Why no guns?

[lonewulf47]

Nevertheless it must be said: there are a dozen of combat simulators. Why do some people absolutely need to turn FSX into one again? The early FS included this famous biplane shooting. But even MS found out that it should be split up and so they created their own combat sim. The thing is that the TacPack will be screwing up the whole FS community sooner or later. In my personal thinking this is pure BS and not what the world has been waiting for. But of course there are always a bunch of kiddies that need boom-bang everywhere. I do hope that someone also develops a tool that allows for TacPack users to be banned in a multiplayer setup. I will be the first user

Oskar

[Roadburner426]

Actually I think VRS has done a good job on their aircraft with the weapons system even without the TacPac. He has been working very hard on this for some time, and I do hold pretty high expectations for what they are attempting to do. You do not have to worry about being harrased online though since you yourself must have the TacPac installed in order for it to have an effect on your aircraft.... I do not think it will be able to do anything for the Spitfire, or any of A2A's birds (except the upcoming F-104/F-4) anyway as it is based more in modern weapons than WWII based platforms. Obviously at this point we are all speculating, but as an owner of their F/A-18E the weapons it has now without the TacPac abilities are extremely impressive.

[Sayuuk]

Ok, now my words about this =P


I completely agree with the initial poster.

=> Please add the safety switches and triggers to the plane + some gun firing effect (just at the wings, although tracer bullets sure would look nice).
This shouldn't prove to be too difficult and one would not have to use it if one didn't want to...!!


However, I completely disagree with the guys stating that this would turn FSX into a combat sim.

=> I don't want it to do any damage, I want it to remove bullets (and thereby weight) by firing and I want it to look good on screenshots. The initial post was in no way ment (the way I read it) to inflame same discussion about the principles of the FS series or any comparison to combat flight simulators.



Just my 50ct


Stefan

[Krycekuk]

The A2A B-17 and P-47 don't have working guns so I'm really not sure the Spitfire requires some half baked tacky effect that FSX doesn't handle well.

I'm very happy flying my Spit around in its modern non war time setting, enjoying it and the scenery I have so far crossed over. I've seen plenty of displays of Spitfires as well as having them and Hurricanes buzzing over where I live and never once have I seem them fire their weaponry thank god! I have to agree with Oskar. Lets not turn FSX into something its not!

I get my combat fix on other software specifically written for that purpose (the excellent although still beta DCS A-10 and Rise of Flight to name two I have). As has been mentioned there is also the IL2:Cliffs of Dover coming out but if its too arcadey I will be staying clear.

[Bruce Hamilton]

Oh, and Justflight do a terribly nice Spitfire which can fire guns AND climb at 4000ft per minute sustained at full throttle to 20,000ft with no oxygen and a terribly modern cockpit taken from, I am sure, terribly accurate sources...

And for all that, it still lacks what we crave the most. Without AccuSim, it's just another airplane.

[Sayuuk]

The A2A B-17 and P-47 don't have working guns so I'm really not sure the Spitfire requires some half baked tacky effect that FSX doesn't handle well.

I'm very happy flying my Spit around in its modern non war time setting, enjoying it and the scenery I have so far crossed over. I've seen plenty of displays of Spitfires as well as having them and Hurricanes buzzing over where I live and never once have I seem them fire their weaponry thank god! I have to agree with Oskar. Lets not turn FSX into something its not!

I get my combat fix on other software specifically written for that purpose (the excellent although still beta DCS A-10 and Rise of Flight to name two I have). As has been mentioned there is also the IL2:Cliffs of Dover coming out but if its too arcadey I will be staying clear.

1. Nobody said the Spit "requires" guns, some ppl just think it could complete the package of simulating the whole plane

2. half baked: no need to use it if you don't like it...

3. You didn't see a Spit firing its guns: Can we deduct from that that no Spitfire ever fired its guns / is capable of doing so...? => Interesting...
=> I never saw a B17 in reality with 4 burning engines, and yet the A2A one can simulate that...

4. Again, we are not turning FSX into nothing... no combat simulation, just effects that no one needs to use

5. combat fix: again, please read the previous posts...


=> Let me repeat this: a feature like gun effects would be completely optional, why not let those that want it get that phracking effect...


No Offence, just what I think...


Stefan

[Krycekuk]

=> Let me repeat this: a feature like gun effects would be completely optional, why not let those that want it get that phracking effect...


Stefan

Because I would rather developers spend their time bug fixing where appropriate and adding in awesome features much like the A2A Spitfire already has.

My point being in the modern world of FSX (lets face it you cant easily turn back the clock in it to 1940) there isnt much call for any warbird with working ordnance. If you want some effects for screenshots why not just add them in photoshop after?

[Sayuuk]

=> Let me repeat this: a feature like gun effects would be completely optional, why not let those that want it get that phracking effect...


Stefan

Because I would rather developers spend their time bug fixing where appropriate and adding in awesome features much like the A2A Spitfire already has.

My point being in the modern world of FSX (lets face it you cant easily turn back the clock in it to 1940) there isnt much call for any warbird with working ordnance. If you want some effects for screenshots why not just add them in photoshop after?

So the stuff some people want is more important than what others want...

My point on this is that it would be nice to have those effects. If the developers feel like they have the time and feel that it may be nice, they should add it.

Nobody here is trying to tell the developers how they should spend their time improving their products.

Of course I agree that fixing bugs and improving parts that need to be improved much takes priority over cosmetic changes.

I think it would be a not too complicated - meaning relatively fast to be done - addition that may be done when the initial bug-fixing is done!


Cheers, Stefan

[Krycekuk]

Well I think we need to agree to disagee

Anyway friendly handshake Stefan. Hope you are enjoying the excellent Spitfire as much as I am

Regards,

Nicky.

[Sayuuk]

Well I think we need to agree to disagee

Anyway friendly handshake Stefan. Hope you are enjoying the excellent Spitfire as much as I am

Regards,

Nicky.

Sure thing =P

The first thing we need is the XVIII anyway xD

[Skycat]

I've had a few FS warbirds that came packaged with a 'working' guns. Some times the effect was satisfactory, other times it was plain horrible. In my opinion, being able to fire the guns ends up being little more than a gimmick (like Lewis stated).

That said, I know there are people who would enjoy the thrill of firing the guns. One solution for FSX could be an 'airshow demonstration' option that simulates bursts of butane. The muzzle flash and sounds would be available without having the controversy of ballistics, damage modeling, tracers...or even whether the rate of fire is authentic. I know it won't be the full modeling that the Combat Kiddies want for FSX however, as evidenced by various posts here and SimHQ every time an A2A Sims warbird is released.

I don't think it is at all feasible to try to turn FSX into a WWII dogfighter sim. Perhaps limited fighter pairings like Spitfire vs. Bf109 could be achievable...but then the obvious question arises, why not just get "Wings of Victory" or "Cliffs of Dover" instead of trying to shoot each other down over modern London while avoiding Cessna 172s?

Someday--perhaps with further development of TacPac--I think it would be fun (and arguably within the realm of a civilian sim) to have strafing and bombing ranges. This is one feature that could broaden the appeal of a plane like the P-47. I can envision training sorties and perhaps scoring competitions. Don't mind me, I'm just dreaming...

[Sayuuk]

I've had a few FS warbirds that came packaged with a 'working' guns. Some times the effect was satisfactory, other times it was plain horrible. In my opinion, being able to fire the guns ends up being little more than a gimmick (like Lewis stated).

That said, I know there are people who would enjoy the thrill of firing the guns. One solution for FSX could be an 'airshow demonstration' option that simulates bursts of butane. The muzzle flash and sounds would be available without having the controversy of ballistics, damage modeling, tracers...or even whether the rate of fire is authentic. I know it won't be the full modeling that the Combat Kiddies want for FSX however, as evidenced by various posts here and SimHQ every time an A2A Sims warbird is released.

I don't think it is at all feasible to try to turn FSX into a WWII dogfighter sim. Perhaps limited fighter pairings like Spitfire vs. Bf109 could be achievable...but then the obvious question arises, why not just get "Wings of Victory" or "Cliffs of Dover" instead of trying to shoot each other down over modern London while avoiding Cessna 172s?

Someday--perhaps with further development of TacPac--I think it would be fun (and arguably within the realm of a civilian sim) to have strafing and bombing ranges. This is one feature that could broaden the appeal of a plane like the P-47. I can envision training sorties and perhaps scoring competitions. Don't mind me, I'm just dreaming...

I guess I'll need to rephrase why I want this:

I want a more realistic way to remove the 159lbs of ammo than unloading them from the Shift+4 panel.

This is even more important for the P47, as it carries much more/heavier ammo.

Also I'd like those red covers to be gone when I return from a flight, just my personal taste.


If we fly this in peace and all, why carry the ammo anyway?


Cheers, Stefan

[Lewis - A2A]

If the effects were added, they wouldnt be removed from weight as that would require more than 'just effects' but an entire code base + the red gun covers would not change as this would also require an entire mod created to add the black circles were the rounds had opened up the ports on the texture.

The reason to fly with the ammo weight is to have the option to fly the aircraft when in combat configuration

As mentioned previously however FSX effects engine doesnt model anything that looks remotely like tracers or gun smoke, in fact we had to remove some effects from the spitfire as the FSX engine simply doesnt render 'faint smoke' very well at all. Adding a cheap effect would be like adding furry dice to an expensive Rolls Royce Car

[JayKae]

Funny how people want things not even two days after a major release.

To be honest, if I want to see guns working etc, I start up my Wings Of Power or Rise Of Flight, if I want to fly planes the way they were meant to be flown I will start up FSX, I like the serenity of FSX, to chase the dream of flight, not to chase another victim

[dj0311]

Well I agree that it would be a pain at this stage to add gun effects and what not and that this is a flight sim not a combat sim and this is a truely amazing work of art, honestly I think its the best one so far.

On the other side of this there are people like myself that fly in a virtual squadron, we fly as RAF, USAAF and the Luftwaffe from multiple WWII addon scenrys employing multiple different aircraft and 90% of A2A's products. We do patrols, photo recon, bombing missions and scramble fighters to intercept. We have also added a gun fire/sound effect (they arent the greatest but they look ok and its better than sayin "i got you i got you") to most of our fighters so when we do have a change to engage we have a stream of shells in our screenshot to prove it was a hit and not argue about rate of turn or nose angle. We also use Plan G as a jury rigged radar/spotting system and set it to only show other aircraft within 50 miles.

So 95% of our time is spent enjoying the way these aircraft handle and act and occasionally we get to 'simulate' what it would be like to encounter the enemy and engage.