Jump to content

Capn kamikaze

Members
  • Posts

    1305
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Capn kamikaze

  1. Redesigned the prop while there, continued on, deadstick and parked next to it....
  2. Can we please have the parking spot at the aft of the deck to the starboard side moved, or adjusted, the AI make a beeline for that spot, and with larger aircraft like the F-14, they stick out into the landing area quite a bit, can't they go somewhere else that isn't in the way for human players?
  3. Have to report the same against APC's and IFV's. I made a mission to practice with them on the F-16, and got four good hits against M113's and BTR-80's, and there was zero damage, even if they could take a hit, I'd expect them to at least be damaged, they're not T-80's....
  4. With the upcoming apache and kiowa will there be any enhancements to the environment to look a little more lively?
  5. Not your fault, I forgot to use the quote in one of my responses above.
  6. You completely misunderstood my response. I don't think the player experience is going to be improved in any appreciable way by adding an E-2C when we already have an E-2D, and I would bet the vast majority of people would not be able to tell any difference and would not notice unless it was pointed out to them since the differences would all be behind the scenes, and that is why I would say it would be a waste of the devs time to do an E-2C when there are far more QoL improvements elsewhere that would make much more impactful changes.
  7. What do you expect the difference to actually be to you though, it's likely not worth the devs time to make it.
  8. The naysayers love to trot out that excuse, glass half full people SMH...
  9. That's not what I want to do, I want to be able to start it in the air at the beginning of a mission, have it follow waypoints, and then hit either the ground at its last waypoint, or give it a specific target to hit.
  10. Would it be possible to add cruise missiles like how we do with AI aircraft, adding them to the maps, giving them waypoints where appropriate, and their final waypoint be their target, or designate a moving target if the missile is capable of engaging moving targets. This would go some way to simulate the really long range missiles being employed in a realistic way on smaller maps.
  11. Here's the track, the Tu-160 is towards the north east, and will start releasing them shortly after it makes a slight course correction. Kh65 spiral.trk
  12. Dropping these from a Tu-160, tried it at 5000ft and 22000ft, they then start spiralling all over the place, rolling inverted, then soon after crashing.
  13. They do a sort of tumble then level out, then do another tumble as they lose altitude, occasionally they do level out, but then are flying along at about a 60 degree bank angle.
  14. Watching some vids on YT, they show a gunsight but when I try it, I get nothing, I can lock a target, and laser range find it, but I have no indication of where any of my guns are pointing in relation to that.
  15. Could we have the ability to seperate ROEs by weapons types, eg when I have a fleet of ships, I want to be able to specify that they are ROE green on all defensive weapons, like SAMs and CIWS, but control the ROE for offensive weapons entirely seperately, so they do not fire off Harpoons until I say they can, such as when the incoming missiles have all been dealt with and all the ships in the fleet are in weapons range of the other fleet. At the moment with the AI as it is, you get the odd ship firing off a Harpoon or two every now and again, effectively wasting them because they're not in a mass attack, but just a couple of them. By having different ROE for defence and offensive weapons it would be a lot better.... And no, Return fire is not what I want, because that again allows both types of weapons to be fired, which is what I am trying to avoid.
  16. I'm trying to build a mission where you're attacking a radar site in ww2 at dawn on the Normandy map, and it has a search light nearby, what I want to happen is for the operator to realise he's giving away the precise position of the radar site, so turns off his search light if you get in close enough to it.
  17. I've noticed that the LSO lags what he needs to tell you by sometimes several seconds, eg saying to add power several times after already having trapped and come to a stop.
  18. Possibly found some more detail, I tend to launch from the #1 cat, so often put in a little bit of a right roll after take off which will cause a slight turn, I think that me doing that is altering the direction of my wake a little bit, and upsetting my wingman on the other cat positions, because if I do not put in that roll, he takes off. So perhaps some problem with the AI and wake turbulence?
  19. I'm having a problem where my wingman fails to launch from the carrier, I've tried different carriers, and different catapults. It may be nothing but I've also noticed it tends to do it more often if you restart a mission, either by shift-r or by going back to the briefing and hitting fly again.
  20. Yeah, the AI is dumb as a bag of bricks, as is, that would just confuse them further. What would be nice would if they'd just follow your damned orders, like telling them to rejoin formation just doesn't work at the moment, they do their own stuff and then maybe rejoin, sick and tired of them flying to SAM engagement zones, while I'm telling them repeatedly to rejoin formation which would bring them out of it, all the while they're yelling SAM launched.... well it wouldn't be if they'd do as they're *expletive* told, when they're *expletive* told to do it.
  21. So we could set trigger zone, and have a condition where you would have AI (depending on coalition) simply refuse to fly through it, they will automatically go around it. It would be quite useful to stop AI from blundering into known SAM engagement zones for example when chasing other aircraft.
  22. I'm getting two AIM-9's come off the rails for a single fire command.
×
×
  • Create New...