ARMAT?

[QuiGon]

You sure you can handle me having a mod? Based on your freak out in the AIM-9 mod thread and all somehow doubt it. . . :megalol: I love the "OMG DCS WILL BE WAR THUNDER!!!" crowd. In addition from my real world flying week in and week out, I spend hours a week on a sim where it takes 10 minutes to start the A-10 just to be told I don't care about realism by some cat who acts like he knows me (despite 90 percent of his "quotes" of me to be either completely self generated or inaccurate) :lol:

 

This thread... It all started so nice and then the nay sayers came along. God help the guy who just started the MICA thread!

 

Now that is the purest form of trolling. Consequent ignoring of facts and making fun of other users without adding anything substantial to the discussion. You can mod whatever you want in DCS as long as you keep it to yourself...

[Hook47]

Now that is the purest form of trolling. Consequent ignoring of facts and making fun of other users without adding anything substantial to the discussion. You can mod whatever you want in DCS as long as you keep it to yourself...

 

Ah, I see. You miss the constant little digs made by Tomcatmcduwee, most of which I ignore, but if I return in kind it is "trolling"

 

There is no rule about keeping mods to yourself, sir, at least not on the forum board. If someone made an ARMAT mod tomorrow they would have every right to post it here (although I would feel sorry for what they would have to put up with) and before you get harsh with me for giving the other dude a taste of his own medicine, remember he popped in on the Aim 9 Mod thread to do nothing but gripe at other people using it. That is actual "trolling"

 

I guess that is because he agrees with you, and I don't.

 

What facts have I ignored? I've said multiple times I don't care if the ARMAT was used on the M-2000C. I've said multiple times adding it is no more or less immersion breaking than non-french liveries (a point yet to be refuted) and I have ALSO said that if their is no way Razbam can do a realistic launch sequence or operation then so be it. Seems you have ignored some things here, not I. The need to circle the wagons with the vocal view who don't like this is beyond me. If someone made a thread about a weapon on the plane that I didn't want, my response would be far more limited. Oh well, I guess it's a purism addict thing.

 

Forget it, I am out. I planned on being done with the thread anyway since we haven't been allowed to actually discuss the missile very much, and spent more time talking about DCS becoming war thunder. I'll leave you guys to discuss how the ARMAT will turn DCS into a arcade game overnight, and spam responses to anyone who disagrees within 30 seconds of their post :lol:

 

I'm done :lol:

 

Didn't you wanted to have twin magic and under fuselage 530D ?

 

Like I have said multiple times, I would prefer the E variant, or a realistic addition. If it is totally unrealistic for more than two Magic IIs to ever have been on a C version, as in the aircraft or missile simply were not capable or some other blocking feature existed, so be it.

 

I guess you must have missed my above post? Not surprising, that would have required you to actually read my thoughts before launching off half-cocked personal digs. . . Doesn't seem to be your thing I suppose.

Edited January 12, 2016 by Hook47

[QuiGon]

Ah, I see. You miss the constant little digs made by Tomcatmcduwee, most of which I ignore, but if I return in kind it is "trolling"

 

I guess that is because he agrees with you, and I don't.

 

I'm still waiting for any proof that the ARMAT has been integrated in the M2000C. The MICA-guy you mentioned did post some sources so it's fine for the moment. We will have to see how reliable they are. If they turn out to be true than I would be more than happy about MICA implementation into the DCS M2000C. Same thing with the ARMAT: As I said, if there is any evidence of their implementation, then I'm all for it. But I haven't seen such evidance yet.

 

There is no rule about keeping mods to yourself, sir, at least not on the forum board. And before you get harsh with me for giving the other dude a taste of his own medicine, remember he popped in on the Aim 9 Mod thread to do nothing but gripe at other people using it. That is actual "trolling"

 

I was refering to MP when I said that. It's fine as long as you use those mods in private, but if you use them on a public server against the rules, then it is not OK!

Edited January 12, 2016 by QuiGon

[TomCatMucDe]

I'm still waiting for any proof that the ARMAT has been integrated in the M2000C. The MICA-guy you mentioned did post some sources so it's fine for the moment. We will have to see how reliable they are. If they turn out to be true than I would be more than happy about MICA implementation into the DCS M2000C. Same thing with the ARMAT: As I said, if there is any evidence of their implementation, then I'm all for it. But I haven't seen such evidance yet.

 

 

 

I was refering to MP when I said that. It's fine as long as you use those mods in private, but if you use them on a public server against the rules, then it is not OK!

 

just let him go, he told you he wont give you any facts cause he doesnt need him for his "immersion"

 

on other note, we started seeing 4 AIM9 + 2 530D on the server Mirage vs Migs... yes 4 x AIM9 against MiG 21

[Hook47]

*Double post*

Edited January 12, 2016 by Hook47

[QuiGon]

just let him go, he told you he wont give you any facts cause he doesnt need him for his "immersion"

 

on other note, we started seeing 4 AIM9 + 2 530D on the server Mirage vs Migs... yes 4 x AIM9 against MiG 21

 

I don't know their server rules. Are custom loadouts allowed there? If not then it should not be tolerated at all. If it is allowed then I won't play there anymore.

[Hook47]

I was refering to MP when I said that. It's fine as long as you use those mods in private, but if you use them on a public server against the rules, then it is not OK!

 

Ok, and I said I would do that where? Come on, man. . . Beyond that, you gave me absolutely zero indication you were talking about MP until after you clarified.

[QuiGon]

Ok, and I said I would do that where? Come on, man. . .

 

You didn't and I haven't said you did. I just wanted to make that clear since there are people doing that.

[TomCatMucDe]

I don't know their server rules. Are custom loadouts allowed there? If not then it should not be tolerated at all. If it is allowed then I won't play there anymore.

 

They are not of course. In fact the limitation fo the Mirage now make it more balanced and fun against the 21. Anyways, sorry for the out of topic discussion

[Hook47]

You didn't and I haven't said you did. I just wanted to make that clear since there are people doing that.

 

Make what clear? As if I didn't know. And those who are breaking the rules are getting banned for it, on the 104th at least. People could always easily cheat on DCS if such a crowd was commonplace, it isn't the modders fault. On other servers, if it isn't against the rules, who cares? It's their choice.

 

Geez wasn't this thread about that... shoot... what was it called again? Oh yea, the ARMAT missile!

Edited January 12, 2016 by Hook47

[QuiGon]

Make what clear? As if I didn't know. And those who are breaking the rules are getting banned for it, on the 104th at least. People could always easily cheat on DCS if such a crowd was commonplace, it isn't the modders fault. On other servers, if it isn't against the rules, who cares? It's their choice.

 

Geez wasn't this thread about that... shoot... what was it called again? Oh yea, the ARMAT missile!

 

I don't know you well enough to know that you don't do that. From what I could gather from your behaviour in this thread it seemed quite possible. But if you're not such a guy then there is no problem :)

 

What facts have I ignored? I've said multiple times I don't care if the ARMAT was used on the M-2000C. I've said multiple times adding it is no more or less immersion breaking than non-french liveries (a point yet to be refuted) and I have ALSO said that if their is no way Razbam can do a realistic launch sequence or operation then so be it. Seems you have ignored some things here, not I. The need to circle the wagons with the vocal view who don't like this is beyond me. If someone made a thread about a weapon on the plane that I didn't want, my response would be far more limited. Oh well, I guess it's a purism addict thing.

 

ARMAT is a bigger immersion breaker than non-french liveries since they are of practical use and influence gameplay. Liveries don't. But yeah, I would have no problem with removing those liveries for the sake of realism.

 

But after all it looks like we're are on the same page then. No ARMAT for the DCS M2000K unless some new information surface that show otherwise.

Edited January 12, 2016 by QuiGon

[TomCatMucDe]

You didn't and I haven't said you did. I just wanted to make that clear since there are people doing that.

 

let him go, that guy had 2 seprate profiles connecting from the same IP and was writing double bad Reps for some people with both profiles. Ask Jojo, his second profile was blaming jojo for being rude to Ramsey :doh:

 

Let's just get back on topic

[Hook47]

I don't know you well enough to know that you don't do that. From what I could get from your behaviour in this thread it seemed quite possible. But if you're not such a guy then there is no problem :)

 

 

 

ARMAT is a bigger immersion breaker than non-french liveries since they are of practical use and influence gameplay. Liveries don't. But yeah, I would have no problem with removing those liveries for the sake of realism.

 

But after all it looks like we're are on the same page then. No ARMAT for the DCS M2000K unless some new information surface that show otherwise.

 

So you are saying my "behaviour" has led you to believe I would cheat? Because I didn't agree with you on some aspects about ARMAT implementation and don't suffer passive aggressive remarks from other users? Sigh... Seems petty to assume bad about me because I disagree about a stupid missile in a PC game. I don't assume negative things about anyone here, even the guys who get my ire with their posting style.

 

As far as what you said about missile implementation that is what I have wanted from the start. I think if at least a decent guesstimation could be made put it in, if not then leave it out, even if it is a bummer. What I don't care about is if it was ever used on the aircraft, because unlike the current DCS world situation, the French never needed to press it into SEAD service. It sounds like RAZBAM still is considering putting it in anyway based on that exact criteria a few pages back, and if they can come up with something I would hope it would satisfy all crowds. I enjoy the realistic aspect of the simulation but I think there is room for addition here or there if it can be done in a realistic manner.

Edited January 12, 2016 by Hook47

[OxideMako]

And getting banned for it, on the 104th at least. People could always easily cheat on DCS if such a crowd was commonplace, it isn't the modders fault. On other servers, if it isn't against the rules, who cares? It's their choice.

 

You will get banned for using twin launchers in place of the 1x Magic. You will not get banned for using only 1 AIM-9 per Magic pylon in place of the hilariously broken Magic until they fix it. At least on the 104th/TAW servers. I don't think the Mirage v MiGs server allows the AIM-9 in any from, as the MiGs have a hard enough time as it is.

 

http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2632806&postcount=36

 

On topic - RAZBAM should rule out the ARMAT unless they can find evidence proving it was possible to use it on the 2000C RDI S5, even if not used operationally. If they do, go ahead and add it. I don't think people can object to that.

Edited January 12, 2016 by OxideMako

[QuiGon]

I think we can all settle this discussion for now until there is new evidence/documentation of the the ARMAT beeing used with the M2000C.

[BIGNEWY]

I think we can all settle this discussion for now until there is new evidence/documentation of the the ARMAT beeing used with the M2000C.

 

Agreed this thread is done.

 

To all please be respectful when posting on the forum, if you can not warnings will be given.