:huh:
... balanced game play....
:hmm: :argue:
That's at least the second time i've heard it. Any "sim" with "balanced game play" is not a sim, but a game/console port/arcade game. Any coding to "balance" the sides takes away from realism - hence - becomes a game.
Air combat is not about balanced game play. It's about shooting aircraft down/high explosive landscaping/redecorating, and not about balancing the sides. Each side, EU, US, Russia... all strive to UNBALANCE the engagement. A simulator simulates something about reality - (modern air combat :P perhaps?) To do this, the missiles, radar, aircraft flight dynamics/performance should approximate reality so that "real" tactics and procedures can be used to fight. Switchology is not the most important thing here if what the program's trying to do is SIMULATE modern air combat. I could care less about landing lights, or fire bottles, or the ejection seat modeling. After all this isn't LockOn, Modern Ejection Seat Firing, its about air combat. For air combat to be SIMulated, we need a simulated radar, missiles, guns, damage model, flight model, IFF, IRSTS, HMTS, etc. If those things don't allow us to fly the way we would IF we were flying as a Flanker pilot vs an Eagle driver, then it's a game. Balancing the game play by modeling one thing for one aircraft, and leaving out the same thing in another aircraft just so they can face each other cranium to cranium and (with pilots of equal skill) both pilots have a fighting chance of winning is PURE Black Shark!:doh: Tactics are what balance game play. Not shortcomings in SIMulating the things that are needed to employ tactics and win.
Sorry, needed to get that off my chest.
I fly LOMAC because it's still a fun game.