Jump to content

Lithion

Members
  • Posts

    282
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Lithion

  • Birthday 03/04/1980

Personal Information

  • Flight Simulators
    DCS
  • Location
    ETO

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Good read, thanks for the info! Also thanks for sending a notification via the Discord.
  2. You're absolutely right, i thought it was a revolver design as well..
  3. The strong fireflash at the base of the cannon is probably due to being of a revolver design. The multiple breaches never make as good of a seal as a single battery design. Nvm it's not a revolver design
  4. Nice to see it buffed somewhat, could be that they're testing the Molniya for now. Our definition of a large ship is different, though it looks like, from Grimes' post, it is now tuned to the Harpoon being able to destroy a Molniya, which could be expected to suffer from just one Harpoon sized warhead.
  5. So i guess in response to these issues, which, imo were resolved when they stated ship damage modelling will be updated, ED has just decided to prevent these discussions, by encoding the Weapons lua files? Still no official response to this thread which is sad.
  6. So you can still use fun and interesting weapons when locked in certain time periods as far as weapons are concerned. It's like with GPS being disabled pre-1986 or something. I actually hope ED will further act on the time-period lock you can set for WW2 stuff, so that available weapons are dependant on the time period.
  7. The only thing i've actually seen do a lot of damage to that thing (including 2000lb BLU's GBU-24 and GBU-31) is the Walleye II. 2000lb glide bomb only available on the outer wing stations. The ship damage model is so f'ed and the lack of official response on this thread is ridiculous.
  8. Others are interested in this as well, easily found this post in the wishlist section, i'm sure there are more posts asking about it. Sadly no response yet. Hydra 70 Warheads - Wish List - ED Forums (eagle.ru)
  9. Came here to report this, sad to see it's been in since 2018.
  10. The recent Hornet A/G SEA mode addition has flared up the discussion on this again. Here's a diligent list bij u/Hammer_keys on Hoggit as well, though i wouldn't agree with the tone set out in the title. What good is the Hornet's SEA radar if Harpoons can't kill anything? ED has known about Harpoon damage since 2019 and have done nothing to fix it : hoggit (reddit.com) The discussion here and in the Hoggit link's comments on how 2-4 missiles are far from enough to achieve a catastrophic kill, instead of a mission kill are in the right. However, I believe in the interest of actually ever being able to achieve a mission kill, perhaps we should take the third-party approach and up the missile damage parameters, or hold a poll which the community would prefer, the realistic or 'fun' interpretation of this simulator, for as long as the ship damage model is in this state. Just my 2cts on that topic. However, there DOES SEEM TO BE funky stuff going on with the warhead, observe this simple test: Harpoon: 5% damage on a molniya, and 1% on a Moskva. Maverick: 42% on a Molniya, 9% on a Moskva. Here's the recording as proof. This discrepancy needs to be addressed if the above discussion on # of missiles required for a kill is to be taken seriously. The devs don't want to up the damage on the Harpoon missile in the interest of realism, but the Maverick actually already does damage to ships on the 'fun' side of things. My vote would be to up the damage on the Harpoon while ED addresses the limits of ship Damage models. If this issue doesn't get handled, we're left with no real tool for engaging any ships larger than a missile boat.
  11. +1 thanks for the thorough screenshotting, this is exactly what's wrong.
  12. I think this will bloom more when picked up by cameras on photos, though certain weather conditions (rain/fog/sand) should give the light something to 'bloom' against.
  13. I've edited my original reaction to the new info: Might've been translation error etc. They were apparently talking about 3d models of passengers, not whether or not the Hind could transport.
  14. That would be really disappointing. EDIT: Might've been translation error etc. They were apparently talking about 3d models of passengers, not whether or not the Hind could transport. Sounds epic, would be really cool to have it get some kind of A2A SP to help it fend for itself in the coming influx of helicopters and just some SP against jets.
  15. +1, came here for this, can't believe HESCO's aren't a thing in the ME, I'm stuck between using F-shape barriers and shipping containers for building walls around my FARP...
×
×
  • Create New...