To: devnull@falcon3.k9.com (Falcon3 Mailing list) From: devnull@falcon3.k9.com (Falcon3 Mailing list) Reply-To: devnull@falcon3.k9.com (Falcon3 Mailing list) Sender: devnull@falcon3.k9.com (Falcon3 Mailing list) Errors-To: postmaster@falcon3.k9.com Return-Path: devnull@falcon3.k9.com (Falcon3 Mailing list) Precedence: bulk Bcc: falcon3-outgoing Subject: Falcon3 Digest V8 : I11 Falcon3 Digest Volume 8 : Issue 11 Thu Aug 10 06:38:36 PDT 1995 Compilation copyright (C) 1995 Jeff Beadles Send submissions to "falcon3@falcon3.k9.com" Send add/drop requests to "majordomo@falcon3.k9.com" Archives are available via ftp from cactus.org Today's Topics: Unrealistic encounter (?) "Iwan Setyawan" Subject: Unrealistic encounter (?) Hi, A couple of hours ago I flew a strike mission to Kuwait International. The strike itself is not very important here, but an encounter when I was just about to land at my base is the subject I'm going to talk about here. Just when I was in my "upwind leg" of my landing pattern, I saw 2 new blips on my radar. I've got a bad feeling about this, so aborted my landing pattern and locked at one of the blips. It proved to be an An-12 transport. I know that this thing never flies alone. There's got to be an escort. I locked at the other blip, and found out that it was a "Flanker". I managed to shoot down the Flanker, and landed safely (I didn't go after the transport). This encounter raised 2 questions in my mind: 1. Is it at all realistic that the Iraqis sent a transport over enemy teritorry (an enemy air base, to be exact)? I think this is simply stupid. Or perhaps this transport was going to drop a squad of ultra-elite paratroops to attack my base? I think this is insane, too. I think this encounter is simply a bug by Falcon's "randomizer", that did things simply at random, without intelligence. I'm correct, eh? 2. As I recalled, Iraq did not have a single Su-27 in its inventory. (At least when Desert Storm broke out). Then why does Falcon fea- tured this plane in this scenario? Well, for the sake of gameplay, I think this is a good decision. But for the sake of realism...? Anybody interested in fixing this? Probably Mr. White has already planning a patch to fix this :-) ! Well, I think that's all. Thanks for any comment to this mail. Check six.. Iwan 'Obelix' Setyawan obelix@hme.ee.itb.ac.id ------------------------------- From: steve@waldo.marc.com (Steve Elam) Subject: Airvars I still can't find the airvars file that was reportedly uploaded into the archives. I use cactus.org. Is it there? Perhaps the person who uploaded it could do it again. Thanks. ------------------------------- From: S_MORGAN@delphi.com Subject: Re: Unrealistic encounter (?) > 1. Is it at all realistic that the Iraqis sent a transport over enemy > teritorry (an enemy air base, to be exact)? I think this is simply > stupid. Well, yes, all other things being equal, that would be a strange action in war time. > Or perhaps this transport was going to drop a squad of > ultra-elite paratroops to attack my base? I think this is insane, too. Here is where all other things being equal falls apart. Every now and then it might be worth the effort to do something ridiculous if noone is expecting it. Perhaps to disable a radar to allow for a strike or something? How is it said? It is better to fight an experienced opponent because you have an idea of what he will do versus a complete knuckle head who will be unpredictable and thus screw up your idea of a good defense. > I think this encounter is simply a bug by Falcon's "randomizer", > that did things simply at random, without intelligence. I'm > correct, eh? This is probably the case. But to suspend reality, why not have just believe Sadam's cousin's wife's sister's child who dropped out of bakery school was appointed thearte tactical caommander. I have seen many such stupid things in F3, but it never really throws me for a loop. The fact that the world is not static and such occurences are present keep me from shelving the sim due to canned missions. Perhaps in F4 (if we ever decide to downgrade to MS Win 9X) we will see a better randomizer. Yes, it is a ponderable. > 2. As I recalled, Iraq did not have a single Su-27 in its inventory. > (At least when Desert Storm broke out). Then why does Falcon fea- > tured this plane in this scenario? Well, for the sake of gameplay, > I think this is a good decision. But for the sake of realism...? Well in that train of thought, most all planes defected or were kept on the ground by allied air supremcy (sp). Would make for a pretty dang boring sim since any plane encountered is (was) unlikely. Maybe this would be a mud moving only theatre if it could more of a purist theatre. To take it to the fringe, to be really realistic, there would be no doubt to the campaign out come as we all know Iraq lost. > Anybody interested in fixing this? Probably Mr. White has already > planning a patch to fix this :-) ! Well your comments are of course as valid as anyone else's who enjoy this sim. But for the sake of game play (as you say) there had to be some changes, IMO. Therein lies the great enigma. We all would like the most realistic sim possible. But in reality that sim may bore the pants off even the most hardened techno junkie. Fly for 1.5 hours, strike for 30 seconds, fly for 1.5 hours home. Maybe an inflight refuel, which might be fun for 1-5 times before that got to be old (let me fly and nail some tanks! Enough of this lengthy acrobatic flying!). So I agree that the program fails in some ways. But heck, it is a sim. It is for fun. It gives the player to chance to challenge themselves to see "what if I did this?" I suppose MPS PAW 1942 can pull of a (near) completely accurate theatre for campiagns. Unfortunately, there just are all that many prolonged modern jet wars that would give much fun if completely modeled down to the nth detail. All this is just my opinoin and I applogize if it comes off rough. Still realing from hearing of J. Garcia's death. Scott S_Morgan@delphi.com ....He's gone, and nothing's gonna bring him back, he's gone. ------------------------------- [[ End of digest Volume 8 : Issue 11 ]]