Page 3 of 6

Re: [DISCUSSION] Aircraft Regulations for Combat Squadrons

Posted: Sun Nov 20, 2016 2:07 pm
by m88youngling
That perhaps might merit some more research into the capabilities of OpenYS into controlling SAMs, or into the source code of YSF itself.

I think the whole civilian aircraft issue might merit an entirely different forum topic

Re: [DISCUSSION] Aircraft Regulations for Combat Squadrons

Posted: Sun Nov 20, 2016 9:32 pm
by Flake
m88youngling wrote: more research into the capabilities of OpenYS into controlling SAMs
Yes.
m88youngling wrote:or into the source code of YSF itself.
No.

Re: [DISCUSSION] Aircraft Regulations for Combat Squadrons

Posted: Mon Nov 21, 2016 12:21 am
by m88youngling
Wouldn't having the source code be helpful for doing what they did on the 4ch server? I understand if Soji just doesn't want to let it be known. That's his choice, not ours.

Re: [DISCUSSION] Aircraft Regulations for Combat Squadrons

Posted: Mon Nov 21, 2016 1:10 am
by NightRaven
No, the thing is, we don't even have the source code of YS in the first place. 2ch scripts did not use YS' source code.

Yes it would be helpful if Soji released the source, but then we no longer have to develop scripts to supplement YS; rather modifying the source to suit our needs. But since Soji does not want to do so then we don't have much of a choice.

Re: [DISCUSSION] Aircraft Regulations for Combat Squadrons

Posted: Mon Nov 21, 2016 2:18 am
by Nodoka Hanamura
m88youngling wrote:Wouldn't having the source code be helpful for doing what they did on the 4ch server? I understand if Soji just doesn't want to let it be known. That's his choice, not ours.
>Source Code of YSF
>Source Code of YSF
>Source Code of YSF
Youngling, YSFlight's source code is off limits, out of respect of the wishes of Mr.Yamakawa.
He has said that he will make it open source one day, but not until "he's done playing with it", if my recollections of his words are correct.

Re: [DISCUSSION] Aircraft Regulations for Combat Squadrons

Posted: Mon Nov 21, 2016 2:22 am
by m88youngling
Nodoka Hanamura wrote:
m88youngling wrote:Wouldn't having the source code be helpful for doing what they did on the 4ch server? I understand if Soji just doesn't want to let it be known. That's his choice, not ours.
>Source Code of YSF
>Source Code of YSF
>Source Code of YSF
Youngling, YSFlight's source code is off limits, out of respect of the wishes of Mr.Yamakawa.
He has said that he will make it open source one day, but not until "he's done playing with it", if my recollections of his words are correct.
m88youngling wrote:Wouldn't having the source code be helpful for doing what they did on the 4ch server? I understand if Soji just doesn't want to let it be known. That's his choice, not ours.
Maybe we should get back on topic of regulations

Re: [DISCUSSION] Aircraft Regulations for Combat Squadrons

Posted: Mon Dec 05, 2016 2:45 am
by Neocon
Ok, here is my new proposal:
For real-world aircraft, come up with an acceptable .dat file for each aircraft that all squads must use.

For fictional aircraft, create a .dat file that both sides can use. Both sides can have wacky designs for aircraft and both wacky planes can use the same wacky .dat. Before putting a new wacky .dat into service, send it to the other side so they can assign that .dat to their own wacky plane.

Re: [DISCUSSION] Aircraft Regulations for Combat Squadrons

Posted: Mon Dec 05, 2016 3:05 am
by Vic Viper
Patrick31337 wrote:Ok, here is my new proposal:

For fictional aircraft, create a .dat file that both sides can use. Both sides can have wacky designs for aircraft and both wacky planes can use the same wacky .dat. Before putting a new wacky .dat into service, send it to the other side so they can assign that .dat to their own wacky plane.
I agree with this, with the caveat that the wacky (or let's call it "futuristic") dat(s) cannot be used to overpower every other normal one. This would prevent it's abuse (ie only using that one plane because it's so damn tempting). Thus it needs to be tailored in such a way that it's potential uses are very niche and limited.

I'll start work on the 49th pack to reflect this, and then make a self-explanatory guide to help any current and future squad implement it. if they so desire.

Re: [DISCUSSION] Aircraft Regulations for Combat Squadrons

Posted: Mon Dec 05, 2016 3:29 am
by Neocon
I think conventional vs conventional and wac...futuristic vs futuristic is the only way to go.

I suggest you talk out what .dat files to use as the "standard" for each type plane (All F-18s use the stock F-18 .dat, all F-22s use the HQPGAC F-22 .dat, whatever). Then take your favorite futuristic .dats and each squad can assign those to their models.

Re: [DISCUSSION] Aircraft Regulations for Combat Squadrons

Posted: Mon Dec 05, 2016 6:14 am
by KM6BZH
I have found out that 2ch (the Japanese YSFlight community) has a GAC pack which has basic A2A combat aircrafts, with real life like .dat files. It has a lot of aircrafts from a lot of countries (Japan, US, Russia, etc.), so it might be useful. Just saying...

Re: [DISCUSSION] Aircraft Regulations for Combat Squadrons

Posted: Mon Dec 05, 2016 1:34 pm
by Nodoka Hanamura
KM6BZH wrote:I have found out that 2ch (the Japanese YSFlight community) has a GAC pack which has basic A2A combat aircrafts, with real life like .dat files. It has a lot of aircrafts from a lot of countries (Japan, US, Russia, etc.), so it might be useful. Just saying...
It could be worth review - Thanks for bringing this up, KM6.

Re: [DISCUSSION] Aircraft Regulations for Combat Squadrons

Posted: Mon Dec 05, 2016 9:41 pm
by m88youngling
Patrick31337 wrote:Ok, here is my new proposal:
For real-world aircraft, come up with an acceptable .dat file for each aircraft that all squads must use.

For fictional aircraft, create a .dat file that both sides can use. Both sides can have wacky designs for aircraft and both wacky planes can use the same wacky .dat. Before putting a new wacky .dat into service, send it to the other side so they can assign that .dat to their own wacky plane.
Maybe the metric system that was proposed earlier would help with this. Also, as I have seen some designers doing now, they have been giving arguments based on design for how a plane should be able to realistically perform based on the shape or the presence of certain features like canards, wing shape, etc.

One thing I'd like to add is that I know some communities like this with an endless possibility of performance efficiency is that they make limits based on tech limits that people can pick and choose from. You can have a restriction set for modern tech, post modern, and future. For different combat events or servers the squadrons can reach an agreement on what restriction set to use. I implemented this for a similar situation on a different game and nationstates uses this for roleplaying.

Re: [DISCUSSION] Aircraft Regulations for Combat Squadrons

Posted: Tue Dec 06, 2016 12:40 am
by KM6BZH
Nodoka Hanamura wrote:
KM6BZH wrote:I have found out that 2ch (the Japanese YSFlight community) has a GAC pack which has basic A2A combat aircrafts, with real life like .dat files. It has a lot of aircrafts from a lot of countries (Japan, US, Russia, etc.), so it might be useful. Just saying...
It could be worth review - Thanks for bringing this up, KM6.
Oh, but the 2ch GAC pack is pretty hard to install, FYI.

Re: [DISCUSSION] Aircraft Regulations for Combat Squadrons

Posted: Tue Dec 06, 2016 12:56 am
by NightRaven
KM6BZH wrote:
Nodoka Hanamura wrote:
KM6BZH wrote:I have found out that 2ch (the Japanese YSFlight community) has a GAC pack which has basic A2A combat aircrafts, with real life like .dat files. It has a lot of aircrafts from a lot of countries (Japan, US, Russia, etc.), so it might be useful. Just saying...
It could be worth review - Thanks for bringing this up, KM6.
Oh, but the 2ch GAC pack is pretty hard to install, FYI.
It's not for Windows. If you're on OSX or Linux then yes it is, but I remember Krux making a Linux friendly version, so maybe you can ask him for the link, if it's still online. Also, the GAC pack has been around for a long time and is already well known and liked. While it does simulate relative performance well, the only banes are the horrendous fuel consumption and the lack of use of newer YS variables, given that this was made before 2010.

Re: [DISCUSSION] Aircraft Regulations for Combat Squadrons

Posted: Tue Dec 06, 2016 1:33 am
by KM6BZH
It took me a lot of time to install the 2ch GAC. Well, but there is update versions, which has newer aircrafts (I think). Well, the idea is that there should be a standard GAC .dat, which could make a2a combat more fair.

Re: [DISCUSSION] Aircraft Regulations for Combat Squadrons

Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2016 6:41 am
by Flake
With my latest development on my coding library, I am able to do math based on DAT files.

I can now do the "spider graph" comparison I wanted to do.

Can anyone help me draw up some math functions to do this?

I can add whatever variables I like, as many as I like. I am not constrained here. That said, I would like to have no more than, say, 6 categories.

See below my suggestion:

=============

ACCELERATION = (MAX CALCULATED THRUST / MIN CALCULATED WEIGHT) * 10
TOPSPEED = (REFVCRUS / REFTCRUS) / 200% *10
TURNRATE = (MAXVALUEOF<MXIPTAOA,CRITIAOA> / CPITSTAB * CPITMANE? <<DOES THIS WORK?)
STRENGTH (STRENGH * MINIMUM DAMAGE)
ARMAMENT (MAX NUMBER OF WEAPONS)
STEALTH (MINIMUM CALCULATED RADAR CROSS SECTION)

OVERALL: WEIGHTED AVERAGE OF ABOVE VALUES

Re: [DISCUSSION] Aircraft Regulations for Combat Squadrons

Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2016 7:43 pm
by Neocon
If squad leaders are working together to resolve their disputes, they need to A. make their members aware of that, and B. make the general public aware of that. I'm not saying details, but let everybody know that the hostilities are over and that your members should cut it out, shake hands, and move on or move out.

Re: [DISCUSSION] Aircraft Regulations for Combat Squadrons

Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2016 7:53 pm
by Vic Viper
Patrick31337 wrote:If squad leaders are working together to resolve their disputes, they need to A. make their members aware of that, and B. make the general public aware of that. I'm not saying details, but let everybody know that the hostilities are over and that your members should cut it out, shake hands, and move on or move out.
Sorry Pat, but the 49th didn't make this topic, nor would we have in the 1st place. We'd rather not drag combat matters in the open. In all honesty, discussions like these should always be in the O Club; for example, when Bomb and I discussed stealthy briefly back in 2013.

But I digress, there is currently no formal arrangement between GRUN and the 49th. If there is, it won't be posted here, HQ isn't the place for it.

Re: [DISCUSSION] Aircraft Regulations for Combat Squadrons

Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2016 8:00 pm
by Alpha Star
I agree with all the things about DAT regulations.
But why shake hands and forget about it. Fight. Isnt that why there are combat squads in this game? Lets have some fun, no?

Re: [DISCUSSION] Aircraft Regulations for Combat Squadrons

Posted: Wed Dec 07, 2016 8:08 pm
by Nodoka Hanamura
Vic Viper wrote:
Patrick31337 wrote:If squad leaders are working together to resolve their disputes, they need to A. make their members aware of that, and B. make the general public aware of that. I'm not saying details, but let everybody know that the hostilities are over and that your members should cut it out, shake hands, and move on or move out.
Sorry Pat, but the 49th didn't make this topic, nor would we have in the 1st place. We'd rather not drag combat matters in the open. In all honesty, discussions like these should always be in the O Club; for example, when Bomb and I discussed stealthy briefly back in 2013.

But I digress, there is currently no formal arrangement between GRUN and the 49th. If there is, it won't be posted here, HQ isn't the place for it.
Well Vic, if you want to make such an arrangement, I am open to this.

The community at large has been effected by this - And it is getting to the point where tensions are getting to a all time high. We need to resolve this issue before irreversible damage is done to the community - It's time for both of us to come together, GrunSol and VFA-49 and discuss these issues as to resolve this. I am willing to come to the table if you all are willing to.

@Alpha Star - We're not so much shaking hands and forgetting about it - We're shaking hands, only to turn around and have a gunsmoke-style shootout. ;)