my wallet is ready for Eurofighter, but eurofighter not ready for wallet

Slithy původně napsal:

Very excited for this.

A question I've seen bounce around the community though is will the 30mm rounds from the M230 have a blast radius (I think we're all aware that fragmentation is out of the question as that would be a nightmare for you to program and on our systems) that will kill infantry or will it be like the Mi-24 where you need to land the round on the infantry's hit box to kill them?

Someone at the forums made good guide how to make the fragmentation thing work. It was then bignewy who went to insult the person and then didn't apology but finally deleted all the posts even when everything had been by their own forum rules. But it is clear that ED doesn't want constructive discussion in their forums how to improve the DCS World. When people was astound about it, bignewy threaten everyone from bans and deleted the whole thread.

Fercyful původně napsal:

Great to have a new high poly bomber in game :horns: Thanks! Please next ones B-52 and Bear :lunar2019piginablanket:

A game that has so small maps around 500 km at the longest edges, it doesn't make much sense to have any strategical aircraft in. A 1200 km and it would start to be somewhat sensible as you need about 800-900 km for detection distance to have interceptors in the air so they can have any change to intercept cruise missiles with those hundreds of kilometers strike distances.

So what these models gets used is to have them cruising at 18 km altitude, appear on the edge of the map, release ordinance 50 km inside and then turn away and fly back out of the map. You just had nice couple minute flight period inside a map and rest is outside the map on flat lands without anything.

bignewy původně napsal:

Lima původně napsal:

No pre-purchase. Shame.
So I imagine the summer that was talked about was the southern hemisphere one. Got it.

we said planned for end of summer and we are here now, we are close to a pre-order, just a little longer to wait. thanks

I'll literally die of anxiety!

Popping 30mm rounds at infantry was funny!

airHead151 původně napsal:

People be like: A P A C H E
me : First playable strategic bomber

"The H-6J is one of the first high polygon model AI bombers in DCS World"
Not playable.

It would be cool to have high quality bigger planes though.

High quality bigger targets.

High quality bigger explosions (namely the MiG-21Bis RN-24 and RN-28 tactical nuclear bombs)

just give me the dynamic campaign as early access pre alpha version, please.

Gib stingers the longbow had them

Mobius 1 původně napsal:

Gib stingers the longbow had them

The AH-64 has always had capability to mount stingers, but USA doesn't mount them for doctrinal reasons as they don't operate currently in any country where defenders would have air superiority. Instead stinger lugs, they have mounted instead the UV sensors for missile launch detection. The crew chiefs has said that they can swap those things in matter of hours if so wanted but as there is no use and benefit to mount stingers because pilots don't even train to use them because there is no need to use them by doctrine then they don't. Same way pilots have no training for NOE flying and perform all the apache sneak and peek tactics because they are used against freedom fighters so it is flying at high altitude (300+ meters) and just cruising around.

Based to ED arguments to follow only doctrinal simulation hence stingers are not to come to Apache, then they need to as well drop the NOE operations and all such as pilots don't train for it. But likely it is again double standards that ED will pull out just to make what they want regardless it is against their word.

https://www.fighterpilotpodcast.com/episodes/090-ah-64-apache/

Don´t argue with doctrines and what is actually used or done in the real world.
If this really was a thing for ED, they wouldn´t make the KA50 with 6 Hardpoints :) In the end it´s just what makes profit.
Speaking of it - shut up and take my money.

Jel původně napsal:

Don´t argue with doctrines and what is actually used or done in the real world.
If this really was a thing for ED, they wouldn´t make the KA50 with 6 Hardpoints :)

It is the thing. ED doesn't support things because real world doctrine doesn't support it, even if aircraft would be capable for it. This example was reason again for the F-16C getting HARM missiles launch capability back in stations 4 and 6 in last patch, as previously they removed that and left only carrying capability because they got couple SME to tell that is how they are wired. Now they got another set of SME to tell that it is incorrect as doctrine is not same for everyone and some does have the wiring to launch them as well, so ED came up with a solution because people were constantly going back and worth that what is proper by history and technicalities that it is a mission editor setting per pylon that editor choose what is the carrying capability. That was after the release of F-16C one of most argued topic.

The same thing is coming for A-10C II that is now simulated in a version that should offer the Sniper XR targeting pod, but likely it doesn't get it as it is only given for a F-16C because it was promised for it.
The Harrier, Hornet, A-10C, Apache and Viper all have used APKWS rockets at the year that they are modeling but ED doesn't give them because doctrine was not to have every unit utilizing them. And all of them are capable utilize them properly, but don't let technical and historical facts to slap ED backside because they just follow one fantasy doctrine.

In the end it´s just what makes profit.
Speaking of it - shut up and take my money.

You make more profit by following technical qualifications instead fantasy limitations and then having double standards that you have plane from 1992 flying with a plane from 2007 and you don't give the 1992 one the weapons it would have technically available in 1992 configuration but at 2007 mission.
ED arguments are double standard that you can find that in one thread they say reason X2 being valid, but in another module thread the X2 is not anymore valid. Either stick to one logic or then don't do development work. When the manufacturer moves goalposts it is not good for business but there is one born every minute that will be throwing their money at ED regardless their double standards and invalid logic.

BlestPenguin původně napsal:

airHead151 původně napsal:

People be like: A P A C H E
me : First playable strategic bomber

I was surprised too! A naval one at that

Its not playable it states that its an AI bomber