Project Reality Forums

InfantryGamer42 wrote:If you dont have anything smarth to say, pls leave this thread. You are just making yourself look dumb.

lakinen wrote:The next thing to be corrected in my opinion:
Armor(component) on most planes is put on "Airplane"-wrong.And then it has penetration of AA rockets 7.5 which is much larger than the helicopter which is 3 (PR_ARMOR_HELO_LIGHT)

https://imgur.com/a/XoY1Gq3

I do not know why the reason was ejected this armor PR_Airplane_Attacker -penetration 4.Which looks much better than "Airplane" armor c.

https://imgur.com/a/BsTN4Pf

And this is a probable reason why I could not do anything with adjusting head of the AA rocket damage.In the last video I used a AA rocket for testing with wary low exploding damage and plane explode.I wrote about it in "State of AA" theme.and maybe the reason Ehplosion_AA_blastwave...

The the with AA missiles is that they're proximity based, and never suppose to hit target directly but explode as it set in detonation component.

F.e., as current settings says for sa19_grison(tunguska missile), the explosion radius(35) even lower than detonation radius(50), so "in theory" target shouldn't be even damaged.
That's where we've had bf2 issue for ages - proximity checks for missiles were happening with much lower frequency than server fps, so missile could be at 51m from target at first tick, omitting explosion, and next tick it would be at 10m or at 49m, triggering explosion with basically random damage.
The check frequency been fixed at some of last patches, so detonation should now be happening on near edge of explosion radius - which require from us either increase explosion damage(aim-9 killing tanks lol) or adjust missiles materials damageMod against materials that planes, cas planes, and helicopters use.

Again that's kinda drives thread off as i'm mostly seeking flight physics feedback, and damage&materials could deserve their own thread if anyone upset

Personally i now got used to the new meta of flying towards AA missiles to glitch them and then promptly gunning the AA position. Please don't change a thing. Works everytime

DogACTUAL wrote:Personally i now got used to the new meta of flying towards AA missiles to glitch them and then promptly gunning the AA position. Please don't change a thing. Works everytime

so you agree to have advantage over some helpless AA. im all for change and fixing the issues with jets cause i used to play it a lot back in 1.3.9 -1.4... ,sorry but this is just stupid, you only do CAS and play nothing else ! how come you agree on a glitched system ? changes need to be made for good... both sides should have 50/50 chance to take out each other !

there are enough feed back on this thread to be worked on, give the Dev's(Groho) time to work on it instead of changing your mind all the sudden :/ !

I very sorry m8.

DogACTUAL wrote:I very sorry m8.

don't be sorry but you made videos about state of jets long time ago, so i was like "wtf why he changed his mind" ?!

solidfire93 wrote:so you agree to have advantage over some helpless AA. im all for change and fixing the issues with jets cause i used to play it a lot back in 1.3.9 -1.4... ,sorry but this is just stupid, you only do CAS and play nothing else ! how come you agree on a glitched system ? changes need to be made for good... both sides should have 50/50 chance to take out each other !

there are enough feed back on this thread to be worked on, give the Dev's(Groho) time to work on it instead of changing your mind all the sudden :/ !

Why change something when it wasn't broken? Mig needed nerf and aa spam to stop that's all cas needed.

solidfire93 wrote:don't be sorry but you made videos about state of jets long time ago, so i was like "wtf why he changed his mind" ?!

DogACTUAL changed his mind as all he cares about is "CAS > everything" and until it is like that he isn't happy

I heard from a guy called yeahok that there is a 3rd party app that helps you to avoid getting killed by AA

Exactly. Now that i found a way to play the AA-CAS system to my advantage i am perfectly content.

Can we get back on topic?

Mineral wrote:Can we get back on topic?

Since you seem to enjoy removing my posts, I'm gonna rephrase my question again.
Are any devs looking to fix this issue? Yes or no?

AlonTavor wrote:Querying for all GenericProjectile objects every tick and doing getPosition on them in Python is very reliable.

As for "current target" you'll need to reverse engineer the projectile struct and find the comp there.

After reversing CComponentInfo_Target from the AA missile launcher, I found the target ptr at 0x1C . Then I reversed this god damn projectile struct to find the active target, but now I'm not able to reproduce the redirect bug to see exactly when the target ptr is swapped with the second target that isn't supposed to die in the first place.

DogACTUAL wrote:A long time ago i wrote Fastjack a PM asking him about his approach and ideas and he wrote me back in some detail.

To paraphrase his ideas:

1) explosion.coneAngle for AA missiles. Have AA missiles only deal damage towards a certain limited angle when exploding, like claymores do, so good manouvering can defeat them.

2)Change flares from being a Heat_Object to being an object with an invisible sphere that has ProjectileCollision. So flares would work less as decoys to misdirect the missile and more like obstacles in the way of the missile that have the potential to 'block it' from hitting the aircraft. Putting flares in the right spot in the path of the missile would defeat it.

Would both or one of these be feasible to do, to mitigate the current problems with AA?
And to make the AA system more fair, interesting and skill based for both parties (AA and pilot) and less 'random' and frustrating?

This is another nice suggestion to approach the problem, but nobody bothered it.

rPoXoTauJIo wrote:Working as intended.

At this point Mineral, you might as well remove your dev post for trolling.
The main goal of this thread is to find a solution to this post-v1.1 PR version problem.
And yes, this never happened in 0.98 as far as I know, @AlonTavor, I'd like to know the exact assembly change you made so I can apply it on my old copy of 0.98 at least client side since I don't have the server files.

winject wrote:Since you seem to enjoy removing my posts, I'm gonna rephrase my question again.
Are any devs looking to fix this issue? Yes or no?

I checked your post history and have never removed a post of yours it seems?
I don't believe anyone is actively working on it atm or will in the near future. But like most things it will probably be looked at eventually. Then again I don't really have anything to do with all things flying in PR except exporting some assets. So probably not the right person to discuss this at all.

winject wrote:At this point Mineral, you might as well remove your dev post for trolling....

This thread is about ground AA, A2A, flight physics, how flares work in this engine, the fun of flying in general, fun vs realism debate, 1.0 vs previous debate, assembly edits and long e-penis comparison posts and videos. There surely is some good feedback and suggestions in here but it's an absolute clusterfuck overall that no DEV or modder will ever take as a serious feedback thread I believe. But I never said 'get back on topic' to stop posting about those things, I was referencing the previous posts about DogActual only. So please continue, just not about DogActual

DogACTUAL wrote:A long time ago i wrote Fastjack a PM asking him about his approach and ideas and he wrote me back in some detail.

To paraphrase his ideas:

1) explosion.coneAngle for AA missiles. Have AA missiles only deal damage towards a certain limited angle when exploding, like claymores do, so good manouvering can defeat them.

2)Change flares from being a Heat_Object to being an object with an invisible sphere that has ProjectileCollision. So flares would work less as decoys to misdirect the missile and more like obstacles in the way of the missile that have the potential to 'block it' from hitting the aircraft. Putting flares in the right spot in the path of the missile would defeat it.

Would both or one of these be feasible to do, to mitigate the current problems with AA?
And to make the AA system more fair, interesting and skill based for both parties (AA and pilot) and less 'random' and frustrating?

1. Yes, this is possible, but not all missiles have a forward facing shrapnel area (forget the proper name of it) and even thous that do, often have a secondary proximity charge on top that is all around or relies on a direct hit afterwards to finish off the aircraft.
It should also be mentioned that down to BF2's amazing proximity code, things often explode after they have passed the aircraft, especially with the jet and missile speeds we have in PR and if we had this directional explosion in front of the missile ingame, then in all likelihood, the jet would take no damage from the missile often exploding after it had just passed it, and all the explosion going away from the jet, and none towards it.

2. Not possible to have a projectile have its own col mesh and also wouldn't be realistic.

winject wrote:After reversing CComponentInfo_Target from the AA missile launcher, I found the target ptr at 0x1C . Then I reversed this god damn projectile struct to find the active target, but now I'm not able to reproduce the redirect bug to see exactly when the target ptr is swapped with the second target that isn't supposed to die in the first place.
.

Nice work

So, no more dis?!

from my POV this was some good animation

Winject, you are our last hope. R-DEV team no more give shit about CAS.

So, is JET/Heli physics getting reverted on 1.6? ALL jets/helis that got touched by rpoxo hands got their physicists REALLY broke. The fast and easy solution is reverting all.
Make cas whores happy again. Thanks.

No major rework or revert of any kind is planned.

Danes i heard if you ask an R-DEV to do a certain thing 50 times he is contractually obligated to act out your request.