TAW_Blaze

And what exactly do you have to prove that you should have burnthrough further than 10 nm against such a large target that likely has a very powerful dedicated jammer? (disregarding the fact that ECM modeling in DCS makes no sense whatsoever) Not seeing anything further than 40 nm is the classic symptom of using interleaved PRF. Perhaps instead of bashing the game without any proof you should focus on improving yourself. If everyone else is going the wrong way, maybe you're going the wrong way.

10 nm in a tailchase, nothing will ever hit a target. HoJ is the lowest pK of any shots. For a Sparrow to hit from 25nm in HoJ the target would basically need to fly straight towards it at high altitude. Now as far as why the missile quit guiding, I can't really tell. Maybe a tacview would help. AIM-9 warheads are pretty small, that combined with the weird damage model of some planes will often leave targets wounded running away. I've had situations where I shot 3 AMRAAMs into an AWACS and it was still flying.. if you're that close just use your guns and save the missiles. The rule is really simple. Shoot it until it blows up or bursts. It's not the radar's fault if you don't know how to operate it.

:megalol: :megalol: :megalol: :megalol: :megalol: :megalol: The music combined with it, a total win. :D

It isn't mixed because either plane is overpowered and bullshit like that. It's mixed because if it was a real blue vs red, then blue side would always have ridiculous numbers advantages.

:megalol:

LOL Thread just got murdered, call 911. :D

That's nowhere good enough. At minimum I need an advanced speech recognition software that can comprehend complex brevity calls and then do what I wanted him to do after it made sense of it. If it can of course, because a guy can always ask questions if something's unclear, but I wonder what the code would do. 404 not found :D

I'd say your typing skills got ahead of your comprehension. I didn't point specifically at you, but rather at some people in the thread. Read back a few pages and you'll see people claiming A2A combat difficulty is a matter of having switches to click and desperately trying to prove that flying FC aircraft requires no knowledge.

Considering the amount of radio commands I would need to give via keybinds there's probably no chance the AI will ever be competitive with a good human.

The point is you can't argue against realism because of current states that exist in the game. We're all really ****ing tired of this neverending circlejerk of "I have it harder than you". You picked to fly a certain plane, nobody forced it on you. If it's inferior to some others, then deal with it. I'm not afraid to push into certain fights where my Eagle is inferior to others (WVR for instance), yet you don't see me yelling that the Flanker is unfair and OP if I do get shot down. Since some of you are doing this retarded circlejerk all over again there isn't much left to do than to show you how the current state of the game is highly favorable for you (relatively), despite all of your claims of unfairness and whatnot. It is unfair, but it should be far more unfair. I'm not against discussing how to fight unfair fights and how to improve at it, but when some guy comes here and starts shoving bullshit in my face then I probably won't take it without a response.

:megalol: How can it not matter? DCS is a hardcore simulator. A simulator is supposed to represent real life behaviour, isn't it? Do you even think about what you're writing, or you just contradict yourself by default?

Available technology and designer goals determine how a system will work. They fly and operate differently because they are engineered differently and incorporate different technology. Not really. I don't need to go and try myself to see that flying a different aircraft will be more difficult than to fly the one I'm used to. The point is, this superiority complex about having fully simulated systems is just blatantly retarded. As I said, it isn't more difficult because you have to click things. That's not how this works, that's not how any of this works.

You're not even close to understanding the problem. The 21 is difficult to fly because it's a different generation aircraft than the others. Therefore it isn't supposed to be an equal opponent to them. IT IS NOT DIFFICULT TO FLY BECAUSE IT HAS A CLICKABLE COCKPIT AND FULLY SIMULATED SYSTEMS. What you condescending clueless people do not understand that a fully simulated Eagle will be far easier to use compared to an FC level jet given the fact 1) you understand the concepts that work behind the systems 2) you have read the manual and acquired the subconscious knowledge of what button push does what. But that just goes like this: I figure out what I want to do, and I'll figure out what combination of user input it takes to do it. None different to what you have to do in FC jets currently, except some actions not representing IRL procedures. Currently the FC level simulation adds a lot of holes in the system that cause a lot of trouble throughout it's operation. There are many situations where you would have the fraction of the present workload with a fully simulated radar for instance. I could go on and on about this, but I'm just gonna name a few key features that are missing: - TWS memory - AMRAAM guiding to last known intercept point in case bug/lock is lost - APG-63 subsearch modes - missing RWR features - laughable ECM modeling (with proper ECM modeling, your little 21 will have a hard time ever keeping lock on an Eagle, just like GG said) On the other hand there's very little benefit from the simplifications. IIRC the only real positive inaccuracy is that TWS scans a slightly larger area than it should, but this is mostly insignificant. Having a wider azimuth and elevation is most important when you're trying to attack multiple targets at the same time, but the chances of being in lethal firing position against 2 or more competent bandits strongly converge to zero.

You accuse others of provocation from your high horse spewing shit on people because their aircraft don't have a clickable cockpit. The hypocrisy is ****ing real here. It's brilliant how some people think they are superior because they managed to learn some sequence of switch operation.

It's kind of funny to read people arguing over air combat while they have no clue about it. If you think the complexity of air combat is a matter of having functional switches in the jet and FC fighters don't require a high level of knowledge to efficiently use in A2A combat then you should just go back to your A-10 and keep flicking them switches. Seriously this thread is just flat out hilarious lately.

I think the game runs surprisingly well considering the ms range of the clients. For instance our server allows people with 300 ms as highest, and the game goes decently. Or atleast that's how we perceive it, after all it's difficult to really see what went wrong due to latency in such a complex environment. But compare this to CS:GO for example. A guy with 80 ms is almost impossible to hit because he's literally teleporting on the map.

That bug has been there for more than half a year now, it was introduced with 1.2.8 IIRC. It was supposed to be fixed with 1.2.15, but something went wrong I guess. Hopefully it gets corrected soon, I'd like to have my tankers back on missions :)

Even military grade sims have bugs. Any software you create at such level of complexity will have bugs. Some of them you won't even notice. You can minimize the amount of bugs by careful design and extensive testing, but there will always be bugs. I'm positive LN has the required documentation to build the jet otherwise they wouldn't have announced it in the first place.

I think the Cat will be a killer in WVR. The extra set of eyes is massive in any dogfight scenario. The awful visibility magnifies this to an even further extent.

Just fly it with people you know. I would rather jump off a cliff than have a random driver or RIO in my jet. The amount of headache would be off the charts.

The hype train is off the rails by a long shot. :D

Sundown wouldn't stand being yelled at. :megalol:

Where do I throw money at this?

Make sure you are in BVR mode, and you have the appropriate missile selected. As a note, there is no such thing as guaranteed hit range or no escape zone. NEZ is most often referred as the point where the missile cannot be defeated kinematically. That doesn't mean it'll always hit. :) Don't bother practicing anything against AI. It'll teach you the wrong habits and it'll be more difficult to unlearn them. (Albeit flying against the online crowd will also teach you some wrong habits :) ) One parameter ranges are worthless in any missile discussion. Whether the missile will hit is defined by the position of the launching aircraft relative to the target, and the target's dynamic behavior post launch, or in case of a nonmaneuvering target, the lack of it. Once you upgrade the 'beatup' to a 1v1 fight things get more interesting because you want to avoid the other guy's missiles while delivering yours. This is generally done by maneuvering and some more maneuvering. You preferably want a good starting position aswell. There are a million threads about BVR, just hit the search button and click on advanced, then select search for titles only, and search for the keyword "BVR".

If your best solution to beating people online was FLOOD mode sparrows then you have no idea what you're doing.