SF2 - what has been taken away?

[MigBuster 2,884]

Win7 64bit , Asus Z77 MB , Nvidia GTX-680 , I7-2600K CPU, 16GB RAM

 

no problem on any terrain sofar , all settings to unlimited and a flightengine setting to have trees up to the horizon

 

the only terrain i encounter some FPS drop is the Anatolia terrain

Well proof that true high end hardware will run it at full wack...............if you have the cash................although saying that your  system could have been cheaper than Z09s modern Mac/PC :)

Threat libraries are locked down, now...apparently...sheesh...

Do you have text file examples to use?

[PFunk 198]

Nope.  Wish I did.

[Wrench 9,847]

 

F-4=RWR_F-4.tga

F-8=RWR_F-8.tga

F-14=RWR_F-14.tga

F-15=RWR_F-15.tga

F-16=RWR_F-16.tga

F-18=RWR_F-18.tga

AV-8=RWR_AV8.tga

JAS39=RWR_JAS-39.tga

EF2K=RWR_EF2K.tga

MiG-29=RWR_MIG-29.tga

Su-27=RWR_SU-27.tga

MiG-31=RWR_MIG-31.tga

NASARR=RWR_F-104.tga

ScanOdd=RWR_MIG-17.tga

SpinScan=RWR_MIG-21.tga

JayBird=RWR_MIG-21.tga

HighLark=RWR_MIG-23.tga

FoxFire=RWR_MIG-25.tga

Cyrano=RWR_Mirage3.tga

BarLock=RWR_Search.tga

DogEar=RWR_Search.tga

AAA=RWR_AAA.tga

Hawk=RWR_Hawk.tga

M163=RWR_M163.tga

SA-2=RWR_SA-2.tga

SA-3=RWR_SA-3.tga

SA-6=RWR_SA-6.tga

SA-8=RWR_SA-8.tga

SA-10=RWR_SA10.tga

SA-11=RWR_SA-11.tga

ZSU-23=RWR_ZSU-23.tga

 

 

there's a whole buttload of them by dtmdragon, but I forget what mod pak it's in

[PFunk 198]

Just copy this, paste into Notepad, save as an .lst file?

[Wrench 9,847]

Yes.

You can put them into either the /Flight folder or individual aircraft folders.

 

that is NOT the most recent one; I haven't updated them for the new ships radars from WBS's latest ships (or actually, not updated for 2+ years!!)

[+Stary 2,427]

having a legacy December 2010 install the bigger disappointment for me is

 

 

clouds altitude

 

 

I've spend alot of time trying to move them down in current installs (trying environmentsystem, shaders, etc) to no luck, must be hard coded

[SFP1Ace 33]

having a legacy December 2010 install the bigger disappointment for me is

 

 

clouds altitude

 

 

I've spend alot of time trying to move them down in current installs (trying environmentsystem, shaders, etc) to no luck, must be hard coded

 

Yeah, probably it's in the weather.dll or in the .exe itself. What a shame...Not to mention the fiddling with bomber "hitpoints". A year or two ago bombers were soaking up missiles like it was candy, which was bad alright. Now a single Sidewinder with it's puny warhead takes down a Tu-95 EVERY time... Insta kill/paper planes. What a load of crappola :/

Edited September 18, 2013 by SFP1Ace

[+daddyairplanes 10,238]

you mean you use stock weapons?!?!?!?

[+streakeagle 871]

Yeah, probably it's in the weather.dll or in the .exe itself. What a shame...Not to mention the fiddling with bomber "hitpoints". A year or two ago bombers were soaking up missiles like it was candy, which was bad alright. Now a single Sidewinder with it's puny warhead takes down a Tu-95 EVERY time... Insta kill/paper planes. What a load of crappola :/

 

This has been the problem for a while: Someone complains about a valid gripe and TK waves a cursed monkey's paw over the problem so that his "fix" makes the situation as bad or even worse than the original problem.

[+Stary 2,427]

This has been the problem for a while:

but then we have problem with the developer not certain features Streakeagle

 

Yesterday made myself clean May13 install with no mods, flew two campaign missions in Thud over Germany. All stock this title is soo 1999, so kudos to modders!

[+streakeagle 871]

While it may look 1999 visually, I can tell  you that in 2001, the only sims with F-4s and F-105s worth playing was Jane's Fighters Anthology and Jane's USAF. USAF looked a lot better, but a modded FA install played much better and had much more accurate FM limitations. To this day, there is no more realistic modeling of the 50's to 70's aircraft and weapons technologies. Only in SFP1/SF2 would you have an AIM-7E that would not work every time or an AIM-9B that is almost useless except against a high flying non-maneuvering target. But in the past year or two, missile reliability and warhead effectiveness was slanted back towards the arcade kill probabilities of most other sims/games. If Jane's USAF had been patched to have decent FMs, AI, and had the object size/time/distance scale corrected, I would never have needed SFP1. But TK stepped up and made a sim that had a great FM foundation that was easily comprehended and improved if you know aerodynamics. That the textures and resolution of the terrain were dated never kept me from enjoying the flying and fighting. But trading modability and realism for new terrain, locked down files, and arcade style combat is a step backwards.

[+Stary 2,427]

But trading modability and realism for new terrain, locked down files, and arcade style combat is a step backwards.

Especially when most of the NA users switched back to HFD format Gerwin's version...

 

To my understanding 3rd party weapons have the accuracy fixed?

[Stratos 3,191]

3rd party weapons have the accuracy fixed?

I hope!!

[+gerwin 451]

Update Readme: Jun 2012. "Damage from player missiles has been increased"
 

Thus the same missile is weaker when launched by an AI aricraft.

It is not in the WEAPONDATA.INI. I see no changes for AIM-9l/AIM-7F regarding accuracy and explosives there.

It is in the game engine.

 

That is why I prefer May 2012 currently.

[+streakeagle 871]

Update Readme: Jun 2012. "Damage from player missiles has been increased"

 

Thus the same missile is weaker when launched by an AI aricraft.

It is not in the WEAPONDATA.INI. I see no changes for AIM-9l/AIM-7F regarding accuracy and explosives there.

It is in the game engine.

 

That is why I prefer May 2012 currently.

 

This change bothered me more than any other.

The SF series already had some game oriented features to make gameplay more interesting for the player, but intentionally making separate laws of physics for players and AI for no other reason than to appease players that want to smoke the enemy without being smoked by the enemy is ludicrous. Couldn't such an effect been associated with the difficulty level or an optional checkbox? For most of the history of SFP1 and early SF2, the game got more and more detailed/realistic. When something didn't behave as expected, it was a bug and TK tried to make it right. Now, since around the release of expansion pack 1, every release seems to take a step backwards.

 

However, I will say that I have not back-dated my installs. What little time I now spend on SF2 doesn't seem too bad despite all negative changes. I have seen enemies and wingmen use AA-2 and AA-8 missiles quite effectively. I also still have great difficulty using AIM-9Bs and AIM-4s effectively. So, despite any stated bias in the readme, I don't see any outlandish results caused by it.

 

I hope DCS eventually matches the planeset and terrains of the SF series. DCS also needs much better air-to-air AI for both single player and co-op. AI needs to be scalable from novices to aces and able to reflect doctrine and training. While I enjoy DCS dogfights on 1 vs 1 situations, 1 vs 2 exposes some flaws and 4 vs 4 is just messy compared to SF2. Of course, SF2 is far from perfect. But, I think Battle of Britain 2 is the only sim I have played with equal or better air-to-air AI than SF2.    

[PFunk 198]

I have tried to get into DCS World and I keep coming back to SF 2.  It simply does the single player experience better.

[Stratos 3,191]

Realism is being decreased, and TK anounced that long ago. We can't expect to see better avionics or even fixed in the future.

[+Stary 2,427]

the bad thing is sometimes we can't go back to earlier patch levels, HDDs crash, DVDs become unreadable, you got my point