S77th-GOYA

That is absurd. If Black Shark can be legally released, there is no reason that changes to the present code can't be included. UBI doesn't own the code and there will be plenty of changes in BS. For example, the current mission editor is being scrapped and a new one will be in its place. And there is supposed to be an ingame joystick mapping change as well.

Read the choices again. Fix the problems we currently have and include that in BS or just release BS with no fixes to our current problems. In other words, do you want BS to be released and still have missiles that are very easily fooled, for example. Or do you want BS to be released only when fixes to the current problems are included. Bugs that will be part of the newly added things in BS are not to be considered in this poll. I suppose a follow up poll might be: for those that answered that they want the fixes included; Would you still buy BS if there are no fixes included?

rugg, did you ever get an explanation of what is wrong with your sig?

Have you got a before and after shot?

Choose the answer that best describes how you feel.

http://forum.lockon.ru/showpost.php?p=350317&postcount=4

Are they different sizes? I think any rail bridge will work.

Here's another: Make it all the way through. It looks like there's just enough room but you have to hold your line perfectly. I haven't done it yet. (No fair using a little baby MiGGy.) :D

Hey B, Which facts? Can you cite a source? And If you think that so far all that has been said is that the F-15 should beat the Flanker you really should read the thread again. You've missed quite a lot.

And you base that statement on what data? Sales figures? And what does it have to do with missile modelling? This is getting way to complicated. We can talk about exact physics and radar properties and modes and classified and tactics and anything you want but we simply want the game to give results we expect to see from real world information. When ED puts out a readme and states that missile susceptibility to chaff has been "tuned" it is not a great leap in logic to expect that retuning it would be a reasonable request. It would be very helpful if someone from ED would chime in with their opinion on the missile modelling and the chances of anything getting changed. Yes, I know, they're very busy.

This is from the dreaded fas.org. No idea where they got it or where the data came from. But it is interesting.

I got your point. But you assume that everyone is using all the exploits that can be used. They are not. The reality of HL is that a 100% slider setting will make more people get shot down than a 50% setting. Missiles will be more effective.

Not anything. Chaff will break a lock now if it is released between the radar and the target. And that should stay.

Really. Do you think every missile that doesn't hit is because of chaff? And remember some missiles DO hit even in the area of chaff. I wouldn't prefer to go back to 1.02 overall, but it was better gameplay. (Please don't start with the game v sim thing. I know where you stand.) It used to be that if you got yourself in position for a very high PK launch, you could count on it hitting. Now it's a crapshoot. The frustrations that go along with that crapshoot are making it less entertaining to fly. I can't help but think that that is a factor in LOMAC being less popular now than before 1.1.

It is more deadly to humans. If anyone tells you different they don't know HL. There have been plenty of complaints that point out what needs to be fixed. It starts with backing down the chaff vulnerability. How hard could it be? It was just added in the last patch so just reduce whatever was done. It's worth a shot. Right now it is a joke. I can't tell you how many times I've spoofed an ER with a single chaff. It's ridiculous. I don't know how ED could even consider not fixing it. In 1.12 it was descibed as "tuned" so simply detune it. And just add a little thrust to the Winder. It won't be perfect but that should be an easy adjustment and get it closer to realistic. A 1.11 "feature" has needed fixing for quite a while. The F-15's ability to identify a friendly jammer. Hell, there's a laundry list of things for the F-15 but I'll keep to the missiles. The inability of missiles to pull enough Gs to hit a climbing target is a real problem too. That seemed to come into the game when the AI started porpoising to evade a shot. There are many things about 1.02 that were much better than what we've had to deal with over the last year+ with 1.12. Yes, those things added in 1.1, 1.11 and 1.12 were meant to be improvements but they were poorly implemented or poorly tested and ended being detriments rather than improvements. The Tung/Mav Fiasco is a prime example. Chaff vulnerability is another.

Yes. But the slider doesn't fix the missile problems. The end result is a more deadly missile at 100% than 50% and the basic problem is that missiles aren't deadly enough.

But in the interim, there were plenty of add-ons and patches released for IL2. LOMAC has been stagnant.

I think he's counting on the "new" 120C to fix the AMRAAM's problems. But it not just the 120 that has the problems. It's ALL the radar missiles and the AIM-9. (And possibly the R-73) If the "new" 120C IS the fix for the AMRAAM and nothing is done to the Russian missiles, these boards are going to light up like the 4th of July. (Yes, I'm waving the flag a bit.)

The S77th uses the right side.

Lock the other one. Fudd can PM Alfa with anything that should be added. Might save a lot of deleting time in the long run. (I assume threads can be temporarily unlocked for additions)

Yep. Okty = 6 The least of all bases.

The following is a list of the maximum number of clients that can be placed at each airbase. JaBoG has a similar list at their website but it appears to be outdated. The bases listed in red are changes from the JaBoG list. I only tested up to 50 clients because above that would likely be beyond the limits of even a top of the line PC. (except maybe for a coop) The JaBoG figures are listed after the bases that can hold at least 50 confirmed by testing with 1.12a. Kirov 50+ (64) Kerch 29 Anapa 40 Novo 16 Gelendzhik 13 Krymsk 30 Kras Center 23 Kras Pash 45 Majkop 50+ (57) Sochi 41 Gudauta 10 Sukhumi 34 Dzankhoy 18 Krasnogard 39 Okty 6 Razdolnoye 47 Gvardeyskoye 32 Simferopol 35 Saki 50+ (54) Belbek 28 Khersones 15 If anyone wants to test the 50+ bases, feel free. I will edit my list.

Study the map before going into the mission. And this thread might help: http://forum.lockon.ru/showthread.php?t=17982&

The Winder was from a hog.