Jump to content

Wish List


Boneski

Recommended Posts

I get that. But what get you guys to nerf the performance of the F-15 on the patch 1.2.1 ?

 

The F-15C wasn't nerfed. It was adjusted to match its real performance. There was a mistake in the original 2.0 release FM of the F-15C that caused it to turn far far better below M0.6 than the real thing does.

This also tells me that you don't know how to fight an F-15 ... flying it at slow speed before you're established on the bandit's six and about to shoot him (as opposed to stuck in lag behind him) is the wrong way to fly this crate.

 

On release day, everybody has a choice for what plane they want because they are nearly the same in performance. After the patch, everybody just fly the Su-27, leaving the F-15C like an easy target most likely to be shot down.

 

Just my opinion, :D

I fly the F-15 all the time, and I have a whole bunch of tacviews of me mowing down flankers in public gunzo servers. Those are the same flankler pilots who are killing you. There are only a few vPilots who can fly their plane very competitively (doesn't matter which plane) and skillfully.

 

I'd say 'draw your own conclusions' but really, Sir, your problem is that you lack knowledge and training, and this will always make you an easy target for a pilot of the same skill level who has a plane that turns better :D


Edited by GGTharos

[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

  • Replies 868
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The APG-63 is vulnerable to the doppler notch like every other radar ...

 

As for boresight, I'd go with LBST with 40nm (or who knows how much) range :D

 

Well back on topic, maybe if we wish for (and then actually receive) the ability for a 15nm-range boresight as well as an immunity to look-up/look-straight notch for the APG-63, we won't need to go gunzo unless we REALLY want to.

[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

The APG-63 is vulnerable to the doppler notch like every other radar ...

 

As for boresight, I'd go with LBST with 40nm (or who knows how much) range :D

 

What's LBST? LB Search and Track I presume... whatever that is.

 

Sorry, I was always under the impression that in a look-up situation, the F-15 couldn't be beamed out of a lock. I read it in one of SK's posts in one of the F-15 Avionics threads... can't find it right now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Long range Boresight.

 

F-15's don't get beamed out of a lock in look-up. You're simply running into the closure limitations of HPRF.

[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

Long range Boresight.

 

F-15's don't get beamed out of a lock in look-up. You're simply running into the closure limitations of HPRF.

 

OOhhhhh ok. So I assume I should change to MED PRF in a beam or during tail-on tracking?

 

But let me have another go... an implementation of the LR Mod's ECM/ECCM would be nice in FC3 and future titles. It's too bad no such mod exists for FC2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, you can switch to MPRF - but that's limited to about 22nm (which still gives you a few more nm than HPRF. Or you can stay in ILV once your bandits are inside 40nm)

 

As for ECM ... no comment. :D

[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

Woah, wait that wasn't fixed? I thought that it takes 15 seconds to start up the jammers in FC2 now :huh:

 

It does, it was a joke because it really doesn't do anything once in burnthrough, in addition to, as you said, taking 15 seconds for it to activate. Though to be honest this is an oversimplified implementation, so the fix was equally as simply arbitrary.

If you aim for the sky, you will never hit the ground.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Each unit not fight , not opposite, not compete each other

 

I detected really important point .

Not conceptof conflict between one side and the other side , but concept experience of independent personal aircrafts

.

Through that we compete for more score , object clear, and other higher records.

There will not be balancing problem , political problem , but just real simulation gaming . .

how about this ???....

For example,

Su 27 f 15 are not opposite each other, peoples compete each other only in su 27 or f-15 for other goal like flight simulator(??)

Search keywords: simulation concept , not battle war


Edited by plane00
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Hello,

I'm currently looking for a modern combat flight simulator, I'm a huge sim fan, I played FS 2002,2004 and FSX at the moment. But now I really wanna try some military action (air to air combat). I have done some research and figured out that Falcon 4 and Lock on Flaming cliffs 2 are probably the best two games at the moment, I also saw DCS A-10c but I'm not a fan of air to ground. So in fact I would like to know which one is better, Falcon 4 or Lock on Flaming cliffs 2 and if any company is planning on making a new combat flight simulator (air to air, such as the F/A-18 or the MIG) in a few months. I would also like to have some informations about the multiplayer, how many people are active on both games and how it works. Thanks for your help!

 

PS: sorry for the poor english, you can msg me in french if you can.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello,

I'm currently looking for a modern combat flight simulator, I'm a huge sim fan, I played FS 2002,2004 and FSX at the moment. But now I really wanna try some military action (air to air combat). I have done some research and figured out that Falcon 4 and Lock on Flaming cliffs 2 are probably the best two games at the moment, I also saw DCS A-10c but I'm not a fan of air to ground. So in fact I would like to know which one is better, Falcon 4 or Lock on Flaming cliffs 2 and if any company is planning on making a new combat flight simulator (air to air, such as the F/A-18 or the MIG) in a few months. I would also like to have some informations about the multiplayer, how many people are active on both games and how it works. Thanks for your help!

 

PS: sorry for the poor english, you can msg me in french if you can.

 

Depends if you like a survey or study sim. If you want multiple playable aircraft, Flaming Cliffs is for you. If you prefer to study the F-16 down to the switches level Falcon 4/BMS it is.

 

I think both are believable in the flight dynamics department (referring to Falcon BMS, not 4.0) but Flaming Cliffs have better graphics especially for the ground (Falcon's ground textures are tile-based, looks like flying over Diablo I/II land). Flaming Cliffs doesn't have the dynamic campaigns which the Falcon has though.

 

If you decide on Flaming Cliffs, wait for FC3. It's announced that it'll be out this month.

i5 2500K @ 4.2GHz | GTX 470 | 8GB DDR3 @ 1600

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I second that: R-77 on Flanker!

 

But my uppermost biggest wish is some other AI-pilots. I fly offline, and I cannot count how many times one of my AI wingman just shot me out of the air.

 

These AI morons should be court-martialled and kicked out of cyberspace for once and for all.

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Falcon 4 BMS is a sim. From my DCS/BMS view I would say flaming cliffs isn't a real sim anymore. ;)

 

Off to BMS with you then. This is what we call "trolling."

 

Also, I'd like to just note that if you want to get technical, from that point of view, calling either one a simulator is a stretch. They're computer games, with varying levels of fidelity.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why the R-77 when we can have the R-33/R-37? R-37 for the Su-27S!

:holiday:

 

Why stop at that when we have lasers out there.. :)

 

Or at least: KS-172 for the Su-27S!

i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg.

 

DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?).

 

Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...