Bugs and issues Nordic 1.0
-
Hey guys.
Are you at the stage where you fix elevation bugs? SA-2 site locks and fires at me through a mountain. My first attempt at a campaign mission, I couldn’t say how generalized this issue is.
Cheers!
PS: I had DL working in my blk15. Is that me or?…
Hum, interesting! I am not sure that radars shooting thru mountains qualifies as an elevation bug issue. When I think of an elevation issue I am thinking more along the lines of coastlines, airbases, and water not being level. These are something we can fix pretty easily. Do you have an idea how to resolve an issue where Falcon doens’t interpret the mountain as an obstacle to a SAM?
-
Elevation and terrain problems are what is discussed about in this French thread, if the language doesn’t refrain you.
http://www.checksix-forums.com/viewtopic.php?f=266&t=195985&p=1573905&hilit=sam+terrain#p1573905
No, I have no idea how to resolve this issue if it’s not a matter of elevation and terrain. I suppose it’s tricky.
Leaving a video for the record. Considering the interest risen by the terrain itself and the mountains to hide behind when you play vintage, I suppose this is particularly important.
-
is this in only a certain location? i ask because i often use the mountains to intersept sams. i have a few vids showing it. i will look at the french post soon. Falcas pointed out a bad spot in terrain a while back that i have yet to fix. this spot is directly SSE of bardufoss ab. in the mountains. edit. just tested sead on alta base. 3 sa2 smashed into mtn. and 2sa10 came in from above but lost track of me in the gully and crashed into mountain. so this might be a localized glitch from your loc.
-
is this in only a certain location? i ask because i often use the mountains to intersept sams. i have a few vids showing it. i will look at the french post soon. Falcas pointed out a bad spot in terrain a while back that i have yet to fix. this spot is directly SSE of bardufoss ab. in the mountains. edit. just tested sead on alta base. 3 sa2 smashed into mtn. and 2sa10 came in from above but lost track of me in the gully and crashed into mountain. so this might be a localized glitch from your loc.
If it’s localized, it’s really good news. You can probably reproduce it by approaching ALTA Airbase low level, within the SA-2 ring, from West.
Thanks for your interest!
PS: the French thread is about Korea, after your answer, there’s nothing add to what you said, you shouldn’t bother
-
Not localized after all.
Well I re calculated all radars and SA2 can still detect thru mountains. I thought maybe detection was brought from another unit so I made te with only Sam site. Still tracks me through mountains. So I checked with KTO the SAM stats are all correct.
I think we will just add this to known issues for now, until a solution presents itself.
-
Not localized after all.
Well I re calculated all radars and SA2 can still detect thru mountains. I thought maybe detection was brought from another unit so I made te with only Sam site. Still tracks me through mountains. So I checked with KTO the SAM stats are all correct.
I think we will just add this to known issues for now, until a solution presents itself.
Thanks for your time, starrats. I’m pretty sure people have solutions to that, or there wouldn’t even be a Korea.
-
If the problem doesn’t exist in Korea but in all theaters, and everything else is the same, makes me wonder if there is some aspect of theater switching code - for example would it be possible that the radar tracks using data from another theater for terrain. A good test could be to swap out a theater with Korea - in the primary spot and then retest the radar tracking. . . if it still tracks thru mountains then that would suggest it might be an issue specific to the way the theater is built.
-
Not localized after all.
Well I re calculated all radars and SA2 can still detect thru mountains. I thought maybe detection was brought from another unit so I made te with only Sam site. Still tracks me through mountains. So I checked with KTO the SAM stats are all correct.
Gentlemen,
If I’m allowed to tell mine, I experienced this same ‘issue’ (?) in discussion several times before, in SP as in MP as well.
At the end, Lorik signed a good point, but I think that Ned’s advise is the most reasonable answer.
And anyone can’t beat AI behavior, especially when facing true ‘killing boxes’ like those referred by Ned and experienced by me too, I’m afraid.
Sometimes also having being spotted by enemy civilian buildings helped AAA and SAMs in locating and tracking me, in spite of all tricks I was able to try against that.
Not to mention if enemy troops or units got to do it, of course.Just my little one cent, hoping maybe it helped a little, huh?
With best regards to all,
Gianni. -
The carrier group in the baltic sea is to easy to kill.
Campaign is russian bear as far as i can remember. I need 3 manual tasked 2 ship flight F18C with Harpoons out of Pitea to sink the entire task force. Last flight my ai wingmen only carrys AA weapons. With the ships the planes are also gone, a massiv drop for the enemy.Problem is that the ships cant defend against the missles (will it ever happend in BMS, i dont think so) and that enemy interceptors had no chance to cache me. From take off to weapon release i need around 5 minutes. To equal this game related things a carrier should be placed far away from the front lines, best with enemy territory between.
I would vote for a remove.
yeh… i thought obout this we may move it but i like it in the sim still for a couple reasons. AI has a hard time sinking carriers, i think because they target first boat they see in the group. this means unless ai gets lucky , russia will have a four sqdn advantage until you sink the carrier. this gives the pilot the option to thin out russian fighters by sinking the boat (easily with harpoons) or enjoy frequent dogfights with migs and flankers. any other thoughts on this carrier? v2 is closing in.
-
Another thought is to consider developing very detailed TE’s. In this way, one might be able to script engagements in a way that would create more desired scenario for given engagement. TE can be a pretty neat set of missions or vignettes to showcase aircraft, ships, time of day, weather, etc.
-
Right, I’m going to at least leave in Gianni’s carriers from f4 test so people will have an easier start point to build carrier ops te. Still need some complex TEs built for feature examples and new weapons and plane testing. I will get some for v2
-
any other thoughts on this carrier? v2 is closing in.
Yes, master.
Just one: please consider introducing some aggressive Russkij HAVCAP packages covering their fleet, and let’s see how it will end for the Blues. :rofl:
With best regards,
-
Another thought is to consider developing very detailed TE’s. In this way, one might be able to script engagements in a way that would create more desired scenario for given engagement. TE can be a pretty neat set of missions or vignettes to showcase aircraft, ships, time of day, weather, etc.
Right, I’m going to at least leave in Gianni’s carriers from f4 test so people will have an easier start point to build carrier ops te. Still need some complex TEs built for feature examples and new weapons and plane testing. I will get some for v2
Guess what, dearest friends…
how interesting these yours. Just thinking the same about, and almost to do that consequently.
‘Funny’, isn’t it?With best regards, bellezze
Gianni. -
DB is up to date for all fixable bugs . . . back into waiting mode for next items . . .
ccc task list has been cleared: F-4 bugs with gear door dof numbers are fixed now. IL-28 has been upgraded and a 3dpit added too. SK-37E has also been reworked a little got rid of intake pylons and chaff/ecm pylons behind gear. Remove radar and corrected internal fuel capacity and removed wps as wel and updated for the correct ECM only role. PAK-FA has been renamed to official Su57. Added 2 more skin sets to the Germany EF2000. Will wait for a few more items if they present - else I am back to skinning the RF-4C.
-
F 35c is not getting tasked flights no matter how I set the role numbers. I thought adjusting this to same numbers as a working model (such as f18e or f35b) would help but no joy so far.
The buglist I can fix is caught up as well. Besides f35c tasking. Campaigns have more realistic units and placement, but weapons will be in a future update, along with other wip for Nordic.
Roads are being made now as priority to be finished for v2.
-
So for all of these fixes what do we do to incorporate them re download the theater or what
Just wondering
-
the public and beta testers wait for Starrats to build another installer - for beta testers, Starrats will contact you with links. For the public - be patient - Nordic is only going to improve over time.
-
F-35A will not settle on the runway when landing until it almost stops…brakes work although the plane is elevated above the runway several feet…Is there something I can tweak in the AC.dat ? I’m enjoying this theater,good job …
dfang
-
which airbase? When I tested this I was pretty sure I had the tire elevation correct. It might be that particular airbase. I suggest trying several to isoloate if the aircraft acdata is the problem or the airbase isn’t level. In the base of the airbases, that is also something we were pretty sure we had nailed down but there might a stray one that isn’t quite right yet. If it isn’t one of those items I will need to look more closely at it.
-
which airbase? When I tested this I was pretty sure I had the tire elevation correct. It might be that particular airbase. I suggest trying several to isoloate if the aircraft acdata is the problem or the airbase isn’t level. In the base of the airbases, that is also something we were pretty sure we had nailed down but there might a stray one that isn’t quite right yet. If it isn’t one of those items I will need to look more closely at it.
Just got around to testing,tried Velhelmina,Tromso Lengnes,Gallivare, & Kiruna,all had same results…
The F-35A sets nice on taxi and runway,takes off normal,but landing is a problem at least on my end…
Thanks,
dfang