Boogieman Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 very disappointing to hear I wouldn't ever fly as a RIO if the cat was restricted from using the weapon system it was designed for. Would it be possible to just restrict the number carried per aircraft? I don't know if it's feasible for hosts to simply use mission files were it is only possible to carry the Phoenix on two stations or something. IIRC, more restricted AIM54 loads were actually the norm when the Tomcat was in service - the Phoenix was a big and expensive beast to be loading jets to the hilt with on a regular basis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 Why would you want to restrict anything? Real life restrictions in peacetime mean nothing at all to a game setting. It's so funny that people are already anxious about 'balance' and facing off against big sticks. No, it's not possible to restrict carried number per aircraft. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
al531246 Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 Whenever I see talk of restricting weaponry it really triggers me! There is no legitimate reason for doing so - the exception being if you're trying to create a period server i.e. ACG Cold War If you keep getting killed by R-27ET's or AIM-120's it's not the fault of the missile for being 'too OP' - it's your fault for lack of SA. The same people who complain about AIM-120's are the people who sit with their eyes glued to 1 of 2 displays; the radar or the RWR. Looking out of the window never crosses their mind. Intel i5-8600k | EVGA RTX 3070 | Windows 10 | 32GB RAM @3600 MHz | 500 GB Samsung 850 SSD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myHelljumper Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 (edited) The only restrictions that make sense are time restrictions, and I don't think you can find a time-frame were every DCS fighter keep their Fox1 and the F-14 have to abandon its Phoenix. Quick internet search : AIM-54 : 1974 Super 530D : 1987 R-27R: ~1985 R-27ER : ~1990 AIM-7M : 1982 AIM-120 : 1991 There is no point to remove it other than "balance" or "fairness" that I find irrelevant to this sim. Edit: Balance is already here, I would really like to see the turkey performances with 4 or 6 phoenixes, good luck turning or accelerating with that drag and load, not even talking about range limitations :D. Edited January 23, 2018 by myHelljumper Helljumper - M2000C Guru Helljumper's Youtube https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCK3rTjezLUxPbWHvJJ3W2fA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boberro Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 I would gladly see a MiG-31 mod with R-33. Various mods like Su-17, MiG-31 are already known but such one should be allowed. At least is on my server when I run one. Thus it will be nice to see flying cow vs. smooth F-14 :) Reminder: Fighter pilots make movies. Bomber pilots make... HISTORY! :D | Also to be remembered: FRENCH TANKS HAVE ONE GEAR FORWARD AND FIVE BACKWARD :D ಠ_ಠ ツ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucas_From_Hell Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 You kids are missing the big picture. The real winner game plan is to station an F-14 some way from the frontlines, preferably next to an airbase, SAM side, AEW or tanker aircraft, and use its big fat radar to direct lighter fighters to targets or discourage enemy fighters from attacking strike aircraft. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RED Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 The only restrictions that make sense are time restrictions, and I don't think you can find a time-frame were every DCS fighter keep their Fox1 and the F-14 have to abandon its Phoenix. Quick internet search : AIM-54 : 1974 Super 530D : 1987 R-27R: ~1985 R-27ER : ~1990 AIM-7M : 1982 AIM-120 : 1991 There is no point to remove it other than "balance" or "fairness" that I find irrelevant to this sim. Edit: Balance is already here, I would really like to see the turkey performances with 4 or 6 phoenixes, good luck turning or accelerating with that drag and load, not even talking about range limitations :D. Agreed. Trying to put the F14A into a "realistic conflict" with its weapons is even worse :music_whistling: When it got introduced in 1974 the only DCS Modules flown in bigger numbers (I think we can leave out F86 and Mig 15) are: Mig19 Mig21bis with R60 but without R60M F5E with AIM-9P F4E with AIM-7 and AIM-9 AJ 37 with RB24J MIIICJ with R.530 and AIM-9 no mig 29 or su 27 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boogieman Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 (edited) Why would you want to restrict anything? Real life restrictions in peacetime mean nothing at all to a game setting. It's so funny that people are already anxious about 'balance' and facing off against big sticks. No, it's not possible to restrict carried number per aircraft. The only restrictions that make sense are time restrictions, and I don't think you can find a time-frame were every DCS fighter keep their Fox1 and the F-14 have to abandon its Phoenix... ...There is no point to remove it other than "balance" or "fairness" that I find irrelevant to this sim. Edit: Balance is already here, I would really like to see the turkey performances with 4 or 6 phoenixes, good luck turning or accelerating with that drag and load, not even talking about range limitations :D. Fair enough. I'm not a fan of restricting anything either, just thinking of possibilities for hosts who do decide to crack down regardless. :thumbup: Edited January 23, 2018 by Boogieman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattebubben Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 (edited) I dont think servers should ban the Aim-54. But what they could do as we are getting numerous Aim-54 versions (AIM-54A-Mk47, AIM-54A-Mk60 and AIM-54C-Mk47) is restrict which ones are available (Especially for servers running earlier cold war scenarios etc) as the earlier Aim-54A´s should be easier to evade then the later Aim-54C (Especially at low altitude etc). Edited January 23, 2018 by mattebubben Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bad Idea Hat Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 It will behave like an aim-54. It didn't behave like an r33 and vice versa. I was replying to the person I quoted. My point was that the Phoenix will probably be extremely easy to defeat at max range, but damn near impossible at AMRAAM range. Not actual, real behavior. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_sukebe Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 I'm surprised that no one has yet talked about the other available missiles. Sure, they're not A-A missiles, but if you setup a multiplayer mission with say a defensive post on each site, then I'm unsure as to how you're meant to stop multiple harpoon or similar missiles. Some of the longer range cruise missiles that the F18C can carry have a range well in excess of 100 miles. The HARM supposedly has a range of over 50 miles. Do we need to have bigger maps? System: 9700, 64GB DDR4, 2070S, NVME2, Rift S, Jetseat, Thrustmaster F18 grip, VPC T50 stick base and throttle, CH Throttle, MFG crosswinds, custom button box, Logitech G502 and Marble mouse. Server: i5 2500@3.9Ghz, 1080, 24GB DDR3, SSD. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 Every missile is easy to defeat at max range, and the Phoenix won't be able to maneuver like an AMRAAM, nor accelerate like one. It's big, it's dangerous, and it goes far. Also, it's draggy. I was replying to the person I quoted. My point was that the Phoenix will probably be extremely easy to defeat at max range, but damn near impossible at AMRAAM range. Not actual, real behavior. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 The maps are large enough already ... except when you're playing airquake. Certainly, even larger would be very nice, like 1000nm on a side. I'm surprised that no one has yet talked about the other available missiles. Sure, they're not A-A missiles, but if you setup a multiplayer mission with say a defensive post on each site, then I'm unsure as to how you're meant to stop multiple harpoon or similar missiles. Some of the longer range cruise missiles that the F18C can carry have a range well in excess of 100 miles. The HARM supposedly has a range of over 50 miles. Do we need to have bigger maps? [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Top Jockey Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 The only restrictions that make sense are time restrictions, and I don't think you can find a time-frame were every DCS fighter keep their Fox1 and the F-14 have to abandon its Phoenix. Quick internet search : AIM-54 : 1974 Super 530D : 1987 R-27R: ~1985 R-27ER : ~1990 AIM-7M : 1982 AIM-120 : 1991 There is no point to remove it other than "balance" or "fairness" that I find irrelevant to this sim. Edit: Balance is already here, I would really like to see the turkey performances with 4 or 6 phoenixes, good luck turning or accelerating with that drag and load, not even talking about range limitations :D. Completely agree. Hangar FC3 | F-14A/B | F-16C | F/A-18C | MiG-21bis | Mirage 2000C ... ... JA 37 | Kfir | MiG-23 | Mirage IIIE Mi-8 MTV2 system i7-4790 K , 16 GB DDR3 , GTX 1660 Ti 6GB , Samsung 860 QVO 1TB Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swordsman422 Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 It's not about the capabilities of the weapon system. It's how you employ it or prepare for it that matters. The MiG-29 is by all accounts one of the best ACM aircraft in the world, but it's been shown in training fights between A-model F-14s and German MiG-29Gs that the F-14 can actually beat the Fulcrum in a duel if the pilot flies it smart. Are we gonna see MiG-29 players that only rely on the capabilities of their machine to carry the day come and complain when a skilled and talented Tomcat player bags them in a gunzo duel because he flew his jet well and took advantage of the MiG's weaknesses while playing to the Tomcat's strengths? We can't all beg for realism and then whine when that realism doesn't always benefit us. The F-14 with a player that lacks the understanding to properly employ his weapons is gonna mean bang-all on an MP server against other players who know how to fly their jets well and understand the weaknesses of the F-14/AIM-54 combo and how to take advantage of them. If me in my Su-27 gets bagged by a smart player in an F-14 that knows how to use his weapons, I won't feel bad at all, because I'll understand how hard that guy worked to shoot me down. Banning is only going to create bitterness and resentment when the end point of DCS is to have fun. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dimitrischal Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 I hope heatblur give us the ability to datalink the AIM54 from an E-2C. That way I don’t even have to stay around after foxing them. If anyone objects he can get a tomcat also. I won’t be frequenting any servers that restrict anything from the Tomcat anyway. This seems to be a lovingly crafted product with a lot of work gone into it and effort to make it realistic, definitely more than many modules out now or in beta, it should be treated accordingly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 They're not going to give you something that doesn't exist. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gearbox Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 I was replying to the person I quoted. My point was that the Phoenix will probably be extremely easy to defeat at max range, but damn near impossible at AMRAAM range. Not actual, real behavior. When it's employed at max range doesn't it take a high loft flight and then come crashing down on your head? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 That doesn't sound optimal. It does loft, but 'craching down on your head' isn't exactly a great loft-glide path to take. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swordsman422 Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 I don't know for sure, but I suspect that after lofting the missile sets up on a best glide profile to extend range with minimal required steering, then performs its harder maneuvers when in terminal flight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 That's true of any MRM - not necessarily the lofting part, but the others :) [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GGTharos Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 Maybe those aircraft should just be restricted instead /s. There are servers which don't pit 3rd gen vs 4th gen. In other cases, make sure you have air cover - you can also notch-to-merge. There are plenty of possibilities. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
myHelljumper Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 (edited) In that scenario, how do you even compete against an F-14 if you're using those aircraft? You don't. I don't see your point, you want to take out a Fox1/3 capable aircraft that have a radar with 40+ nm range with your short radar ranged Fox2 only aircraft and you are complaining that the fight is not fair ? BTW, good situational awareness means that you can't be surprised by another aircraft, I you are surprised with your pants down it means that your situational awareness was bad or not good enough. Edited January 23, 2018 by myHelljumper Helljumper - M2000C Guru Helljumper's Youtube https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCK3rTjezLUxPbWHvJJ3W2fA Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SinusoidDelta Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 The AWG-9’s spotlight mode should make AIM-54’s easier to defeat than most seem to assume. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RaceFuel85 Posted January 23, 2018 Share Posted January 23, 2018 The AWG-9’s spotlight mode should make AIM-54’s easier to defeat than most seem to assume. How dare you bring logic and smart planning in on this! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts