SF2: North Atlantic

[+Stary 2,427]

the ridiculous bug in campaign as it looks ingame:

 

 

 

 

 

 

not funny

[squid 21]

the ridiculous bug in campaign as it looks ingame:

 

 

not funny

 

OT : i like about the new water (apart from the obvious) having a good way of avoiding shimmering

Edited March 11, 2012 by squid

[Wrench 9,846]

that's more than just a simple "bumping" incident!!

[+Stary 2,427]

no collision meshes so these just went one through another

[Gr.Viper 131]

So, it's penetration, then.

[+Stary 2,427]

[ArturR 17]

Everyone, I just ran an exparment. I took the latest F-22A and changed the AvionicsDLL from "Avionics70.dll" to "AvionicsDLL=AvionicsF14A.dll" in the F-22A.INI file. I then flew an intercept mission. I set the radar to TWS mode and selected the AIM-120C. I then followed the procedure outlined for F-14 in the manual, no shootlist number apeared on the display, however I ripple fired 4 AMRAAMS anyway. Each of the 4 hit a separate target!

 

yeah, but Map mode doesnt work now :(

 

but good thing is that in Avionics70 we can now freely shooting Amraams in TWS (without going to STT)

[FastCargo 412]

Alrighty then...

 

The question is always value...are the benefits of the purchase enough to offset the detriments?

 

Modern combat aircraft simulations, especially those with electronic warfare included, are very complex programs...which is why most software companies have gone bankrupt or have abandoned the serious air combat simulation market. You can count on one hand (and have several fingers left over) the number of companies that still exist that put out air combat simulations that include electronic warfare.

 

One company is large, putting out simulations that focus in detail on one aircraft, have closed systems, cost tons of money and lots of people to develop, and benefit from work done for the government.

 

One company is very small, putting out simulations that are more survey sims, has an open system for 3rd party modifications, and has very little budget.

 

One thing no one has mentioned really is that payware has a budget. Every day that product is not released is another day money is being spent with no return. That tends to put increasing pressure on a developer to get the product out...regardless of what potential customers want. It is always a tradeoff between how long a feature will take to make and how much money it will make...all superimposed on the relentless pace of technology. Freeware has no such constraints...because there is no monetary pressure (ie cost) to get it done, an infinite amount of time can be taken to release the product.

 

All things considered, what TK has done is quite remarkable, making a simulation that in many ways is very detailed in terms of what it has to model (AI, electronic warfare, aerodynamics, ballistics, graphics, etc), yet still trying to keep it backwards compatible and open.

 

Is that an excuse for a crappy product? Of course not...the market can be unforgiving for a non-functional product. SF2:NA is certainly functional, with a lot of little bugs, and a few large ones (Fringe ships, co-mixing fleets, A-7E campaign start crash). For any product, the idea of 'release now, fix later' can hurt long term sales. However, the developer may feel boxed into a corner...no money to spend on beta testers (or bad past experiences with extensive beta testing), but no money left to continue development of the current title, especially if that title has implemented several new core features (new terrain engine, new avionics, new dlls, etc). The pressure to release may become overwhelming...if the product gets out there now, revenue will be available to spend on fixing post-release bugs.

 

I am not saying that's what happened here.

 

I will say, there is nothing out there on the market that is like the TW sims...period. I challenge anyone to find sims that cover the time period, aircraft, gameplay and remain available to freely modify.

 

FC

[saisran 84]

Alrighty then...

 

The question is always value...are the benefits of the purchase enough to offset the detriments?

.......I will say, there is nothing out there on the market that is like the TW sims...period. I challenge anyone to find sims that cover the time period, aircraft, gameplay and remain available to freely modify.

 

FC

 

Well said. I feel the same way. The process of creation is very tedious and more times than not things doesn't go the way you planned. And often it's easy to miss out on some. On my part i'll gladly pay the $30 just for the F-14 avionics alone. I believe its the only one out there that closely simulates it. That alone would have probably taken half of their development resource. Give it time. TW has always gambled like this. As soon as he gets some breathing room something good will come up.

[squid 21]

Alrighty then...

 

The question is always value...are the benefits of the purchase enough to offset the detriments?

 

Modern combat aircraft simulations, especially those with electronic warfare included, are very complex programs...which is why most software companies have gone bankrupt or have abandoned the serious air combat simulation market. You can count on one hand (and have several fingers left over) the number of companies that still exist that put out air combat simulations that include electronic warfare.

 

One company is large, putting out simulations that focus in detail on one aircraft, have closed systems, cost tons of money and lots of people to develop, and benefit from work done for the government.

 

One company is very small, putting out simulations that are more survey sims, has an open system for 3rd party modifications, and has very little budget.

 

One thing no one has mentioned really is that payware has a budget. Every day that product is not released is another day money is being spent with no return. That tends to put increasing pressure on a developer to get the product out...regardless of what potential customers want. It is always a tradeoff between how long a feature will take to make and how much money it will make...all superimposed on the relentless pace of technology. Freeware has no such constraints...because there is no monetary pressure (ie cost) to get it done, an infinite amount of time can be taken to release the product.

 

All things considered, what TK has done is quite remarkable, making a simulation that in many ways is very detailed in terms of what it has to model (AI, electronic warfare, aerodynamics, ballistics, graphics, etc), yet still trying to keep it backwards compatible and open.

 

Is that an excuse for a crappy product? Of course not...the market can be unforgiving for a non-functional product. SF2:NA is certainly functional, with a lot of little bugs, and a few large ones (Fringe ships, co-mixing fleets, A-7E campaign start crash). For any product, the idea of 'release now, fix later' can hurt long term sales. However, the developer may feel boxed into a corner...no money to spend on beta testers (or bad past experiences with extensive beta testing), but no money left to continue development of the current title, especially if that title has implemented several new core features (new terrain engine, new avionics, new dlls, etc). The pressure to release may become overwhelming...if the product gets out there now, revenue will be available to spend on fixing post-release bugs.

 

I am not saying that's what happened here.

 

I will say, there is nothing out there on the market that is like the TW sims...period. I challenge anyone to find sims that cover the time period, aircraft, gameplay and remain available to freely modify.

 

FC

 

+1

[+SkateZilla 49]

is it me or is there 2 suns in the first image?

[Streakfalcon 57]

Strike fighters Tatooine

[+Swordsman422 61]

Bit of Trivia:

 

If you look at all the F-14 default skins, the BuNo of the aircraft is 160406. Not much known about this jet other than she entered service as an F-14A-95-GR probably around 1980, was AMARCed on 11/27/1997, before the advent of the DFCS, and was officially stricken from the active jet list on 7/06/1999. You've probably shaved with or drank out of her by now. Sad to contemplate.

 

Not that it matters, but I almost wish TK had used a more famous example like 160390, 160403, or 161159.

[+SidDogg 130]

Bit of Trivia:

 

If you look at all the F-14 default skins, the BuNo of the aircraft is 160406. Not much known about this jet other than she entered service as an F-14A-95-GR probably around 1980, was AMARCed on 11/27/1997, before the advent of the DFCS, and was officially stricken from the active jet list on 7/06/1999. You've probably shaved with or drank out of her by now. Sad to contemplate.

 

Not that it matters, but I almost wish TK had used a more famous example like 160390, 160403, or 161159.

 

+1

 

 

 

 

 

SidDogg

[+Stary 2,427]

is it me or is there 2 suns in the first image?

 

Strike fighters Tatooine

 

it's my new flak explosion I'm fiddling with

 

anyone thought the BuNO is an inside joke..? as in April 16 2006... like a big patch for one series or something... just sayin'

[Gr.Viper 131]

Since "Request Help" never works for the F-4 in NA, I've got a theory. The flight spawned isn't random, but comes from one of the free fighter squadrons of the same service on the map.

[+WhiteBoySamurai 1,094]

I went ahead and bought the game, even though I don't have the hardware to enjoy the Iceland terrain. For years I'd been hoping for new features like the new avionics, targettable cruise missiles, better warshops, and so on. IMO the game is worth the price for those alone.

 

One really huge bug I've found, though, is that all third party ships (and the default cargo ship for some reason) have become completely invincible. Guided missiles still track, but they (and all other weapons) pass through with no effect. I've even tried a tactical nuke with a proximity fuse and the boats don't feel a thing! A few other people I know have experienced the same problem.

 

The new stock ships (Kashin, Krivak, Kiev, etc) are all sinkable for me, which leads me to believe there's some new code needed in the data.ini file to get third party ships working again, I hope TK provides us with the cat extractor soon, otherwise I can't properly test the ships I'm modelling. :/

[Wrench 9,846]

bunums:

 

157980-157985 F-14A Grumman

157987-157991 F-14A Grumman

158612-158637 F-14A Grumman

158978-159025 F-14A Grumman

159421-159468 F-14A Grumman

159588-159637 F-14A Grumman

159825-159874 F-14A Grumman

160299-160378 F-14A Grumman Iran

160379-160414 F-14A Grumman

160652-160696 F-14A Grumman

160887-160930 F-14A Grumman

161133-161168 F-14A Grumman

161270-161305 F-14A Grumman 161300-161305 Cx

161416-161445 F-14A Grumman

161597-161626 F-14A Grumman

161850-161864 F-14A Grumman

161866 F-14A Grumman

161868-161879 F-14A Grumman 161874-161879 Cx

162588-162594 F-14A Grumman

162596-162611 F-14A Grumman

162688-162717 F-14A Grumman

 

that's just the pure "A" models. Anything else?

[+SidDogg 130]

Followed PureBlue's suggestion, "substituted" Spruance for Iowa...

 

Now that the strike group that ran amok is no more...

 

The game must be angry, because it always freezes up on me at the debrief screen after the campaign mission when the enemy ships were all destroyed...

 

I thought that might be a bug, but I dunno. Maybe it's the mechanics.

 

 

 

 

 

SidDogg

[+daddyairplanes 10,230]

soon as there is a new CAT extractor we can pop some new BuNos on the Tom. amongst other things of course. watch the NationName be painted on skin this time though, as that would be the best reference for BuNo placement!

[+Brain32 265]

Yes we need the allmighty CAT extractor ASAP, it's starting to drive me nuts, I even tried to open a few cat's with the old extractor just in case TK forgot to code some of them

[+Stary 2,427]

I even tried to open a few cat's with the old extractor just in case TK forgot to code some of them

relief... there is someone else as nutty as me

tried gerwin's (?) catextractor too

[+Brain32 265]

relief... there is someone else as nutty as me

tried gerwin's (?) catextractor too

 

Gerwins cat extractor does not work either, yup I tried that too

[+Stary 2,427]

rename it to Tomcatextractor.exe, works!

[+Brain32 265]

rename it to Tomcatextractor.exe, works!

 

Don't make me try it