Suggestion for database, data supply
-
No need for insults, personal attacks, and un-necessary rhetoric.
Agreed 100%. It’s very disturbing to see constant sarcastic demeaning remarks by some in most every post they make concerning the DB here or other areas of others work in different iterations of Falcon on these boards, not just directed at the BMS crew. Some guys just can’t stop.:(
I also noted after release some issues and I left it at that here in the public. No need to constantly be bashing the horse to death and beyond. Really what does that accomplish??
Now on the other hand, Bonedust is fair GAME!!!:p
RAM22
-
i must say i have the time to follow the forum (a little bit) since the new year approximately. I did not know about the db questions / the fighting that was happening before.
-
Molni was banned alright, for personal attacks. If it were up to me, the ban would have been permanent considering this wasn’t his first time. There will be absolutely zero tolerance for calling someone names. Period.
The rules as so simple, it’s not even funny.
https://www.benchmarksims.org/forum/showthread.php?8465-Forum-RulesYes, this is our forum, and these are our rules.
Then Shouldnt Scoob sustain the same punishment for his remark of " a boy who cried wolf". Sure that may not seem to abrasive to some, but to others that may be down rite rude. You say that there is “Zero” Tollerance for attacks. Then you need to hold everyone to the same Tollerance.
Otherwise you are just taking sides. Period.
-
Then Shouldnt Scoob sustain the same punishment for his remark of " a boy who cried wolf". Sure that may not seem to abrasive to some, but to others that may be down rite rude. You say that there is “Zero” Tollerance for attacks. Then you need to hold everyone to the same Tollerance.
Otherwise you are just taking sides. Period.
Read the forum rules again. They are both clear and simple. By the way, one does not equal the other. Scoobs remark was not a direct attack while Molni’s remark, plus past history, is a direct reflection of his attitude. It’s why we will not normally perma ban someone for a “rude” or “abrasive” remark, at least the first time. Molni has a history of these remarks, so the punishment definitely fit the crime. I’ve said everything that needs to be said of this issue and don’t have the patience to debate it with you.
-
I have been away and still will be but I will ask someone to look into all his recommended changes. Lets please not make this forum into a he said you said bla bla bla forum. Thanks to all that have made comments and please keep posting Molni but dont attack anyone even if you feel you may have been provoked. Paka
-
A person spends a lot of hours testing something and offering his own point of view for fixing them, backing it up with the information that is available to him.
Since he had a communication problem in the past, he just lays it out in a thread on the forums.
He gets called out on a simple words play, and tries to explain what he meant to say. (I highly doubt that he was claiming that either of those SAMS isn’t able to hit any non-maneuvering target).
Then he gets called out even more, with a little spark of impoliteness added, which makes him (I’d say righteously) lose his temper.
He gets no chance to apologize and no warnings, while the second offender is let off the hook.If you have something against the information and suggestions he has, prove it by facts available to you. Playing with his temper and his language barrier, while calling him out on a very narrow interpretation of his words is just not right.
If he is misbehaving, give him a warning and a chance to apologize. Forgiveness changes people, not punishment.
Let the one who has never lost his temper and never insulted others be the first one to throw the stone at me. -
Ok … Please guys … now stop the drama…
Back to the topic : Suggestion for database, data supply
Thank you all!
(And Nice to see you Ratty ;)!)
-
A person spends a lot of hours testing something and offering his own point of view for fixing them, backing it up with the information that is available to him.
Since he had a communication problem in the past, he just lays it out in a thread on the forums.
He gets called out on a simple words play, and tries to explain what he meant to say. (I highly doubt that he was claiming that either of those SAMS isn’t able to hit any non-maneuvering target).
Then he gets called out even more, with a little spark of impoliteness added, which makes him (I’d say righteously) lose his temper.
He gets no chance to apologize and no warnings, while the second offender is let off the hook.If you have something against the information and suggestions he has, prove it by facts available to you. Playing with his temper and his language barrier, while calling him out on a very narrow interpretation of his words is just not right.
If he is misbehaving, give him a warning and a chance to apologize. Forgiveness changes people, not punishment.
Let the one who has never lost his temper and never insulted others be the first one to throw the stone at me.Hey! What part of he said you said dont you get? Let me say this. I understand perfectly whats going on here. I dont want to see another post like this again because as far as I am concerned its finished and thats that. If this thread keeps going the way it has been I will close it and ask that Molni start all over again. I see 10 pages of possibly useful information and its all derailed by a further 10 pages of utter bullshit I dont want to come here when I can find the time and have to read through all the horseshit to see the useful stuff.
Its over its done ok?Regards
RayP.S. Dee-Jay please investigate the data Molni has to offer. I think most of the chaff flares stuff looks good and can go straight in. I did the chaff flares position stuff a very long time ago when the code was first developed and there are plenty of errors I can guarantee that. It was regarded as not all that important at the time as it was an eye candy thing. as far as numbers of each you might have to ask him where his info came from so please work with him not against him.
-
P.S. Dee-Jay please investigate the data Molni has to offer. I think most of the chaff flares stuff looks good and can go straight in. I did the chaff flares position stuff a very long time ago when the code was first developed and there are plenty of errors I can guarantee that. It was regarded as not all that important at the time as it was an eye candy thing. as far as numbers of each you might have to ask him where his info came from so please work with him not against him.
Actually … It is what I’m trying to do! … But Monli’s behaviour does not really help me … (easy easy … everything is alright now! LOL is a sort of joke … ok … me run.)
Seriously … as you know, I’m not in charge of that stuff, but (for some reasons) some .dat updates are missing and did not have been committed in time for public release. Falcas has updates to re-commit (that must be done first) and as far as I’ve understood, that will be looked at as soon as possible.
I guess that he had heard us.
Personally, I’m for those changes.
Finger crossed … and time is required …
(Maybe we should better speak about that on DEV forum check PM)
So @ everybody … back to topic please… more interesting…
-
Yes,back to Topic,
While you guy’s are messing with the SAM’s and saying the SA-5’s are not shooting at you after awhile in Campaign.You need to check it’s Rareity in F4Browse in the WCD window.It may be that the Unit just plum ran out of that missile 'til next resupply event hit’s.Field is 0-99%(1-100 I believe),if they are available for use.Current SA-5 is available 70% of the time.SA-2 is available 99% of the time.
GO figure……
demer
-
…bullshit … horseshit …
Its over its done ok?Regards
Rayok, thanks for your diplomacy and the constructive manner of conversation that I failed to provide in my post. Although I do regret the fact that my call for forgiveness, tolerance and understanding is considered to be a fecal matter produced by different species of livestock, especially by people that have the power to close threads, or otherwise moderate here. It’s ok, you are forgiven.
On topic: I suggest people do not just copy paste Molni’s fixes to their files/database. As good as they may be, different database/files may create problems for you if you are planning to engage in MP flights and it may be hard to revert these changes.
-
Yes,back to Topic,
While you guy’s are messing with the SAM’s and saying the SA-5’s are not shooting at you after awhile in Campaign.You need to check it’s Rareity in F4Browse in the WCD window.It may be that the Unit just plum ran out of that missile 'til next resupply event hit’s.Field is 0-99%(1-100 I believe),if they are available for use.Current SA-5 is available 70% of the time.SA-2 is available 99% of the time.
GO figure……
demer
I never knew what controls that value. How is counted the available missile for batteries if they go into 2D world and transformed again into 3D in a single mission? Does the battalion supply level have any effect on available SAM qty? Is the max. what weapon slots and qtys are defined in DB?
I have many question concerning to DB + exe connection.
-
I never knew what controls that value. How is counted the available missile for batteries if they go into 2D world and transformed again into 3D in a single mission? Does the battalion supply level have any effect on available SAM qty? Is the max. what weapon slots and qtys are defined in DB?
I have many question concerning to DB + exe connection.
Rareity= Percent (%) of full supply\weapon’s which is give in’ to the unit at Start\Resupply.So if you only have a Weapon Count of say 2 for the Missile on the Vehicle,and you have 5 Vehicle’s in the battalion then you have 10 Missle’s available to the Unit at start.So if we have a Rareity of 50% for this weapon,then you will only get back ~5 at resupply(~120Minute’s Campain’ Time).So the AI shoot’s those,so your out of Missile’s again,then we have to wait for the next cycle for the unit to be active (Shoot at you) again…If we say Rareity is 99% then it seem’s we never run out of Missile’s……think it’s the 0-254 in the .exe,not sure,don’t have the current Code.
Don’t think it matter’s 2D to 3D,as I have yet to drive a Tank in Falcon…LOL!!!
demer
-
More SA-2 test. I changed the aero data, added an additional brakepoint for modeling drag above M2.0 Normal force coeff was not changed.
Here is the video about the tests. I had to make two tests - because engagement range prevents to see the deacceleration without escaping - for the data in the 3rd diagram. (Two different color.)
http://www.mediafire.com/?w4009c512x6282a
Change have effect on peak speed but deacceleration is almost the same. Strange.
-
Hi Molini. Can u post your videos on youtube like before. Makes it easier for people like me who cannot download.
kaRadi
-
Roger.
-
glad to see you posting more of this molni. Keep up the good work.
-
Thumbs up molni!
-
Yea Molni good to see u back. Super xtra fine with your effort and stamina on the subject…
Respect and thumbs up. -
Video is added to previous post.