Modern Air combat - Page 17 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-17-2018, 11:50 AM   #161
lmp
ED Translator
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 916
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by falcon_120 View Post
Sorry but what I'm asking is not putting fictional weapons, rather adding realistic configuration of existing weapons in planes that can carry them; simply that because the cold war finished and lack of funds arised such integration was not done in time.
The early MiG-29 and Su-27 variants that we have in the game never carried any PGMs. There's no way to realistically "add PGM capability" to either of these jets without building entirely new versions of them with entirely new avionics and systems (think Su-25 vs Su-25T level differences at least). There's much more to it than just "integrating" a new weapon system. Looking at how ED approaches this project (in a minimum-effort way) this is not going to happen.

The alternative is what.. to add a fictional HUD mode? "Pretend" there's a laser designator somewhere on the jet (where?) or that the IPV can display the imagery from the Kh-29T? That's the sort of sci-fi approach that'll get those jets banned from MP servers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by falcon_120 View Post
Am i wrong or the KA50 is no more than a prototype which never entered operational service (And i mean being active in a fighting squadron)?
The Ka-50 in our configuration existed. How much service it saw is irrelevant, it is a recreation of an existing, documented aircraft.

Quote:
Originally Posted by falcon_120 View Post
Don't we also have a Harrier that is able to launch AGM122 ARM when this weapong never entered in active service?
AGM-122 was in active service, it is simply no longer used (stocks have been depleted). Again - existing, documented.

We have fictional loadouts in other planes (MiG-21 for example), which I refuse to use, but that doesn't justify making things even worse.

Quote:
Originally Posted by falcon_120 View Post
and as far as i know there is no splitted community because of that
I know people who barely tolerate FC3 planes now because there's no alternative. Those people will not include MAC versions of aircraft which have full fidelity versions in their games.

I want a red fast attack jet (preferably in full fidelity) as much the next guy, but not like this.
lmp is offline  
Old 07-17-2018, 12:43 PM   #162
draconus
Member
 
draconus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Poland
Posts: 374
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by falcon_120 View Post
I'm totally ok with MAC as it is, although i would love some little additions to current aircraft like updated PBR texture on cockpits (already announced), NVG for those who have it (come on! Thats simple ED) and/or some more weapons like aim9x on the F15 or PGM in the mig29s/su27 to balance somehow the multirole capacity of the red side (even though not totally realistic cause it was only done to some export version).

That would have little development time but a great acceptance to the already existing FC3 community.
No, no, no, not acceptable. 9X is year 2003 - our F-15C is from 90s. And what balance you're talking about?! Fight same aircrafts w/same payload vs each other - there you have it.
draconus is offline  
Old 07-17-2018, 01:25 PM   #163
falcon_120
Member
 
falcon_120's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Barcelona,Spain
Posts: 683
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by lmp View Post
The early MiG-29 and Su-27 variants that we have in the game never carried any PGMs. There's no way to realistically "add PGM capability" to either of these jets without building entirely new versions of them with entirely new avionics and systems (think Su-25 vs Su-25T level differences at least). There's much more to it than just "integrating" a new weapon system. Looking at how ED approaches this project (in a minimum-effort way) this is not going to happen.

The alternative is what.. to add a fictional HUD mode? "Pretend" there's a laser designator somewhere on the jet (where?) or that the IPV can display the imagery from the Kh-29T? That's the sort of sci-fi approach that'll get those jets banned from MP servers.
I know the early variant we have never had that, that is why like a brilliant idea simulating one that do have that possibility without creating a new plane, we have a good example with J11. R77 capable still being the same plane. Very used in multiplayer and a nice addition to the red side (which i ever hardly flight btw). Up to which point is tat realistic? As far as i know china did nott receive RVV-AE until at least 2005 but we have it in game.

So what if this J11 or the Su27 is able to carry an KH58 but only fired in Self defense mode? No need for new avionics. And the KH29T? Is so hard to pretend that Su27 can employ this weapon through the MFD? I quite sure that this exist, just not at operational level, just like the KA50 or the AGM122. I will later look some information on how many SU27 where able to use AG weapons around 2000s, we might be surprised.

Don't get me wrong I like realism, I would love to see something like a SU30MKI simulated so we do have PGM capability but i also dont want ED to spend resources away from their roadmap, thats why i'm asking for little adaptations on the current fleet, without going to far.

Regarding the AIM9x for example, is up to missiion designer to decide which year we are fighting in. If we are in 2010 then we have r77 flankers and aim9x eagles in the server. We are fighting in 1991? ok so just sparrows and R27s. That is as realistic as you want it to make it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lmp View Post
The Ka-50 in our configuration existed. How much service it saw is irrelevant, it is a recreation of an existing, documented aircraft.


AGM-122 was in active service, it is simply no longer used (stocks have been depleted). Again - existing, documented.
Following the same argument, Su27 or mig29s carrying PGM existed, they would be a recreation of an existing modernisation programme (That was probably finished somewhere around 2000 up to 2016).

Quote:
Originally Posted by lmp View Post
We have fictional loadouts in other planes (MiG-21 for example), which I refuse to use, but that doesn't justify making things even worse.


I know people who barely tolerate FC3 planes now because there's no alternative. Those people will not include MAC versions of aircraft which have full fidelity versions in their games.

I want a red fast attack jet (preferably in full fidelity) as much the next guy, but not like this.
Fair enough, but remember that has been stated many times that any modern russian thing is not gonna happen for political security reasons, what i'm asking for is the closest we can get, which is similar to what we already have BTW. FC3 is not a close representation of anything. The F15c and Su27 are miles away of the real counterparts.
falcon_120 is offline  
Old 07-17-2018, 01:38 PM   #164
falcon_120
Member
 
falcon_120's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Barcelona,Spain
Posts: 683
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by draconus View Post
No, no, no, not acceptable. 9X is year 2003 - our F-15C is from 90s. And what balance you're talking about?! Fight same aircrafts w/same payload vs each other - there you have it.
I'm referring to balance in multirole/mission capabilities, nothing else. I dont want artificial balance of dissimilar planes (e.g. f15 vs su27).

Enviado desde mi SM-G950F mediante Tapatalk
falcon_120 is offline  
Old 07-17-2018, 02:25 PM   #165
SkateZilla
Moderator/ED Testers Team
 
SkateZilla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Virginia Beach
Posts: 18,205
Default

Debate and Discussion is great, but lets keep it on topic of MODERN AIR COMBAT Release,

And not Debate over capabilities of Air-frames via Upgrade Programs etc.
__________________
Windows 7 Ult. 64, HAF922, FX8350 @ 5.31GHz H100 Cooled, 16GB DDR3-2133 GSkill,
2x R7970 Lightnings Crossfired @ 1.1/6.0GHz, Creative XFi Plat. Fatal1ty Champion,
3x ASUS VS248HP + Hanns·G HZ201HPB + Acer AL2002 (5760x1080+1600x900+1680x1050)
TM Warthog HOTAS, TM MFDs, CH Fighterstick, Pro Throttle, CH Pro Pedals, TrackIR4 Pro
SkateZilla is offline  
Old 07-18-2018, 07:15 AM   #166
Fri13
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 2,452
Default

Was it already mentioned that how you can buy the MAC?
- ALL IN BUNDLE
- All individually
- Downgraded versions from Clickable modules with special prices


--
I usually post from my phone so please excuse any typos, inappropriate punctuation and capitalization, missing words and general lack of cohesion and sense in my posts.....
__________________
i7-8700k, 32GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 2x 1080Ti SLI 11GB, Oculus CV1.
i7-8700k, 16GB 2666Mhz DDR4, 1080Ti 11GB, 27" 4K, 60" HDR 4K.
Fri13 is offline  
Old 07-18-2018, 07:31 AM   #167
Nirvi
ED Translator / Moderator
 
Nirvi's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: Switzerland
Posts: 1,545
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fri13 View Post
Was it already mentioned that how you can buy the MAC?
- ALL IN BUNDLE
- All individually
- Downgraded versions from Clickable modules with special prices
Just like Flaming Cliffs 3 now.
- Complete bundle with all planes.
- Single plane
Nirvi is offline  
Old 07-18-2018, 10:12 AM   #168
Saintan
Junior Member
 
Saintan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: Gander, NL, Canada
Posts: 62
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nirvi View Post
Just like Flaming Cliffs 3 now.
- Complete bundle with all planes.
- Single plane
Plus "Flaming Cliffs 3 owners can purchase the MAC pack at a great discount."; quoted from the official post.

And "Purchase MAC aircraft individually or as a pack at a reduced price."; just as FC3 costs less than the sum of its individual plane modules.
__________________
Wayne Saint
Gander, Newfoundland, Canada
"Do Unto Others BEFORE They Do Unto You..."
Apache, Comanche, Falcon, Hind, Intruder, Lightning II
Nighthawk, Rafale, Raptor, Strike Eagle, Tornado, Typhoon


Last edited by Saintan; 07-18-2018 at 10:15 AM.
Saintan is offline  
Old 07-18-2018, 10:24 AM   #169
Brixmis
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: On An Island
Posts: 1,682
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by HiJack View Post
Understood. Can we please have a fully simulated MiG-29K?

No no no - we need that Su-25T as a full fidelity module!

Wht we don't seem to include the Su-25T as FC3, just because it comes free with DCS World is unknown to me - afaic I always include it in FC3 in my mind.

PS - I'll definitely be buying this, as I like FC3 planes for various reasons - the main one being quick testing of missions, PC performance (i.e. terrain mods and options adjustments) etc.
__________________
Pictorial Guides

Last edited by Brixmis; 07-18-2018 at 10:30 AM.
Brixmis is offline  
Old 07-18-2018, 10:38 AM   #170
draconus
Member
 
draconus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Location: Poland
Posts: 374
Default

Question on missions compatibility and availability for MAC: I assume FC3 aircrafts will have the same SP missions and campaigns as they do now. What about those FCfied modules? Will they have the missions updated for compatibility and their lowered capabilities? Will they be able to run the missions already designed for corresponding FF modules despite not being able to hear radio comms or follow some orders?
draconus is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

All times are GMT. The time now is 05:16 PM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.