Dannyvandelft Posted September 10, 2021 Share Posted September 10, 2021 Yes but a simulator should simulate realities and not what if Franken loads. Atleast that’s the way it was with Blackshark and A10c before this became dcs world. I feel the PK online crowd is taking the Sim down the wrong path. Granted I will concede that at-least ED has given us control via the Editor to deny franken loads…If they say there were Vipers that were able to load, and fire HARMS from those 4 stations, it's not a Frankenload. Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randomTOTEN Posted September 10, 2021 Share Posted September 10, 2021 29 minutes ago, Xavven said: At first ED allowed HARMs on 4/6. No, at first ED did not allow HARMS on 4/6. Allowing 4 and 6 was the first change. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Team NineLine Posted September 10, 2021 ED Team Share Posted September 10, 2021 13 minutes ago, randomTOTEN said: No, at first ED did not allow HARMS on 4/6. Allowing 4 and 6 was the first change. I hope now we are not going to argue about the order of events? I think it's time to move on, we have given plenty of options for those that want this and those that don't, we are not going to do any sci-fi fantasy load-outs, but if there is enough evidence that we can see, we will consider things like this, or the Mavs. And if you don't want those load outs, its super simple to restrict. 2 6 Forum Rules • My YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug** Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Exorcet Posted September 10, 2021 Share Posted September 10, 2021 1 hour ago, Enduro14 said: Yes but a simulator should simulate realities and not what if Franken loads. Atleast that’s the way it was with Blackshark and A10c before this became dcs world. I feel the PK online crowd is taking the Sim down the wrong path. Granted I will concede that at-least ED has given us control via the Editor to deny franken loads… A simulator can do both, and I'd argue that it's healthy to do both, as long as one is clearly separated from the other. Simulation is a broad subject and it's not limited to historical accuracy. You can simulate things that have not happened in reality (happens everyday in engineering fields), even if they are extremely unlikely. With the loadout restrictions, everyone should be happy. If you don't think 4 HARM is realistic, the loadout can be limited to 2. 3 Awaiting: DCS F-15C Win 10 i5-9600KF 4.6 GHz 64 GB RAM RTX2080Ti 11GB -- Win 7 64 i5-6600K 3.6 GHz 32 GB RAM GTX970 4GB -- A-10C, F-5E, Su-27, F-15C, F-14B, F-16C missions in User Files Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ignition Posted September 10, 2021 Share Posted September 10, 2021 This option is the best choice. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SCPanda Posted September 10, 2021 Share Posted September 10, 2021 1 hour ago, NineLine said: I hope now we are not going to argue about the order of events? I think it's time to move on, we have given plenty of options for those that want this and those that don't, we are not going to do any sci-fi fantasy load-outs, but if there is enough evidence that we can see, we will consider things like this, or the Mavs. And if you don't want those load outs, its super simple to restrict. Yep. Time to move on. This is the best decision that suits everyone. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dee-Jay Posted September 10, 2021 Share Posted September 10, 2021 (edited) "it depends" situation" This is indeed very true and not only for the F-16. For instanse ... some C-130 can carry and drop GBU-12s. Edited September 10, 2021 by Dee-Jay Typo 1 ASUSTeK ROG MAXIMUS X HERO / Intel Core i5-8600K (4.6 GHz) / NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080 Ti FE 12GB / 32GB DDR4 Ballistix Elite 3200 MHz / Samsung SSD 970 EVO Plus 2TB / Be Quiet! Straight Power 11 1000W Platinum / Windows 10 Home 64-bit / HOTAS Cougar FSSB R1 (Warthog grip) / SIMPED / MFD Cougar / ViperGear ICP / SimShaker JetPad / Track IR 5 / Curved LED 27'' Monitor 1080p Samsung C27F396 / HP Reverb G2 VR Headset. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QuiGon Posted September 10, 2021 Author Share Posted September 10, 2021 (edited) 6 hours ago, Frederf said: "some Viper units" doesn't specify USAF or foreign Given the fact that ED specifically simulates a USAF/ANG Viper and stresses this all the time, I'm pretty sure they meant USAF Vipers when making this comment. 6 hours ago, Xavven said: It's clear ED is not going to implement Mavs of 4/6 without evidence I've not seen anyone requesting Mavs on 4/6 anyways. There was just some curiosity about the technical implication of Mavs on 4/6 if they are wired for HARMs, but no request for ED to allow Mavs there. Edited September 10, 2021 by QuiGon 1 Intel i7-12700K @ 8x5GHz+4x3.8GHz + 32 GB DDR5 RAM + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furiz Posted September 10, 2021 Share Posted September 10, 2021 17 minutes ago, QuiGon said: I've not seen anyone requesting Mavs on 4/6 anyways. There was just some curiosity about the technical implication of Mavs on 4/6 if they are wired for HARMs, but no request for ED to allow Mavs there. Exactly, For example, I'm curious why is it that we can load TER-9A on stations 3-4-6-7 but on stations 4 and 6 there can be only 1 GBU-12 and on 3 and 7 we can load 2 x GBU-12, at the same time we can load 3 CBU-97 with TER-9A on stations 4 and 6. Doesn't make sense that only one GBU-12 can be loaded on 4 and 6 then, right;D? If Mav can be loaded on 4 and 6 I want them to enable it, it gives a lot of loadout combinations, but if it can't then we shouldn't have them on those stations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QuiGon Posted September 10, 2021 Author Share Posted September 10, 2021 3 minutes ago, Furiz said: Exactly, For example, I'm curious why is it that we can load TER-9A on stations 3-4-6-7 but on stations 4 and 6 there can be only 1 GBU-12 and on 3 and 7 we can load 2 x GBU-12, at the same time we can load 3 CBU-97 with TER-9A on stations 4 and 6. Doesn't make sense that only one GBU-12 can be loaded on 4 and 6 then, right;D? The answer to this can be pretty simple: The USAF probably has made flight and seperation tests for tripple MK-82/CBUs, as this was probably important in the early years of the Viper at the end of the Cold War, when precision munitions were still pretty rare. When GBUs arrived for the Viper the USAF probably saw no need for double GBUs on the inner staions and thus hasn't done any flight and seperation tests for it. 3 Intel i7-12700K @ 8x5GHz+4x3.8GHz + 32 GB DDR5 RAM + Nvidia Geforce RTX 2080 (8 GB VRAM) + M.2 SSD + Windows 10 64Bit DCS Panavia Tornado (IDS) really needs to be a thing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Team BIGNEWY Posted September 10, 2021 ED Team Share Posted September 10, 2021 If we have evidence of it for the Mavericks we will reconsider, but we need to see evidence. Please PM me if you do. thanks 2 1 Forum rules - DCS Crashing? Try this first - Cleanup and Repair - Discord BIGNEWY#8703 - Youtube - Patch Status Windows 11, NVIDIA MSI RTX 3090, Intel® i9-10900K 3.70GHz, 5.30GHz Turbo, Corsair Hydro Series H150i Pro, 64GB DDR @3200, ASUS ROG Strix Z490-F Gaming, HP Reverb G2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
macedk Posted September 10, 2021 Share Posted September 10, 2021 I saw this question back in 1999 3 OS: Win10 home 64bit*MB: Asus Strix Z270F/ CPU: Intel I7 7700k /Ram:32gb_ddr4 GFX: Nvidia Asus 1080 8Gb Mon: Asus vg2448qe 24" Disk: SSD Stick: TM Warthog #1400/Saitek pro pedals/TIR5/TM MFDs [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wing Posted September 10, 2021 Share Posted September 10, 2021 (edited) There is no 1553 bus for stations 4&6 USAF blk 50. This means it’s not possible to launch 88s or 65s from 4&6. (You can carry, just not launch). What happened here, is ED trusted a “SME” without reviewing/finding a tech order to back it up. It’s as simple as this. The gameplay change is there now, and again that’s all fun and games. That’s not the point. The point earlier was that ED overstated what they have proof of. Edited September 10, 2021 by Wing www.v303rdFighterGroup.com | v303 FG Discord Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ED Team BIGNEWY Posted September 10, 2021 ED Team Share Posted September 10, 2021 5 minutes ago, Wing said: There is no 1553 bus for stations 4&6 USAF blk 50. This means it’s not possible to launch 88s or 65s from 4&6. (You can carry, just not launch). What happened here, is ED trusted a “SME” without reviewing/finding a tech order to back it up. It’s as simple as this. The gameplay change is there now, and again that’s all fun and games. That’s not the point. The point earlier was that ED overstated what they have proof of. That was the point, not what people carry. Everyone is getting distracted by this. We have been over this more than once. I have told you we have proof, and I can not share it with you, you need to accept that and move on. Thanks 5 2 Forum rules - DCS Crashing? Try this first - Cleanup and Repair - Discord BIGNEWY#8703 - Youtube - Patch Status Windows 11, NVIDIA MSI RTX 3090, Intel® i9-10900K 3.70GHz, 5.30GHz Turbo, Corsair Hydro Series H150i Pro, 64GB DDR @3200, ASUS ROG Strix Z490-F Gaming, HP Reverb G2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Big.Biggs Posted September 10, 2021 Share Posted September 10, 2021 54 minutes ago, Wing said: There is no 1553 bus for stations 4&6 USAF blk 50. This means it’s not possible to launch 88s or 65s from 4&6. (You can carry, just not launch). What happened here, is ED trusted a “SME” without reviewing/finding a tech order to back it up. It’s as simple as this. The gameplay change is there now, and again that’s all fun and games. That’s not the point. The point earlier was that ED overstated what they have proof of. That was the point, not what people carry. Everyone is getting distracted by this. Your incessant quest to be right and more in the know than everyone is embarrassing. Go on photoshop and print ya a nice participation certificate….. 5 I9 (5Ghz turbo)2080ti 64Gb 3200 ram. 3 drives. A sata 2tb storage and 2 M.2 drives. 1 is 1tb, 1 is 500gb. Valve Index, Virpil t50 cm2 stick, t50 base and v3 throttle w mini stick. MFG crosswind pedals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twistking Posted September 10, 2021 Share Posted September 10, 2021 (edited) @BIGNEWY have you considered to somehow explain the realism aspects of certain restrictions to the user through the UI? The way i see it, the current UI (judging from the pic posted by wags) implies, that restriction to each weapon is equally valid (froma realism point of view), however there is obviously a difference between restricting use of aim120c and restricting HARMS on 4/6 for realism aspects. It would be nice if the UI could speak to the user in a way that allows to understand realism implication of certain setups. This could be done by tooltips, or simply by having the most restricted setup the default (no HAMRS on 4/6), so that users would have to enable the stations and by that understand that they are leaving the super realistic safe space. they could then make their own research or simply roll with it... Edited September 10, 2021 by twistking 2 My personal wishlist after half a decade with DCS: https://forum.dcs.world/topic/184968-my-personal-wishlist-after-half-a-decade-with-dcs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furiz Posted September 10, 2021 Share Posted September 10, 2021 (edited) 4 minutes ago, twistking said: @BIGNEWY have you considered to somehow explain the realism aspects of certain restrictions to the user through the UI? The way i see it, the current UI (judging from the pic posted by wags) implies, that restriction to each weapon is equally valid (froma realism point of view), however there is obviously a difference between restricting use of aim120c and restricting HARMS on 4/6 for realism aspects. It would be nice if the UI could speak to the user in a way that allows to understand realism implication of certain setups. This could be done by tooltips, or simply by having the most restricted setup the default (no HAMRS on 4/6), so that users would have to enable the stations and by that understand that they are leaving the super realistic safe space. they could then make their own research or simpyl roll with it... What do you mean, realism, its realistic 4 harm or 2 harm both is realistic, what are you trying to say? Cause some Vipers had 4 and some had 2 harm, its very well explained. Edited September 10, 2021 by Furiz 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twistking Posted September 10, 2021 Share Posted September 10, 2021 (edited) 7 minutes ago, Furiz said: What do you mean, realism, its realistic 4 harm or 2 harm both is realistic, what are you trying to say? Cause some Vipers had 4 and some had 2 harm. I think it would be helpful for new user (or for us in many years, when we have forgotten HarmGate), if they could understand this fact through the UI. Some Vipers have 2, some have 4 Harm. But all Vipers can have 120Cs. The interface however implies, that some Vipers can have 120Cs and some don't. The interface should make clear that restriction of 120Cs (as an example) has other implications than restriction of HARM. That does not change that HARM on 4/6 can be realistic. Edited September 10, 2021 by twistking 1 My personal wishlist after half a decade with DCS: https://forum.dcs.world/topic/184968-my-personal-wishlist-after-half-a-decade-with-dcs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Furiz Posted September 10, 2021 Share Posted September 10, 2021 Can we stop over complicating? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twistking Posted September 10, 2021 Share Posted September 10, 2021 (edited) 33 minutes ago, Furiz said: Can we stop over complicating? I'd argue that good UI can make things less complicated. edit: ps: Just make the default the restricted setup, so HARM on 4/6 is easily understood as optional. Not unrealistic, but optional. Really too complicated? Edited September 10, 2021 by twistking typo 3 My personal wishlist after half a decade with DCS: https://forum.dcs.world/topic/184968-my-personal-wishlist-after-half-a-decade-with-dcs Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hobel Posted September 10, 2021 Share Posted September 10, 2021 (edited) 13 hours ago, Enduro14 said: Yes but a simulator should simulate realities and not what if Franken loads. Atleast that’s the way it was with Blackshark and A10c before this became dcs world. I feel the PK online crowd is taking the Sim down the wrong path. Granted I will concede that at-least ED has given us control via the Editor to deny franken loads… We can simulate large and modern wars in dcs. And in a big war, things become possible that have no use in peacetime. So if an f16 can carry a certain armament, it can also fire it. Then the missing hardware that makes this possible is retrofitted without further ado. Those who disagree can continue to destroy T72s, jeeps and tents with the A10. Because I am not aware that it has ever shot at a T90. We have that opportunity to do that in dcs now. Of course, it should all be within reason and I believe that an f16 with 4 HARMs does just that. Edited September 10, 2021 by Hobel 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColinM9991 Posted September 10, 2021 Share Posted September 10, 2021 (edited) Can't believe this is still going. Both sides have gotten what they've asked for (and then some, benefitting the cold war servers) yet there are still problems. Never change, DCS community. Edited September 10, 2021 by ColinM9991 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Big.Biggs Posted September 10, 2021 Share Posted September 10, 2021 (edited) Edited September 10, 2021 by Mr. Big.Biggs Not helpful 1 I9 (5Ghz turbo)2080ti 64Gb 3200 ram. 3 drives. A sata 2tb storage and 2 M.2 drives. 1 is 1tb, 1 is 500gb. Valve Index, Virpil t50 cm2 stick, t50 base and v3 throttle w mini stick. MFG crosswind pedals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dawgboy Posted September 10, 2021 Share Posted September 10, 2021 (edited) 5 hours ago, ColinM9991 said: Can't believe this is still going. Both sides have gotten what they've asked for yet there are still problems. Never change, DCS community. Yeah. We've reached a compromise, but we still want to continue arguing the need for a compromise in the first place. Sigh... Edited September 10, 2021 by Dawgboy 6 The only time you have too much fuel is when you're on fire. ============================= Intel Core i7 5930K 3.5GHz, 32Gb RAM// Radeon RX Vega // SSD only // VKB STECS Mini Plus Throttle / TM Warthog FCS / Saitek Combat Rudder Pedals / Physical Cockpit // TrackIR or VR (HP R-G2)// Win10Pro 64bit // Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gierasimov Posted September 10, 2021 Share Posted September 10, 2021 1 hour ago, Wing said: There is no 1553 bus for stations 4&6 USAF blk 50. This means it’s not possible to launch 88s or 65s from 4&6. (You can carry, just not launch). What happened here, is ED trusted a “SME” without reviewing/finding a tech order to back it up. It’s as simple as this. The gameplay change is there now, and again that’s all fun and games. That’s not the point. The point earlier was that ED overstated what they have proof of. Hello. You are apparently the B-52H Dedicated Crew Chief, which is really nice. I have found a thread on the similar (if not the same) topic where a person claims to have 8 years experience loading up HARMS on F-16C Viper and says that all stations are fully weapon ready but stations 4&6 were typically not loaded as it would mean longer mission (finding emitters to attack) with less fuel. Long story short, it was not practical but possible - and why would you load just to carry in a combat mission ? Do you by any chance accept the fact that you could be wrong here, and just live with the fact that ED decided to implement a solution that ultimately closes this topic? 3 Intel i7-13700KF :: ROG STRIX Z790-A GAMING WIFI D4 :: Corsair Vengeance LPX 64GB :: MSI RTX 4080 Gaming X Trio :: VKB Gunfighter MK.III MCG Ultimate :: VPC MongoosT-50 CM3 :: non-VR :: single player :: open beta Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts