Frostie

Fantastic thread. 1v1 maybe but a jammer only has so much power, if it has to jam two aircraft it has to split the power accordingly AFAIK, therefore increasing burnthrough range. This brings in a whole new level of tactics. As it is now we can jam everybody. Strangely the AI is now able to blink his Jammer at you denying lock but this was taken away from players a long time ago with the 15sec warm up.

Sweeps you're a young lad, its Friday night, have a wash, put on that spray you got last Xmas and get out there and find a girl. Protip: smile, always pay cheeky compliments, don't be creepy, if they don't appear interested they're not interested, above all else enjoy yourself then the party will come to you. You can't fail. X

Got my vote and I'm sure Rage and Chima agree with me, or they will. :thumbup:

Don't disagree with that, do me a favour and try and comprehend something before responding to it. Proof that the Sea Harrier is far superior to anything Russian also.

Would you like some cream with that propoganda pie, just the mention of MiG-31 should stop this Rus bashing. Surely we're old enough to not care for my cock is bigger than your rooster discussions. If anyone needs a sick bag just PM me i've got a large supply after reading so much of this kind of nauseating nonsense over the years. :D

CALLSIGN: <51>Frostie TEAM: Fishbed COC & RULES REVIEW: YES EMAIL SENT: Yes

In BMS once airbourne you don't need to leave the throttle and stick. DMS, TMS, pinky etc. do all the necessary switching on the MFDs for you, yes you can use the ICP to check flight timings, set up DL with other flights etc. set comm channels, adjust steerpoints and adjust CMs but most of this stuff should be loaded with the data cartridge pre-mission. A2G may may need some fine detailing but this is a matter of preference. Basically if your hands are off throttle and stick in combat then you're doing something wrong, this is where some claim hardcore is more difficult, they believe that because the pit is fully clickable then all those switches need to be pressed all the time which is basically incorrect.

Keep the radar antenna dot inside the radar area on the HUD, there is an outline on the left side (the range scale), the right side is harder to judge.

You don't, you can try turning the RWR off and then on though which can sometimes initially give you different priorities allowing you to decipher the emissions a bit.

You can't talk about the Mirage and MiG21 radars in the same context, one is 60/70s tech the other late 70s, the MIG radar has a bug with low level and besides is not a look down radar and generation behind so will suffer heavily on anything not above it. The Mirage radar has its own quirks and bugs. I like how you label these bugs as realistic while FC are not, i'm sure if the F-15 was clickable your new assumption for this would be, because the F-15 is more advanced because of the 'its full fidelity so it must be realistic right' mantra. BMS doesn't suffer from ground clutter like the MIG or do F-16s lose lock on diving aircraft, but hey its fully clickable so thats all ok then, must be realistic, right. Facts are, all radars including FC radars which incidently are late 80s tech suffer from the clutter notch and lose lock, comparing the capabilities of the Sapfir with an APG-63 thats funny.

Just choppers and Combined Arms would be interesting. :D

Yes I think they have visibility limits now.

I'd have to question if you even know what a simulation is. Deriding FC is a typical response to being shot down by one because it's easier to blame FC than ones own incompetence. The sort of complaint of 'if that F-15 pilot had a clickable pit he wouldn't be able to kill me so easy'. This has been disproven as many good FC pilots seemlessly transfer to Mig-21, Mirage and F-5 with the same effect. This is because being proficient in a fighter is not down to how well you remember start up procedures but how well you apply yourself in combat. Procedures to activate systems and start up aircraft are a case of once learned hardly ever forgotten, they are not skills that are perishable by neglect the only limit here is memory. FC aircraft are well simulated in combat, some features maybe missing but these are features that only complement what already exists ie. makes them better and easier to use. Some light examples, the A-10C can create bomb profiles where as the A-10A is restricted to simple CCIP and CCRP with only guess work to help you battle the wind. With Mavericks there is no force correlate and you don't get to steady your gun aim before firing, Ka50 gets a working datalink in mp Su27 doesn't but should etc.This is what seperates full fidelity from FC in combat, it is the full fidelity aircraft which make it easier not the otherway around, in the case of combat fairness everything else is irrelevant. If the F-15 and Flanker were full fidelity then MiG-21s, Mirages et al would be facing a much tougher prospect, as it is now they're getting an easy ride.

But you say you've flown every round since round 2, if that is the case then surely you realise that every round has a different flavour this being one of them. If F-15 pilots feel outmatched because of off bore shots then so be it, this will be a great learning curve for them don't you think. I'm sure it is no more of a challenge going against ARH missiles with only SARH. Dropping modules is not an answer to round 9, maybe a later round out of interest would be good but somehow I get the impression you want them out period.

I gathered you don't like them. F-15 APG-63 doesn't have what you claim it does. Mission planning can be done in any aircraft but a Mirage can take off in 1 minute also, it's not the platform but the actual pilot that makes these decisions. And with that I think you're wrongly trying to put people in separate categories of Eliteness because some differ to you by liking FC3 aircraft as well as everything else DCS.

Way easier than what? If you can operate an A-10, Mirage, Ka50, Gazelle then you can operate it to it capability with ease unless you have no clue what you're doing. I think you're confusing capability with something else and in that respect a Ka50 dominates a Gazelle, a Mirage dominates an A-10, a Huey's AI gunners dominate a Mi-8 etc.

I know full well you have nothing to do with BS i'm not in the slightest concerned in that regard. So an implementation in an F-16 is proof of implementation on an F-15, where did you get that idea and how does that make anything unfair. If it takes you 20-25 mins to get airbourne in an A-10C it can also take you that long in an F-15 because besides making nonsense needless adjustments and tea what else is there to do you can't do on ingress. Heck have you even heard of aligning mid air, that gets an A-10 airbourne in a couple of minutes, a MiG-21 2-3 mins, Ka50 the same etc.

It also needs more fish in a barrel ground targets to be destroyed by A-10 and Ka50s. ;)

I'm sorry but your logic and reasoning doesn't make sense to me. You say remove the FC3 aircraft based on what simplicity exactly? The fact they don't have switches to start them up and prep for combat is all I can think of here. If this is so, how does this make it unfair? The only portion that is unfair is the fact they are superior platforms in A2A combat than anything else. You then say allow Su25 based on fairness which contradicts your reason to omit the others. If for example the F-15 and Su27 were given fully clickable cockpits with systems to switch on at start up you wouldn't have issue with them even though the pilots would be operating them in exactly the same way in combat that they do now. Also your point about those that fly FC3 aircraft don't have interest in full fidelity modules is a terrible generalisation and so far from the truth. People actually like fighters and especially the F-15 and Su27. To label these modules as games is pretty lame, I don't see any difference in application during combat between these and the Mirage.

TWS2 is more like STT2.:)

Great work Bushman.:thumbup:

No not when tested at its release.

I tested it when it first came out and sure enough it gave a lock and launch warning to both aircraft. Not sure about now though but no doubt nothing has changed, this functionality seems a bit of an after thought.

What i'd say to the op is don't follow the sheep, don't just join the server with the most players in it join the one that suits your requirements. If you join a good server more will follow. Get on TS, how can you co-ordinate tactically if you don't communicate. READ THE BRIEF. A lot of missions have very instructive and informative briefings. There are so many variations in how missions are made up, find a server that matches your taste and remember it.

I don't understand what you mean by traditional multiplayer experience, what do you want to see, one life deathmatch, 15 min rounds, first to 10 kills, you need to define what it is that you expect to see. The single player part of the sim doesn't lead anyone on to believe mp is going to be anything, unless for some reason you're expecting a game environment to suddenly crop up out of nowhere based on the fact some more common mp games are like that. How are FC aircraft an abomination or make it disjointed, they have the same restrictions and complexity with weapon employment, they also have just as complex flight models. The FC aircraft were there before any click cockpits arrived they've just been updated since. The click cockpits are of the same ilk just with more in depth system modeling, the FC3 aircraft still have realistic systems that matter in combat but lack the system modeling out of combat and configuring for combat, hence the original name of 'lock on: modern air combat' They also add to the scenario of choice. The benefit of having a community drive mp is that you can create, request ideas that can then be implemented. If someone wants a fast battle map or 30min objective mission it can be done, this is how the il-2 sim grew in mp.