Need some minor modeling assistance

[+EricJ 4,238]

That might work, worth a shot.

[+daddyairplanes 10,228]

2 hours ago, Wrench said:

what about FAS.org???? Just a shot in the dark ...

i myself find they match Wiki a little too closely in general. not sure sometimes who's copying who

but with Wiki, you can go to the bottom and backtrack the sources for more indepth info. i dont ever recall seeing a sources or citation area in FAS

Edited November 14 by daddyairplanes

[+Coupi 4,388]

You should try the Secret Projects Forum... 

 

[simonmiller416 1,829]

So... I searched all the pages I could find today, but didn't get much. Maybe I'll have to go to the Pentagon or Langley to ask for more detailed,maybe have a chat with woods.Can someone inside help me get a pass or something?

Considering that there were multiple upgrade packages during the PAC-2 period,as well as the gap between the contract and the delivery time, maybe I'll give them "approximate" date first untill I got more infor.

Edited November 15 by simonmiller416

[+EricJ 4,238]

Yeah a foreign national without clearance... Good luck with that my friend.

Anyway without data you'll have to make it up I suppose, but maybe the Wiki article has approximate dates.

[simonmiller416 1,829]

BTW PAC-3 retextured and MSE variant added

[+yakarov79 11,064]

about those Patriot operators...Does it matter in the game after all? I thought the game was only recognizing Red or Blue, friendly or enemy.

 

[Wrench 9,845]

yes and no. the userlist defines when Exported= is TRUE. So, if Turkey for instance, starts using S-300 SAMs, both the data inis for the launchers, radars, and missiles have to reflect that (Exported=TRUE)

OTH, simply Blue or Red side WILL populate based on what year the mission is

[simonmiller416 1,829]

7 hours ago, yakarov79 said:

about those Patriot operators...Does it matter in the game after all? I thought the game was only recognizing Red or Blue, friendly or enemy.

 

6 hours ago, Wrench said:

OTH, simply Blue or Red side WILL populate based on what year the mission is

Exactly like Wrench said.

I hope they could show up in the right date and in the right country. For example, Sweden received the first batch of PAC-3 MSE after 2016, so they should not have had such a good missile before that, the same is true for operators who own PAC2 and later purchase PAC3.

And we can see that excellent map modders like Wrench will assign correct red and blue countries to the map theaters, which will also affect which units(groudobjects) are generated on the map, which is also related to the operator. 

So, following the example above, on the Sweden map, Swedish ground units can start generating the best PAC-3 MSE after 2016, whereas before they could only generate PAC-3. US Army can get AN/MPQ-65A after 2017, etc etc.

AND will be reflected in the specific missions. There are value differences between them in the game, which may not be obvious to players, but it is a design method that I like to make it as realistic and historical as possible.

Edited Saturday at 05:08 AM by simonmiller416

[Wrench 9,845]

well, there's kind of a problem with that  ...  assigning historical SAM units (types) to specific areas.

Your RWR won't work. 

When placing correct/specific units (like I did for the Persian Gulf & Cuba maps) the game engine for some unfathomable stupid reason, can's "see" them with your on-board RWR gauge. You'll also get NO audio warnings either. It's been a glitch for, at least, 10+ years that I know of.

So, we have to let the lame-ass engine populate by guess and by golly (not even going to mention NIKE radars showing up with HAWK or other Blue SAMS)

[Blade 353]

2 hours ago, Wrench said:

not even going to mention NIKE radars showing up with HAWK or other Blue SAMS

That's strange. The proper usage of the 'NetworkType=' parameter is supposed to prevent that.

[+yakarov79 11,064]

only sam_radars works properly with sam_launcher (given the proper NetworkType). But EWR is random madness.

[simonmiller416 1,829]

4 hours ago, Wrench said:

When placing correct/specific units (like I did for the Persian Gulf & Cuba maps) the game engine for some unfathomable stupid reason, can's "see" them with your on-board RWR gauge. You'll also get NO audio warnings either. It's been a glitch for, at least, 10+ years that I know of.

Not sure if I misunderstood you.

I noticed this as well, but I made sure to write the correct operator and time in Userlist.ini so that the game engine would spawn the right thing when it randomly spawned objects.

Of course EW Radar is definitely an exception, so I don't want to spend too much time on it, but at least the Fire Control Radar (AKA SAM_RADAR and launchers can be matched to the date.Yeah I mean randomly spawned not place the one.

I understand your distress, especially in those historical events, we can know through various records that a certain radar or launcher is at a certain exact location, but the game is wrong because certain bug and can't do anything, haha.

[+EricJ 4,238]

That's why I remove warships from maps, and replace it with like a Cargo Ship or something. I mean it's cool to bomb a real ship, but that bug really gets you shot down because you're not aware of it coming in.

[+Coupi 4,388]

I'm not sure because the missions I usually create are "dogfights"... but if we relaunch the same mission this runs !

Edited Saturday at 04:33 PM by Coupi

[simonmiller416 1,829]

Guys I wanna push a public tests ,about PAC and HIMRAS.

Both systems are relatively new concepts for me (on modding), so any feedback is welcome.

[simonmiller416 1,829]

Please make sure you know basic mod knowledge before downloading, remember this is a test.

I made three carriers, they use M30, M30A1, M31 munitions respectively.

M30 and 30A1 are cluster variants for anti-tank, in addition to different operation time, A1 has much more sub-munitions (for game performance considerations, I set it to 1% of IRL, but still a lot), which may bring certain FPS drop.

M31 is a variant with independent warheads. Since SF2 cannot show any difference between A1 and A2 sub-types of M31, I combined them into one.

Below is HIMARS: 

HIMARS.7z

[simonmiller416 1,829]

I am still looking for the operator information, the date included in the current version is not accurate.

But let's not talk about this, this is a long-term project, and I happened to have some free time recently, so I dug it out and re-examined it (actually the same is true for HIMARS, they are all projects from several months ago).

The mod currently contains the PAC-2 through PAC-3 MSE variants from the 1990s to the 2010s, and although it still lacks the state-of-the-art LTAMDS radar, besides that it is(should) otherwise fairly complete.

Below is PACs: 

PAC2-3_SAM_0.3.7z

Edited Monday at 05:53 PM by simonmiller416

[simonmiller416 1,829]

I adjusted the launcher of the original model to comply with the ATACMS standard, and imma just wanna know if any one ever made MGM-140/168 before?I didn't find it in the public files.

I m going to make M57 one (with WAU-23/B unitary warhead). If there aren't any existing public versions, I might just build my own, as is the 227mm rockets that's already included in the beta.I modeled those rockets from scratch, they look a little crude but are basically enough for a type of ammunition we don't usually see in games

 

Edited yesterday at 07:19 AM by simonmiller416

[simonmiller416 1,829]

If you gentlemen have no suggestions or comments on the current beta test version, then I may release the pack after the ATACMS variant is completed.

[+EricJ 4,238]

I'm sure that an ATACMS doesn't exist as nobody has made a HIMARS, and ODS would have the MLRS, but I don't know if they made an ATACMS version or just the usual DPICM rockets.

[simonmiller416 1,829]

[simonmiller416 1,829]

[+dtmdragon 2,703]

8 hours ago, simonmiller416 said:

That would utterly destroy my FPS! 😄 

[simonmiller416 1,829]

1 hour ago, dtmdragon said:

That would utterly destroy my FPS! 😄 

Already destroy mine!