F-15E? - Page 11 - ED Forums
 


Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-11-2015, 07:31 PM   #101
RoflSeal
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 306
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mjmorrow View Post
...And the AIM-120 can just as easily be added by the scenario designer. I have seen the AIM-120 employed against an Mig-15, without provocation, on free flight server, where the server operator expressly forbade the use of weapons in writing. Express written bans on the employment of the AIM-120 does not prevent the use of the AIM-120. Show me the populated DCS multiplayer servers where the AIM-120 is consistently left out of missions. If the AIM-120 is available for the F-15E in a mission, you are going to guarantee me that F-15E players are going to stick to the AIM-7, so the mirage sim pilots and F-14 sim pilots can have a word in edgewise? They will part with an available advantage sanctioned in game, just to be nice guys and gals? if I don't carry my 520D, so players like Hadwell can have a better chance of getting in close and making a kill, the other players on my team are going to likely do the same, follow my lead, or are they going to tell me that they paid for their Mirage 2000c add-on and will do as they please, within what is permitted in the mission, including use the 530D on a parakeet, if they can do so? I can count on uniform sportsman like behavior, in an environment where that behavior is not required? As the saying goes, "Opportunity makes the thief and the thief without opportunity is resigned to a life of an honest person. " I like my mission planners and multiplayer players resigned to a life of SARH only DCS level ASM/ PFM and ASM/EFM add-ons.
Well, that is the mission designers fault.

Every free flight server I have been on, I cannot mount anything on the hardpoints except smoke pods.
RoflSeal is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2015, 12:16 AM   #102
Sierra99
ED Testers Team
 
Sierra99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: Orlando Florida
Posts: 2,209
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mjmorrow View Post
...And the AIM-120 can just as easily be added by the scenario designer. I have seen the AIM-120 employed against an Mig-15, without provocation, on free flight server, where the server operator expressly forbade the use of weapons in writing. Express written bans on the employment of the AIM-120 does not prevent the use of the AIM-120. Show me the populated DCS multiplayer servers where the AIM-120 is consistently left out of missions. If the AIM-120 is available for the F-15E in a mission, you are going to guarantee me that F-15E players are going to stick to the AIM-7, so the mirage sim pilots and F-14 sim pilots can have a word in edgewise? They will part with an available advantage sanctioned in game, just to be nice guys and gals? if I don't carry my 520D, so players like Hadwell can have a better chance of getting in close and making a kill, the other players on my team are going to likely do the same, follow my lead, or are they going to tell me that they paid for their Mirage 2000c add-on and will do as they please, within what is permitted in the mission, including use the 530D on a parakeet, if they can do so? I can count on uniform sportsman like behavior, in an environment where that behavior is not required? As the saying goes, "Opportunity makes the thief and the thief without opportunity is resigned to a life of an honest person. " I like my mission planners and multiplayer players resigned to a life of SARH only DCS level ASM/ PFM and ASM/EFM add-ons.
I gaurentee you have control over the content of servers you create...And the choice of what server you decide to participate on...beyond that basically hobbling the game to suit your desires is the most childish thing I've seen in a long time. Back to the subject...

I don't own the L-39. Can someone who does tell me how the dual player functions seem to be implimented. Is it a work in progress or pretty stable.
__________________

Primary Computer
ASUS Z390-P, i7-9700K CPU @ 5.0Ghz, 32GB Patriot Viper Steel DDR 4 @ 3600Mhz, ZOTAC GeForce 1070 Ti AMP Extreme, Samsung 970 EVO M.2 NVMe drives (1Tb & 500 Gb), Windows 10 Professional, Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS, Thrustmaster Warthog Stick, Thrustmaster Cougar Throttle, Cougar MFDs x3, Saitek Combat Rudder Pedals and TrackIR 5.

-={TAC}=-DCS Server
Gigabyte GA-Z68XP-UD3, i7-3770K CPU @ 3.90GHz, 32GB G.SKILL Ripjaws DDR3 @ 1600Mhz, ZOTAC GeForce® GTX 970.
Sierra99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2015, 12:22 AM   #103
Sweep
Senior Member
 
Sweep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: South 'Jersey, USA
Posts: 1,283
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sierra99 View Post
(...)
I don't own the L-39. Can someone who does tell me how the dual player functions seem to be implimented. Is it a work in progress or pretty stable.
I haven't really tried much of the dual seat besides slamming the IFR blackout hood down on my squad-mates.

I'd say its great for a WIP control model...

Darn it, this thread makes me REALLY want a Strike Eagle!

Thanks guys
__________________
"Salt Shaker" - Long live v1.2.2, home of the 10 minute flight
Sweep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2015, 05:07 AM   #104
mvsgas
Veteran
 
mvsgas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Phoenix AZ
Posts: 8,343
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Home Fries View Post
The F-14 is not AMRAAM capable. The USN chose to fund the FLIR instead of the AIM-120 upgrade, so the only ARH missile the Tomcat has is the Phoenix. The Phoenix wasn't carried when knowingly going up against fighters because the palettes reduced the maneuverability of the F-14.
That's cool, but I was talking about the AIM-54. I'm not arguing how the F-14 employ the missile. Simply saying the AIM-54 makes the F-14 a non SARH only aircraft. That was my only point.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sierra99 View Post
Everyone seems twisted up over what variant of F-16s used AMMRAMs...I'm not that worried about OCA/DCA because the Air Forces uses F-16s for SEAD and strike more than CAP.

I'm looking for ANY version of the with the Harm Targeting System (HTS) and associated goodies. Block 52 one would be nice but I just don't care as long as we can get the HTS.

I'm gonna toss this out there for everyone to noodle while I am at work. DCS is about fidelity, realism, simulating the real thing. it's not an "Arcade game" in the traditional sense of the word.

If you want an idea of what might be coming to DCS in the future...I'd look at what AI Aircraft have the nicest exterior models...Compare the level of detail of the F-15 / F-16 / F-18 with some of the planes NOT being talked about on wish lists.

Some are pretty detailed for just an AI aircraft. Just my 2 cents.

Sierra
AFAIK, the only versions of the F-16 that use the AN/ASQ-213 HARM Targeting Systems (HTS) initially where USAF F-16C block 50/52 (AKA F-16CJ now converted to F-16CM). Now, after the Common Configuration Implementation Program (CCIP) USAF F-16C block 40 to 52 can carry the HTS. Other AGM-88 capable F-16 (Block 20, 30, 32, 50, 52, 52+) only carry the missile and use other methods of employment.

Finally, I would like to ask, what do you guys like about the F-15E in particular if it where to be a module?
__________________
Quote:
Q:The internet says...
A:The internet is wrong.
EvilBivol-1
https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php...2&postcount=51


CPU=AMD Ryzen 5 3600, Mo/Bo= Gygabite X570 AORUS Elite, Memory Corsair vengeance LPX DDR4 3200 32gb, 500g Samsung 970 evo pro, WD blue 3D NAND 2 TB SATA III, video card=Gigabyte RTX 2070, 8gb gddr 6, EVGA SuperNOVA 1000 G+, Cooler Master NR600 Masterbox, Joystick=Thrustmaster T-flight Stick X, Track IR, Win10 64
mvsgas is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2015, 05:15 AM   #105
Dudikoff
Senior Member
 
Dudikoff's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Croatia / Lebanon
Posts: 2,487
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mjmorrow View Post
...And the AIM-120 can just as easily be added by the scenario designer.
The idea that you can just "add them in" to a "SARH-only" DCS level module is preposterous. It has to be supported by the base DCS module first (HUD, WCS, MFD store pages, etc.). I guess your research is still pending.
__________________
i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg.

DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?).

Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!

Last edited by Dudikoff; 12-12-2015 at 05:18 AM.
Dudikoff is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2015, 06:04 AM   #106
Angelthunder
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Posts: 329
Default

Eventually when Razbam gets to making the F-15E.I would love to see a campaign,similar to Janes F-15 simulator back in the day.In which EDs Strait of Hormuz map would make good use of a conflict with Iran.
Angelthunder is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2015, 02:53 PM   #107
mjmorrow
Member
 
mjmorrow's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 565
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dudikoff View Post
The idea that you can just "add them in" to a "SARH-only" DCS level module is preposterous. It has to be supported by the base DCS module first (HUD, WCS, MFD store pages, etc.). I guess your research is still pending.
You misinterpreted what I wrote. If the F-15E module was one where the plane had the capacity to carry the AIM-120 and the AIM-7, mission builders could just as easily add in the AIM-120 as add in the AIM-7. Savvy?
__________________
http://i688.photobucket.com/albums/vv250/mjmorrow76/SPAD%20of%20a%20new%20generation_zpshcbftpce.png

Last edited by mjmorrow; 12-12-2015 at 02:57 PM.
mjmorrow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2015, 03:12 PM   #108
mjmorrow
Member
 
mjmorrow's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 565
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sierra99 View Post
I gaurentee you have control over the content of servers you create...And the choice of what server you decide to participate on...beyond that basically hobbling the game to suit your desires is the most childish thing I've seen in a long time. Back to the subject...

I don't own the L-39. Can someone who does tell me how the dual player functions seem to be implimented. Is it a work in progress or pretty stable.
Was it childish to model a Razbam Mirage 2000 that does not have active radar homing missiles? I am not suggesting hobbling the game. I am suggesting modelling an F-15E with the actual weapons that it carried during the time it was serving during the First Gulf War. I would want a SARH only F-15E model, as I believe that this would enhance gameplay, since a SARH only F15E would better fit a multiplayer environment filled with SARH only Mirage fighters and SARH only F-14 fighters. F-15 sim pilots aren't going to be the only ones playing in multiplayer, so figuring out a way for the F-15 to fit within the big picture is a great good. Even the dev team making the F-15 would presumably make other add-ons and how the F-15 fits within the bigger add-on picture is important for players, and I would argue for all the dev teams.

A F-15E with SARH only is a better opponent for an F14A with SARH only. That has potential significant implications that ought to be considered. When you introduce one add-on that is perceived as the best of the best, the most dominant, it will tend to affect player behaviors and ride choices, the add-ons they will use or think they need to have in DCS and it all matters, dude. What is the counter for a AIM-120 carrying F15E? Another AIM-120 carrying F15E? With a SARH only F-15E, the F-14 has a much better relative match up. I think players would be more likely to choice the F-14 as a rival for the F-15E, if the F-15E isn't capable of shooting back with an AIM-120. There will be many add-ons over the years, many dev teams, and all of their efforts are contributing to a greater whole, DCS World. The F-15E is a part of that whole, not everything on a cracker. This is why, despite my affection for the Mirage 2000, I am glad that we have the version we are getting in DCS World and not the most advanced version of the Mirage 2000. This version is perfect.

This version will fit better in the overall DCS World big picture, at least that is how I see it. That is my opinion, agree or disagree. You disagree with me? Ok. I don;t need a binky, I can handle a World where persons disagree and I don't have to make personal attacks. i am just sticking to my perspective. You don't share my perspective? Oh, well. See, the sky didn't fall...

What does maturity have to do with wanting a highly competitive multiplayer environment where all the 4th Gen rides best complement one another and allow for optimal competition? In my opinion, nada.

If you want to personally insult me, do so in person, cyber bullying on flight sim forums is super lame. So could you stay on planes and not me? My opinion is childish? This isn't about whether or not you think my opinion is childish, right? You want the AIM-120, as simple as that, right? There is nothing wrong with that. There is no politically correct version of the F-15E. I am not personally attacking you or anyone else for an interest in the AIM-120. I have an issue with the introduction of the AIM-120 on a F-15E add-on, I don;t have a problem with you or the other supporters of the missile, the dev teams, etc. This is a flight sim forum, not a place for your personal attacks and cheap shots. You don't like my ideas and perspective. There is nothing wrong with that, but I am not your pin cushion. If you want to bully me, do so in person, pal. Thanks.
__________________
http://i688.photobucket.com/albums/vv250/mjmorrow76/SPAD%20of%20a%20new%20generation_zpshcbftpce.png

Last edited by mjmorrow; 12-12-2015 at 04:00 PM.
mjmorrow is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2015, 03:46 PM   #109
Sweep
Senior Member
 
Sweep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: South 'Jersey, USA
Posts: 1,283
Default

Well, I want 8 AMRAAMs like the Eagle. Seriously, like I said earlier: The F-15E went about 2 years without AMRAAM capability, so if its even being done, there's a good chance that it would have Slammers.

And really, better mission design > limiting everyone else from enjoying the jet.

For most of us in MP this isn't about fairness, its about working the jet, having fun, and completing the mission (not necessarily in that order, though ). I'm all for having a SARH-only mission at some point, I love that stuff, I just don't like it as the norm.

TL;DR: Give people more options --> add AIM-120s, and find/create better missions.
__________________
"Salt Shaker" - Long live v1.2.2, home of the 10 minute flight
Sweep is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-12-2015, 03:53 PM   #110
WinterH
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2014
Posts: 1,779
Default

@mjmorrow :

I'm not even sure you read what I've written so far or not, and less sure why am I still writing to the thread but :

- There is no SARH only F-14. F-14A, from day one, had AIM-54 Phoenix, which is pretty much active radar guided. While it is not a favorite aircraft of mine, if we go by your logic, F-14 should then never be done in DCS, or it should be unrealistically castrated by not including it's main weapon. Either proposition is as bad in my book as those asking for AIM-120 on F-14.
- There is SARH only Mirage 2000, which is called Mirage 2000C. There is no SARH only F-16 or SARH only F-15E. They barely existed for a few years, and received AMRAAM more or less as soon as it entered service. So I'm fairly sure no development studio would choose to announce either one without AMRAAM capability, whics is about 1992.

Big picture ? Well here goes :
- Like there are Korea or WW II only servers, there will also be post 90s servers with more active radar and some SARH equipped 4th gen aircraft. F-15E will fit there. More active radar missile equipped fighters are coming in form of F-18, EF-2000 and F-14 to count the ones we know so far.
- There will be servers where AIM-120 is disabled, F-15E will fit there just as fine.
- There will be free for all servers like most popular ones are. F-15E will... you've guessed it. Those servers are crawling with F-15C, which is even if by a bit, more dangerous A-A opponent anyway.

Counter for 120 equipped F-15E ? Whatever has been counter for 120 equipped F-15C so far. And other active radar homing missile equipped modules in pipeline, and also tactics / skill when in a non ARH equipped aircraft. F-15E is not more dangerous than F-15C as an aerial threat.

Peace, out
__________________
Modules:
MiG-21Bis, Fw-190D, Bf-109K, P-51D, F-86F, Ka-50, UH-1H, Mi-8MTV2, Hawk T1A, C-101, FC3, A-10C, CA, Mirage 2000C, Gazelle, L-39, MiG-15Bis, F-5E, AJS 37 Viggen, Yak-52, Christen Eagle II, MiG-19, I-16, JF-17, F-14

Honorable Mention Mods:
A-4E & MB-339

Wishlist:
MiG-23, MiG-27, Jaguar, Su-24M2, F-111, A-6E, A-7E&D, Ju-88A4, Ju-87G2&D5,F-4E,Mirage F-1, Mi-28N, Extra 300,J-7,MiG-25, Battle of Britain era British and German aircraft, A6M5 Zero, Fw-190F8, Super Tucano,Su-17.
WinterH is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

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 02:35 AM. vBulletin Skin by ForumMonkeys. Powered by vBulletin®.
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.