[Iain Baker]

A few random questions about some of FS's quirks.

1: Ships shooting through themselves.

Some ships appear to shoot clean through themselves. The belly AAA on the Rakshasha being a particularly noteworthy example since it can hit you even if you are are above the Rak at the time. Why is this, and is this something that cannot be fixed? (I'm assuming the latter since it has been a known problem for some time and if it was easily fixable someone would have fixed by now).

2: Engine glows visible through the ships hulls

Same question really - why, can it be fixed, would fixing it be an absoulte mission?

3: Wingmen and Trebs

Unless I am mistaken, A.I wingmen using vanilla A.I. cannot use trebs. Does Fury A.I. fix this? I'm guessing it might since TEV fighters in BP WiH use them quite a bit against both yourself and against capital ships as ersatz torpedos. Does this count for wingmen too? If a mission that is using vanilla A.I. loads-out wingmen with trebs would it be wise to swap the trebs for something they can use?

4: Reverse thrust and glide

Would adding reverse thrust and glide capability to every ship be a huge undertaking? I'm, er, 'asking for a friend' 

5: Would 'lock-on-after-launch' be possible under the FS SCP engine?

the number of time I suffered from premature ejection of missiles...

[0rph3u5]

1: Ships shooting through themselves.

Some ships appear to shoot clean through themselves. The belly AAA on the Rakshasha being a particularly noteworthy example since it can hit you even if you are are above the Rak at the time. Why is this, and is this something that cannot be fixed? (I'm assuming the latter since it has been a known problem for some time and if it was easily fixable someone would have fixed by now).

This popped up recently with the Aelous, it is a bug/feature-behavior that is retained from retail. There are a number of flags (e.g. subsystem flag "check hull") that can solve that issue in conjunction with setting turret fovs.

4: Reverse thrust and glide

Would adding reverse thrust and glide capability to every ship be a huge undertaking? I'm, er, 'asking for a friend' 

It would take a -shp.tbm and ai_profiles.tbl.

The -shp.tbm needs +nocreate entries for every ship giving them glide and rear velocity parameters. The ai_profiles.tbl is required so the AI actually uses glide.

5: Would 'lock-on-after-launch' be possible under the FS SCP engine?

the number of time I suffered from premature ejection of missiles...

That's what heat seeking missiles are for.

[Su-tehp]

The fact that we're talking about premature ejection in a video game forum is just hilarious.

[starlord]

Actually, this I wondered: how did wing commander saga create a “true” heat seeking missile (those in FS are more like “fire and forget”)? Their heat seeker was noteworthy in only locking and maintaining lock on engines (it was a no go if they were non facing).

How was that behaviour implemented into FS?

[0rph3u5]

Actually, this I wondered: how did wing commander saga create a “true” heat seeking missile (those in FS are more like “fire and forget”)? Their heat seeker was noteworthy in only locking and maintaining lock on engines (it was a no go if they were non facing).

How was that behaviour implemented into FS?

Try the JAVELIN homing type

[Nightmare]

2: Engine glows visible through the ships hulls

Same question really - why, can it be fixed, would fixing it be an absoulte mission?

Because the loading bumps upon ship arrivals are more annoying (well, they should both be fixed)

[starlord]

I believe the javelin type was one of the features that must have crossed into FS from saga: the javelin IS the heat seeker missile in wing commander.

But technically though, how was it done?

[Colonol Dekker]

Is ship thruster visible = yes= lock possoble


Is ship thruster visible = no = lock not possible


 

[Iain Baker]

Actually, this I wondered: how did wing commander saga create a “true” heat seeking missile (those in FS are more like “fire and forget”)? Their heat seeker was noteworthy in only locking and maintaining lock on engines (it was a no go if they were non facing).

How was that behaviour implemented into FS?

Try the JAVELIN homing type

I was wondering this myself. However since even present day heat seeking missiles such as the AIM-9X sidewinder can detect even the small amount of heat generated by the plan's hull due to friction with the air and can thus track it from any aspect the FS method is more realistic - unless we were to assume the future missile guidance technology in the WC universe is significantly worse than what we have now.

Fun-factoid - heat seekers from say the 60s, 70s and possibly the 80s were pure heat-seekers - they just homed in on what was hottest object in their 'view cone'. Their detectors and imaging software just saw a blob of heat. This is why flares were pretty effective against them.

Modern 'heat seeking' missiles have 'imaging infrared detectors' - the missile 'sees' the target in the same way we do when looking through Thermal Imaging cameras. This is why flares are less effective because the missile can plainly see that a flare looks nothing like a plane and the onboard computer / limited A.I. is smart enough to know the difference.

The AM-9X has a 180 degree detection 'cone' and is hyper-manoeuvrable due to being steered by thrust vectoring instead of the fins used on earlier Sidewinders. When paired with a Joint Head Mouted Queuing System the plane can basically fire the sidewinder sideways.

Some modern missiles are capable of lock on after launch - if a bandit is behind you - fire your missile, then turn to face the bandit and target it. The missile you just launched will the turn around and chase down your bandit. Scary stuff.

Of course the Russian equivalent is to mount a second raydome on the rear of their planes so it can target anyone coming up behind them. In theroy then the missile could be launched then pull a 180 to engage the bandit behind whilst the launching plane could concentrate on evading the bandit behind it. Not sure how risky this would be - there might be a risk of the missile turning around and hitting the launch aircraft. Or you could just fire the missile backwards in the first place http://www.aero-farm.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Number=221766

[Iain Baker]

The fact that we're talking about premature ejection in a video game forum is just hilarious.

 

[Iain Baker]

1: Ships shooting through themselves.

Some ships appear to shoot clean through themselves. The belly AAA on the Rakshasha being a particularly noteworthy example since it can hit you even if you are are above the Rak at the time. Why is this, and is this something that cannot be fixed? (I'm assuming the latter since it has been a known problem for some time and if it was easily fixable someone would have fixed by now).


This popped up recently with the Aelous, it is a bug/feature-behavior that is retained from retail. There are a number of flags (e.g. subsystem flag "check hull") that can solve that issue in conjunction with setting turret fovs.


If it is a relatively easy fix then why hasn't it been fixed already? I'm not trying to sound critical or pushy, its just that so many people on here have done so many vastly more complicated things over the years that it seems odd that this would have been neglected for so long. Or am I missing something?

[Mito [PL]]

Because retail was balanced for ships with this problem, and changing this might break mission balance or even missions themselves - both for retail and mods. That's why you won't see this implemented in MediaVPs. That said I think multiple mods do that (expecially for the Ravana).

[Nightmare]

There's a bunch of older mods that depend on ships firing through themselves (and, afaik, Slaying Ravana from retail does also).

[Iain Baker]

Ah, I see. Thanks for clearing that up.

So am I right in thinking it would be up to mod creators themselves to fix it on a case-by-case basis (To ensure it would only apply to their campaign?)

[Nightmare]

Yep. I would be tremendously useful to have a setting for that like $Check Hull on All Turrets: in the ai_profiles.tbl, but nobody ever coded that in.

[0rph3u5]

Speaking as someone who disabled subsystem targeting for the entire FS1 roster of cruisers and destroyers, it's not that bad to -shp.tbm in "check hull" for all relevant turrets.

However there are turrets, e.g. VLS Missile Launchers, which you don't want to check against the entire model.

[Nightmare]

Probably those should be reverse flagged than, like "don't check for hull".

[X3N0-Life-Form]

3: Wingmen and Trebs

Unless I am mistaken, A.I wingmen using vanilla A.I. cannot use trebs. Does Fury A.I. fix this? I'm guessing it might since TEV fighters in BP WiH use them quite a bit against both yourself and against capital ships as ersatz torpedos. Does this count for wingmen too? If a mission that is using vanilla A.I. loads-out wingmen with trebs would it be wise to swap the trebs for something they can use?

I can't ever remember how BP did it, but personally I overrode the retail weapon's flags to not include the 'bomber+' & 'huge' flags, which allows the AI the actually use the damn thing.
That being said, there are three things to remember if you want to enable trebs :
1/ Trebs are overpowered, even in AI hands
2/ Trebs are on the default loadouts of Mara & Basilisks, two very common fighters
3/ Most Shivan fighters' loadout is set to default in FS2

And yes, in a mission using vanilla AI, it is advisable swap the Trebuchet for something else that your wingmen can actually use, like the Harpoon.