Democratic R-27ET poll

[HRZ]

Vote people, vote, vote, vote and....vote!

[Pilotasso]

You should have put your options differenlty, such as enumerating wich capabilities individualy into each voting option.

 

Your first option will win 100% because everyone here has a different notion of realism on this missile including me. By all means let it be so but my notion will be very different from yours.

 

BTW reality is not a democracy but the most fearsome dictatorship ever. You may want something bad but reality is the one that has the last saying regardless of your personal interests. :D

[Guest IguanaKing]

Where's the "We don't need anyone to add them because they are already there." option? Seriously, they are already in the game, you can add them to your aircraft using LOPE. Maybe the question you should be asking is whether or not HL servers should consider it a cheat. :smilewink:

[HRZ]

 

Your first option will win 100% because everyone here has a different notion of realism on this missile including me. By all means let it be so but my notion will be very different from yours.

 

What? Already bailing out? Cmon man, not all votes are being counted. You still have Florida!

[Guest IguanaKing]

I repeat, its already there. :music_whistling: Its up to the various server admins to decide if they want to allow you to load it.

[HRZ]

I repeat, its already there. :music_whistling: Its up to the various server admins to decide if they want to allow you to load it.

 

Of course, this is what I was referring to. Not everyone knows there's LOPE and how to use it, so it's quite ok. to ask this question. Take care mom!

 

Love,

 

HRZ

[Guest IguanaKing]

Of course it is ok to ask the question, I was just saying that you may want to ask the question differently. As Pilotasso already pointed out to you, the wording of your options needs a little work as well. Not many people here will disagree with adding something if its used IRL on that aircraft, the question is, IS it used IRL on those aircraft.

 

"So they gave me insurance forms to fill out which asked lots of questions, but they were very strangely worded. One of the questions asked, "Have you ever tried sugar or PCP?"-Mitch Hedberg. :D

[Pilotasso]

Unfortunatly too much people know about LOPE already. What seems to be the issue here is that you want to make an axcuse to use 8 ET's with your referrences to proof that the SU's can carry it but you dont want to know nothing about the degraded seeker perfomance on those pylons with absence of cooling systems and missile manual assist wich would make you maddogs useless. Think about it.

 

Untill then theres no point for yet another badly implemented features wich will give the flanker more unrealistic advantages over the missing F-15's features that need far more completeness and unporked than the flanker does.

[Guest IguanaKing]

Oh, if only I could carry AGM-65s on every pylon on my A-10. If only I could carry MERs.

 

Heh...truth be told...the stock loading choices for the A-10 are cheats compared to the real world. I use LOPE to make it more realistic...to my detriment, unfortunately. :D

[Cosmonaut]

I never knew having more ET’s was even a debate.

 

If in real life the 27/33’s are capable of carrying ET’s on other pylons then so be it but I use the term capable loosely. I.e. not theoretically capable but actually capable and it is something you can expect IRL.

[Force_Feedback]

Fine with me, as long as they'll have the limited field of view, and worse seeker performance when hung under the fuselage, but then ED would have to model seeker cooling, and the degrading seeker performance at longer ranges. Give or take 10-15 years for them to work those issues out, then we'll be able to hang ETs wherever we want, with the accompanied operational limits.

[S77th-konkussion]

hmmm. Sure would be nice if this kind of research was done & done right from the start so we wouldn't have to talk about LOPE huh? Basically our server would view 6 or 8 ET's as a cheat only because it's not set up like that out of the box. There's not much of a better alternative to enforce due to endless debate & discussion!

[Guest IguanaKing]

I hear ya Konny. It sure would have been nice if my Hog were set up properly to begin with. I'd sure like to take those LAU-61s off and put the realistic LAU-131s on there (again, to my detriment, since I lose 12 rockets per pod by doing that), but that isn't even an option. I know that's a little bit OT, but if the A-10 weapons systems are that porked, I can only imagine how bad it is on other airframes.

[S77th-konkussion]

HRZ -I'm curious. Are you conceiving this poll based on v. AI or online experience? The AI are some cheetin' &^%&(*^!!

[GGTharos]

No, its because of 'ET Sniping' ... it's another 'boo hoo flanker has no active missiles' thing.

 

Right now ED does not tie cooled/uncooled seeker to a pylon, but perhaps they will - they do simulate uncooled, rear-aspect only AIM-9P in BS.

 

Hey HRZ, would you like me to start equipping A-10's with AMRAAMs? ;) It's easy enought to mount the proper pylon ;)

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

The answer is yes. And if R-27ET has a datalink as noted by Force Feedback , then the DATALINK should be reinstated as well.

[HRZ]

Hey HRZ, would you like me to start equipping A-10's with AMRAAMs? ;) It's easy enought to mount the proper pylon ;)

 

Your comparison is a bit off, don't you think?

Regular A10s don't have AA radar nor they carry Amraams nor were designed to do so.

 

Su-27 on the other hand, carries and deploys ET missiles and we had real-life photos of RuAF Flankers taking off with those missiles underneath.

 

Reglardless of the 'unrealistic' performance they would have in Lomac, if planted under fueselage, they would still make a lot more sense on an SU27 then your Amraams planted on a Hog.:D

[GGTharos]

The answer is yes. And if R-27ET has a datalink as noted by Force Feedback , then the DATALINK should be reinstated as well.

 

Except we found out AFTER this book was printed that it does NOT in fact have a datalink. The radar doesn't even generate a data link signal when you launch a T/ET!

[GGTharos]

Reglardless of the 'unrealistic' performance they would have in Lomac, if planted under fueselage, they would still make a lot more sense on an SU27 then your Amraams planted on a Hog.:D

 

Emphasis mine. No, they wouldn't. You just like slippery slopes, and aslippery slope says if you can do an unrealistic thing for one aircraft, you can do it for another.

 

And you know that those limitations are -exactly- what the difference between realistic and unrealistic is ;)

[HRZ]

Emphasis mine. No, they wouldn't. You just like slippery slopes, and aslippery slope says if you can do an unrealistic thing for one aircraft, you can do it for another.

 

And you know that those limitations are -exactly- what the difference between realistic and unrealistic is ;)

 

Hey, you talk like those fancy 50,000$ suit lawyers..I don't understand a thing you're saying?:huh:

[tflash]

I voted no, but I am not 100% convinced the ET is to powerfull in the game. The long-range maddog is certainly a cheat, but mostly when I have been downed by an ET missile, it was fired by an opponent I was engaging within the 10 miles zone (since otherwise you can't fire any amraams).

 

I think the cheat is not significant. There is reason to believe that the ET is as lethal as it is, when you don't use the launch override.

 

No one needs extra ET's though. It would just reduce the game to a medium range amraam/et spamming orgy.

[GGTharos]

How about if I told you that a pole at 10nm won't let you escape an AMRAAM in a medium altitude engagement? Not in real life, anyway ...

[Cosmonaut]

This is quickly becoming the “Wonderland debate” .. with no end to the rabbit hole ;)

 

If its realistic then put it in... Although I always thought that the Su27/33 was incapable of carrying more than two.. So where’s the info to suggest they can be mounted on more than the two pylons in the game?

[GGTharos]

There are photos. However there's also the matter of those other pylons not being equipped with coolant.

[tflash]

How about if I told you that a pole at 10nm won't let you escape an AMRAAM in a medium altitude engagement? Not in real life, anyway ...

 

Indeed, you're fully right on the amraams: THEY are botched, I was only speaking about the R-27ET's performance.