Jets DLC Official Feedback

[cas 41]

Could we get a MFD map we can zoom in/out manually?

[WurschtBanane 11]

LGB´s are still tracking vehicles, ruins MP gamemodes

 

 

[oukej 2910]

5 hours ago, WurschtBanane said:

LGB´s are still tracking vehicles, ruins MP gamemodes

Actually - they don't "track" a moving vehicle. They fly towards the position where the marked target was at the point of the munition release.
At a given distance from that position they'll seek for something they could guide onto (a laser spot in this case). If nothing's found they'll continue flying towards that initial position.

Possibility is to remove this faux "lock on after launch".

 

[HaseDesTodes 62]

8 minutes ago, oukej said:

Actually - they don't "track" a moving vehicle. They fly towards the position where the marked target was at the point of the munition release.
At a given distance from that position they'll seek for something they could guide onto (a laser spot in this case). If nothing's found they'll continue flying towards that initial position.

Possibility is to remove this faux "lock on after launch".

 

 

can't you simply disable the ability to lock on anything but laser/IR strobe targets for the bombs?

i think that's the main cause for the problems. and afair this was the way it used to be before sensors got changed.

[oukej 2910]

3 minutes ago, HaseDesTodes said:

 

can't you simply disable the ability to lock on anything but laser/IR strobe targets for the bombs?

i think that's the main cause for the problems. and afair this was the way it used to be before sensors got changed.

The bomb already can't lock on anything else than laser/IR strobe. But it can be dropped without a lock - then it flies towards a position of something that was marked by the launching vehicle and only later it seeks for laser/IR strobe.
But it's probably not been the cleanest solution and we'll try to come up with a better one.

[HaseDesTodes 62]

11 hours ago, oukej said:

The bomb already can't lock on anything else than laser/IR strobe. But it can be dropped without a lock - then it flies towards a position of something that was marked by the launching vehicle and only later it seeks for laser/IR strobe.
But it's probably not been the cleanest solution and we'll try to come up with a better one.

 

let it fly straight at first, then start homing in on the closest valid target near the marked target.

if the needed flight path corrections are to great, it's the pilot's fault that the bomb misses. but if the bomb can't find any target it should fly just like it was dropped with out any target.

i guess that would be the best solution here; no imba after-drop flight path, but still precise if a laser/ir strobe is in place

 

Spoiler

btw. i knew bombs couldn't actually lock vehicles, but my skill in expressing complex thoughts in english is relatively limited

 

[M. Glade 524]

So, did anyone find out a port where you can dock the USS Freedom? I believe even the Blue Pearl industrial port doesn't span the dimensions to plug the almighty static ship. 

 

 

[Undeceived 392]

Btw., I don't know if anyone stated this already but the music of the Jets DLC is just f****** awesome. You music guys / the composer(s) really did a great job here, I especially love the main theme "Fighters Jets". When I saw the Aircraft Carrier Reveal Trailer, I was absolutely blown away. This soundtrack is even better than the LoW one, IMO.

[lex__1 422]

Change the behavior of the parachute. This is annoying when the character almost touched the ground with the feet but the parachute:
- jumps on the crowns of trees and bushes
- jumps on the roofs of houses and other structures
The character dies in conditions that produce not the natural behavior of the parachute, which can not be controlled.

https://feedback.bistudio.com/T85069

https://feedback.bistudio.com/T125530

 

[John Spartan 89]

On ‎10‎/‎12‎/‎2017 at 8:06 PM, Undeceived said:

Btw., I don't know if anyone stated this already but the music of the Jets DLC is just f****** awesome. You music guys / the composer(s) really did a great job here, I especially love the main theme "Fighters Jets". When I saw the Aircraft Carrier Reveal Trailer, I was absolutely blown away. This soundtrack is even better than the LoW one, IMO.

Check this out...

 

[YanYatCheng 96]

ILS needs to be 3 degree on ground and on carrier, same as PAPI

Jet tends to slip and slide even touching down at wings level

damage on landing even not a hard landing, only on carrier landing because i never flare, put her on with constant 3-4 degree glideslope

tailhook tends to retract itself after touchdown, result to a bolter nearly everytime i land when a perfect landing, i need to touchdown early to make the trap

tailhook too short compared to F/A-18

[jone_kone 158]

 

Got tired of not having AA units so fired up the "attach to" command. :D

 

[Undeceived 392]

On ‎26‎.‎10‎.‎2017 at 12:22 AM, John Spartan said:

Check this out...

 

It's very impressive but they changed some parts which are cooler in the studio version (talking about music notes, not about arrangement or synths, etc.).

[Belbo 462]

23 hours ago, jone_kone said:

 

Got tired of not having AA units so fired up the "attach to" command. :D

That's not a bad idea at all... Could you post the offset you used?

[the_one_and_only_Venator 163]

13 hours ago, belbo said:

That's not a bad idea at all... Could you post the offset you used?

 

You can experiment that quite easy actually.

Just place the vehicle at 0/0/0 and put the weapon where you want to have it. Than take the x and y coordinates into the command. Just try a few z coordinates and you will find a good solution quickly.

[Ex3B 266]

On 10/26/2017 at 6:21 AM, YanYatCheng said:

tailhook tends to retract itself after touchdown, result to a bolter nearly everytime i land when a perfect landing,

I agree that this is a major problem. I spent a couple hours last night practicing carrier landings, and this was a major problem, although by the end I was getting pretty good at it. I had several successful landings in a row... although I only stopped after 2 with zero damage. Before that I had multiple landings where I had no hull damage, but INST damage for some reason (why? I think the nose came down a bit hard after touchdown but...), and before that a couple with engine/gear/ctrl/inst damage, but no hul damage.

Earlier in my practice, I had multiple landings where I touched down before the wires, had the tail hook retract itself, and went off the end... its like I have to touchdown right on the wires. Here's the somewhat funny results of one landing where I touched down before the wires (a bit hard, granted, I guess, since I took damage), and the tailhook didn't engage, I ejected but the black wasp ended up not going over the edge:

But without a towing mod... I don't think that could be salvaged in game.

 

As for a CSAT reskin that had been mentioned earlier in this thread... its easy enough to "paper over" in the mission editor by placing CSAT banners and a Chinese flag:

Spoiler

The flag is really high, so its a bit hard to see from that close to the tower

 

The obvious problem with a CSAT carrier is the lack of any CSAT aircraft that can land on the carrier - none have tailhooks. This can be handled with triggers/scripts in mission. I made a fairly simple trigger that simply checks if a plane has a speed within a certain range (~105 to 320 km/h in my script), and a direction in a certain range (no more than +/- 9 degrees for my script), and if so it activates a set velocity command  which sets the velocity of the plan to ~70 km/h straight down the runway (which is slow enough to stop in time). I find these landings to be a bit easier than dealing with the tailhook retracting

so... my CSAT carrier in the map editor:

(the banners to cover the US flag are arranged into a neat square with setPosASL commands upon mission start)

Spoiler

 

Obviously, those triggers are the area a plane needs to fly through to get slowed down for landing.

 

Still, the lack of a hangar deck and elevators is troublesome. In that image, you can see that I have a lot of ground vehicles sitting on the flight deck, so that the ship can be a mobile offshore base, and the Helos can sling load them and take them to land.

If we instead look at an LHD mod (Atlas: LHD plus, or use the CUP one if you prefer), derived from BI's arma 2 assets, the USS Freedom is *a lot* bigger:

Spoiler

Yet it seems with VTOL F-35s (Aegis mod), I can pack more stuff onto/into the LHD because of its elevators and hangar deck, and that less deck space is needed for launching/landing

So I'm still using the LHD more than the Freedom... and I'm only using the freedom because there's no good Opfor alternatives for VTOL fighters to use on the LHD.

Spoiler

 

Hover taxing:

Sending it down below:

 

 

 

down below:

 

Down below, where I put the vehicles overlooking where I put the planes:

 

And below that is the well deck

 

 

 

And of course, the vehicles can be brought up to where helos/ a blackfish can lift them

 

 

 

They really could have done a lot more with minimal effort if they had also ported the F-35 from Arma2, and the LHD from Arma 2 + added elevators and fleshed out the interiors just a little more (they already had partially complete hidden interiors for the LHD in arma 2).

In the end, I managed to pack 6 F-35s into the LHD interior (+1 on the read elevator for a total of 7), a tone of ground vehicles (plenty of empty space in the well deck), 4 Blackfeet, 4 Falcon drones, 2x hurons, 2x ghosthawks, 1x blackfish onto the LHD, and because all aircraft are VTOL, they operate just fine.. although you can see in the first image of that last spoiler section, that the deck really isn't even that crowded, the blackfish has a mostly clear runway (just the 1 huron at the end.. although that was with the 3x blackfeet, 3x falcon packing, but I was abel to pack them a bit more efficiently and get 4 of each).

I can't put nearly as much stuff on the USS carrier because of the lack of a well deck and the greater need to keep the runways free

[M. Glade 524]

Minor issue with NATOs DLC jet.

The display doesn't fit inside the monitor, its going out of bounds. 

[jone_kone 158]

 

Here is good video on why rocket pods on the vanilla fighters could be a nice addition. I know its not super realistic but again... make it available and let the mission makers decide.

 

 

[WurschtBanane 11]

This has been mentioned before, but now after countless PvP-Sessions in Jets, i came to the conclusion that the damage the gun does to fighters is ridicilous. It has made the mission maker of King of the Hill give the Shikra 2 extra gun pods with 500 rounds 20mm for him to even be ABLE to shoot down something when out of missiles.

 

Look at this:

 

And that is the bloody AI. In a PvP dogfight you will have a hard time getting that amount of hits.

 

Lets now compare it to Digital Combat Simulator footage of an Su-27 using the same 30mm cannon against a fighter.

 

 

My point is: Why are the guns not high explosive on the CAP jets (except the buzzard)? It is literally impossible to shoot down an enemy fighter with the 250 rounds of the AAF jet´s gun in a dogfight, as even 20+ hits will not achieve enough damage to immobilize it.

 

Footage recorded after the tanks DLC by the way.

[Imperator[TFD] 444]

15 hours ago, WurschtBanane said:

This has been mentioned before, but now after countless PvP-Sessions in Jets, i came to the conclusion that the damage the gun does to fighters is ridicilous. It has made the mission maker of King of the Hill give the Shikra 2 extra gun pods with 500 rounds 20mm for him to even be ABLE to shoot down something when out of missiles.

 

Look at this:

 

And that is the bloody AI. In a PvP dogfight you will have a hard time getting that amount of hits.

 

Lets now compare it to Digital Combat Simulator footage of an Su-27 using the same 30mm cannon against a fighter.

 

 

My point is: Why are the guns not high explosive on the CAP jets (except the buzzard)? It is literally impossible to shoot down an enemy fighter with the 250 rounds of the AAF jet´s gun in a dogfight, as even 20+ hits will not achieve enough damage to immobilize it.

 

Footage recorded after the tanks DLC by the way.

 

 

I hate to be the bearer of bad news but the majority, if not all, of your shots missed and that is clearly visible. 

I am practicing right now and within a well placed hits the AI is ejecting.  In some cases I'm even getting what can only be described as 'critical hits' and the aircraft is exploding almost instantly.

 

Another easy example to see this is to simply place down 1 jet in front of another on the ground and shoot it.  At most it takes about 20ish rounds to kill the A-149.

[WurschtBanane 11]

6 minutes ago, Imperator[TFD] said:

 

 

I hate to be the bearer of bad news but the majority, if not all, of your shots missed and that is clearly visible. 

I am practicing right now and within a well placed hits the AI is ejecting.  In some cases I'm even getting what can only be described as 'critical hits' and the aircraft is exploding almost instantly.

 

Lets go to slo mo and count: 1 hit at the first burst (0:13), 3-4 hits in the back and engine or more at the second (0:16), 2 hits on the left wing (0:20), at LEAST 5-6 hits, most in the right wing at (0:23), another 3+ hits at (0:30), and around 5-10 hits with the last burst.

 

I aimed worse than i had to to simulate a multiplayer dogfight, where you often only have 1-2 seconds to shoot the enemy (and not have the chance to aim for "critical hits"), as a player will not just keep you behind him by doing a couple of laughable attempts to dodge your cannon fire.

 

By my understanding, a 30mm cannon should easily rip off one of the aircrafts wings with 2-3 hits, but here you need to hit with approx 50% of the ammo. And the fact that AI ejects at the slightest damage done to the aircraft does not fix the problem, a good pilot aka player will just keep flying, bring you over his AA and land somewhere afterwards. This is not as bad on the F/A-181, as it at least gets around 600 rounds, which is enough despite the laughable gun damage.

 

Before the Jets DLC, it was way easier to shoot down enemy jets because you 1: saw the bullets tracers way more clearly and 2: it was HE and did more damage. At this point, in a guns only dogfight, the A-164 might beat a CAP fighter just because the CAP aircraft might run out of ammo first.

[Imperator[TFD] 444]

20 minutes ago, WurschtBanane said:

 

Lets go to slo mo and count: 1 hit at the first burst (0:13), 3-4 hits in the back and engine or more at the second (0:16), 2 hits on the left wing (0:20), at LEAST 5-6 hits, most in the right wing at (0:23), another 3+ hits at (0:30), and around 5-10 hits with the last burst.

 

I aimed worse than i had to to simulate a multiplayer dogfight, where you often only have 1-2 seconds to shoot the enemy (and not have the chance to aim for "critical hits"), as a player will not just keep you behind him by doing a couple of laughable attempts to dodge your cannon fire.

 

By my understanding, a 30mm cannon should easily rip off one of the aircrafts wings with 2-3 hits, but here you need to hit with approx 50% of the ammo. And the fact that AI ejects at the slightest damage done to the aircraft does not fix the problem, a good pilot aka player will just keep flying, bring you over his AA and land somewhere afterwards. This is not as bad on the F/A-181, as it at least gets around 600 rounds, which is enough despite the laughable gun damage.

 

Before the Jets DLC, it was way easier to shoot down enemy jets because you 1: saw the bullets tracers way more clearly and 2: it was HE and did more damage. At this point, in a guns only dogfight, the A-164 might beat a CAP fighter just because the CAP aircraft might run out of ammo first.

 

Do what I suggested in the editor and you will see you are wrong. :)

 

Edit:

Here I did it for you

 

 

[Imperator[TFD] 444]

9 hours ago, drgreenthumb said:

The wipeout feels like it's glued to the ground during take-off now, the take-off speed required is something like 30kph faster than before and you run out of runway on the NW Moray island on Malden, breaking my mission completely. 

 

Also, how do you select the GBU and CBU now? It doesn't show up when flipping through weapons.

 

The flight model has been updated so required runway take off length has been increased a little bit.

 

As for you issue with GBU/CBU; are you using ACE?  I noticed this issue while testing things with ACE on Dev branch before the 1.82 patch released today.

[drgreenthumb 2]

No I only use RHS. The flightmodel update seems pretty unnecessary, your wheels hit the rocks at the end of the runway and you blow up instantly. What are we supposed to fly from the shorter airstrips now, Cessnas? 

 

EDIT: It seems that JSRS is what caused the bombs not to show up in your weapon selection. I've left a message on their workshop page. 

 

Also I've removed some rocks at the end of the runway and the A164 can now take off but just barely. 

[lugiahua 26]

A-10 in real world requires 1200m take off distance fully armed, Moray airfield only has 650m, half of the requirement

the game is already very lax on the runway requirements.