Jackjack171

Welcome to the forums dude! I can call you that right? Or is that too much for you as well? And bro, is a brotherly term where I'm from as well as in the Military! It is used as a friendly term! I mean, men can have a healthy discussion right? That's the comradery of DCS! Funny a guy on a war-themed simulation doesn't get that, but oh well! I would never call you granpa as I'm retired. Don't be so sensitive man! We can talk about this as long as the day is old. And you did not read the thread. Your entire second paragraph tells me that! Come on man!

If you think that that is what this is about then you didn't read the thread bro!

Brother you are making way too much sense. Lol. I need you to stop! JK

Welcome to the world of...Simulation (as in as close as we can get to RL)! It's supposed to be difficult. And I'm all for every other aircraft having to bore sight the Maverick too if that is in fact, realistic. I'm sure I've read somewhere that it is going to be the standard, and I love standards!

Bro, I know exactly what it means. Maybe you are the one that doesn't, or maybe you do! Again your argument is very weak! If they all KNOW HOW to do it, then what's the problem? It would take no time at all if they are as efficient as you claim, right? And personal time constraints (whomever you are arguing for, including yourself) are a YOU problem, not an US problem. You ever heard of time management? This is starting to get hilarious! I'm starting to get flashbacks of Bootcamp dude! You keep coming up with fictitious situations in your own head to support your argument. Sounds a lot like you are a troll or you argue for the sake of it! Which is it?

No! The important argument is exactly what you refuse to accept. The company mission statement is in the first line on the website. Yet, you and others try and gaslight and convince others that came here because of that mission statement to accept the lesser. That is liberal gibberish my guy! While this is a gaming environment, real world ideals are that you do not go to another platform trying to change things to suit you! With your logic, you are lo-key saying, "To hell with ED's mission statement and authenticity, lets have options that are made for the lowest tier person on the planet or the person that doesn't want to try hard enough". Here's a novel idea: Why not let those coming in decide if DCS is too difficult for them or not? You have to start someplace! If they suck at say, bore sighting a Maverick then oh well; learn! That's the beauty of the sim, we can die or fail, over and over again until we get it right! If you desire Ace Combat like stuff, then that's your groove! No harm, no foul!

Should be for the early Blk as well. To include the bullet fairing also!

Very nice! You even got the helmets right for that time. Cannot wait until HB finishes the TCS options!

At least give the man the why! To say one is better than the other and not offer him a proper example to your claim is just adolescent bro! Don't be that guy! Kick-ass statement bro!

Amen Brother!

The F-14 is super fun and if you want a real man's airplane, then that is the way to go! Neither one is easy! You have a very steep learning curve if it has in fact, only been a month and a half into DCS. The F-16 is fun but the tech in it has a learning/patience/time curve. You still have a lot to learn with the F-14 but it takes patience and repetition to handle her. You will spend hours trying to feel her out aerodynamically! You cannot just simply bend her around in the air without consequences. In the F-16 you will spend hours learning the systems. She's fun and it is rewarding when you learn how to operate the TGP and such! I own both and I have a blast with them but it took time! You may want to ask yourself: What is it that you hope to get out of whichever module and what it is you hope to achieve? Kick-ass decision either way you go!

This is something I could get behind, except between Syria, the PG map and the NTTR, that's a lot of desert! I'm looking forward to the Marianas map specifically for a change of scenery. That's just me though! Other than that, I'm down lol.

Special Weapons Command? I'm afraid it just doesn't work like that IRL! Sounds like some cowboy stuff!

Wikipedia is not a good source dude!

This is the case of "I want what I want" and nothing else. Screw what the USAF F-16 Blk50 that ED is trying to simulate, we want options! Sounds like "Pimp my ride"! For those that think some want to purposefully derail your fun, you are wrong. If ED decides whatever, tomorrows a new day either way. Whatever's on or off of the real jet is what should be (within sim limits), not what could be. You can get too deep into the rabbit hole with that kind of liberal thinking! Next thing you know, we have laser beams on our simulated jet. This is about "Our dream is to offer the most authentic and realistic simulation of military aircraft, tanks, ground vehicles and ships possible. " I quoted that from the first line on the company website. Where's the confusion? Oh, wait! Lol

Bro, sadly, it seems some of our brethren do not care about SME's or anyone else's inputs. How do you argue for realism/like systems (just look in the forums) and yet want something else? Look at all of the turn rate/G-force/flight dynamics post from guys as if they've flown the real thing! Yet, when it comes to a weapons system that they want or how much more ordnance that they can pack on a jet, realism goes out of the window. This is hypocrisy! Either DCS is as close to realism as possible, or it turns into something else! I hope that ED can provide some kind of "proof" that these guys are asking for. Yes, this is a game. It is also more of a simulation. It sounds a lot like some just want to hurl ordnance around to rack up scores on some server (totally fine) and most want to simulate real life, something that most of us will never get to do IRL! I've launched many jets over a 20+ year span IRL and have never seen any of these heavy fat pig loadouts some guys carry. Hilarious!

Weather they remove/add them now or later, people will still complain. Better to be done with it either way! It is still in beta so they can add or take away whatever. The bigger picture is not with the HARM and Maverick itself. This is about those that want realism and those that want to arcade it up!

I read what you said bro. It was still a valid question! I believe ED has their stuff together is all. If speaking here has no value, then why are we here? I've read the same things you have. I didn't see it as spam. I saw it as collective input. Information can come from a variety of sources. I post in the Supercarrier forum all the time as that was my craft. We are all here to help (most of us) is my point! And again, I trust the ED process. I'm sure they are not so dumb to get burned again! Oh I believe it bro!

So, what you are saying is: you want to see the credentials that these people you speak of, are in fact in the Military and work on said system? There is a lot of current and ex-mil here. I'm sure none us would lie about that kind of thing. We are passionate about our former or current craft. If in fact that is what you are asking, how do you propose to see said credentials? And I can't speak for anyone else here but, I have never seen any of ED's SME's credentials! Or any other Devs SME's for that matter! I just trust the process!

That's situational. It happens IRL. Don't rely on what you see in a video. The trap animations do need improving though!

Well, so is football bro! UFC fighting is JUST a competition! You still have to work up to it all! I've got a weight lifting competition coming. By your logic, I should just walk in and the magic happens. Negative! There are levels to anything you do in life, DCS is no different! It may be just a computer simulation, but that is just a sad attitude to take and say, "let's make it appeal to the lowest person so that everyone can play"! They should want to work up to it if it means that much to them! When these phantom people we are talking about get tired of Ace Combat or whatever it is that they do, they are always welcome here. And they will come! But if they are not ready for DCS, then (IMO) they should stay over there and stop asking for short cuts! And ED is never short of new users, the forums reflect that! Perhaps there should be more training missions. Form flying and basic airmanship is what most seem to need vice an easy way to get into the basket. Learn to navigate by dead reckoning in WWII planes in lieu of an autopilot! More lessons, less aids (cheats)! I hear what you are saying and I empathize with you but please, let's stop dumbing more things down in this world (real and simulated) just because some people are not ready for said ventures!

You are correct. No one will be affected if ED goes Arcade mode on us and give in. Users are free to use whatever they choose. But I still stand by my argument. Not sure where you got that I want a say in who plays or how. This is purely a discussion my friend. Please tell me that you do understand purity! This is akin to new players showing up on NFL gameday and they just got plucked from the B squad! And then asking for the defensive line on the other side not to go so hard on them (special favors). Some should stop asking for ED to bend because they (the user) are not up to snuf to complete the task! And this is a simulation! I'd hate to see some of these guys handle a situation in real life! They came to DCS for a reason. Otherwise, they could have stayed with the Utopian dreams squad that has a hundred missiles in that other sim. Get in there and cowboy or cowgirl up! I look at DCS as Varsity, everything else is JV.

While I'm all for options, this "easy street" attitude is very telling and appalling. There seems to be a culture of "I want it all, and I want it easy" creeping into DCS. I've watched users ask for things that are not realistic at all, yet when told by the Dev and/or SME that it cannot or will not be done, they still ask! There are at least 2-3 different threads for easy AAR. There is a plethora of threads asking for weapons and systems that are just outlandish. The bothersome part about that is that the OP usually doesn't do their homework before asking for said weapon that they saw in a picture! I kid you not, there is a thread where someone asked for autopilot on a WWII aircraft! It is becoming clear that some want to blur the lines. You go from JV to Varsity, not the other way around, unless you suck! History lesson: The more you water down a pure product, one day it will not be recognizable to the original. Let's keep DCS pure, leave that "other" sim stuff over there! The uniqueness and appeal about DCS is what drew most of us here. You don't move to Texas and still act like you're in California.

The landing weight is set down below on each arresting gear engine IRL. That's probably a default thing in DCS and rightfully so. The pilot/aircrew is totally out of the loop on that one. The only way to know someone on the ship screwed up is that the arresting gear parts and the aircraft goes over the side IRL. So, the landing weight setting may not be needed.

Just spit balling here. I can only imagine ED would never make a FCLP specific map nor a Naval Air Station as most of that is in CONUS. It would be cool however if they made a map that had Iwo Jima (Iwoto) located in the Pacific 600nm south of Tokyo. For those not familiar, it is used by Carrier Air Wing 5 in Japan. The JASDF maintain it. It's purpose is to get the entire Air Wing ready for CQ. FCLP needs the painted carrier landing area on it as well which Iwoto has. This could be just like the NTTR except with the true intent of training for Carrier landings. And it's a beautiful scenery. I climbed Mt. Suribachi during my Chief Petty Officer initiation. Simply splendid and eye watering! I'd pay for it! Just my 2 cents