see clearly where he is, and easily know how I should manoeuvre to evade, know where to look for him and shoot him down. You are right about the fusion sensors but we dont get quite enough info or clearer info of the targets on our display. Air targets that actively emit a radar should be classified straight away as either friendly enemy or neutral and the vehicle type that it belongs to with a designation under the contact. Ground targets should be classified by their type ie armored soft artillery(including aa with radar inactive) with their own unique target symbols and only fully identified when visual id is made or if a radar is active from the target ie aa. Data linked targets should also be broken down into this as only known targets are shared. And as for rwr the newest ones are extremely powerful. They will not only give you direction they can range and track out to 250nm+ well beyond radar range but will also classify according to emissions, and apparently can get enough info to cue an amraam launch. They can also cue radar for where to look and prioritize what target should get most radar time. While this is way to much detail i dont see the current rwr as overpowered at all. What i do have a bit of an issue with is ground vehicles have the same type of rwr sensor without the aps to go with it. I know it looks cool when AI vehicles pop smoke in battle, but that shouldn't happen if the ai hasn't seen the missile. As it is they pop smoke as soon as the guided missile is launched no matter the range, even if it had an APS system it shouldnt kick in until very close to the vehicle. @ss9 none of the weapons in game have been set up with the data link sensor yet. And atm is pobably a good thing. While locking range seems to be limited by the engine (around 16km) its still far enough that the islands become to small. Data link is extremely powerful and data linked missiles will shoot down a target that is being tracked by only the IR sensor, will double check this but im sure they do. And data linking range will share out to aleast 32km(will try to see how far i can go with this one day). @Oukej so ive been playing with datalink and i added it to the radio, i had hope when it loaded with no errors, but alas not to be it does nothing. I assume its something to do with the way the ai interacts with vehicles? Tried adding the sensor ui in the hopes of something but that doesnt do anything either. Would love to see this working but attached to a dedicated backpack radio. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SuicideKing 233 Posted July 10, 2017 On 6/27/2017 at 6:27 PM, snoops_213 said: As it is they pop smoke as soon as the guided missile is launched no matter the range, even if it had an APS system it shouldnt kick in until very close to the vehicle. It's worse, they'll pop smoke even if you just select the target and have not locked, if you've locked, if you've locked on to a laser mark... APS or not, ground vehicles should only pop smoke if the AI can visually see the missile or the launch, because players don't have any such APS when they are in vehicles. AI should play by the same rules as much as possible. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SuicideKing 233 Posted July 10, 2017 (edited) The other thing i discovered is that while it's possible to select a hot target using thermal sensors beyond object view distance, the Neophron's Sharur ATGM doesn't lock until object has been rendered (i.e. within object view distance range). Otherwise it can lock up until 6km away. This causes an issue in MP where the server usually forces the view distance to 1600m. While it is possible to set the object view distance for players, fewer people can manage those kinds of object view distances so it's not something i'm comfortable forcing beyond a point. TL;DR - please let the Sharur lock beyond object view distance, the aircraft IR sensors can already do that EDIT: Happens with other ATGMs as well.. Edited July 20, 2017 by SuicideKing Previously used the abbreviation "BVR" to mean "beyond object view distance", which is obviously wrong. Have corrected the language. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
the_one_and_only_Venator 163 Posted July 10, 2017 2 hours ago, SuicideKing said: The other thing i discovered is that while it's possible to select a hot target using thermal sensors BVR, the Neophron's Sharur ATGM doesn't lock until object has been rendered (i.e. within object view distance range). Otherwise it can lock up until 6km away. This causes an issue in MP where the server usually forces the view distance to 1600m. While it is possible to set the object view distance for players, fewer people can manage those kinds of object view distances so it's not something i'm comfortable forcing beyond a point. TL;DR - please let the Sharur lock BVR, the aircraft IR sensors can already do that. That is actually the case for all ATGMs I think. It is just one parameter in the config file. Really easy to change. I guess they don't want to change that but it would be a good thing. Also Radar guided ATGMs would be nice. 2 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SuicideKing 233 Posted July 12, 2017 On 7/10/2017 at 8:01 PM, the_one_and_only_Venator said: That is actually the case for all ATGMs I think Yeah, confirmed. At least the Macer and Macer II behave this way as well... On 7/10/2017 at 8:01 PM, the_one_and_only_Venator said: Really easy to change. I guess they don't want to change that but it would be a good thing. Unfortunately as a vanilla community we depend on BIS for stuff like this...would be a shame if they didn't change it. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jone_kone 158 Posted July 13, 2017 20 hours ago, SuicideKing said: Yeah, confirmed. At least the Macer and Macer II behave this way as well... Unfortunately as a vanilla community we depend on BIS for stuff like this...would be a shame if they didn't change it. Agreed. That is the whole point of having sensors and radar... to have the ability to engage targets beyond visible range. :) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chortles 263 Posted July 15, 2017 @SuicideKing@the_one_and_only_Venator@jone_koneThere's an explanation in the configs: the vanilla air-to-ground missiles' IR sensors mainly (only?) differ from the template in maxRange, angleRangeHorizontal, angleRangeVertical, and maxTrackableSpeed values; therefore the actual sensor range against a target with irTargetSize=1 against a ground background* (thanks to da12thMonkey for this illustration of how the subclasses seem to work, posted on the official Arma 3 Discord) would be the smallest of the groundTarget subclass' maxRange value, the object view distance, or the view distance. Quoting the BIKI's example/explanation when minRange=500, maxRange=5000, objectDistanceLimitCoef=1, and viewDistanceLimitCoef=1: Quote In the following case the sensor will be able to detect targets that are within the object view distance as terrain view distance will always be bigger. However if the obj. view distance is set above 5km the sensor won't be able to detect anything above 5km. If it's conversely set below 500m, the sensor will still be able to detect targets at 500m even if they are not visible.In contrast In contrast to the above** the laser, NV/strobe, datalink, active radar, and passive radar (warning receiver/anti-radiation) sensor templates all have objectDistanceLimitCoef=-1, and viewDistanceLimitCoef=-1 for both airTarget and groundTarget subclasses so (assuming radarTargetSize=1 for the radar-guided missiles' targets) the maxRange values are those sensors' ranges, period. This might explain why complaints about jets in KOTH these days seem to be about GBUs (read: laser guidance) instead of AGMs... Speaking of laser guidance, if you're playing a scenario with a service menu for vanilla aircraft please note that every weapon station ('pylon') on every non-Jets vanilla attack aircraft, UAVs included, supports at least one laser-guided air-to-ground weapon. Under the current 'rules' described above there's a case to be made for foregoing 'punch' for range. * The IR sensor template and all IR sensors I've checked have had airTarget subclasses with viewDistanceLimitCoef=1 but also objectDistanceLimitCoef=-1, thereby object view distance not limiting the range for detecting targets against a sky background, which may be why you're not noticing this issue with IR-guided air-to-air missiles. ** The NV/strobe template inherits from the laser template all except for componentType and color, but on the GBU-12/KAB-250/LOM-250G the NV sensor is limited by object/terrain views distances. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
suddenlymoose 15 Posted July 17, 2017 Scripting functions for sensor data that it would be convenient to have, that I could not find any good way to do now: o Function to list all sensors on a vehicle (maybe with some sensor stats such as range) o Function to list all targets detected by a vehicle sensor, with known information (speed/type/etc.) Alternative, simpler variant: o Function to list all sensor data currently shared via side data link I was able I think to estimate this information by iterating over vehicles array and filtering with configfile to identify vehicles with data link and their range, and then iterating over nearEntities with knowsAbout to check if each vehicle in sensor range is known, but this is a costly way to attempt to calculate information that must already be known by engine. A simple function or two to expand the API would be nice. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
t.buur 0 Posted July 17, 2017 (edited) Quote 2 hours ago, suddenlymoose said: Scripting functions for sensor data that it would be convenient to have, that I could not find any good way to do now: o Function to list all sensors on a vehicle (maybe with some sensor stats such as range) o Function to list all targets detected by a vehicle sensor, with known information (speed/type/etc.) Alternative, simpler variant: o Function to list all sensor data currently shared via side data link I was able I think to estimate this information by iterating over vehicles array and filtering with configfile to identify vehicles with data link and their range, and then iterating over nearEntities with knowsAbout to check if each vehicle in sensor range is known, but this is a costly way to attempt to calculate information that must already be known by engine. A simple function or two to expand the API would be nice. You know following scripting commands? https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/listRemoteTargets https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/listVehicleSensors Edit: forgott to say that listRemoteTargets is a little bit broken: https://feedback.bistudio.com/T125977 Edited July 17, 2017 by t.buur additional information Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
suddenlymoose 15 Posted July 17, 2017 9 hours ago, t.buur said: You know following scripting commands? https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/listRemoteTargets https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/listVehicleSensors Edit: forgott to say that listRemoteTargets is a little bit broken: https://feedback.bistudio.com/T125977 Thank you, I thought I had found all the relevant radar functions, but the splendid engineers at Bohemia had already apparently added the functionality I was looking for. Too bad if it is not working 100% correctly, but working around any problems in listRemoteTargets will hopefully be simpler than trying to reimplement that functionality. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
das attorney 858 Posted July 18, 2017 On 6/18/2017 at 8:48 PM, snoops_213 said: Adding the Man sensor component to the blackfish is fucking awesome! I did it and made the sensor tied to one of the gun turrets, so it can't see infront of itself and make the pilot want to strafe instead, and now it's the deadly battle wagon it's supposed to be(and made the 105 round be used by AI against infantry) . AI attack profile is still screwed under certain conditions but at loiter 500m height and 800m radius its (usually if AI plays nice) deadly to all it comes across lol. I was wondering the same thing and configged up a blackfish with Man sensor as well. The sensors are probably overkill but here's my config if it helps anyone: class Components; class DefaultVehicleSystemsDisplayManagerLeft; class DefaultVehicleSystemsDisplayManagerRight; class SensorTemplateActiveRadar; class SensorTemplateIR; class SensorTemplateLaser; class SensorTemplateMan; class SensorTemplateNV; class SensorTemplatePassiveRadar; class SensorTemplateVisual; class CfgVehicles { class VTOL_Base_F; class VTOL_01_base_F : VTOL_Base_F { class Components : Components { class SensorsManagerComponent { class Components { class ManSensorComponent : SensorTemplateMan { class GroundTarget { maxRange = 2000; minRange = 3000; objectDistanceLimitCoef = -1; viewDistanceLimitCoef = -1; }; typeRecognitionDistance = 3000; angleRangeHorizontal = 360; angleRangeVertical = 180; nightRangeCoef = 1; maxFogSeeThrough= -1; groundNoiseDistanceCoef = -1; maxGroundNoiseDistance = -1; minSpeedThreshold = 0; animDirection = "cannon_barrel"; }; class IRSensorComponent : SensorTemplateIR { class AirTarget { minRange = 500; maxRange = 3000; objectDistanceLimitCoef = 1; viewDistanceLimitCoef = 1; }; class GroundTarget { minRange = 500; maxRange = 3000; objectDistanceLimitCoef = 1; viewDistanceLimitCoef = 1; }; maxTrackableSpeed = 300; angleRangeHorizontal = 45; angleRangeVertical = 35; animDirection = "Copilot_flir_V_rot"; }; class VisualSensorComponent : SensorTemplateVisual { class AirTarget { minRange = 500; maxRange = 3000; objectDistanceLimitCoef = 1; viewDistanceLimitCoef = 1; }; class GroundTarget { minRange = 500; maxRange = 3000; objectDistanceLimitCoef = 1; viewDistanceLimitCoef = 1; }; maxTrackableSpeed = 300; angleRangeHorizontal = 45; angleRangeVertical = 36; aimDown = 1; animDirection = "Copilot_flir_V_rot"; }; class ActiveRadarSensorComponent : SensorTemplateActiveRadar { class AirTarget { minRange = 4000; maxRange = 4000; objectDistanceLimitCoef = -1; viewDistanceLimitCoef = -1; }; class GroundTarget { minRange = 4000; maxRange = 4000; objectDistanceLimitCoef = -1; viewDistanceLimitCoef = -1; }; angleRangeHorizontal = 240; angleRangeVertical = 110; groundNoiseDistanceCoef = -1; maxGroundNoiseDistance = -1; minSpeedThreshold = 0; maxSpeedThreshold = 0; aimDown = 35; }; class PassiveRadarSensorComponent : SensorTemplatePassiveRadar { }; class LaserSensorComponent : SensorTemplateLaser { angleRangeHorizontal = 360; angleRangeVertical = 120; aimDown = 30; }; class NVSensorComponent : SensorTemplateNV { angleRangeHorizontal = 360; angleRangeVertical = 120; aimDown = 30; }; }; }; class VehicleSystemsDisplayManagerComponentLeft : DefaultVehicleSystemsDisplayManagerLeft { class Components { class EmptyDisplay { componentType = "EmptyDisplayComponent"; }; class MinimapDisplay { componentType = "MinimapDisplayComponent"; resource = "RscCustomInfoMiniMap"; }; class CrewDisplay { componentType = "CrewDisplayComponent"; resource = "RscCustomInfoCrew"; }; class UAVDisplay { componentType = "UAVFeedDisplayComponent"; }; class VehiclePrimaryGunnerDisplay { componentType = "TransportFeedDisplayComponent"; source = "PrimaryGunner"; }; class SensorDisplay { componentType = "SensorsDisplayComponent"; range[] = {4000}; resource = "RscCustomInfoSensors"; }; }; }; class VehicleSystemsDisplayManagerComponentRight : DefaultVehicleSystemsDisplayManagerRight { defaultDisplay = "SensorDisplay"; class Components { class EmptyDisplay { componentType = "EmptyDisplayComponent"; }; class MinimapDisplay { componentType = "MinimapDisplayComponent"; resource = "RscCustomInfoMiniMap"; }; class CrewDisplay { componentType = "CrewDisplayComponent"; resource = "RscCustomInfoCrew"; }; class UAVDisplay { componentType = "UAVFeedDisplayComponent"; }; class VehiclePrimaryGunnerDisplay { componentType = "TransportFeedDisplayComponent"; source = "PrimaryGunner"; }; class SensorDisplay { componentType = "SensorsDisplayComponent"; range[] = {4000}; resource = "RscCustomInfoSensors"; }; }; }; }; }; }; Not sure if I got the animDirection correct - I just used animationNames and then selected the one I thought was right. Obv the sensor classes are defined outside of CfgVehicles. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
MoePlaYs 0 Posted July 18, 2017 Is it possible to get the hummingbirg Missile Warning back at any chance? Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chortles 263 Posted July 18, 2017 @MoePlaYs As per das attorney's post above yours you can write a config mod that includes one, but I wouldn't be surprised if the omission in vanilla was intentional, seeing as there it has no sensors or a sensor display. 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
snoops_213 75 Posted July 19, 2017 On 24/05/2017 at 3:48 PM, dr. hladik said: Not as deep. But we still have ideas how to improve it so cooperation between units can be improved. Going back to this in relation to AI artillery and i beg to differ :) turns out man sensor will not display man class targets via datalink but it does still transmit its targets via the datalink that are targetable with artillery units properly set up for it, albeit a bit crude as in it wont lead the targets but it'll try to walk rounds onto its target and stationary ones are toast. Max range seems to be about 16km in VR but when i transfer it to a "proper" map ranges seems to be a lot shorter which makes me wonder if terrain affects the datalink somehow? It still "sees" the targets from around the same ranges but wont fire until a fair bit closer, maybe my stupid config skills could be playing a part lol. @das attorney have you made a custom 105mm round for it? Try it and find aiAmmoUsageFlags and put 64 in it, this will make ai use the cannon against troops. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
das attorney 858 Posted July 19, 2017 @snoops_213 Thanks for the tip - no I haven't yet, but I just had a quick look in the config and the ammo it uses is already set up for infantry. I found: weapon = "cannon_105mm_VTOL_01" mags = "100Rnd_105mm_HEAT_MP" ammo = "Sh_105mm_HEAT_MP"; aiAmmoUsageFlags = "64 + 128 + 256"; https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/CfgAmmo_Config_Reference#aiAmmoUsageFlags So it looks like it's already set up to do that plus vehicles and air (weirdly). Or are you saying to edit it so it's just "64" only? Thx Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
snoops_213 75 Posted July 20, 2017 20 hours ago, das attorney said: @snoops_213 Thanks for the tip - no I haven't yet, but I just had a quick look in the config and the ammo it uses is already set up for infantry. I found: weapon = "cannon_105mm_VTOL_01" mags = "100Rnd_105mm_HEAT_MP" ammo = "Sh_105mm_HEAT_MP"; aiAmmoUsageFlags = "64 + 128 + 256"; https://community.bistudio.com/wiki/CfgAmmo_Config_Reference#aiAmmoUsageFlags So it looks like it's already set up to do that plus vehicles and air (weirdly). Or are you saying to edit it so it's just "64" only? Thx Thats a bit strange mine was originally 128+512 only(BIS config), so i added the 64 to make 64 + 128 + 512. Very strange the 256 is in there at all, as you pointed out thats for air targets lol. On 7/13/2017 at 4:45 PM, jone_kone said: Agreed. That is the whole point of having sensors and radar... to have the ability to engage targets beyond visible range. :) It is and it isn't. Radar and radar guide munitions sure not a problem, but the ATGM's are all visual sensor weapons hence them being restricted to objects that are drawn. What might be a compromise is if the tgp/seeker heads be cued by the radar, that way they are already lined up with the target and as soon as its visible you can target and launch without having to search for it. The other thing that would be good for the macers would be the ability to manually lock the seeker head onto an object using the area/ point "lock" feature of the TGP, whether its hot or cold, and it attack that target. The Macers are IR guided and the real life counter parts are actually IIR which doesnt require a "hot" target to be aimed and guided. Hopefully they come up with some sort of solution for this type of system. On 7/10/2017 at 11:49 PM, SuicideKing said: TL;DR - please let the Sharur lock BVR, the aircraft IR sensors can already do that EDIT: Happens with other ATGMs as well.. Aircraft IR sensors should only work BVR against air targets, its easier for the IR sensor to pick out the heat of a plane against the freezing background BVR, than it is the heat of a ground vehicle BVR. But I do get your frustration when its regarding MP. The other thing that I would love to see but will probably never make A3 is GPS guidance, where the pilot has to enter the GPS coordinates manually in a UI panel, not point and click. Would give us a bit of stand off range and promote team work with spotters on the ground, but i wont hold my breath since this thread has been unpinned I assume that sensors are now taking the back burner and only really big issues will be dealt with in the future( i hope i am wrong here) 1 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chortles 263 Posted July 20, 2017 @snoops_213 I'm not sure whether the engine supports IIR (the componentType parameter takes strings but the workings of said strings are hardcoded) but there is the possibility of adding visual sensors so that thus-equipped AGMs can detect/track/lock a cold target, just like the DAGR, Skalpel, and Jian can be locked onto laser spots. Problem is, without true imaging infrared simulation or the missile's visual sensor config disabling the night range/fog coefficients, said IR/visual tracking could be defeated by overcast conditions and/or time-of-day... Would give us a bit of stand off range and promote team work with spotters on the ground, but i wont hold my breath since this thread has been unpinned I assume that sensors are now taking the back burner and only really big issues will be dealt with in the future( i hope i am wrong here) 46 minutes ago, snoops_213 said: Would give us a bit of stand off range and promote team work with spotters on the ground, but i wont hold my breath since this thread has been unpinned I assume that sensors are now taking the back burner and only really big issues will be dealt with in the future( i hope i am wrong here) Probably accurate unfortunately, based on how little it feels like Bohemia does major overhauls of or additions to 'DLC-promoting' (key words there) features once brought to stable. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
SuicideKing 233 Posted July 20, 2017 36 minutes ago, snoops_213 said: Aircraft IR sensors should only work BVR against air targets, its easier for the IR sensor to pick out the heat of a plane against the freezing background BVR, than it is the heat of a ground vehicle BVR. But I do get your frustration when its regarding MP I actually wrote the wrong thing - didn't mean beyond visual range (as that would imply beyond view distance), but beyond object view distance. The missiles can't lock even when the vehicle has been detected by sensors and is in range of the missile - unless the vehicle is within the client object view distance radius. I'll go back and correct this, thanks for bringing it to my attention. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
snoops_213 75 Posted July 20, 2017 44 minutes ago, SuicideKing said: I actually wrote the wrong thing - didn't mean beyond visual range (as that would imply beyond view distance), but beyond object view distance. The missiles can't lock even when the vehicle has been detected by sensors and is in range of the missile - unless the vehicle is within the client object view distance radius. I'll go back and correct this, thanks for bringing it to my attention. Just did a quick test with the wipeout so ir/visual only and set view distance 2000m and obj draw to 1600m and i had no sensor contact moving ground targets until obj draw distance (maybe slightly beyond but not much if any) and tried 4000m/1600m and same thing, which it should do since these sensors require a visual target. Which sensors seem to be the problem or am i missing the point? Then again since i dont really do mp much maybe its different mp wise( i doubt that though). 46 minutes ago, chortles said: @snoops_213 I'm not sure whether the engine supports IIR (the componentType parameter takes strings but the workings of said strings are hardcoded) but there is the possibility of adding visual sensors so that thus-equipped AGMs can detect/track/lock a cold target, just like the DAGR, Skalpel, and Jian can be locked onto laser spots. Problem is, without true imaging infrared simulation or the missile's visual sensor config disabling the night range/fog coefficients, said IR/visual tracking could be defeated by overcast conditions and/or time-of-day... Probably accurate unfortunately, based on how little it feels like Bohemia does major overhauls of or additions to 'DLC-promoting' (key words there) features once brought to stable. Yeah i dont think it could support IIR, but that is an intresting solution, could those coefficients be adjusted to seeker range instead of disabled? Hopefully some of these sensors will come to the ground vehicles. Datalink sharing requires a vehicle to have a sensor component of some sort and the datalink tech would go quite nicely with the tanks dlc kind of like blue force tracking or similar. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
das attorney 858 Posted July 20, 2017 The config I posted on the previous page was bad and broke the vanilla Blackfish sensors. Updated post with correctly working config. :) Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
