Realism Issues Center: Lets make this game make more sense

[GizmoGomez]

In the foxtrot description, you changed it from "its" to "it's"?

Should be "its" as "it's" is only used to denote "it is". "It" has a unique possessive in that it doesn't get an apostrophe. True story.

Did I get overzealous? Rats, I was trying to avoid that.

[EchoFourDelta]

> The result is a long-range fighter aircraft capable of interception missions. It is fitted with a 35mm chain cannon in the nose and two light hardpoints at each wingtip to accomodate a pair of sidewinders.

> It is fitted with a 35mm chain cannon in the nose and two light hardpoints at each wingtip to accomodate a pair of sidewinders.

> 35mm chain cannon

There's hardly any aircraft that usually an actual chaingun (that's a specific type of autocannon - a single-barrel, externally-driven large-caliber weapon, in this example - as separate from revolver cannons, or rotary cannons), as the fire rate is far too slow for air to air use; fighters are usually packing some sort of rotary or revolver cannon (again, different things). Chainguns are the things you see on top of LAV-25s and Bradleys, and on a lot of Russian IFVs, for example.

The particular aircraft in question utilizes a 6-barrel, electrically-driven M61 rotary cannon.

Edited August 30, 2013 by EchoFourDelta

[GizmoGomez]

The particular aircraft in question utilizes a 6-barrel, electrically-driven M61 rotary cannon.

I've updated my version of the proposal from "Autocannon" to "M61 Vulcan Autocannon" and "Sidewinder missiles" to "AIM-9 Sidewinder missiles", just because I can. It adds more flavor.

Edited August 30, 2013 by GizmoGomez

[gshuford]

Did I get overzealous? Rats, I was trying to avoid that.

HA! Well, it's kind of easy to get caught up in this stuff. And I think the pages look good.

I'm glad to actually see how much love is actually going into this project. It would have been a good game if it was released a month or two ago, but to see how much effort is going into perfecting this thing is pretty amazing.

[EchoFourDelta]

Nah, nah, nah. Well, little things.

It's "technically" an autocannon in the sense that a tank is technically an off-road vehicle; correct, but not exactly descriptive. Rotary gun/rotary cannon, and it's not a proper noun.

Like such, for reference: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotary_cannon

The M61 is somewhat of a smaller brother to the massive GAU-8 Avenger in the splash picture there.

Edited August 30, 2013 by EchoFourDelta

[GizmoGomez]

Nah, nah, nah. Well, little things.

It's "technically" an autocannon in the sense that a tank is technically an off-road vehicle; correct, but not exactly descriptive. Rotary gun/rotary cannon, and it's not a proper noun.

True, it's not a proper noun. I'll fix the "A"utocannon.

[Elydo]

@E4D - A fellow pedant! : D

[EchoFourDelta]

@E4D - A fellow pedant! : D

It wouldn't do to leave you without company.

Also, looking good, Gizmo, nice summaries of points on the initial post, too.

[GizmoGomez]

Okay, is there anything else in the two aircraft descriptions that would need to be changed?

We still need to work on the Sidewinder entry (the Avalanche looks fine to me, but I'll post it up alongside the Sidewinder's all the same).

EDIT: Thanks.

[EchoFourDelta]

Yeah, linked to something that might be helpful in the last post on page 8.

[GizmoGomez]

Yeah, linked to something that might be helpful in the last post on page 8.

Yeah, I know it's a rotary cannon, but the game calls it "the autocannon" so I figured I'd not go against that.

[Elydo]

I remember having this discussion years ago when the forums first opened up, heh.

[GizmoGomez]

Anyway, it's an adequate description (imho).

So, Sidewinder. Lets work on that, eh?

I'll go and copy the entry (thankfully it's a tad shorter. )

[EchoFourDelta]

Also, not-quite-so-random aside...

This is as good a place to bring it up as any. Literally none of the weapons on the list fire from anything that could remotely be called a "clip." I know the developers are (what I assume to be) British civilians, and might not have known better (like the original X-COM dudes), but to lay it out, each of the ballistic weapons would read (using the in-game style we have) Pistol Magazine, Assault Rifle Magazine, Precision Rifle Magazine, Shotgun Shells, Machine Gun Belt.

The most recent infantry weapon that actually fed from clips was a crap Egyptian semi-auto made back in the 50s so they could use up a bunch of surplus rounds that wouldn't work in anything else.

Edited August 30, 2013 by EchoFourDelta

[Elydo]

I typically use the example of the M1 Garand, as a lot of people have seen one from Saving Private Ryan. You can point out the difference between the clips of bullets they used as opposed to a magazine used by modern weapons. Go with what will work, and all.

[EchoFourDelta]

Throw it up, Gizmo! We got us another bullet point in the original post!

[GizmoGomez]

Here's the current one, italics added where there's something that needs to be corrected (misspelling, inaccuracy, the like):

The AIM-9 Sidewinder is a medium-range air-to-air missile carrying a substantial 9.4kg explosive warhead. Difficult to evade and capable of inflicting damage through even heavy armour, it can be fitted to any kind of weapon hardpoint due to its low weight and thus can be mounted on either the F-17 or the Mig-32. While conventionally operating as a heat-seeking missile, analysis of the data from the Iceland Incident has led Xenonaut technicians to replace the infrared sensors with a radiation seeker. This allow the Sidewinder to target the distinctive radiation patterns emitted by the extraterrestrial craft and successfully achieve a target lock, but the weakness of these emissions means this can only be done at ranges of less than a kilometre.

EDIT: Here is a revised version that incorporates the ARDA system and some other changes:

The AIM-9 Sidewinder is a medium-range air-to-air missile carrying a substantial 9.4kg explosive warhead. Difficult to evade and capable of inflicting significant damage, it can be fitted to any missile hardpoint due to its low weight.

While conventionally operating as a heat-seeking missile, analysis of the data from the Iceland Incident has led Xenonaut technicians to replace the infrared sensors with a radiation seeker. We've adapted the Adaptive Radiation Detection Array (ARDA) used with our aircraft to serve in this role. This allows the Sidewinder to target and track the distinctive radiation patterns emitted by the extraterrestrial craft and successfully achieve a target lock. In order for the ARDA to be a viable replacement for the original infrared seeker we have had to make the array the same size as the original sensor. Because of this we can only achieve a target lock at a range of less than eight kilometres; any father away and the array simply cannot adequately detect the radiation signature.

Reasons for changes:

-"Damage through even heavy armour" to "significant damage":

It has a fragmentation warhead; armour would easily defeat this. (Aircraft have thin metal skins, not armour, so a frag warhead is effective against them.)

-"Any weapon hardpoint" to "missile hardpoint":

Well, it fits on any missile hardpoint, not cannon mounts, so, it made sense.

-"ARDA-stuff":

Keep with continuity. Also, describe a little bit exactly why the range is so low.

-"Eight Kilometres"

In the game code there's 8000 set as the range. It may as well be measured in meters.

Edited September 2, 2013 by GizmoGomez

[GizmoGomez]

Also, not-quite-so-random aside...

This is as good a place to bring it up as any. Literally none of the weapons on the list fire from anything that could remotely be called a "clip." I know the developers are (what I assume to be) British civilians, and might not have known better (like the original X-COM dudes), but to lay it out, each of the ballistic weapons would read (using the in-game style we have) Pistol Magazine, Assault Rifle Magazine, Precision Rifle Magazine, Shotgun Shells, Machine Gun Belt.

The most recent infantry weapon that actually fed from clips was a crap Egyptian semi-auto made back in the 50s so they could use up a bunch of surplus rounds that wouldn't work in anything else.

Finally, someone else cares!

I'll throw it up, yeah.

EDIT: Thrown.

Edited August 30, 2013 by GizmoGomez

[Elydo]

Take nothing off the table! Though up the tech tree might want to come with spoiler warnings.

That AIM-9 rephrasing seems good. I remember early on in the development laughing at the idea of replacing the Condor internal cannon with another missile and wonder how that would work, before it got changed to a dedicated cannon mount.

[EchoFourDelta]

Okay, are the missiles tracking by radar or are they passive radiation seekers. We get told two different things; are the base radars using radar and the planes and missiles using radar, or are they tracking radiation?

If the ground system can pick it up from [a good portion of one side of the continental United States to the other], the fighers' onboard and missile radar wouldn't have a bit of trouble with picking up the radar signature at all. If it's a holdover from "they have to be close to track it," that explanation's out the window because it makes no sense either way.

Also, the proposal for the "Clips" thing is simple. Every weapon on the list fires from a "magazine," except the machine gun, which fires from a "belt," and the shotgun, which loads individual "shells."

> Pistol Magazine

> Shotgun Shells

> Assault Rifle Magazine

> Precision Rifle Magazine

> Machine Gun Belt

Edited August 30, 2013 by EchoFourDelta

[Elydo]

I thought the rationale was that even the ground stations had a very low chance of detecting a craft's emissions, but once detected the grounds station and fighter systems know what to look for and 'lock' the target. I don't think they could use active sensors or the aliens would just use a HARM equivalent to take the stations out. Onboard missile seekers would be much less able to detect and hold the emissions signatures however, necessitating closer range.

[GizmoGomez]

Agreed, there's kinda a disconnect if you think about it. If we can see the plane with radar, why do we need missiles that use something other than radar?

Well, this could be because sidewinders aren't meant to use radar. I mean, they use IR, right? It'd be a simple fix to use something different.

Is it really a big deal that the sidewinder uses a passive radiation-seeking system instead of a passive IR-seeking system?

The avalanche description is by comparison relatively light on details, and so wouldn't be a problem:

The Avalanche is a long-range air-to-air missile fitted with a powerful 58kg shaped-charge explosive warhead derived from the AIM-54 Phoenix missile. The Avalanche is relatively slow moving and has a poor turn rate (making it easy to evade), but can be devastating when it does find its mark.

[GizmoGomez]

I thought the rationale was that even the ground stations had a very low chance of detecting a craft's emissions, but once detected the grounds station and fighter systems know what to look for and 'lock' the target. I don't think they could use active sensors or the aliens would just use a HARM equivalent to take the stations out. Onboard missile seekers would be much less able to detect and hold the emissions signatures however, necessitating closer range.

That is a good point.

What if we used the term "sensor" instead of "radar" for the base structure, then?

EDIT: There is only one use of the word "radar" in the Xenopedia, super easy to change that. I'll check the strings file.

EDIT2: There are only 11 uses of the word "radar" in the strings.xml, and most of them wouldn't be changed (them either being variable names or referring to non-xenonaut radar stations being harassed by UFOs on the geoscape).

All in all, just renaming the base building "Sensor Array" or "Radiation Sensor Array" instead of "Radar Array" would work quite nicely.

EDIT3: It also would make sense why we can see UFOs and engage them and the rest of the world really can't. I mean, if they could be seen on radar, wouldn't we get concrete reports of any UFO activity practically anywhere? We don't get any concrete reports, only sightings, reports of activity, but no actual tracking. It's obvious now that the Xenonauts detect the enemy using the specialized radiation-detecting equipment they have.

In fact, why isn't this emphasized? It'd lend a whole lot of credibility to the whole "only Xenonauts can do anything about the invasion" business. If the ships can't be detected by radar, then the Xenonauts really would be the only ones who can do anything.

Edited August 30, 2013 by GizmoGomez

[Ishantil]

The technical designation is M61 Vulcan, but saying M61 autocannon or M61 Vulcan cannon will get the point across.

I have made some suggested edits to your F-17 Condor description. Please click the link below to view them.

The F-17 Condor is the primary Xenonaut interceptor aircraft, principally utilised in a general-purpose dogfighting role. Derived from the F-16 Fighting Falcon, it has broadly similar performance to its parent aircraft but uses a modified airframe that incorporates significantly larger fuel tanks, greater resilience, and the Adaptive Radiation Detection Array (ARDA), designed by yours truly.

The result is a tough and manoeuvrable aircraft capable of long-range interception missions as well as detecting and tracking extraterrestrial craft without the assistance of additional aircraft. Fitted with a craft cannon in the nose and a light missile hardpoint at the tip of each wing, it is currently configured to carry the M61 Vulcan autocannon and two AIM-9 Sidewinder missiles. Unfortunately, due to the large amount of space required by drop tanks and the ARDA, the Condor's weapons payload has been significantly reduced. If the firepower available does not prove sufficient to down an enemy, one could simply employ multiple Condors against the same target.

Concerning survivability; my team has studied the damage sustained by F-4 Phantom aircraft involved in the Iceland Incident. To avoid a similar loss of aircraft, we have developed and installed a variety of redundant systems, designed to allow the pilot to remain in control of the aircraft even after sustaining heavy damage. Even after taking damage that would normally prove crippling to a comparable aircraft, the Condor can still be flown home under its own power. Of course, this does not mean one can be lax about being shot. The Condor is very manoeuvrableand can make an evasive roll to dodge incoming fire. I recommend that in a combat situation this be utilized to it's fullest extent.

Of course, it is impossible to know how it will measure up against extraterrestrial craft unless they return. If they do, one hopes it will prove itself to be a capable combatant.

I changed the word "maneuverable" to "manoeuvrable" to maintain the British flavor.

[Elydo]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Active_Electronically_Scanned_Array

This would be technology worth considering if we're wanting to go a little deeper into how detection and tracking would work. The technology was known in the 60s, just becoming more refined with more modern technology.