Canadair

I read that, about the warhead not exploding,, but still...

Well the idea is a campaign, althoguh the mission would be great in aGIUK package... With weapons set as ARM and ALL ships with radars maybe it could work, but then each and every anti-ship would be a sead mission, althoguh in hyoptehical sea scenario, ships could be declared in the types as Sams, launchers or radar, or AAA and they would be in target areas so prepared, being ships of course but with the system thinking they are AAA, or SAM In this case SEAD mission would be generated, but those would require, a useless strike flight, which WILL overfly the fleet and get , most likely shot. Which was less or more the role of Mr.BEAR. So a huge number of bomber armed with ARM-modified cruise missiles and tasked 100 SEAD, and a few wtasked with strike role and strike loadout empty, so to play disguised as strike the recon role of sea-recon planes. It is very complicated, but could work. I will try Saguany please still waiting for yuor terrain test bed, since this is going toward the single install thing

I completely give it to TK and Community ( I am just coming out a conversation with a Lomac entusaist and I was paraisng the value of SFP1's concet) Actually I posted on 3rdwire forum, and TK answered, showing us once again, that he does really care for the community.. http://bbs.thirdwire.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=4888

Limitations, limitations, limitations I have beena a great defender of SFP1 series but it is gettng on my terms; especially because many features are semi-activated. I understand the low funding etc etc, but ,, I mean,, you know,,,, We will see about WOI.

Onorary Gaeta-Citizen, you have no idea how bad I felt when in a test flying the badger formation rolled in on the ship group,, and did not launch kent missiles,, I really felt the GIUK scenario, right... there! Anyway, it is worth testing in campaign environment subs and ships typed in as ground units, so that ground battle occurs; perhaps the sub will engage the ship with CAS (simulating anti-sub) performed by s-3 or p-3; But I will test and try this when I reconcile myself with sfp1 at the moment I am very disappointed

Excellent, thanks for the answer Dave. Let's hope it gets fixed And yes fleet defnse IS impacted because if bombers are NOT launching what is the point of shooting them down?

Suggerrieri per iniziare un install NON moddato WOV forse è quello che abbiamo tutti. Resta da capire se i DATA e le skin devono essere le stesse

Ci sto e mi interessa. pintogabriele (at) hotmail (dot) com suggerirei un'aereo solo per iniziare, magari un phantom di default, o F-100 ed il terreno range per esercizi al poligno, che dio lsa che ne abbiamo bisogno. Il problema grosso è la coordinazione del RT, oltre che le limnitazioni di TK. Tra moglie, fidnzate, lavori vari, spese, condomini, e le dosi favolose di colossali minchiate che ci propone il nostro favoloso mondo reale a manetta, è difficile organizzarsi Scusate ma sono inca nero. Fosse per me mi chiuderei in casa con videogame vari uscendo solo dopo mezzanotte per andare in giro nel bosco. E magari andare al lavoro se mi facessero fare sto corso, viva la serietà delle compagnie italiane. MA cmq di qusto ve be frega poco. LA cosa mi interessa, di provare a giocare online, ci riescono glia mericano non vedo perchè noi no La piattaforma è purtroppo, però un c...

Can I ask again, where it has been discussed if anywhere? And if TK knows of this problem and perhaps feels like working on it?

Typhoid thanks for answeringmy pm as well As for the anti-ship campaign at the moment I guess the whole idea is better put on hold according to this thread, about a bug I spotted and apparently every one knew about. Please give it a read http://forum.combatace.com/index.php?showtopic=24817 It clearly makes no sense since it is impossible to release the power and destruction of the soviet ASM Unless missions can be done which I d really like to get, from someone who really met MR Bear, Badger and Backfire

I read about the avionics80 not being done. But I also read about new AG modes. But who knows, maybe we will get something. and yes I know about the never-post-80 obviously, I ve only been following SFP series since the beginning. My point is why in the hell bother with guided weapons if they can't be used but from player's controlled flight? Basically I am a little disappointed and my bubble had burst, since I really really had this perfect GIUK scenario and campaign in mind, but since AI-flights won't launch their missiles,, well sigh bye bye big bombers formations and tomcat, bye bye fleet defense operations, and postponed defended sea lane concept. yes definetly my bubble busrt

Dave, I ve been looking on 3rdwire forum and here, can't find any related post or thread, can you please help point me in the right direction so I can learn more about the subject?

I think they don't release them at all! Anyway this is a major big deal, in the least to me, and basically confines back sfp1 to pre 80s era. I guess there is nothing to do right?

Must have escaped me for a couple of years now of every other day SFP1ing. I am quite disappointed about it, and this jeopardize a lot many projects I had in mind. I suppose there in no known work around? Perhaps next patch... I posted also on 3rdwire

I am surprised that no-one noticed this before. Please read along I might be wrong but while working on the sea-air campaign that I posted about I noticed that in campaigns, AI flights NOT belonging to your flight but tasked STRIKE , won't WON'T launch missiles. Tested with Tu-16C and Kent missiles, with launches succesful undel player control. Then tested on the Range with maverick armed F-16. no launches. F-16 with paveways. No launches. I have seen thoguh, I remeber dumb bomb releases and harm launches, in the least in Wov. So basically, no "smart" pr guided weapon is launched by AI flights? I REALLY HOPE I AM WRONG. could you please all check this? Should that be true this is a MAJOR issue, that really relegates SFP behind , and before the the guided ammo era? What is the point of weapon pack if AI can' use it?This stops from building elaborate campaigns PLEASE, PLEASE investigate and let's all run tests on this issue..

The game is SFP1 But I have a terrible suspicion, which if true jeopardizes all the efforts so far For some reason AI-flights do not attack my ships, (which are set as gound targets MISC or Naval_base) That would make useless the whole idea of large missile bomer soviet formation attacking ships I will experiment more, but limitations and no help are frustating me

I don't think that is the point; besides strangley one out of three launches has effect.. no offense but go trust french weapons... I am kidding french aces eh?

I will do the testbed campaign. I am waiting for saguanay to make a test terrain; or I will modify the ini

Posted elsewhere...might be of interest here, for more reason than one... I modified the standard flakland campaign, by having very high ship types values, and ship organized in target areas, so that the campaign directs missions (strike missions, not anti_ship missions) against them Of course the loadout needs to be changed. Not a problem with flakland since A-4 and pucara have dumb bombs and rocktes anyway. Trickier with etendards that might be tasked to attack ground targets while arme with exocets when AI managed. But by having a little number of etendard in the campaign ( which is realistic, I think they had 6 and 5 exocets in total) this possibility is reduced. Indeed the system generates nice missions of attacks against supply ships, shffield destroeyes,(bristoll class), etc.. I have to see what happens with CAS missions, since eventually those Britishsquads and Argent Squad will come in contact.. Now my problem is that the sheffield played temporarily by a bristol ship, downloaded at combat ace) resisted two direct exocet hits....is the weapon not that great? the ship should have no flight deck, so should be destructible Thus saying wher ein the hell is the setting that lowers dmage points for ships? I need to know that to proceed with the GIUK project I have in mind, and improve this "interim" falkland PS: Respect to both sides of that war. Courage of the Argies dealing with a superior tech enemy,, (oh those AIM-9L), and to the british for being so far away from home, stuck in a "little" perhaps avoidable war. Long live and respect to the warriors on both side, Gentleman Thankfully it was over; and as the IronMaiden sing, "No more tears, amigo"

To give some updates on this; I did the campaign But the altitude problem is still there, as much as you lower it in missioncontrol.ini But what is worse is the tendency of having CAP and SWEEP assigned to helicoptes, which willl try to engage at 14000 ft,, And even worse the lack of ground 2 air reaction from the tanks attacked,,,a solution mabe could be to have prepositione AAA in areas where ground combat is going to take place, but this is beyond my pay-grade.. Still it is worth trying,, any othe rideas? NOTE to the swedish WIzard, julhelm. Even if this post sounds a little grim that does not mean that you are allowed not to give us your GREAT models,, that is if you still have fun making them that is...

I modified the standard flakland campaign, by having very high ship types values, and ship organized in target areas, so that the campaign directs missions (strike missions, not anti_ship missions) against them Of course the loadout needs to be changed. Not a problem with flakland since A-4 and pucara have dumb bombs and rocktes anyway. Trickier with etendards that might be tasked to attack ground targets while arme with exocets when AI managed. But by having a little number of etendard in the campaign ( which is realistic, I think they had 6 and 5 exocets in total) this possibility is reduced. Indeed the system generates nice missions of attacks against supply ships, shffield destroeyes,(bristoll class), etc.. Now my problem is that the sheffield (bristol ship, downloaded at combat ace) resisted two direct exocet hits....is the weapon not that great? the ship should have no flight deck, so should be destructible Thus saying wher ein the hell is the setting that lowers dmage points for ships? I need to know that to proceed with the GIUK project I have in mind

Probably already said but labeling the nukes as highexplosives, (with the proper nuke effects of course) should do the trick and allow desctruction of things and vehicles, althoguh I never dropped ona town

bump

After a few experiments; Max visable distance in objects data.ini does the trick for BVR; both for air and ground targets. Wingman will engage bvr, and launche anti-ship missiles at ships targets. something alnog the line of maxvisbaledistance=40000 for ship works better, althoguh I am still experimenting. there is this other thread... http://forum.combatace.com/index.php?showtopic=24773 On the other hand having radar wil have also 3&4 engaging maybe because they might think it is airdefenses.....

Wrench I don't know I tried setup 80000 for both entries for sa-6 and striaghtflush. My idea was to setup a strike against samsite in campaign which can be done easily, by declaring launchers and sam as comm_building or misc (since campaign ignores happily sam_launcher and sam_radar), and with using groundobjects=true. My idea was to be able to pick froma distance the various launchers and the radar, (yes I know I can launch harms, and it works but it would be cool to launch arms and then launch mavericks to the launchers, or command the wingman, etc). Still the ground objects even at 80000 don't get visable but at a distance of about 2.5 miles, and even so they are difficult to switch from using E; i mean,, I acquire, I switch I lose the target. Would be cool , to be able to use E to switch among all the targets (including buildings!)within a certain range....but I guess this is game limitation. But still there must be a work out for this ditance thing