SayethWhaaaa

Where'd you get that snap from dude?

I gots 24 bombs and one target?? Seems like a waste to me. Anyways, given the method of long loiter times and varied payloads, isn't the Family model Superbug more suited to this kind of op than the Tommies?

Here I was getting sick of only only being able to play as a USMC or US Army character, then this comes along and makes it fun again! It's freakin' good stuff! ...and purdy too! Love the Laser sights in nightvision! Could be an issue that kill's surprise in MP.

Effin' A! Effin' A take 2! That's where I figure CoD has had the upper hand. I shoot someone running at me 5 times in the chest in BF2, body armour or no, they keeping coming. I do the same in CoD, that dude's going down because he's dead or taking cover. Half the time, I don't think you realise you've been hit in BF2. I mean you get hit with an M95 in real life, you're gonna know right away

I noticed that having edited missiles with reasonably large kill proximities (the distance your missile needs from its target before the warhead detonates) can be set off by your own aircraft. I had an R-73 variant do just that with a detonation proximity of 5m.

Yeah, I got screwed with that when I first installed the weaps pack years ago, but the thing I learned is that there aren't any 'fire and forget' sticks in the weaps pack. Some are much more effective than others (ie, the Aim-9x will crap on the Aim-9B) but if you're flying against aircraft equipped with Chaff/Flares, fact is that your missile has only a percentage chance of a hit, as opposed to fighting AI who don't have any cms. As for aircraft flying in a straight line, well, if they're following a waypoint, they won't take evasive action. AFAIK it's a limit of the game engine. There's no way to curb the effectiveness of the chaff/flares, but one way to get around it is to specify how many are deployed at once. This way, your aircraft can keep the same number of flares, but only use them a small number of times. eg, say your Phantom can pack 48 chaff/flares, but it deploys 8 at a time. This way, it can only deploy cms 6 times in total and each time it does, it may be a little more effective than normal (might spoof 2, instead on 1 IRM) but in a furball it may use them a lot more and therefore run out quicker. To be able to do this, just copy and past your cms from your ***data.ini (*** being the name of your plane) entries like so: [Fuselage] ModelNodeName=Fuselage ShowFromCockpit=FALSE HasAeroCoefficients=TRUE CLa=0.1014 CD0=0.0059 Cmq=-0.3723 Cmad=0.0045 Cyb=-0.1014 CLaMachTableNumData=4 CLaMachTableDeltaX=0.40 CLaMachTableStartX=0.00 CLaMachTableData=1.000,1.000,1.000,0.782 CD0MachTableNumData=4 CD0MachTableDeltaX=0.40 CD0MachTableStartX=0.00 CD0MachTableData=1.600,1.000,0.918,37.689 CmqMachTableNumData=4 CmqMachTableDeltaX=0.40 CmqMachTableStartX=0.00 CmqMachTableData=1.000,1.000,1.000,23.468 MinExtentPosition= -0.82,-4.21,-0.74 MaxExtentPosition= 0.82, 3.86, 0.74 CollisionPoint[001]= 0.00,-4.06,-0.17 CollisionPoint[002]= 0.00,-0.96,-0.62 CollisionPoint[003]= 0.82, 3.50, 0.30 CollisionPoint[004]=-0.82, 3.50, 0.30 CollisionPoint[005]= 0.00,-4.41, 0.68 CollisionPoint[006]= 0.00, 2.96, 0.76 CollisionPoint[007]=-0.39,-4.00, 0.14 CollisionPoint[008]= 0.39, 4.00, 0.14 DamageRating=DESTROYED SystemName[001]=Engine SystemName[002]=CenterlineStation SystemName[003]=FuselageFuelCell SystemName[004]=LeftAirbrake SystemName[005]=RightAirbrake SystemName[006]=BottomRedLight SystemName[007]=TopRedLight SystemName[008]=Tailhook SystemName[009]=LeftFlares <<-- SystemName[010]=RightFlares <<-- Make sure you have these subsystems in place first and in correct sequence SystemName[011]=LeftChaffs <<-- SystemName[012]=RightChaffs <<-- SystemName[013]=ECM Then in your ECM/CMs section, copy and paste the CMs // ECM --------------------------------------------------------- [LeftFlares] SystemType=DECOY_DISPENSER EjectPosition=-0.675,-2.21,0.592 EjectVelocity=--5.0,5.0,20.0 <<----------- Vary these numbers by one or two(or however much) at a time NumFlare=40 NumChaff=40 MinExtentPosition= MaxExtentPosition= [RightFlares] SystemType=DECOY_DISPENSER EjectPosition=0.675,-2.21,0.592 EjectVelocity=5.0,-5.0,20.0 NumFlare=40 NumChaff=40 MinExtentPosition= MaxExtentPosition= [LeftChaffs] SystemType=DECOY_DISPENSER EjectPosition=-0.675,-1.161,0.592 EjectVelocity=-5.0,-5.0,20.0 NumFlare=40 NumChaff=40 MinExtentPosition= MaxExtentPosition= [RightChaffs] SystemType=DECOY_DISPENSER EjectPosition=0.675,-1.16,0.592 EjectVelocity=-5.0,5.0,20.0 NumFlare=40 NumChaff=40 MinExtentPosition= MaxExtentPosition= This way, I've been able to fight aircraft equipped with 40+ flares, but not with 40+ chances to spoof my missiles. The only major problem with this method is that you'd have to alter each aircraft individually.

Personally, I think F-4 Phlogger A... because it looks like a Mig-23 that needs to go to the gym, then the plastic surgeon! ...man, that swing wing Phantom is Rosie O'Donnell fugly...

I think this is the 11th one in the series!

Yeah, I got through reading that 'leak' (the source I read said it was a leak but it wasn't sourced) and the only thing I could think was: "So... it's pretty much the same?" But if they think they can get away with churning out another BF using the tried and true EA tactic (New box art, a slight polish of the game that is rectified after 4 patches), they won't even come close to CoD 4. I played that demo the other day and there's not much it's not going to crap on! You just can't get away with adding one or two new minor features (See 2142) and releasing it as an entire 'new' game anymore. We're over it. Bucklehead, those new weaps may have been potent originally, but patches 1.3-.now have pretty much toned them all down except for one in each class. ie. The MEC still have the strongest carbine (AK-74Su), the USMC still has the higher power sniper rifle and so on it goes, but the majority of the new unlocks which are available in SF and EF as standard have been toned down for stoopid balance purposes! To hell with balance! Balancing is the introduction of blandness! Same weapon, different sound effect.

You guys are defending your country... and you can't even open jars of stuff...?? AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.... Oh you crazy infidels! A thousand prayers for you for stronger fingers! (This coming from a dude who stapled his pinky this moning)

...and when shot down, the super radar absorbing rubber fuselage allows it to bounce, becoming airborne once again... I mean, there's really no way to kill the bugger short of hitting the Earth with a small(ish) asteroid, bringing on the second ice age and waiting for them to die out. Same applies to gingers too I hear.

I really got into games like freelancer and was looking forward to trying this but my 'puter would crap itself when I tried to play this on my old one (I have a new one as of Sunday, and it's one PIMP MOFO!!) Anyways, I had some buddies who played this online and they seemed to think that mining was the only way to make a meaningful amount of cash, and that if you weren't mining, those who were would dominate your ass. Was this true? Admittedly, it's sort of what put me off it initially, but these mods coupled with my new killer 'puter has kinda rekindled my curiosity...

Heard about this a while ago (quite a while ago in fact) I was looking forward to see what you guys are coming up with! Can't wait to get into a furball with an Excalibur or a Hellcat! Sad to see what happened to the B5 crew...

...Yukikaze fans, lookee, lookee!!!!!!! http://screenshots.teamxbox.com/gallery/69...ei-Yukikaze/p1/ WOOT!!

Is the difference just that BadFrank just has a goatee and GoodFrank doesn't...?

Cheers dude, now I've got the "Milky milky Coco puff" part stuck in my head! Canadian bastardo! So if this is a mod of the Double Ugly, the airforce variant would require a new name, yeah? Double Fugly maybe?? Super Fugly? I'm getting into this idea of a single seater Phantom. The hunchback version is so fugly, but I'm so fascinated, I can't look away...

Hey, you're from my hood! Big ups to you!

Caliber shouldn't be an issue should it? I figured it's the multiplication of weight per round x fire rate...? In any event, that was my problem.

Stick it up your ars-- oh wait, that's my first ever post!

Not that I condone the practice or anything, but a lot of the steps MS have taken to neuter the pirated/cracked editions are pretty effective. I had to re-install MS Office on my Ma's computer the other day and couldn't find my own copy but did find an old dodgy copy of it that used to belong to my old housemate (he was a dodgy, dodgy, tightarse! Don't think he ever paid(pays?) for software) and tried to repair it but something in the new service packs nullified it. I'm building a new puter at the moment anyways and I figure I'll pick up a cheap copy of it and XP when I get the last few parts on Friday. I tell you waht, I'm pissed with the dude who robbed me last time! I'm thinking all my XP/MS whatever discs were pinched! I'm still finding stuff missing, like old copies of WCIII and stuff that I haven't seen since then... Bastard! I got burgled by a nerd! By the way, off topic. With my new machine, I'm planning to use XP Home edition for the OS since I won't have the issues Vista seems to have with games and what not. Anyways, I'm hearing that there are XP users using cracked versions of DX10 and not having these problems. What's the deal with this? Is this legal? Have they just d-loaded a copy of dx10 for xp?

Be careful with the projectile weight and it's combination with muzzel velocity. I screwed myself with that and and had a testbed aircraft break an ingame speed record (albeit flying backwards) whilst trying to dev a similar weapon. If it helps, you should be able to do more to create a laser effect by making each round fire a tracer and making sure each tracer round has a long 'tail', That way, you should (in theory) be able to have a beam style apperance without the associated inertial effects associated with massive rates of fire. One snag I ran into was that in the few times I got it to work, there was a dip in the stream after about a 2-3kms, but that's to be expected I guess. The only other negative is that in using this method, you're only able to keep the beam effect if you keep your aircraft from pitching/yawing in any direction other than stright and true, otherwise the beam bends.

Stinger should be, but I've got several sources that state that those measure weren't adopted. Specifically, the sidewinder.

Nothing personal dude, I know you're keen for the F-22 (I'm keen to have a go at knocking one outta the sky ) but EVERY week we answer this question and the answer is: There currently is no news about the F-22. Its under development but when news becomes available, I can guarantee this too, ANY information about it will be posted about 5 seconds after we get it! (Assuming it's not posted by the Author himself) This applies to the Gripen too, but from what I know of it (and this info may be out of date) it is much further along than the Raptor. But that's all I know from reading the posts in the Gripen development thread. That's my source of info for the SAAB. As for the F-117 Nighthawk and the B-2 Spirit, go have a looksee at the Marcfighters site (there's a link at the top of the page) under the projects link. That will display all of the projects he's currently working on. And contrary to popular belief, Marcelo DOES sleep from time to time! :yes:

Awww... but that means uninstalling, then reinstalling... I want action now dammit!

Disney has their own wing of long range strategic bombers...? Actually, that's not all that surprising really. EDIT: Oh wait... I thought that was a BUFF. Carry on.