What interest you most, A-A or A-G missions?

[*Rage*]

A2A - and only for the thrill of flying against someone else.

[leafer]

Ground pounders move mud so fighter jocks may grow old, drink cranberry juice and talk about the good ol' days.

 

A2G for life!

[Ferocious_Imbecile]

For helicopter missions? A2G, definitely. Particularly as the DCS promises some really interesting (and hopefully huge) ground attacks.

 

REally just how huge is the scope of military operations going to be in the DCS for the consumer model?

 

A division? :music_whistling:

[Kula66]

Not a pound for air to ground!

 

There's nothing like taking on other opponents in A2A - real, thinking, sometimes unpredictable and clever opponents - team on team. A2G can never compare with this. Escorting A2G craft, protecting HVAA's, maintaining air superiority, fighter sweeps.

 

It's all good, but there's almost zero cooperation and understanding between A2A And A2G crews to make those things work well typically ;)

 

Totally agree GGT!

Without a perfect ground system AI and highly detailed ground modelling, A2G ends up like plinking fish in a barrel - boring! It should be an add-in to a ground sim like SB.

 

A2A is ideal for a SIM, in addition to your points it works well 1 v 1 ... which is what many of us end-up playing (even on-line).

[VMFA117_Poko]

I like both... best combining them into same mission...

That's the spirit! :thumbup: No need showing "whose daddy will beat another daddy". I remember once Zuki said something like that to me and I got really angry. I don't know why... I think I had a bad time (I apologize You Zuki).

 

One thing is sure. Both are equal important. I think this poll is about to show ED again which aircrafts should be developed in a first place. I worry that fighters addons will be available when Poland would get new highways and stadiums (2012?).

[Boberro]

I worry that fighters addons will be available when Poland would get new highways and stadiums (2012?).

 

Off course if all be OK, but I worry rather it will be said: "we wanted well, but it went out as usual". I am accustomed to this adage in Poland :megalol:

[RedTiger]

*looks at the poll results*

 

I'm still not getting the appeal that A/G has to so many people...:music_whistling:

 

You're either 30 or 40k up in the air dropping bombs on targets you can only see on radar that can't dodge those bombs (if you are smart, that is, and your plane has this capability), or you're shooting at little vehicles that drive in a straight line. Yes, I know that they shoot back and yeah, they can be deadly.

 

I'm still not seeing the appeal here, however...does everyone like shooting fish in a barrel? Scared of a little ACM? Maybe they just like to watch things blow up. :P

 

You can argue that there's no use to say which one is better than the other, but unless you have AI that is far more skillful than what we have now or have each and every vehicle crewed by real players along with realistic armor penetration modeling, there's no contest IMO. ;)

[Groove]

Dont hear on GGTharos! :chair:

 

A2G is the best! :smartass:

[Guest Crazy_Eyes]

46 v's 12?, Without doubt there's more intrest in A2A!, ED are you watching?.

[mvsgas]

*looks at the poll results*

 

I'm still not seeing the appeal here, however...does everyone like shooting fish in a barrel? Scared of a little ACM? Maybe they just like to watch things blow up. :P

)

 

Shooting fish in a barrel may not require skill, may be boring to some ,but it sure fun for others, including me...:D

[thereminqblank]

46 v's 12?, Without doubt there's more intrest in A2A!, ED are you watching?.

 

Che? From where I'm sitting it says 46 vs 17 in favour of A2G....

[brewber19]

As much as I am an advocate for A2G, and I voted accordingly, the ground AI is frankly so retarded it isnt even entertaining any more. When I started LO(FC) it was all very challenging...3 years on...not so much.

 

(1) Vehicles carry on in a straight line, no reaction to your presence

(2) AAA/SAMS can see you behind terrain, so cant use masking as a tactic

(3) AAA/SAMS fire at you at their Rmax...so easy to avoid most sams unless you screw up or there's more than 2 or 3 of them incoming at the same time

 

I'm looking forward to BS...but only for the challenge of the flight model and doing some novel things in a rotary a/c. When I feel I've mastered that, I'll do some skinning etc, may be try my hand at making a movie. I won't be buying BS with any hope of a challenging ground AI because they will behave in exactly the same way I am sure. (they might still kill me, quickly, but thats only because I'll be flying my BS like an ass-hat for the first few months!).

 

I still vote for A2G cos I like to see things get blown up ;)

[Guest Crazy_Eyes]

Che? From where I'm sitting it says 46 vs 17 in favour of A2G....

 

Yes... it does now! 3:1 A2A v's A2G.

[Boberro]

Eeh I think 3:1 A2G vs. A2A :P

[Pilotasso]

Im in reality a multirole slob. LOMAC forced me to mostly AA (did AG on critical missions online). It makes no sense to me to be purely AG or AA, but between both I choose AA.

AG targets are always AI and slow moving. AA has much more adrenaline going.

[thereminqblank]

I like both A2G and A2A. Doesn't really matter to me, I still get my butt handed to me on a platter!

[RvETito]

I like to bomb especially if I have cleared the sky myself.

[Boberro]

Sometimes on HL I create room mix AA\AG ;}, you have to kill anothers with your Su-25T and only Vihrs :D:D. It is adrenaline.... :P

[tacit_blue]

For years I trained and used the fighter jets, but lately I can't ignore the mud movers it's something different. I'd vote for both AA and AG!!

[cool_t]

:)

 

Well,

 

The Su's and Migs can cary bombs, right. Oh man it would be nice to have the F-15E, to make things fair ofcourse.

 

:doh:

[GGTharos]

.. Along with the correct FM modeling to drive home the fact that anything carrying a bomb is a target ...

 

In other words, an F-15E with bombs would lose a BVR fight to an F-15E without bombs.

[rogue_blade]

i dont see how anything can surpass the intensity, fun and test of skill of a 1v1 or 2v2 dogfight

[arneh]

i dont see how anything can surpass the intensity, fun and test of skill of a 1v1 or 2v2 dogfight

 

Sure it's fun to do a old-fashioned dogfight. But that's not really what I'm looking for. I want to feel like I'm part of a big war. A living world with tousands of ground units trying to accomplish their mission, and the aircraft to support them. In war pilots don't challenge each other for a 1v1 duel over neutral ground. They are there to support the ground forces.

 

Doing AA realisticly would lead to many boring missions where all you do is make circles in the sky for hours in a CAP-pattern. Not my idea of fun. Even F4 didn't bother to do this realisticly, as you only have to remain on the CAP-station for 15 minutes, not hours.

[Mnemonic]

I like both... But mostly A-G

[GGTharos]

Doing A2G realistically would have you flying circles until someone called you in to drop a bomb on some location - you'd point the A/C that way, lock on, drop the pig and fly on, and back to your boring circles in the sky. Not all that much different.

 

Ah wait, you meant 'peacekeeping' operations, not 'full out war' with a faction that has plenty of aircraft to throw at you ;)

 

Doing AA realisticly would lead to many boring missions where all you do is make circles in the sky for hours in a CAP-pattern. Not my idea of fun. Even F4 didn't bother to do this realisticly, as you only have to remain on the CAP-station for 15 minutes, not hours.