homepage Forums Read Only Forums Read Only Forums Typhoon (Read Only) I just don't understand it!.....

1)
The Eurofighter in Typhoon is actually slower than the one in EF2000.

2)
The Meteors appear to be working very well for me. I've been getting about a 60% success rate with the long range version, and that's probably too high if you compare it with the success of real world missiles. Also things rarely work as Air Forces expect them to

3)
It appears to me that the Brimstones do hit things 90% of the time. It just takes two for a kill. Everyone knows that's not quite realistic but it was a design decision that Steve explained in a message here, deal with it.

Tig

Actually, no, the Typhoon in Eurofighter Typhoon is a hell of a lot faster than the one in EF2000

Top speed, full burner, EF2000 @ 10000ft?
Mach 1.2 with loadout. Mach 1.4 (or thereabouts clean)

Mach 1.6 in dive.

Transition from 0 to Mach 1.2/Mach 1.4? Around thirty seconds.

Not very scientific, I know.

Top Speed, full burner, Typhoon @ 10000ft?
Mach 1.6 with loadout. Mach 1.7 or thereabouts clean.

Transition from 0 to Mach 1.6? Around ten seconds.
AND you can do it in a steep climb.

I just checked. Again, this is not very scientific. But there ya go.

The Meteors work maybe 50-60% of the time, true. But we are not given a nice engagement envelope or even a "shoot, shoot command." So its a pretty hit and miss affair. And I have wasted lots of Meteors trying to down one lousy MiG-27. He was heading towards me at 10000ft. And the missile would fly near or past him, but it finally took the ASRAAM to get him.

Gavin

As Jeremy Clarkson would say, this is the souped up coupe version.

Is it?

Not from what I can see.

I could post some results like Gavin did, but I doubt they'd mean anything.

As far as I'm concerned, the Typhoon flight model, apart from the lack of drag modelling, is quite realistic - even on the thrust side of things which most people here have said is too powerful - in comparison to some of the other aspects of the game.

The Typhoon pilot I spoke to at Farnborough '98 said that empty, it's probably one of planes with the highest thrust-to-weight ration except for the MiG25.

He said that brakes off to gear up is seven seconds with a light load of weapons. I can do that in Typhoon - I can't in EF2000.

He also said that from 250 knots, Typhoon can accelerate straight up vertically. I don't know about the loads in this situation, but I can also do this in Typhoon, and to a lesser extent in EF2000.

Cheers,
Manteau

Actually, no, the Eurofighter in EF2K is a hell of a lot faster than the one in Typhoon!! In EF2K v2 I could get it over Mach 2 with ease in level flight, Typhoon won't go near that.



It actually goes slightly faster than that.



That must be a pretty big "or thereabouts" because I can't get it to go over Mach 1.47 at that altitude, level flight and clean.




Yep, just as you can in EF2000, seems almost exactly the same in that respect to me. Must be because of that Ninja powerplant! Only difference is that when you climb to high altitude the EF2000 is much faster than the one in Typhoon.



Yep, it is really cool when you see those Meteors going for the enemy chaff isn't it!! Really adds to the feeling of being there. You did know the MiGs have countermeasures too, didn't you? Call yourself a Hardcore player, shame on you! I'm just a weekend gamer and I don't have any problem with no stinkin MiG-27.. lol!! And you won't catch me whining like a baby because I miss now and then.

Tig

Typhoon does have drag modelling, at least it seems to go a lot slower with a big A2G load. Surely that's because it has drag modelling?

Tig

Hmm.
I know the meteor goes after chaff and flares.

And sometimes it doesn't.

And I have been messing with both games all morning to investigate the issue.

And i am still not whining. Its a discussion. And its a discussion about how the game balances itself.

About three years ago, I wrote a big spiel about game balances in flight sims, comparing TAW's dynamic campaign to F-15's semi dynamic campaign.

TAW throws endless supplies of MiGs and Sus and Rafales and Mirages at you to ensure you have a constant challenge, and hence, gameplay, experience.

F-15 on the other hand, has far less enemy aircraft. You may encounter a half dozen in a mission. But F-15 challenges you with avionics, flight model and missile engagement perameters and so on. That's how F-15 balances the gameplay.

And I would argue that the Meteor, better than AMRAAM fancy advanced thingie, is probably artificially less effective, so as to get you into the merge. Others have suggested that the enemy has "better" AAMs. This would suggest to me that this is to discourage you going BVR all the time. Because at that range, he can hit you better than you can hit him. I figured that one out pretty early. So I don't try it so often. And I am sure that eventually, I will know by looking, what the Probability of Kill for the longer range missiles is.

The air to air gameplay is centred around BFM. That is a pretty good design decision, but I would question - not whine about or condemn - that decision. If you have an objective based campaign model, and you want to achieve the allies strategic and tactical aims... you should be much more concerned with the bigger picture, and no dogfights.

Well, using Super EF2000, the max speed after a level flight, clean with sustained afterburners is nowhere near Mach 2. In Typhoon, playing the Helsinki multiplay mission (potentially having different physics because of the multiplay nature of the mission) I hit and sustained Mach 1.7.

As for drag modelling:
Drag is modelled. But its not modelled with the same believability as EF2000 (or A-10 Cuba.., the god of all physics models :-)). Believe me, try dogfighting in EF2000 with a full bomb load and watch yourself get outturned and spanked. As you would in real life. It's a lot more possible in Typhoon.

If you will notice, I am in favour of leaving Typhoon "as-is" as a default mode. however, I would like to see more complex modelling of things like drag and physics, to make the experience more immersive and interesting for people like me.

Now, it is a little rich, for you, as a "weekend gamer" making judgements on my character because I judge something along the lines of a simulation and not as you do. This is _simhq_ after all.

I have been the most vocal supporter of Typhoon since time out of mind. I had my father ship me my copy from Ireland because I wanted it. I had an ex-DID staff member ask me for help researching an aspect of the game, during the development period. So I am quite entitled to make reasonable critical comments about it. Just as you are entitled to defend it. But attacking me will not earn you any particular respect. And it makes your arguements look less valid.
Nothing would make me happier to have Typhoon become a huge success in the United States. However, I constantly carp on about things like the throttle issue, because people are having such problems, and many people will just return the damn thing. And that will not contribute to Steve and the boys getting skiing holidays to Switzerland this year.

Gavin

Guys,

Allow me to step in here on various performance issues raised by Gavin Bennett, Tiger and Manteau for the purpose of setting the record straight.

Firstly, comparing the speed of different aircraft isn’t as straightforward as one might think. However it is normal to quote the top speed for aircraft as the maximum true airspeed that the aircraft can sustain in steady state flight. For jet fighters that speed often occurs close to the upper edge of the troposphere, at approximately 36,000ft depending where you are in the world, it varies. Most simulations however use the international standard atmosphere, but others use standard atmospheres for that part of the world they are simulating.

With that in mind, it is correct to say that the old EF2000 sim’ had a faster Typhoon. Top speed for it at 36000ft was Mach 2.36 (It also reached Mach 2.5 at 40k) and the new Typhoon top speed is only Mach 1.83. I also suspect that is a more realistic figure, despite the fact that some sources quote as much as Mach 2 at 36,090ft.

Also, Typhoon has a detailed drag model, including the effect of stores etc, right down to the differences in drag resulting from different deflections of the individual control surfaces. In that respect it might indeed be considered superior to the Falcon4 drag model.

Hope that helps.

Badboy

Okay, maybe I'm wrong as far as speed is concerned.

But acceleration and thrust seem to be much more powerful in Typhoon.

Cheers,
Manteau

Can't argue with that, now can we?
:-)

Ehm, I took all the "speed readings" at 10k. It was a good place, for my way of thinking, since i never stay up high in either EF2000 or Typhoon.

I didn't try and "break" the flight model by accelerating up to the edge of space, or anything.

Now, this took place under Super EF2000. It seems that there are differences between SEF2k, EF2kV2 and plain vanilla EF2000. MAke of that what you will.

Ah well.

Gavin

They certainly do. Andy and I both agree that it feels a tad too powerful. We have the benefit of a complete set of EM diagrams for the Typhoon and some of the adversary aircraft and the Typhoon's curves of specific excess power are very impressive indeed. When I check the flight model data it all appears to be good, the results are what you see in the sim. I can only wonder if perhaps the real Typhoon feels a tad too powerful also

Badboy

Part of the reasons of my constant harping on about this, is that a couple of people who know this stuff better than I do figure that the thing goes maybe 10-20% too fast, or at least has 10-20% too much energy going on.

Now, I figured that drag modelling is the suspect here. After all, we get neither G-restriction nor a "believable" (whatever that means) restriction on speed when loaded up.

Now I am sure the RAF would love to have a jet with this much kick. But I think it has a bit too much kick.

Not saying that this is not incredibly useful when buggering off at highspeed away from some angry annoyed tanks, but...the jet seems overpowered.

As for the speed breaks, if your zipping along at Mach 1.4 and apply it, your speed drops pretty quickly. (not as quickly as in SEF2k)

But with a lower speed...say around the 500knts mark...the thing bleeds off speed less quickly, where I would have thought you'd see a more noticeable effect. (I am probably talking out my ass here) Hence having to barell roll and do lots of speed bleeding moves to slow ya down!

Gavin

Hi Gavin,



The Typhoon as simulated has a top speed of Mach 1.83, I really don’t think anyone could reasonably claim that is excessive. I’ve seen published data for the Typhoon that ranges between Mach 1.8 and Mach 2. So the current model is if anything conservative, and certainly a good deal slower than the Mach 2.5 available in previous versions of EF2000.



Those comments relate to structural and placard limits and it’s hard to see how that would make you suspicious of the drag model. For example, in Falcon4 those restrictions do exist, but they are only applied in accordance with the stores load category, and have nothing to do with Falcon4’s drag model at all.



The airbrake will indeed be much more noticeable at higher speeds, and less and less effective as the speed drops, so what you are seeing is correct. That is because the drag is proportional to the square of the airspeed so that if you double your speed, the drag is four times greater. Similarly, when you are making a landing approach half your speed results in only one quarter of the drag. There is a trap here though, because that’s only true to a certain point, if you get onto the backside of the power curve the drag will begin to increase rapidly but you will probably only notice that in Typhoon if you are already way too slow. If you are having a problem slowing down to land the answer in a civilian sim would probably be a longer slower approach, but my advice would be to get inside your base defences quickly and then do lazy circuits until you get your airspeed low enough to follow the glide path in without too much stress

Hope that’s helpful!

Badboy

By 2015 the EJ230 will be in the Typhoons, this will give the damn thing 120KN of thrust per engine! It will feel like a Maclaren F1 engine in your go-kart!
It may feel over powered to you, but that is why it has a lot of power to spare.........have you ever seen a real Typhoon fly? When you have you will know all about its thrust, s this thing gets off the runway pretty damn quick, in under 1/3 the space an F-16 needs....and yet it can go vertical straight off the runway and accelerate...and this is just with the EJ200, let alone the extra power that the EJ230 will give

------------------
If it aint bust, you haven't played with it enough!