The SIM put in the players perspective: What should it be?

[VMFA117_Poko]

I want realism, I don't care if I have a long flight in my A-10 to get to my target. I don't care if I have to fly back to base to rearm and refuel. I don't think you should be able to land at the enemies base and rearm/refuel. And using tactics that don't work in r/l is a bunch of crap.

 

Most people here just want the air quake or start close to the ground targets. All they want to do is kill as many of them as they can. but that's not the object or that shouldn't be. There should be some sort of plan/mission.

I sign under this too.

[tflash]

I want realism, I don't care if I have a long flight in my A-10 to get to my target. I don't care if I have to fly back to base to rearm and refuel. I don't think you should be able to land at the enemies base and rearm/refuel. And using tactics that don't work in r/l is a bunch of crap.

 

Most people here just want the air quake or start close to the ground targets. All they want to do is kill as many of them as they can. but that's not the object or that shouldn't be. There should be some sort of plan/mission.

 

How did you make your assessment about "most people here"? I read the chart very differently.

 

"And using tactics that don't work in r/l is a bunch of crap."

 

I consider you are stopping immediately playing Lockon then, since it forces you all along to use tactics that do not work at all IRL?

 

This is not only the case in A2A, but even more so in A2G. Or do you know the secret of having chat over radio with GROUND FAC's in Lockon?

 

In my view this will be the utter paradox of BS: flying low and dirty over inhabited land, with no troops to talk to.

 

At least, in classic Lockon A2A + teamspeak you can have some radio chatter.

[VMFA117_Poko]

In my view this will be the utter paradox of BS: flying low and dirty over inhabited land, with no troops to talk to.

You're right about it. Offline communication is a pain in a butt.

[Jester_159th]

For added Realism when I crash I get my missus to come and smack me around the head with a piece of turf at the moment of impact.

 

 

:megalol:

 

Nice one! Best laugh I've had all day!

[Pilotasso]

I've had had some convsersations while flying online about this and I think I have missplaced this poll somewhat, it apears that the notion of realism is highly dependent of your favourite aircraft. I may post another poll soon as to what to make of this voting that could not mean the same thing for everybody.

[JonTex]

what would you do?

 

Dude......show me a AIM-54 loaded Su-27 :chair: Maybe you need to get back to flying formations...

 

I noticed you didn't vote Ice?

 

Sigh, sadly enough real life took shape and I had to make a decision between spending time with my family or virtual formation flying. Strangely enough that seems to be the point that you just dont get. Simulations were built to test your character , and skill to see how you would react to the unexpected shock of a few real life scenarios and who is to say what can and cant happen.

No I cant show you a picture of a Su27 with a Phoenix missle strapped to it but I can show a picture of a F14 with a MIM-23 Hawk Surface to Air missle strapped to it.

http://f-14tomcat.persiangig.com/phpNwVmt5AM.jpg (modded loadout wouldnt you think)

I wonder what the Iraqi's would have done if "Project Skyhawk" had been a success. Would they have said

ok then why not fly a X-wing fighter then or have the Death Star.........I want to be Darth Vader.

Thats a modded loadout dont you think? Nothing is impossible just takes someone willing to gain the upper hand right? Not to mention Iran didnt build the F14 we did yet that didnt stop them from using it against Iraq.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-14_Tomcat

 

You think any of those dead Iraqi pilots gave up and said, man the F14 is an American jet and thats not the default Iran jet so Im going to ban you from the war? No they did what any real life pilot would have done in that situation they studied their enemies weaknesses and tried to gain the uppper hand.

Its a shame but never the less Cali just proves my point here. We as virtual simmers preah all day about being the best of the best and rising to the call of duty yet you let one guy mod his loadout and suddenly we cant play the game anymore. I thought this was a simulation. A test of one character and skill. Its not like they are invincible you just have to cowboy up and adapt to the situation. Or am I speaking to computer nerds who just want to change the server settings to their liking. You know Cali I question whether you want to test your skill at being a pilot , or do you just want to change the settings to your liking.

I dare you to shoot down the next supposed cheater that mods his loadout. Or do you have the skill?

[GGTharos]

That's not a good argument, Tex,

 

If anything your argumebnt shoots your point down. The HAWK on the F-14 was tried, and it was inadequate and ineffective - it was abandoned, though it was a neat idea.

 

This is an air combat simulator, meant to simulate jets using the payloads they were designed with.

 

There are no provisions for simulating 'research' into mating incompatible weapons to them, nor are there provisions to make such weapon systems fail in the myriad of ways that they can do so in real life (or even in just one way).

 

If you want to fly against a Flanker pilot with a Phoenix you're welcome to, but this isn't any sort of measure of pilot skill ... it's merely bafoonery ;)

[JonTex]

That's not a good argument, Tex,

 

If anything your argumebnt shoots your point down. The HAWK on the F-14 was tried, and it was inadequate and ineffective - it was abandoned, though it was a neat idea.

 

This is an air combat simulator, meant to simulate jets using the payloads they were designed with.

 

There are no provisions for simulating 'research' into mating incompatible weapons to them, nor are there provisions to make such weapon systems fail in the myriad of ways that they can do so in real life (or even in just one way).

 

If you want to fly against a Flanker pilot with a Phoenix you're welcome to, but this isn't any sort of measure of pilot skill ... it's merely bafoonery ;)

 

Well like this thread says "The SIM put in the players perspective: What should it be?" from my perspective this sim is a test of your character and skill I dont care what loadout you have. And Im sorry to hear that you think flying against a Flanker pilot with a Phoenix missle is bafoonery

 

I have shot down guys with loaded AIM-54 jets before and I can do it again.

 

it seems some of us have accomplished this task although I dont consider Cali a bafoon. He merely rose to the challenge to beat a pilot at his own game and kicked him out the server afterwards , im sure.

Which brings me to this , I think your right in some ways Cali. We can agree to disagree. In your server , because it breaks server rules, modded loadouts are cheating. And in my oppinion like i said when i was responding to pilotasso's thread , I think modded loadouts are not cheating. But I wont resort to calling people "bafoons" or the "crackpipe" punchlines that inflame a thread because I respect your oppinion and there are no right or wrong answers when it comes to oppinions its just what we think. The day I give up my right to express my thoughts when someone asks is the day I stop living. :thumbup:

[JonTex]

I agree with Christopher_m. SA is difficult to simulate and not equal for all players (some use track-ir, others hotas, ...)

 

I didn't vote yet since the poll misses the essential point between "realism" and "simulation". First of all, a "simulation", as the word states, isn't "real". It is meant to *simulate* possible scenario's. What you count as "realism" depends totally on what you want to simulate. E.g. WOV/Yap wants to simulate the specific *experience* of flying over Vietnam. In this sense it is "realistic".

 

If Lockon wants to simulate A2A *combat*, then realism means that you use ANY trick available to win. That's what a REAL pilot also would do. So, you will use the weapons of Lockon to your best advantage whatever. In combat, you win or die, there are no rules. Even if the game differs substantially from real-life conditions, you can really learn from it how to fight.

 

If you want to simulate real-life tactics, then you need something totally different. For this, unfortunately, Lockon sucks. You cannot use the real advantages of an F-15 e.g., since its look-down capabilities are porked.

 

But even when you would opt for a strict simulator of RL tactics, good simulators provide in a learning path, adapting to the students skills to be able to get on board in the first place.

 

amen brotha:thumbup:

[Fudd]

Well like this thread says "The SIM put in the players perspective: What should it be?" from my perspective this sim is a test of your character and skill I dont care what loadout you have. And Im sorry to hear that you think flying against a Flanker pilot with a Phoenix missle is bafoonery

 

 

 

it seems some of us have accomplished this task although I dont consider Cali a bafoon. He merely rose to the challenge to beat a pilot at his own game and kicked him out the server afterwards , im sure.

Which brings me to this , I think your right in some ways Cali. We can agree to disagree. In your server , because it breaks server rules, modded loadouts are cheating. And in my oppinion like i said when i was responding to pilotasso's thread , I think modded loadouts are not cheating. But I wont resort to calling people "bafoons" or the "crackpipe" punchlines that inflame a thread because I respect your oppinion and there are no right or wrong answers when it comes to oppinions its just what we think. The day I give up my right to express my thoughts when someone asks is the day I stop living. :thumbup:

 

Why stop at AIM-54's... Lets make it possible for people to run around with S-300 sites as loadouts.:wacko:

 

There is no way you can justify an Su-27 carrying a AIM-54 as any where near real.

[Pilotasso]

As I said I think Ill post a different poll that will aim better at the issue rather than this Sci-fi what if's. It will a bit more specific on what you want to change or not in LOMAC (hypothetical) in order to make it more realistic and eliminate such ambiguous aspects out of this voting.

[Trident]

As realistic as possible, IMHO. Two reasons:

 

- I've learned more about real-world aircombat/aviation from flying and discussing sims than any book I've read sofar. Books aren't worthless, but for example descriptions of certain three-dimensional tactics are tricky to understand when you just have words to feed your imagination (I never could see the sense in a high-yoyo untill I found myself unconciously adopting this maneuver in Flanker2.0 - I was like: so THAT is what a high-yoyo is!). Realistic sims complement your library very nicely.

 

- Flexibility! Hardcore realism features can be made optional only if they're there in the first place. And noone prevents the player from trying out what-if scenarios in realistically modelled aircraft, if anything the latter makes stuff more interesting, IMHO.

[JonTex]

Why stop at AIM-54's... Lets make it possible for people to run around with S-300 sites as loadouts.:wacko:

 

There is no way you can justify an Su-27 carrying a AIM-54 as any where near real.

 

:surrender: point taken fudd i think i understand what it means to have an oppinion that conflicts with the general consensus .... hehe i always wanted to use that word in a sentence ... CON-SENS-US ....sigh, i think im gonna go work on my sarcasm in the "screenshots and movies" forum.:joystick: