• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Apr 29, 2012
6
0
Hello everyone, and developers!

I'm creating this thread to toss out of few things I've noticed in the game, and some suggestions I have on improving it. I'd like to know other player's opinions on the topic so that hopefully patches can be made for the game that would turn it into an already kick @$$ game into fricken awesome one!



Submarine launch depths: I've noticed that the game allows for submarines to launch land and surface attack weapons from any depth. I would like to see this reflect a more real world setting where the vessel needs to be at a shallow depth, and at a slow speed in order for correct launch of these weapons. While you can launch a Mk 48 at any depth, the TLAM (RGM/UGM-109E) or TASM (RGM/UGM-109B) need to have launch depth set to no greater than 150ft and a speed of no more than 5 knots.


KC-130 Refueling: Another thing I've noticed in the game, is that the amount of fuel carried by these aircraft for the purpose of refueling seems quite a bit off, and by off, I mean very lacking. In the game, I can refuel a F-35, three times before I get the message that the KC-130 does not have enough fuel for the 4th go around. I'd like to just throw out some factual numbers, the KC-135 can carry 200,000 lbs. of transferable fuel. The maximum internal fuel tank capacity for the F-35 is 18,480 lbs. The math comes out to being able to refuel that aircraft more than 10x. Another thing I've noticed, is that after refueling an aircraft, it's bingo fuel % is lowered yes, but it's as if they are not filling up the tanks of the aircraft? It seems like they get 3/4 of the way there and say "Eh, you've got enough fuel, get out of here!" :)


KC-130 Transferable Fuel Reading: On the topic of refueling, I do not say anything on the interface that indicates the level of fuel left in the aircraft. I'd love to see some kind of reading so when I select the aircraft, I have a gauge or something that tells me it's fuel level, so I can better manage my refueling operations instead of waiting to get the message that the next aircraft cannot refuel, and has to RTB (Return to base).


F-22 Raptor Air Superiority LR Range: Maybe it's just me, I cant confirm this but while playing the game I noticed that when going with the "Long Range" load out, which is supposed to give the aircraft +50% more fuel, they still seem to reach bingo fuel at the same distance than if they were not using that loadout. Maybe it's me, like I said, I've not sat there in a game and tested that 100% yet. Anyone else notice this, or am I wrong?


Active Radar off, but still detects: I've seen this several times with the F-22, where I will have my active radar turned off, but it will pick up a hostile contact. I go to the hostile contact, and look at what it was detected by an, and with what system and sure enough AN/AGP-77, then I go to the aircraft, and it's turned off. It leaves me wondering if the indicator light is just broken. I thump the screen to check for a short, but it still stays off!


Weapons System's Encyclopedia: This here is more of a "I'd really like to see this, but it has no real effect on the game itself therefore it shouldn't be a high priority" kind of things, but, you guys have done an OUTSTANDING job with putting real world weapons into the game, the real world sensors, radars, sonars and such, I'm very much impressed by this and it's one of the reasons why I love the game so much. I would like to maybe see something added into the game that would allow players to know more about each one of these weapons or systems, along with maybe a picture or two. The basic specifications, along with a description of the weapon or system, how it works, stuff like that. I'd like the same thing for the aircraft, and marine vessels too. It would be a BIG project to collect that information, get all the data on everything, organize it, and the integrate it into the game, but I think it would be cool to see, but still, I consider this more of a personal pipe dream than anything else.


Aircraft engagement problems: This is one of those things that I've noticed and I'd like to see if anyone else is having this same kind of issue. In some missions like "Task Force" I will have a large number of missiles inbound on my airfield that I will have to defend. So lets say I send up an aircraft to start intercepting these missiles. The aircraft will engage with AMRAAM missiles well enough. Then it will fully expend it's missiles. The aircraft will continue to close range and will eventually be able to use it's Sidewinder missiles, but it doesn't. I have to manually tell that aircraft to engage with it's short range missiles. Further more, in several instances, I've expended all my missiles, leaving only the aircraft's gun with ammunition. I will go to military thrust, set a coarse to close on the group of missiles, select the gun from the weapons display, and have it engage the missiles. Now even with the "Engage entire group" setting selected, it has a nasty habit of taking out one missile, and then wanting to break off, rather than engaging the next contact. I have to sit there and keep clicking on the missile contact to keep it engaging the next target. Even then, it seems like it will reach a point where, it aircraft will break off regardless. It has the attack order, the red line on the map is drawn to the missile, but the it will still fly away, unless I specifically go to the movement tab for the aircraft and force it to start flying on a heading to re-engage the group once again. That is with missiles, but I've noticed kind of the same thing when engaging other aircraft as well. I've also tried turning off the option of "Engage entire group" settings, and I still get the same result where I have to keep having the aircraft engage the next target by manually clicking on it. Has anyone else had this happen?


Aircraft flying at 100m: I've noticed that in missions, all enemy aircraft seem to fly at a level of 100m. It doesn't matter what kind of aircraft it is, bomber, fighter, ect, they are all at 100m. Is there some way this can be mixed up a bit?





So in all guys, these are some of the things I've noticed in playing the game thus far. I love the game, I hope I do not come across as nit-picking on stuff here. I am excited to see how this game is going to develop beyond it's original release, and I hope other players out there can add some suggestions of their own that developers can consider.

Thanks for reading guys!
 
Hello everyone, and developers!
KC-130 Transferable Fuel Reading: On the topic of refueling, I do not say anything on the interface that indicates the level of fuel left in the aircraft. I'd love to see some kind of reading so when I select the aircraft, I have a gauge or something that tells me it's fuel level, so I can better manage my refueling operations instead of waiting to get the message that the next aircraft cannot refuel, and has to RTB (Return to base).


There already is a "bingo-fuel" indicator in each unit's information panel. It's the percentage with the fuel barrel symbol - 0% equals a full tank of fuel, 100% means they're at bingo fuel and either need to retank or go home. However, the fuel system in this game could stand to be improved. It does seem either buggy or just not reflected well in the instrumentation, because when you tell a unit to retank or RTB, they immediately go from whatever percentage they were at straight to 100% bingo fuel and this then becomes irreversible. Moroever, if a fighter is bingo fuel and you tell him to rebase to a closer airfield, the response is that he has insufficient fuel (what?!?). I agree with having larger fuel loadouts and topping off the tanks, but keep in mind that in reality it probably wouldn't bring a fighter straight to full tank, as they're constantly burning gas while tanking.

Active Radar off, but still detects: I've seen this several times with the F-22, where I will have my active radar turned off, but it will pick up a hostile contact. I go to the hostile contact, and look at what it was detected by an, and with what system and sure enough AN/AGP-77, then I go to the aircraft, and it's turned off. It leaves me wondering if the indicator light is just broken. I thump the screen to check for a short, but it still stays off!
This is just a guess, but probably the F-22 is gaining and identifying the contact through EW emissions from the hostile, but the game is oversimplifying it by indicating that it was detected by the radar. I don't know if the APG-77 could be employed in this manner, I guess it's possible, but the F-22 should have a separate EW suite dedicated to this function.

Aircraft engagement problems: This is one of those things that I've noticed and I'd like to see if anyone else is having this same kind of issue. In some missions like "Task Force" I will have a large number of missiles inbound on my airfield that I will have to defend. So lets say I send up an aircraft to start intercepting these missiles. The aircraft will engage with AMRAAM missiles well enough. Then it will fully expend it's missiles. The aircraft will continue to close range and will eventually be able to use it's Sidewinder missiles, but it doesn't. I have to manually tell that aircraft to engage with it's short range missiles. Further more, in several instances, I've expended all my missiles, leaving only the aircraft's gun with ammunition. I will go to military thrust, set a coarse to close on the group of missiles, select the gun from the weapons display, and have it engage the missiles. Now even with the "Engage entire group" setting selected, it has a nasty habit of taking out one missile, and then wanting to break off, rather than engaging the next contact. I have to sit there and keep clicking on the missile contact to keep it engaging the next target. Even then, it seems like it will reach a point where, it aircraft will break off regardless. It has the attack order, the red line on the map is drawn to the missile, but the it will still fly away, unless I specifically go to the movement tab for the aircraft and force it to start flying on a heading to re-engage the group once again. That is with missiles, but I've noticed kind of the same thing when engaging other aircraft as well. I've also tried turning off the option of "Engage entire group" settings, and I still get the same result where I have to keep having the aircraft engage the next target by manually clicking on it. Has anyone else had this happen?
Yes, I've noticed this as well. Fighters require a lot of micro to make an impact on the battlespace without expending tons of missiles on the same target. It's frustrating. I've had little success in having them target cruise missiles with guns too, and I've given up on that. In reality, it probably would be challenging for a fighter to intercept and shoot down many cruise missiles. They could probably be tracked and engaged on radar, but intercepting a target that small visually sounds rather difficult.

Aircraft flying at 100m: I've noticed that in missions, all enemy aircraft seem to fly at a level of 100m. It doesn't matter what kind of aircraft it is, bomber, fighter, ect, they are all at 100m. Is there some way this can be mixed up a bit?
You can mix this up. In your airfield/hangar's launch panel (F key), there are two sliders at the top of the panel that allow you to adjust the initial speed and altitude.
 
Last edited:
The refueling topic is one I'm familiar with. Fuel problems, especially related to refueling, kills more of my planes than enemy missiles do.
The interesting thing is that the kc seems to be burning fuel at a rate around 20x faster than a fighter flying the same speed. Or the fighters fuel needs suddenly get magnified by 30x the moment they reach bingo.

AFAICT the bingo% not going 0 on refuel is a matter of a flawed UI.
Heck, the whole bingo% should have been an option. Fuel/Home ranges would do the job much better.
 
Last edited:
Oops, I wasn't clear on some things!

There already is a "bingo-fuel" indicator in each unit's information panel. It's the percentage with the fuel barrel symbol - 0% equals a full tank of fuel, 100% means they're at bingo fuel and either need to retank or go home. However, the fuel system in this game could stand to be improved. It does seem either buggy or just not reflected well in the instrumentation, because when you tell a unit to retank or RTB, they immediately go from whatever percentage they were at straight to 100% bingo fuel and this then becomes irreversible. Moroever, if a fighter is bingo fuel and you tell him to rebase to a closer airfield, the response is that he has insufficient fuel (what?!?). I agree with having larger fuel loadouts and topping off the tanks, but keep in mind that in reality it probably wouldn't bring a fighter straight to full tank, as they're constantly burning gas while tanking.

I think I wasn't clear enough, the "Bingo Fuel" is for the aircraft itself, what I'm thinking would be good is to have a way to measure the "Transferable Fuel" level that is used to refuel other aircraft. Maybe the existing "Bingo Fuel" level ties in some way to the fuel used by the KC-130 to refuel other aircraft, I have not paid too much attention to that but having a specific reading withing the unit's "weapons" tab for instance that says the transferable fuel level is 80,000 lbs / 200,000 lbs is what I was going for.




This is just a guess, but probably the F-22 is gaining and identifying the contact through EW emissions from the hostile, but the game is oversimplifying it by indicating that it was detected by the radar. I don't know if the APG-77 could be employed in this manner, I guess it's possible, but the F-22 should have a separate EW suite dedicated to this function.

That may be what is happening. To my understanding though, when you are counter detected by hostile radar transmissions, a red lined triangle appears pointing to the aircraft that has detected you. It may be completely unrelated to what I've been seeing so far. But that very well could be the reasons why my aircraft is discovering the enemy with active sensors turned off.


Yes, I've noticed this as well. Fighters require a lot of micro to make an impact on the battlespace without expending tons of missiles on the same target. It's frustrating. I've had little success in having them target cruise missiles with guns too, and I've given up on that. In reality, it probably would be challenging for a fighter to intercept and shoot down many cruise missiles. They could probably be tracked and engaged on radar, but intercepting a target that small visually sounds rather difficult.

True in real life targeting a cruise missile like that and engaging it with guns would be difficult, but not impossible, especially given that the weapon is traveling at a subsonic speed and you can catch up to it. But I'm glad I'm not the only one that has noticed the need to have to micro manage the independent aircraft to do what you really need them too and not dump 8 AMRAAMs at a single large fixed wing aircraft!


You can mix this up. In your airfield/hangar's launch panel (F key), there are two sliders at the top of the panel that allow you to adjust the initial speed and altitude.

:) heh, again, I should have been more clear, I'm not talking about my own aircraft, I know how to set their altitudes, what I was speaking about what computer played hostile aircraft during missions and how they always seem to fly at a default of 100m.
 
I think I wasn't clear enough, the "Bingo Fuel" is for the aircraft itself, what I'm thinking would be good is to have a way to measure the "Transferable Fuel" level that is used to refuel other aircraft. Maybe the existing "Bingo Fuel" level ties in some way to the fuel used by the KC-130 to refuel other aircraft, I have not paid too much attention to that but having a specific reading withing the unit's "weapons" tab for instance that says the transferable fuel level is 80,000 lbs / 200,000 lbs is what I was going for.
The game makes no differentiation between transferable fuel and non-transferable fuel. All the fuel on a tanker can be used for both flying the tanker and refueling other planes.
 
Hello iDrake,

Sub launch depths: Adding this option would require GUI elements to tell players what is going on. Thinking about it.

Refueling: We should probably increase fuel load for tankers considerably.

LR load: I'd like to see this confirmed. It should be increased accordingly.

AGP-77 (and others) as RWR: The most time consuming component of the game currently is the sensor and detection logic. Many aircraft have a large amount of sensors; we've collapsed some of them into the main components for simplicity.

Aircraft engagement: I typically experience the fighters get off their sidewinders, too, without micromanagement. There is a problem with engagements with any short range weapons; we'll look at that.

Air altitude: Yes, since there is no penalty for low altitude, the AI uses it excessively. We're looking into that.

Thanks for feedback!
 
About the subs and launch parameters... I'm sure you guys have considered this and perhaps better solutions but I'd be happy if the sub automatically changed speed and depth when I order it to fire a weapon that requires particular parameters. As UI goes, just a message telling me the sub is adjusting speed/depth to fire is quite enough for me. Kind of like when vehicles go into evasive maneuvers and we get a little message to inform us. Heck, "Maneuvering to launch" would be clear enough.
 
I have not noticed any problems with IR missiles, my fighters shoot them all off at appropriate targets when in range. I also noticed that if you set the number of weapons to use to the minimal amount, they make an effort to limit their ammo expenditure. I have noticed that the AI will generally wait until the target is well within range before firing, although that is a nice change from other games where the AI will fire as soon as a target reaches maximum range.

On refueling, I also do not micromanage this game aspect and have not really seen an issue. I set up tanker tracks and the fighters will automatically go refuel as needed and will then go back to their assigned mission. In campaign mission 4, I had about 6-8 Gripens refuel from one large tanker without any issues. Perhaps the lack of fuel problem only pops up when you try to micromanage it? One thing that would be helpful would be to know how much fuel the tanker has remaning so I could know when to send another tanker to replace it.

On the whole, I don't find the AI requires much babysitting.
 
I agree I think the AI does a good job at engaging targets and refueling. It very hard to have the perfect balance between offensive and defensive AI, between wasting and saving ammo, etc.. I feel this is actually well done in the game.
 
I've not had a problem with the AI during the refueling, it does a fine job of taking the aircraft to the tanker and then returning to it's previous patrol. No problems there. The problems I see with the refueling process is 1: there is no indicator to show how much transferable fuel is left, and 2: the transferable fuel level itself seems to be dramatically insufficient. As I said in my previous post, I sent one F-22 up with a KC-130 behind it. The F-22 was able to refuel 3 times, before attempting a 4th refuel where the message came up saying there was not enough fuel in the KC-130, resulting in my F-22 having to RTB. At that point, the KC-130's bingo fuel level was around 25%. I can refuel a group of 3 F-22s at once, but on the next refuel attempt, I have the same RTB result. So the AI does a good job of getting the aircraft to the tanker to refuel, don't have to micro manage that at all, it's the amount of transferable fuel I think needs additional work.

Lets consider the Gripen. The Gripen's internal take *not counting exterior drop tanks here because they are not mentioned in the game* carries 3000 liters of fuel. Aviation fuel has a ratio of 1.65 lbs per 1 liter. Which means the Gripen has 4950 lbs of fuel it can carry. Now the KC-130 can carry a maximum of 200,000 lbs of transferable fuel. That would allow for the refueling of round about 40 Gripen aircraft. So it's not really good enough that you can refuel 8 of those aircraft, it should be way more is my point.


The AI does a good job engaging hostile aircraft at long range with AMRAAM. In playing with the game last night, it seems to be using the Sidewinders all on it's own too, once it does get close enough. I agree that the AI waits until the hostile is "WELL" within range instead of firing a salvo of missile at max range. The downfall seems to be on short range engagements with guns, and not missiles though. Rather it be missiles or a group of hostile aircraft, it will engage one target, and then break off, fly around, let the enemy get far away before trying to engage the next aircraft within that group.

The other thing I've seen that really frustrated the HECK out of me, was when having the setting to engage the group turned on, I would encounter hostile group, where the hostile lead aircraft was separated from it's wing-man. When I would tell my plane to "Engage that group" it would automatically target the group leader, instead of the actual aircraft I was clicking on. I turned the "Engage group" setting off, and now I don't have that problem.
 
This is just a guess, but probably the F-22 is gaining and identifying the contact through EW emissions from the hostile, but the game is oversimplifying it by indicating that it was detected by the radar. I don't know if the APG-77 could be employed in this manner, I guess it's possible, but the F-22 should have a separate EW suite dedicated to this function.

I don't know about the APG-77 exactly, but passive reception is supposed to be one possible function of a phased array radar:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_electronically_scanned_array#Other_advantages

Flightglobal had an excellent writeup on the current fighter radar market a couple of years back. Here's the link. You'll need to download the PDF:
http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/media/reports_pdf/fighter-radars-special-report-2010-52625.aspx
 
Flightglobal had an excellent writeup on the current fighter radar market a couple of years back. Here's the link. You'll need to download the PDF:
http://www.flightglobal.com/airspace/media/reports_pdf/fighter-radars-special-report-2010-52625.aspx


That there was an AWESOME read! Thanks for sharing that!


And your thoughts on passive reception may be what is happening. I've noticed that in game, even with the APG-77 turned off, the active sensor icon is yellow, not red. The other two active sensors are non controllable, but maybe that is what it is, it's passive ability to detect enemy transmissions.
 
On a side note, I just tinkered around with the previous anomaly about the F-22 LR load out not having the extended ranger it's supposed too, and as luck would have it, it seems to be working as it should now! :) I'm thinking that was just a miss observation on my part.
 
Lets consider the Gripen. The Gripen's internal take *not counting exterior drop tanks here because they are not mentioned in the game* carries 3000 liters of fuel. Aviation fuel has a ratio of 1.65 lbs per 1 liter. Which means the Gripen has 4950 lbs of fuel it can carry. Now the KC-130 can carry a maximum of 200,000 lbs of transferable fuel. That would allow for the refueling of round about 40 Gripen aircraft. So it's not really good enough that you can refuel 8 of those aircraft, it should be way more is my point.

It was only 8 because the mission ended at that point, there was no indication it could not handle more.

As I said, I have not seen an issue with refueling or received a message about a lack of fuel.
 
Don't know if I'm missing a UI element but an engage at short/medium/long range in the battle planner would be great so I don't have to micromanage depending on whether I want to just scare them away with missiles or to get an almost certain kill.