Sorry we live in a timeloop where all we can do is winge winge and winge some more because implimentation of Y doesnt fit their world view
4 Likes
Lads, invest in pharmaceutical shares. I’m gonna have a mega migraine should this can of worms open. Again.
10 Likes
İ already started taking pills and some Whiskey.
Helps a lot tbh.
Hello mig
I’m not trying to silence you or anything but I personally really like this thread, I know others do too. It’s a cool place to share Gripen information and pictures and I’d honestly hate to see the thread turn into another sh*tfest for a week and then have it get locked again due to the huge inevitable toxicity from certain people.
Could you make a new thread about it? If you made an original post with your findings/reasonings and chose a title, it would get even more attention/traction than you and feet would starting random arguments here about stuff like win-rates that’s leading nowhere in terms of the flight model. Despite our disagreements about fore-planes/canards, I’m sure you’d be able to get a far more productive discussion going than riling people up here or feet’s ‘creative interpretations’ of data.
3 Likes
i just want to know if R darter can be use with BOL and i get this headache
1 Like
be careful
1 Like
Ah dont worry mate everything is under control.
Cant say the same thing for other people tho :)
1 Like
Unfortunately R-Darter was only used in that very distinct rail on the Cheetah, we don’t know the name of it, I’ve never seen it on other aircraft, maybe the R-Darter is compatible with other rails, but that will be much more difficult to determine since we need the technical details on it. Sorry for the ping @Headnaught, but I know you have done much more research on those SA missiles and aircraft, can you help us?
Look at the message I quoted if you want context to why I replied to you here, you don’t have to take it personally, it’s not that deep
I just suggested you make a dedicated thread about it instead of instigating this contentious topic again just because it’s been 2 weeks since the moderators had to step in and shut it down.
It’s not like I’m hindering your bug report, It’s inevitable. And you’ll probably hide your sources in it for the employees to see only… And like you said we will all be ‘Helpless’ to do anything about it anyways…
The fact that you can’t even see the flaw in using “Mouse aim max pull” as a parameter representing SEP, and the constant bombardment of derailing unproductive posts from feet only adds to my growing sense of hopelessness in our ability to address these issues effectively. Frankly I’m tired of the whole Gripen FM discussion, by the looks of it so is everyone else here too. The >2200 replies in the actual Gripen FM thread got us nowhere except a few bans, the thread being locked and a massively toxic environment. Just make your damn bug report.
Some of us actually enjoy this thread and don’t want to see it go down the drain. If you insist on opening this can of worms again then I obviously can’t stop you, I just suggested making a thread about it, you’d even get more attention/traction that way.
6 Likes
The moderators didn’t shut it down because of the topic, they shut it down because of responses like the ones you are generating right now. You are avoiding discussion of a particular issue… if you wanted to do that it would be far easier to just ignore it and not reply. Nothing I said was toxic or generate such a response from you or anyone else.
I’m not working on any reports, just pointing out a problem that is being ignored / not discussed. Instead y’all are focused on issues that would improve the performance of the pack leader of air RB and sim. This is incredible to me, not a soul is concerned about the performance of the aircraft or accuracy all of a sudden?
Because of replies like yours, quit dismissing the problem. We know there is a clear issue… why does it take someone to make a report and suffer death threats to get stuff fixed?
Why is that person not supported in their endeavors instead? Why are you so hostile to changes that negatively affect the plane you have such a high interest in? It’s not like these are a-historical changes… this is pushing for accuracy.
None of this is for personal satisfaction or attention. I’m concerned with the direction the game is heading and pointing out a blatant issue. If you don’t want the thread to end the same way as the other one… support the endeavors and not squash them pushing the idea that it’s toxic to bring up REAL issues.
Frankly, dismissing @FeetPics hard work and purposefully misrepresenting what happened goes to show how biased you are in this.
3 Likes
You keep saying this but you never give any proof. And youre the one who calls everyone “trolls” on the forum? …
Last warning?..
3 Likes
To be entirely fair to Mig that’s a Bug Report systemism. He could repost the sources in the comments so everyone can see but not everyone does that… so i’m not expecting him to.
I think it wouldn’t be a problem if he presented shiny new evidence that for the Devs were prepared to accept. However, for good or bad, right or wrong, Devs don’t want to nerf the FM anymore with the current data.
The discussion has moved towards R-Darter and the capability of using BOL rails with it, so it’s high time that the matter be laid to rest.
2 Likes
Since I know everyone gets their panties in a bunch, FOR THE SAKE OF THE ARGUMENT, lets assume the Gripen is overperforming. Even if all the data was available I’d be willing to bet money it not getting fixed until a shiny new toy is introduced, bonus points if it’s in another tech tree. Its the old song and dance, throw in something obviously better than everything else to incentivize the player base to grind an entirely new tech tree only to replace it with something even more broken in an update or two. The Gripen will be brough more in line with other planes the same patch we get a shiny new toy, be it a Rafael, F-16Blk52, F-15C, Su-27SM and etc.
1 Like
I’m not versed enough in how flairs work in game but shouldn’t we have the option of either small or large flairs on the internal launchers on Gripen?
Same with chaff, should we not get the choice of effectiveness against specific radar bands?
Edit:
@Gunjob might have some insights?
The ALE-47 comes in many different configurations. However I’m not sure if the BOP-G is actually an ALE-47 under license or home grown. As it stands the dispensers on the Gripens are large caliber.
When it comes to chaff, in real life you could have band specific chaff, but the most effective is broad band chaff as you don’t always know what threat type you’re up against. In game chaff works in broad band.
I know nothing about the ALE-47 or why it pertains to gripen.
and i know they are large in game curently, but IRL they can choose different versions of flairs to load into the internal dispenser. as shown in the images there are four options of flares for internal mounting.
my question was if there was a posibility to get those options in game as a choice when choosing flares/chaff
and if the option exists IRL could we get the option in game as well?
or are both these thoughts suggestions i can make and not something already implemented in game?
Both will be a suggestions for now. Different caliber flares to the internal ones you can get only in external dispensers and there is no option to choose what band the chaff is. Well, i have no idea why you would want to change the second one but you do you
Similar dispenser bins
I mean it could be possible sure, presently not so much.
A suggestion for band specific chaff could be made, not all dispensers have broad band chaff as an option. Early ALE-40’s are pretty limited if I recall only had band specific chaff (I’d have to check up on that, think my Jaguar Tactics manual talks of it). ALE-47 is more capable with more options. Pods such as Phimat usually dispensed broad band chaff.
