Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

Community Reputation

677 Excellent

About SeaSerpent

  • Rank

Recent Profile Visitors

1024 profile views
  1. Maybe someday, kid. For now, I'd stick with a working title like 'Larner: The View from my Parents' Basement Egress Window' or 'Larner: Hands Orange as Doritos' or 'Larner: Where is my Princess?"
  2. You won't have to hit Refly...his bullets are purely theoretical, remember?...So just barrel roll back on his 6 and let him have it. That is, if your wingman Larner hasn't come down from the perch and gotten him first.
  3. What I found is that there is much to be done in DCS that doesn't involve actual combat. Many squadrons are spending a lot of time doing training exercises that are demanding as hell but they are based on real-world peace time exercises, not rooted in actual conflict. If you are fighting a "war" in Nevada it doesn't make much sense...if you are going through flight qualifications at Nellis based on real world training doctrine, it makes perfect sense. Doing Carrier Quals in the PG with live Marshall and LSO and a guy that knows what he's doing in the back seat is an experience in and of itself, and it doesn't involve combat or conflict. That isn't to say that it wouldn't be cool to have theaters like the Koreas, for Sabres and Migs, or whatever, but it isn't the end-all-be-all of what DCS offers and groups are making very good use of it as it is. This is the difference between a Study Sim versus a Survey Sim like IL-2...the latter has more of a need of actual historical battlefields than the former.
  4. The measure of your skill in a game like this is to shoot people down, and anything else is hypothetical, best reserved for practice-time with your wingmen and friends. The idea of "I *could* have shot you down, but I'm such a nice guy, that I decided be merciful" strikes me as smug nonsense. Rationalizing your skill under the cover of a hypothetical "could've shot him down" seems like a copout. If nothing else, absolutely terrible 'tactics'...because other players are there to achieve actual victory, not hypothetical victory, and while you're playing with your food, the joke is going to be on you when one of those hot-shot squadron guys, with something to prove, comes in and nails you. If I learned one thing from RoF and Il-2, it's that the hunter is often the hunted, and bad things happen to those who get smug.
  5. I have no use for "simcade". We already have a game where we can start an airplane with a press of 'E', and if someone wants they can turn off all kinds of simulation options. If you want something even more simple than that, I think the games you are looking for can probably be found on an App store for your Ipad or similar tablet.
  6. I think the whole notion stinks. What I'm reading is that instead of shooting the enemy down, what you really want to do is taunt somebody, humiliate them, and let them know that you pity them. And then you'll probably give them a sarcastic "Salute", right? I think games like this would be a lot better if people stopped trying to invent a game within a game and just played it straight. Don't play with your food; if you think you're good enough to shoot an enemy down, then shoot him down. Anything else is a waste of people's time, imho.
  7. When the Flat Earth society tells you that you're a crackpot, it's like Keith Richards telling you that you have a drug problem. Might be time for some self reflection....
  8. Trees are such a fascinating topic. As I look back on my life, my only regret is that I didn't become an Arborist....
  9. If I get on a server for an organized or scheduled event where the command structure is understood, and that's what you're signing up for, that's one thing, but if I get on a place like WoL for a more casual experience and there is some yahoo trying to boss people around, well, I don't know that I'll be game for that. Like you said, we'll see how this goes and how it plays out. I'm all in favor of 'Air Marshal' capability being added to the game, I just think it has to be used smartly by the server operators.
  10. Actually, I think that's the only place this would ever work: Organized, scheduled events or closed, intra-squad flights. In those situations, having a higher organization looking at the bigger picture can be pretty cool. But as far as the daily, general public servers go, I don't see how an 'Air Marshal' would go over, trying to tell people what to do. That doesn't seem viable to me.
  11. When she said "It's too short", did you really believe that she was referring to your game controllers?
  12. I'm sure that in time studies will show that people with face huggers have fewer intimate relationships and higher rates of obesity. Except for Hans, he has it under control, and gets his share.
  13. I'm surprised that anyone playing Flanders in Flames thinks this is a "new" thing. I've seen this done a few times back in the day, in various servers, and it's a shame that you need a new rule to keep jerkfaces from exploiting something like that: One would think it's a given not to do that.
  14. When making generalizations about DCS Multiplayer numbers, I think you need to be very clear that you are specifically talking about servers offering WW2 specific scenarios. For jet and helicopter pilots, it's not how you describe it.
  • Create New...