Ground attack vs Air to Air

[Prophet]

http://www.thewarthogpen.com/fact_sheet.html

 

:megalol:

 

/thread

 

That is one of the funniest things I have ever read.

 

:notworthy:

[TwoLate]

That was a real funny article. had my sides hurting.

[Mercury]

http://www.thewarthogpen.com/fact_sheet.html

 

:megalol:

 

/thread

 

:megalol: hehehe.. ED should give the guy who wrote this article a free copy. He deserves it. :P

[HitchHikingFlatlander]

^+1

 

My favorite " It can survive having a 2002 VW Beetle launched at it at extremely high velocity by a Russian-made Volkswagen Cannon"

 

Ain't that the truth? Runner up:

 

" launching missiles shaped like those giant oversized boxing gloves from the cartoons which give enemy commanders the middle finger before punching them in the balls, and then detonating with enough force to create a volcanic eruption on Mars"

 

Derka Derka that sucka!

[Sarge55]

My favorite;

 

"those hotshot flyboy prissy fighter pilots get a goddamned medal, a bj from a supermodel, and the rank of "Flying Ace" after only five ****ing kills! These Desert Storm A-10 pilots were racking up those kinds of numbers on their bathroom breaks. When it comes to no-bullshit death from above badassitude, the A-10 Warthog is where it's at."

[Callsign.Vega]

Pretty good article, but I don't think anyone ever doubted the A-10's bad-ass'ness. Just to me, it seem's like running scripted missions (no dynamic campaign) against convoys of enemy armor consisting of about three lines of AI code, in a world with lackluster terrain (no line of sight check even through trees), seems like the replay value might be low. No offense to ED.

 

I will purchase DCS: A-10C to support the Genre but I would definitely like to see a multi-role fighter for the next add-on in which you can move mud and mix it up fighter style multi-player.

[nomdeplume]

Well the credits for FC2 suggest the vehicles were programmed by one or two people, so I think they're pretty decent given that. It does surprise me a little bit that they haven't been given more attention, given that the first DCS game and the next to be released are entirely focused on the ground war. But I guess there was an awful lot of other things that needed to be done, too.

 

However it has been said that there's improvements coming in this area, so I'm sure DCS: Warthog will make it easier to make compelling scenarios. I think there was mention of being able to change vehicle waypoints using triggers, which would open up a lot of possibilities.

 

I think trees being purely aesthetic is almost a non-issue for the 'hog. It bugged me in Black Shark, but not in FC2.

 

I'm also hoping infantry will be fleshed out a bit more so counter-insurgency support missions are a bit more feasible. Maybe some mortars?

[TeeJay82]

i wonder why the russians havent adapted the ka50 to use vikhirs on the inboard pylons and aa on the outer... or 4x8 vikhirs... a hell of a lot more effective tbh :P

[GGTharos]

More effective against what? They barely get to shoot at 4 targets, never-mind 16.

 

i wonder why the russians havent adapted the ka50 to use vikhirs on the inboard pylons and aa on the outer... or 4x8 vikhirs... a hell of a lot more effective tbh :P

[TeeJay82]

its just me not utilizing the ka50 fully, but i never mind using inboard pylons... wtf are bombs good for? (its easier to take a dump from a 11 story building and try to hit a bucket) and unguided spagetti straw rokkits good for? ( i have more luck with throwing small rocks at a wasp 5 meters away) Naaah i prefer to stay as low as possible, as faraway as possible, use up all my vikhr`s, and sneak into gun range and poke down the infantry and soft targets if any. No high flying, no RWR bitching at me and no manual fire on rocket launcher family ammo waste mode.

[TeeJay82]

and same with A-10s... why cant they carry AGM88s instead of dumb mk82s/84s? why does a huge flying 30mm gun need to have those? they are suicide weapons unless they are dropped from a high altitude, wich again makes em even more inaccurate.. I SAY A10 LOADOUT as follows:

 

2x Harms,

12x AGM 64d`s

2x Sidewhiners (OMG that growling tone gets annoying)

2x ecms

and 9 rocket pods for further mastrubation when using the gun

[GGTharos]

Yeah, that's you. Real life is a little different ... weapons require supporting equipment, and they have a cost; the dumber the weapon, the cheaper it is. They also have a specific effect.

If you happen to not know or understand what they are to be used for and how, how's that the real aircraft's problem?

[TeeJay82]

Yeah, that's you.

 

as you probably guessed, im no IRL fighter pilot :D

[GGTharos]

Neither am I, but I do put a little effort into understanding things when the sim bills itself realistic. ;)

Not everyone likes to do it that way of course, and that's fine ... just so long as we understand that you're not getting a toy version of the aircraft unless you switch to arcade mode ;)

[TeeJay82]

ok question.

 

is the loadout manager for FC 2.0 A-10 fully realistic? can you fit everything that an IRL a10 can use without mods?

 

just fired away since it was talk about realism.. no rudeness :)

[TeeJay82]

anyways.. about the prev posts, i completly agree with you :) i was just adressing my own perfect fantasy payload that suites my style of play :)

[GGTharos]

Hehe, no problem.

For the FC 2.0 manager, I suspect you may be able to fit more onto your A-10 than you should be able to. I have not looked at close enough, but the LO/FC series always has some little quirks like that, being a light sim.

[159th_Viper]

its just me not utilizing the ka50 fully, but i never mind using inboard pylons......

 

External fuel tanks ;)

 

Tanks, Vikhrs, an OPFOR base that needs plundering and Fast-Jet Jockeys' Girlfriends that need ravaging afterwards :D

[GGTharos]

External fuel tanks ;)

 

Tanks, Vikhrs, an OPFOR base that needs plundering and Fast-Jet Jockeys' Girlfriends that need ravaging afterwards :D

 

They're too fast for you slow-movers ;)

[159th_Viper]

Touché

 

:megalol:

[TeeJay82]

External fuel tanks ;)

 

Tanks, Vikhrs, an OPFOR base that needs plundering and Fast-Jet Jockeys' Girlfriends that need ravaging afterwards :D

 

nah... ive yet to play a mission where i run out of fuel... 100%internal, no inner pylon for better agility, and ze good stuff on the outer :thumbup:

[TeeJay82]

considered 50% internal, and drop tanks, but hey, we dont wanna waste military assets here do we :P 2x ECM would be better there

[Callsign.Vega]

I think two pilot aircraft like the F-15E and AH-64 would stink as a DCS title. I'd love for the next one to be a single seat multi-role fighter.

 

5th Gen fighters are out, they are too classified. As for 4 to 4.5 Gen multi-role fighters, I'd love to fly any of these: F-16 block 60, F/A-18E, Dassault Rafale-C, Mig-29/35, Su-27/35, JAS 39 Gripen and the Eurofighter Typhoon.

[TheProphet]

Not gonna happen either, 4.5 Gen fighter are VERY classified as well, prepare youreslf for F-16C Block 50/52 or better, an F/A-18C.

[Exorcet]

I agree on the two seat aircraft, it would be difficult to do it right.

 

As for the next DCS, I'd love F-22's, EF-2000's, and Su-35's, but it's probably not happening.

 

I hear a lot of talk about the F-16, but it just feels kind of redundant to me as I have Falcon, and I'm more of a fan of the bigger jets (aka F-15). I really hope that the F-15 is the next DCS, even if it's the A with Sparrows.

 

I'd love to buy every DCS, as I'm sure such a complex sim would make flying anything fun, but I have limited funds so I'm going to have to hold out for the fighter module(s).