PFunk

Yeah, trying to break radar/missile lock in this game seems to be a largely hit or miss affair. After multiple attempts, I can never get replicable results.

I've got the X56. If you ever used the X36 or the X45, it'll be a snap to use. I had the X45 for about six years before it finally bit the dust, and I eventually migrated back to the X56. Windows 10 will work with the X52 Pro with next to no compatibility issues. After Logitech bought the designs from Mad Catz, there have been steady improvements in QA. A lot of people complained about the quality of the X56 when I first came out, I have one of the latest builds of it and Logitech has done some solid work in making them much more reliable. I would buy an X52 with no reservations. I just had my Thrustmaster T16000M FCS die on me and I was not going back to that. TM's quality doesn't feel nearly as solid as Logitech's to me.

How is this possible? These are literally designs from the 50s and 60s.

Sure. Why would you want to? The SAM systems available now for download are already insanely difficult to counter. The engine isn't really to model next-gen SAM systems. This is a sim built for systems no newer than about 1985.

Well, that's interesting. After years of radio silence, TK does something interesting. I would doubt a single bug has been fixed; this is likely a simple repackaging. However, is he planning on working on a few bugs to finish the product? Who knows? I know the mobile gaming market is largely driven by quick, simple to play games. I've never played any of TK's mobile games because that's not what I use my iPhone to do. I also doubt that TK is planning new PC development. He has already expressed how he feels about the PC gaming environment, and I begrudge him nothing. His mobile gaming enterprise seems to be keeping him in the black, so more power to him. I may reinstall the SF2 series, I'm getting tired of waiting on DCS to finish Modern Air Combat and I think Ed Scio has pretty much waved the white flag on Combat Air Patrol 2.

Okay, thank you for confirming that works. I haven't reinstalled anything yet, but I'm glad that someone could clarify for me that this works. The lack of night missions in campaigns is unacceptable. I think the thing I would probably miss the most from running SF2NA is the carrier battle groups.

I know that if you do not merge SF2:NA with the rest of your installs, you do away with some of the idiosyncrasies of the campaign, like the enemy focus on sinking naval battle groups and focusing strikes on land targets. Are there any other advantages to running without North Atlantic? I know the user misses out on the F-14 Avionics.dll, but are there other trade offs that make the game better?

That might work.

Thanks. I’ve come to the conclusion that modern warfare simply just doesn’t work well in the SF2 environment; you go past about 1993, you’re just playing whack-a-mole with the limits of the engine. I’m looking at the existing terrains to see what we have.

I literally just dumped the whole thing and I'm starting over from scratch.

Found the error. It's definitely something wrong with the terrain engine. Faulting application name: StrikeFighters2 NorthAtlantic.exe, version: 13.7.5.35, time stamp: 0x51d221e5 Faulting module name: TerrainEngine.dll, version: 0.0.0.0, time stamp: 0x51d21fa0 Exception code: 0xc0000005 Fault offset: 0x0000baa4 Faulting process id: 0x28f8 Faulting application start time: 0x01d3ebbff683301d Faulting application path: C:\Program Files (x86)\ThirdWire\Strike Fighters 2\StrikeFighters2 NorthAtlantic.exe Faulting module path: C:\Program Files (x86)\ThirdWire\Strike Fighters 2\Core\TerrainEngine.dll Report Id: 7305208f-1043-40c9-96f1-e925a6194652 Faulting package full name: Faulting package-relative application ID: Does this mean I need to uninstall SF2 and reinstall it?

It's like trying to find an electrical short in a classic car that you're in the middle of restoring. I get about 20 minutes into a mission in campaign mode and BAM.

No, no. That helps outline some possible culprits.

I'm working on the Operation Darius reboot (a little at a time) and I'm noticing I'm getting a LOT of CTDs, but usually only well into the mission and with a lot of activity going on. Is it graphics settings? It is the number of air units I have? What's the right number of air units to have in play at any one given time? Thanks.

Getting discouraged on this project and may have to shelve it for a while. SF2 does not lend itself well to modern combat systems, even if visual quality and flight models of the aircraft are nothing less than stellar.

God makes them pretty when they're in their 20s. It's a trap.

Finally got a Hulu subscription.

HARD difficulty simply gives the AI an almost UFO-like ability in the game, I've noticed. The AI aircraft are capable of speeds and maneuvering that the player simply cannot replicate. It's not harder enemies, its just enemies with capability you don't have.

I've noticed that seesaw effect in the settings of game behavior for this series. Normal difficulty seems to offer the most consistent results.

I'm almost certain the advantage is not in the missile data files, but a hardcoded behavior within the architecture of the game. I removed 16 friendly air units yesterday and I may remove more. The workhorse of the air campaign is still the F-16. The F-22 is still in, but the JSF is gone. On the weapons, all air-to-air missiles have a maximum accuracy of 90%, nothing over that. I used the RSSM files as a benchmark for data entry values. I have not decided if I am going to force all AI flights to use SAHM missiles for BVR combat. I'm going to play-test what I have so far.

Truth. Just trying to make it challenging enough to be close to reality without completely removing the element of fun.

What I may do is give all AI aircraft SAHM-only BVR missiles. The player will have to manually adjust their loadouts to use AHM missiles. The AI is literally filling the sky with AHM missiles (which they would do in Real Life, honestly) within three seconds of my takeoff, I'm getting Fox 3 calls that are wiping out everything. I think reducing Coalition numbers is probably smart. I'll be removing the JSFs, and reducing the number of F-22s along with more than a third of the original Coalition size. I've identified forces and aircraft that wouldn't likely be part of a Coalition and I'll be consolidating other forces. I think it'll work, I should be ready to release a beta by the summer.

The problem is not of itself too many SAM emplacements. If anything, I think the number of SAM systems on the terrains I'll be using is representative of what would exist if military planners had to contend with the threats in Iranian airspace in Real Life. The problem is that the IRIAF is operating relative antiques compared to the equipment being fielded by the developed nations and they're getting slaughtered by the AI. The most advanced aircraft in the IRIAF inventory (that we are aware of) is the MiG-29, and it's the A-model the Iranians 'inherited' in 1991. The F-14 fleet is down to less than 40 flyable aircraft and military planners estimate that none of their AIM-54 Phoenix missiles are even operable, because of crucial batteries that are in short supply. The Iranians only had a little less than 300 of them to start with and according to Grumman accounts, the tech reps on the ground who were training the IRIAF maintenance crews actually sabotaged about a dozen of the missiles by destroying the internal components. Over time and attrition, we estimate they've used up all the functioning Phoenixes are now resorting to reverse engineering the remaining missiles. It appears the Iranians essentially stuck the components of a Hawk SAM in the body of a Phoenix missile. Either that, or we're just seeing an old, unserviceable Phoenix. https://theaviationist.com/tag/fakour-90/ Adding Russian or Chinese 'help' might work, because if the theatre that is unfolding in the SF2 game engine is anything like reality, the IRIAF is in for a bad time. I'm just trying to make it more 'sporting'. @daddyairplanes, your idea of reducing the size of the international coalition to just Arab states, French, and UK help is probably a good idea. The RAAF should probably stay in, though. The other problem I'm running into is the old AHM/RWR trap. I really don't understand why TK didn't make that one, crucial little change to the avionics.dll files.

As I’m sure you’re all aware, the SF2 game engine has some limitations in how it sets forces against one another that don’t lend itself well to modern combat. I’ve been working on basic campaign play and there is no scenario in which the Iranian Air Force get does not get pounded like cheap veal. The greatest threat you as a player face is from SAM emplacements. I’m trying to figure out a way to even the playing field, or if I even need to (i.e., the IRIAF is largely using antiques, why wouldn’t they get annihilated)? Suggestions are appreciated.

Guys, the Insky website is known for being riddled with viruses in addition to hosting ganked files, in violation of all kinds of copyright law. Be smart. Don’t go off and do something foolish you’ll regret later. We have tons of good quality files from reputable, hardworking people right here.