why is the sraw wire guided in PR?

CAS_117 · Post by **CAS_117** » 2007-12-09 23:57

I think the rockets need fastropes.

=Romagnolo= · Post by **=Romagnolo=** » 2007-12-09 23:59

zangoo · Post by **zangoo** » 2007-12-10 00:08

CAS_117 · Post by **CAS_117** » 2007-12-10 00:14

[R-MOD]Wasteland wrote:I can't imagine it would be possible for the engine to "track" the rate of change of your cross hair position continuously and then pull up that data for the last two seconds when you want to fire, and then apply that rate of change to the missile's path, causing the missile's angle of change to need to accelerate as it gets further from the firer.

That's like BF2 engine fail.

Why would you even think that would be possible?

Because Missiles can hit planes now.

markonymous · Post by **markonymous** » 2007-12-10 13:04

zangoo wrote:here is my way of doing this, make the sraw track the lasertarget_object that the tanks have, give the saw a very small lock angle, give the missile a very small lock angle and a 2 sec lock on time and make it so that it will lose the lock very fast if you stop following the tank. this way you would have to keep your aim on the tank for 2 sec then you can fire, and it would then just track like a normal missile.

thats how i was thinking too. is this possible?
(could coders plz respond not just spammers)

edit: and can we add fastropes to the blackhawks? that would own so much!(joke, plz dont hurt me)

zangoo · Post by **zangoo** » 2007-12-10 14:13

i did do that if you would like to try it out just go to this thread and a patch should be out with some new changes and this will be one. if you would like to try it out sooner or help test xfire me or cas and we will help.

https://www.realitymod.com/forum/small- ... 31046.html

Gaz · Post by **Gaz** » 2007-12-10 14:48

Crusader09 wrote:The USI mod gave the tank's deployable smoke the ability to block lock-ons. Just put that in PR and then there's your balance.

Not reality though. Smoke doesn't defeat some H-AT systems. Not sure on the SRAW. Eddie would need to comment.

markonymous · Post by **markonymous** » 2007-12-10 14:51

zangoo wrote:i did do that if you would like to try it out just go to this thread and a patch should be out with some new changes and this will be one. if you would like to try it out sooner or help test xfire me or cas and we will help.

https://www.realitymod.com/forum/small- ... 31046.html

sounds nice. And for the balance, to heck with balance. Nothing is fair especially not warfare. reality= unbalance

Post by **77SiCaRiO77** » 2007-12-10 14:52

[R-DEV]Gaz wrote:Not reality though. Smoke doesn't defeat some H-AT systems. Not sure on the SRAW. Eddie would need to comment.

unless its a t90

on topic: IIRC ,the AT version of the sraw was discontinued , and the remains of that version are begin converted to MPV (multiple propose variant) , wicth add more blast and remove the guidence (not sure) for bunker buster abilities

Hotrod525 · Post by **Hotrod525** » 2007-12-10 14:52

Modern tank are not suppose to be equiped whit jammer and IR and all stuff can disturbing an incoming missile ?

http://stinet.dtic.mil/oai/oai?verb=get ... =ADA248068

Sadist_Cain · Post by **Sadist_Cain** » 2007-12-10 15:04

Wire guided missles are hard to defeat because the lil IR light on the back of the missle flashes at a certain frequency, the crosshair tracks this flashing. hard to jam effectively unless you know the frequency. and adjusts the missles course to position it on the crosshair. But the T-90s Arena system should own it once its within 25 metres

as for the Predator (FGM-172a) AT version, because that uses inertial guidance it gives no lock on tone, once fired it still gives no lock on tone. it has Laser sensors to detect where the tank starts and finishes, and a magnetic sensor to detect when it is exactly atop the tank and ready to fire a downwards warhead.
so that bones you also, the only things you can really "see" coming and therefore have effective passive countermeasures are radar and laser designated weapons. Everything else needs active countermeasures, which means actively shooting down the missle thats coming for you, cool

...I await to be torn apart

Wasteland · Post by **Wasteland** » 2007-12-10 18:59

zangoo wrote:here is my way of doing this, make the sraw track the lasertarget_object that the tanks have, give the saw a very small lock angle, give the missile a very small lock angle and a 2 sec lock on time and make it so that it will lose the lock very fast if you stop following the tank. this way you would have to keep your aim on the tank for 2 sec then you can fire, and it would then just track like a normal missile.

But that's not how the locking system works IRL. IRL if the tank altered its velocity, you'd have a miss.

markonymous · Post by **markonymous** » 2007-12-10 20:06

[R-MOD]Wasteland wrote:But that's not how the locking system works IRL. IRL if the tank altered its velocity, you'd have a miss.

well thats true we cant replace one unreal thing with another. Is there any way to combat this?

Sadist_Cain · Post by **Sadist_Cain** » 2007-12-10 20:11

don't spose it's possible to get the lock system to stop guidingf the missle after a few milliseconds, so effectively the missle is locked, fired and the missle corrects course for the moving target, then (milliseconds remember) the missle continues straight, recieving no more guidance instructions. possible or not?

if so it would give the effect were looking for, i.e. after missle launch, apc stops, missle would hit in front

Wasteland · Post by **Wasteland** » 2007-12-10 20:23

The thing is that unless the missile knows the target's range, the missile will need to keep changing direction (curving) in order to always be on target. I doubt that one could get the missile to find range and do the trig to hit on target with the BF2 engine. Besides, the missile would need to know your tracking speed, which I can't imagine one could code.

It seems to me that this is just such a mess that it could never get coded. I don't see what's the big deal with keeping our current wire guided system. It seems like the best approximation.

Sadist_Cain · Post by **Sadist_Cain** » 2007-12-10 21:10

[R-MOD]Wasteland wrote: It seems to me that this is just such a mess that it could never get coded. I don't see what's the big deal with keeping our current wire guided system. It seems like the best approximation.

Because the wire guided system gives a lock on tone that IRL dosnt happen with either the SRAW or the wire guided missle.
And it is not the best approximation as the SRAW is a fire and forget weapon that isnt tracked onto target, and has essentially a "dumb" guidance system that guess where a tank will be providing it stays on a relatively steady heading.

Currently you can guide the sraw onto target regardless of speed or direction change, whilest having to stay out of cover, whereas irl as I said, fire and firget.

Also I dno if this can be fiddled, but the SRAW has a soft launhc ability, meaning it can be fired from inside an enclosed space and out a window causing no danger to anyone inside. dosn't it blow up killing everyone atm?

Post by **Masaq** » 2007-12-10 21:33

Sadist_Cain wrote:Also I dno if this can be fiddled, but the SRAW has a soft launhc ability, meaning it can be fired from inside an enclosed space and out a window causing no danger to anyone inside. dosn't it blow up killing everyone atm?

Isn't that more to do with the fact that usually, people miss the window?

Wasteland · Post by **Wasteland** » 2007-12-10 21:37

Sadist_Cain wrote:the SRAW is a fire and forget weapon that isnt tracked onto target, and has essentially a "dumb" guidance system that guess where a tank will be providing it stays on a relatively steady heading.

Exactly. I don't think a lot of people are getting this point.

My point though is that there would be no way to approximate the above in the BF2 engine.

BloodBane611 · Post by **BloodBane611** » 2007-12-10 23:07

As wasteland said, hard to code.

Also, a more effective guided missile makes balance much harder. That was what I tried to communicate in my previous post and obviously failed at. Currently the balance between tanks and infantry is pretty good. Now make infantry 10x more capable of killing tanks, at longer distances. Not a good way to increase balance.