runny

The F-4 Phantom :) Between those 2, the sabre because I don't know what a mig-15 is.

Anyone who actually looks at this forum would probably buy DCS: seagull It's like going to a car show and asking people if they like cars.

It would be epic to be able to have real players on the ground supported by real players in tanks and real players in aircraft. That's my dream when it comes to gaming/simming. Now.. Even if there was such a thing, it wouldn't work and I'll tell you why. Time. When you play realistically, things go at a realistic pace. You're going to be waiting for other people 90% of the time. The other 10% will be traveling around the map. Honestly I think one little mission would take all day, and most of it wouldn't be exciting in the least. I'm sorry but I don't game it up all day. I have a couple hours at most and I need to pack in the fun! It's great to dream about this stuff and I do it all the time but I bet if we had it it wouldnt actually be all that great. I mean.. Unless you dedicated your life to it... But then just go join the military. As for ArmA, I understand what you're saying but I disagree with the things you accuse BI of

I noticed some mistakes in your sample scripts.. Maybe you need a script editor as well? (Not trying to be a smartass)

The Savage 77th server is (almost) always open to the public and a lot of the players there are on teamspeak as well. http://www.s77th.com for ts info

Speak for yourself when it comes to ArmA, man. :music_whistling:

We're just joking around :P

sig test

I can't wait to use my new updater!

After not flying the shark for 2 months I instantly noticed the change too. Love it!

Lol I called it when I posted it that someone would do that.

Where's the "what's a Su-22" button?

You should be able to select them by cycling through your weapons the same way you'd switch from one type of rockets to another.

I prefer the classic eastern equipment vs. western equipment. MIGs and KA-50s are the only things that can be on either side IMO. If I see other aircraft on the wrong side then it's a deal breaker for me and I go do something else.

My most memorable flights have been with the MiG-29s.

I see people every day that can't drive their cars. Now OP says that (sim) flying a military jet, along with all the procedure, protocol, and tactics is common sense?

Everyone has their own way if doing things. Personally when I fly the russian jets (all the time) I don't use radar for finding bandits. I build my SA in different ways and I think it's pretty successful, especially when I have a wingman familiar with my style. My style.. You say it's hard to see through friendly ECM and I say it's hard to see through friendly spikes. If you're blind then listen. Don't rely on one thing for SA because you'll get all messed up by your own guys. That's not their fault. We already seen someone state that he thought it was beneficial to jam while RTB, and he has a valid point. It's also valid to keep the air clean.. Just don't make up rules and expect everyone to think like you, because you'll get angry. Use whatever your friendlies are doing to your advantage. They're jamming? Go stealthy and use them as bait.

Yeah... But. Only if you disregard the considerable other assets in the game. Pretty much everything other than what you listed plus the Huey. What's left is a pretty weak selection in my opinion. However, if you differ, that's fine, but you're still not going to be allowing those other units in your server (granted you have one) so the game is becoming split. Even if all eras had a full line of units and appropriate landscapes, you end up with multiple subsets in DCS which are not compatible with each other in terms of gameplay and immersion. I'd much rather see a focused effort by all the dev teams to work towards a common game, whatever it may be, to have one thing good instead of these seemingly arbitrary aircraft that don't belong with the other aircraft we have (or that have been announced). Most aircraft buffs would agree that the sabre or almost any warbird is cool. But is it a good expenditure of resources to improve DCS as a game?

I only read OP and am in the same boat. There's more to a Vietnam era flight sim than airplanes. I'm not interested in the WWII stuff for the same reason. I have trouble enjoying a game where things are so mixed up. I'm confused why each developer is running in a different direction with this platform. Regardless, the sabre is cool but without the supporting assets it's just another oddball plane I can fly in Georgia but can't "use".

I'd get excited for a F4

Fair enough but it hardly ever starts like that. At least in s77th's server the number and team of fighters fluctuates greatly even from minute to minute. Even today I jumped in a mig because there were 6 f15s and no red fighters. Shoot a couple down, some crash, now suddenly everyone is flying a red fighter and there's only blue a10s! Wait another minute and.. Yeah. People either aren't grasping the concept of balance or they just don't care.

soo... what exactly is happening? Can't launch the multiplayer exe? Can't connect to master? Can't see servers? Can't join a server? More info please!

This is cool. I'm a farmer irl and spend a lot of time trucking too (17,000 km since mid Feb) Funny how I'll be in a tuck looking at flight sims on my phone, and the next guy is in a airplane looking at trucking sims!

Good point, if the missile was flying alongside the target it would be outside of its gimbal limits. That's really weird because this happens pretty consistently and without anything fancy from the enemy in attempt to defeat the missile other than purely running away. Unless the missile is going for some intercept point and ends up beside, then loses track.. It should be smarter then that tho and it should obviously take the nearest possible intercept solution. As for screwing up the weapons cycle, I mean when you have 120s, 9s, and 7s, the order goes 120,7,120,9 and I don't like the extra 120 in there. Maybe I could fix that by putting the 7s on different pylons.

I have to data to back what I'm about to say, but just from what I observe playing DCS, the aim7 seems to get up to speed a lot faster than the aim120. This seems to be really nice when the enemy is running like heck and you're trying to catch up and shoot him down. Using the 120, it seems the rockets burn long but don't really create the thrust that the short burn of the 7 has. So it takes a longer time to catch up.. Longer time catching up equals more distance to cover on a running enemy. Seems like the aim7 has more effective range here. Also in the same scenario, the lead pursuit of the 120 drives me crazy because it'll sometimes come up alongside the enemy ship and just fly with it, intending to intercept it at a point further ahead, only to lose steam and peter out. It'll fly so close without hitting that if it would just detonate it'd almost definitely cause damage. The aim7 seems to go directly for the enemy without trying to calculate its interception and seems more reliable for these shots. Personally I usually don't pack aim7s just because it screws up the weapon cycling order :P