>>65075766
Pretty much. Computers and fly by wire made the extra complexity, weight, and maintenance of such systems obsolete.

>>65075813
How do computers and fly by wire change the efficiency of different wing angles?
The design concept never was worth it but they were had to be made and used to find that out for certain.

>>65075766
Are there any trainers with swing wings? Many trainers can already just load a different flight model for different characteristics, why not give it swing wing for even more possibilities?

>>65075834
You can design an aircraft so aerodynamically unstable that only a computer can keep it flying straight. Which means its highly maneuverable at most speeds and coupled with thrust vectoring it makes swing wings unneeded.

Are those missile pylons swiveling? Why? Can't they attack off bore?

File: 68678776.gif (415 KB, 444x222)

415 KB GIF

>>65075766
Yes, they look cool but swing wings are the folding headlamps of their day.

>>65075849
Why do people like you post about aircraft when you know so little about them? Swing wings for reducing stall speed to allow aircraft to take off with higher loads than they otherwise could and do low speed loitering patrols without running out of fuel, something which FBW and thrust vectoring don't really help with at all.

Honestly, the last few days has felt like someone introduced a new bot to /k/ airplane threads that knows far too little about aircraft to not make all its posts utterly shit. Like, same bot in an F15 thread claiming that the OG F15 was a twin seater so there could be a radar operator because 70s radar was complicated. Surely no human posting in an aviation thread could have that little domain knowledge about aircraft - sure - right?

>>65075851
IIRC, it has more to do with efficiency at speed than maneuverability (spread out for high lift at take off and landing, tucked in for low drag while cruising or with afterburner). It's just that we found out that the benefits aren't worth the weight and complexity.

>>65075766
>Are swing wings an obsolete technology?
Yes. Juice ain't worth the squeeze. It's a lot of weight and mechanical complexity and maintenance challenge that also fucks stealth hard. Computers enabling control of something with low or even negative stability negated a lot of the benefits like >>65075849 anon says.

The fit has only ever gotten worse as the decades have gone by, hard to even come up in theory with any reason it'd ever be worth it now. Certainly something really cool about a transforming aircraft though, won't deny that.

>>65075863
No he's right. You're saying another reason but that wasn't the main one. Like shit anon
>Swing wings for reducing stall speed to allow aircraft to take off with higher loads than they otherwise could
Except they add so much fucking weight that this isn't actually very useful.
>low speed loitering patrols
Dedicated CAS and copters could do it better, cheaper, in more numbers. Nowadays obviously all of that is drones.

Nobody has designed even one single new variable sweep design since the Tu-160 in fucking 1980. The final American one was the B-1 in 1974. If you think they have advantages why do you think it's been abandoned by the US for over 50 years now?

File: NASA_AD-1_in_flight.jpg (349 KB, 1280x700)

349 KB JPG

>>65075766
No but nobody wants to build the kind that actually work well because of the aesthetics.

>>65075869
>It's just that we found out that the benefits aren't worth the weight and complexity.
I think it's more that priorities changed.

Swing wings aren't very stealthy even though they're aerodynamically advantageous, and no one built any high capability aircraft that weren't stealth after the teen series. B1B is still in service and unsurpassed by B2 and B21 in most non-stealth regards, F111 was always a heavily and deliberately compromised design because of the McNamara TFX shenaninganisation but still surpasses F15E in many regards, and F14 was replaced by a lower capability multirole mix because very distance fleet defence from massed bombers stopped being a force structure requirement.

It's true that cost, complexity, weight and maintenance were huge factors, but I think stealth and changing requirements were the real killers.

File: spastic.png (275 KB, 589x470)

275 KB PNG

>>65075885
>Dedicated CAS and copters could do it better, cheaper, in more numbers. Nowadays obviously all of that is drones.
The swing wings were not for CAS "patrols" you ignorant fuck, they were for fleet defence patrols at 200nm from a CBG at 10 degrees AOA to pound bombers, and taking off with eye watering loads of bombs that fast jets without variable geometry can only dream of. They don't add more weight than is useful, there is an enormous net gain, you gigantic fucking normie pseud.

Picrel. An F15E can can take off with and carry one quarter this bomb load, largely because it can't generate enough lift to take off with more from any reasonable runway. And the F111 was a massively compromised design that had loads of unnecessary weight and silly aerodynamics choices, produced 25 years before the F15E.

File: mach fuck.jpg (539 KB, 1920x1080)

539 KB JPG

>mach 2.6
It's so fucking over from boscali just bend over and take the PALAcock

>>65075935
I'm not really trying to disagree with you on your larger point, but I just wanted to jump in and say:
The F111 is a significantly bigger bird (wingspan and mass) than the F15E. A better (but still incomplete) comparison would be the F15EX which is still smaller but can nearly carry as much (poundage). The US pretty much gave up on the heavy strike fight/light bomber role so no matter which modern plane you pick you're gonna have a hard time one way or another. Maybe go abroad and compare to Su-34?

>>65076002
Why bother going so fast if you're just trucking ALBMs?

>>65075766
swing wings kill any hope for stealth, so until a counter to low-observability is comprehensively spread we probably won't see any attempts at a return to reduce the complexity and weight of swing-wing systems.

>>65075766
imma designing a jet with vert-fins that retract into slots, like a jack knife, for low speed or intense maneuvers.

when retracted would add an extra layer of stuff to protect engines from hits from abeam

do jets today even have an automated feature to try to rotate at max speed to try and take any missile blasts from abead, presenting the smallest target area???

you track the incoming missile and AI starts fast rotation to gain R-speed so when the missile is near the jet is rotating very fast to always present abeam.

also canard wings in front that do the same

stay tuned.

Stealth is completely useless in nuclear option and it's annoying

>>65076131
brainlet mong

>>65075935
>25 years before
F-111 was designed in the early 1960s, F-15 in 1969
the E version, first demonstrator prototype flown July 1980 as a modified TF-15 prototype was simply a 2-seater with different electronic/weapons systems
Both are 1960s designs and technology

>>65076298
Either RADAR is dead in which case it doesn't matter, or it's alive and it actively hurts you because it makes ARH take longer to pitbull
There is no advantage

>>65076305
stealth is for opening up different routes that would otherwise have you spotted on radar, it's not a magic cloak
brainlet mong

>>65076312
Yeah it doesn't do that though because effectively infinite range vs effectively infinite range * 0.75 makes zero difference

>>65076317
I don't get if the maps are too tight or radar is that OP even IRL. Also, unlike the player, R9 batteries, ships, and CIWS seem to have infinite ammo. Attrition doesn't seem a factor in NO, DEAD is best done with AGM-48 trucks, and ships are immune to everything, especially AShM.
Also, TBM make flying redundant: you take off, spam as soon as gear is up, turn around, land, repeat. Idk, maybe one day there will be continent sized maps where you need to fly to get in range, and where radar can have gaps in coverage.

>>65076451
>>65076317
>>65076131
Are you literally retarded? Stealth is so strong that you can stratonuke a defended airbase with a stealth multirole without even SEADing first. TBMing doesn't work against even slightly competent players because you can perfectly intercept them with light IR missiles. AShM-300s are fine against botes, although AGM-99s aren't. I have so many questions about these posts.

Are you taking external stores on your Ifrit and Vortex sorties or something? Do you not know how to turn your radar off? I genuinely don't understand where this sentiment that stealth is weak could be coming from. Even AWACS and fixed radars only get tracks on clean stealth multiroles from, like, 17nm max absolute, I don't understand where this sentiment is coming from. Stealth is so strong that it can almost ruin the game more than half the time because it's so easy to delete airbases.

>>65076740
I know game mechanics well, my suspicion is a failure on community made maps: I remember unisntalling one because there was a cluster of AD so dense and layered it was impossible to get through. That being said, I don't play multiplayer, as I usuall play NO on the Deck, so maybe that's part of the reason. With a coordinated effort some stuff gets more balanced.

>>65075766
>supersonic darkreach with the jamming abilities of a medusa and the air to air abilities of an ifrit
I don't get it. The UFO was an april fool's joke and even that looks reasonable compared to this monstrosity.

>>65076740
>17nm
I swear I get hit with shit while flying no externals with radar off from 50km away. Just got used to flying in cover or under 10m RALT. How do I get good? I only play PvE because I don't have the time to get good enough against aeroplanosexual furry NEETs.

>>65076451
>and ships are immune to everything, especially AShM
ARADs are the one thing they aren't immune to. Take a medusa with the default loadout, fire all six missiles at a destroyer while jamming its radar. One of them will get through and destroy its radar, then you can hit it with AShMs.

>Are swing wings an obsolete technology?
No, they are cool and useful, the issue is that making and servicing them is a pain the in the ass

File: lfd.jpg (371 KB, 1336x855)

371 KB JPG

How do we feel about the Littoral Flight Deck?

>>65077397
Might be more impactful if I could fly rotorcraft worth a damn.

>>65077397
How will you every deploy 2800nm away through 28ft seas? Coastal patrol is for the coasties.

>>65077397
that underbelly is designed to be flown under

>>65077412
Even the Vortex can launch from them, its pretty good.

>>65077397
Takes way to long to land on given how small and active the maps are. I know aircraft are basically disposable in game but it still bugs me when I can't get back home. Wish the game would add a beartrap system for helicopter landings.

>>65075766
>only aircraft in game where I’ve ever accidentally detached a wing
Speed is overrated anyway. Agility and low observably > speed every day.
…also can we get a 4 engine ifrit?

>>65076451
> R9 batteries, ships, and CIWS seem to have infinite ammo
Land batteries have an ammo truck near them that replenishes them, if you blow up the truck they run dry really quickly. That said if you blow up the truck the ammo explosion almost always kills the battery anyway. Ships have got really deep but not infinite missile magazines (check the encyclopedia) and can be resupplied by an ibis/tara (the AI now does this as of 0.33)
As far as ASHMs go you need to be careful which direction you launch them from. Their terrain hugging is very cautious and they’re slow to come back down so even a small hill can force them to climb up to a few hundred meters, exposing them to radar. Having a Medusa jamming is hugely beneficial so that the ships won’t pick up the missiles until they’re in optical track range - just a kilometer or two. Also Shards lack forward PD, so attacking them nose-on can yield good results. Glide & gravity bombs are also hugely useful because they have 0 IR signature and are immune to IRMs, the only counter is Radar missiles (which should already be jammed by a Medusa or Alky) or ballistic CIWS (which are too short range to defeat a saturation attack)

>>65075889
Too ugly to pass approval.

>>65077397
>Can't launch God's chosen airframe; the T/A-30, off of it
I hate it.

File: ad1.jpg (1.15 MB, 1920x1049)

1.15 MB JPG

>>65075766
for militaries yeah, a headache maintenance-wise for niche purposes at best. using large, thin, low-loaded delta/trapezoid wings with high-lift devices get pretty close in performance

for civilian use we've got some intriguing possibilities, like picrel

>>65078137
the new 500ERs are great at peppering ships, if you get one to pop you can almost guarantee at least one subsystem on a ship is going offline be it radar, a turret, missiles ect. They do however suck at killing anything besides a corvette

>>65082537
I like how low RCS they are even when carried externally. You are still properly stealthed when you have two slung on a Vortex. Sea skim, drop GBMs, turn cold, watch them wreck the radar and CIWS, finish it off with a GBO-500.

>>65082551
i haven't tried low level attacks with them yet, im still stuck in my default anti stratolance maneuver of with a clean ifrit space climbing, flying directly over the target then going mach fuck and releasing bombs hopefully too close for intercept

>>65076451
>I don't get if the maps are too tight
Heartland is definitely too tight.
Ignus archipelago, now that's better. Even if you still don't need a full tank to traverse it.

Hopefully the new landlocked map that's coming will fix this.

>Also, unlike the player, R9 batteries, ships, and CIWS seem to have infinite ammo
The players does have infinite ammo, you are never bothered with stuff like "no we are not letting you use the entire coutrie stockpile of hypersonic missiles to take out a few trucks"

Unless you meant they don't need reload time, then yes. But players don't need much effort to do so either.

>and ships are immune to everything, especially AShM.
You can saturate a whole fleet using 250kg bombs.
It would be ridiculous if boat didn't protect themselves, all you need is quantity and it becomes a quality on its own.

The game also reward using the right ammo against the right anti-air system.

>>65076740
>AShM-300s are fine against botes, although AGM-99s aren'
To be fair, AGM-99 weren't because no aircraft used them in any numbers enough to go through defense.
The game just lack target that can be taken out without a spam.

>>65077397
>How do we feel about the Littoral Flight Deck?
Flat.
It's not ugly but I think there's more important boat to make.
PALA need their landing ships
We could use drones boats
We don't even have enough helicopter/dronecopter to make it useful.

>>65082943
>Fly helicopter for 15 minutes to target
>Expend 48 lynchpins, it hits the ammo truck and nothing else
>Ammo explosion doesn't event take any other vehicles with it
>IR lock on
>Radar lock on
>Attempt to fire missiles at the radar missile while dropping flares
>Blow up anyway due to enemy jet strafing you right in deez nuts
>Get saved 15 minutes flying back to rearm
We need supersonic helicopters.

>>65077397
I instinctively hate anything that has a laser on it.

>>65075889
This is what commercial airliners would do if Boeing had some fucking balls

>>65075813
That's a take.
In reality, fly by wire and computers are what made swing wings viable in the first place.
And improvements in material science could actually make them viable again, because they have large inherent benefits.

>>65075853
Actually those got killed by regulation.
Flapping up a light is neither hugely expensive or complex and there would have been customers willing to shill out the extra 100 bucks on a 30k car.

>>65075766
Not really. It's still the only way to make a high supersonic aircraft that can land on a runway of reasonable length, with a T/W of ~0.3

In other words, a bomber. The battle between speed and stealth is still not decided, and stealth has an all or nothing quality - either you avoid detection and are invincible, or don't and you are 100% dead.

Meanwhile flying fast affords a degree of protection that reduces the effectiveness of enemy air defences. Sure you can't get as close, but in the era of cruise missiles, you don't need to, but more importantly, you have a much better chance of guessing how close you can go before being shot down.

And cruise missiles and hypersonics benefit immensely from a fast launch platform, as they don't need to carry those otherwise massive boosters, further increasing effective payload.

So you can either have a fixed wing delta, or a swing-wing that weighs 20% more and costs 2x, but can carry 3x or more the supersonic payload.

>>65083043
that's the trouble with heli-warfare, it needs special small scale feature, stuff you can shoot at using your turrets, ideally without being shredded apart by anything with a turret

>>65083506
The battle between speed and stealth is still not decided, and speed has an all or nothing quality - either you're fast enough to avoid fire and are invincible, or you aren't and you are 100% dead.
Meanwhile being stealthy affords a degree of protection that reduces the effectiveness of enemy air defences. Sure they can still see you if you get close enough, but in the era of cruise missiles, you don't need to, but more importantly, you have a much better chance of not being shot at to begin with.

They're both sliding scales with different utility at different combinations, dummy.

>>65083043
If you're being threatened by a radar missile while flying a helicopter you need to rethink the sequence of events that lead you to that point.

>>65083927
>rethink
Every OP has an AAR, dumbass

>>65083252
Viable for what though? What mission critical modern jet aircraft needs it enough to sacrifice the extra weight, cost, and maintenance hours for it?

>>65084006
Or some guy who just went
>Fuck IRMs, just slap an ARAD on it

>>65077397
That thing makes no sense. It's a way of getting 2 helicopters a little further up the river. The ship is so big you couldn't get into very shallow, or very narrow sections of a river, so there's only so far the ship can go. So, you're getting the helicopters a little further in land. The helicopters could fly that distance with no problem. But this way, you do it slower, and put a whole ship at risk. There's no benefit to building that kind of ship.

>>65084814
I mean, it holds more than 2 helicopters. There is room for 8 vortexes/chicanes below decks and another 4 on top. Cheap projection of power if you are lording over minor third world colonies.

>>65075766
Yes. But they are still SEXO.

>>65083506
>stealth has an all or nothing quality - either you avoid detection and are invincible, or don't and you are 100% dead.
This is not how decibel reduction works.

File: f-16m.jpg (420 KB, 1920x1080)

420 KB JPG

F-16 in the big 2070

>>65084948
The concept of a 100 year old fighter plane design in service is ridiculous. Why would you want an F-16 over a (probably cheaper) revoker?

>>65084982
Because the Revoker was only manufactured with a SINGLE underwing pylon for some reason

>>65083252
>And improvements in material science could actually make them viable again, because they have large inherent benefits.
At what cost?

Sure you COULD spend $10-20B trying to figure out super strong/lightweight/minimal maintenance swing wing joint structures, but that money could ALSO develop a whole new clean sheet CCA drone or a 6th gen adaptive cycle engine.

IDK about you, but I think the money is simply better spent elsewhere.

File: LADS.jpg (267 KB, 1008x764)

267 KB JPG

Fuck you. Piss off.

>>65085302
*shoots u with guns*

File: 1455327756295.jpg (1.36 MB, 1920x1440)

1.36 MB JPG

>>65075766

Yes. They figured out how to make more advanced wing shapes that got the same broad low/high speed effectiveness without needing the weight and complexity of pivoting wing. Also control surfaces and their control laws got way more sophisticated.

Also the meta shifted away from super high speed anyways. Might shift back if hypersonic aircraft tech gets cracked but i'll bet $100 you still won't see swing wings return.

>>65084942
True, but I meant you either get detected while within air defense range or not.

If you are an operational planner that designs around zero loss, and you have an enemy air defense system with unknown capabilities, you either take maximalist estimates of how close you can fly to enemy radar (which is probably >100km) or you do SEAD like you do without stealth.

With air defense missiles, you can estimate their kinetic performance much more accurately.

Is nuclear option a good game to play solo?
It looks cheap enough for the value, and doesnt go on sale. And the price is only gonna go up isnt it?

>>65075834
By manipulating control surfaces thousands of times per minute.

>>65085497
In the current state the solo missions are really just a tutorial for multiplayer. The AI does its job but its job is mostly to fill space.

PALA>BDF. If you disagree you're just wrong.

>>65085489
No, it matters a lot. The B-1's semi stealthy elements, for example, give it an RCS akin to a large 4th gen fighter.

File: Man.png (1.51 MB, 1624x685)

1.51 MB PNG

>>65085302
>tactical nukes authorized
>fly over the strait in my T/A-30 with a 1.5kt just over the water to avoid radar and parachute it over BDF main airbase
>get kicked from the server
>send_the_pain_below.mp3

>>65084948
B-52's and F16's on Mars.

>>65087930
>>65085302
>>65085304
you people are so gay you make Freddy Mercury rise from the grave from schadenfreude

>>65085497
I've had a lot of fun playing Escalation on solo which is the main game mode. You can customize the settings to do things like add more AI aircraft for more of a challenge. I would say that PvP should be harder than the AI but honestly half the time in multiplayer I'm getting most kills within a couple of km's as if the enemy players are literally retarded. Or my personal favorite of baiting the enemy to spam their ARH missiles while I defend on the reverse slop of a mountain and then ambush them with an IR or even guns when they fly over the ridgeline to try to get me.

The main threat for a lot of the game, especially when playing solo is the enemy ground units, specifically the AD units. I am hoping that in future updates they advance the ground unit AI so that they're not just massive convoys driving down the road but actually drive off into the terrain to launch proper attacks.

File: Nuclear Option Aesthetic (...).png (1.98 MB, 1625x684)

1.98 MB PNG

>>65087943
>avg. BDF pilot

File: bombed.jpg (782 KB, 1920x1080)

782 KB JPG

>>65087946
>The main threat for a lot of the game, especially when playing solo is the enemy ground units, specifically the AD units
GBM and PAB-80 my beloved

File: Average Brawler successfu(...).jpg (720 KB, 2560x1440)

720 KB JPG

>Average Brawler returning with minor damage

File: nuclear war radiation eff(...).jpg (758 KB, 1674x895)

758 KB JPG

What the fuck are the BDF and PALA forces even fighting for?

File: 0001.jpg (112 KB, 595x842)

112 KB JPG

>>65088116

File: fpWTVsk1bt9MkQ.jpg (35 KB, 640x400)

35 KB JPG

>>65088084
>It's just a flesh wound!

File: 8il2n938r8vg1.jpg (326 KB, 1600x2400)

326 KB JPG

>>65087751

>>65088116
vibes and hype moments

File: weight reduction.webm (3.93 MB, 1280x720)

3.93 MB WEBM

>>65088084
Successful Sortie + 67.0

>>65089159
>optionally gunnered attack helicopter

File: airconditioning.png (925 KB, 976x595)

925 KB PNG

>>65089159
really gotta keep the pilots well air conditioned don't want anyone passing out mid flight

File: breezy.jpg (124 KB, 764x388)

124 KB JPG

little hard to see in this one but this Chicane has no canopy, we ride with the top down (off) in this bitch

>>65089661
The chicane getting jammers has made it a bastard to deal with now.

>>65089678
It's better than it was but it still suffers from being the same rank as a brawler while having half the speed and half the payload.

File: HGTCwDaXsAA3Mpt.jpg (401 KB, 2560x1080)

401 KB JPG

Nice to see this game finally getting properly modded

>>65089159
I love that you can literally land a compass upside down and it still counts.

>>65089678
It had optional jammers for a while

File: TA-30 Compass Nuclear Option.png (183 KB, 319x300)

183 KB PNG

T/A-30 master race. Second to none. Master of the skies. Vaporizing cities, annihilating airbases, sinking carriers, owning the skies. God's chosen airframe.

>>65089678
For a little while after first release the chicane and cricket were both effectively invisible to radar. Those were the true propeller supremacy days.

>>65090474
Wish it could have more than two fox 3s

Wild how the worst anti-ship weapons in this game are anti-ship cruise missiles.

I just launched a whopping 32 harpoons at a Hyperion to see what would happen. All intercepted. Every single one.

>>65090950
ASHM-300 are perfectly acceptable AShM. AGM-99 are just uniquely ineffective because they have something (popup attack) that confers none of the real life benefit but has a real downside.
If AGM-99 just flew directly into ships they would be almost as good as ASHM-300.
What's hilarious is that AGM-99 are better ALCMs than ALM-C450s are; they cost 1/3rd as much and you can carry more at once.

>>65090321
Yeah but now it's also carrying a couple IR missiles to pop anything incoming in addition to jammers

>>65089873
Damn what's that thing?

>>65091130
Fan made AWACS, evidently

>>65091130
Triangle Man

>>65091130
Illuminati mothership

>Pre-0.33 Scythe
A shot inside 3km? I dunno man that sounds pretty difficult. I like to relax for a second or two off the rail before homing
>Post-0.33 Scythe
Oh? You think you're safe 120 degrees off boresight? Watch this rate

Goddamn I hate the new frigate, what the hell do you do beyond spamming Tuskos?

Why were ships a point in the patchnotes? Do you pilot the ships, or did they really announce and focus a new enemy to kill.

>>65093919
Ships are a boss battle.
>>65093295
I've had luck sea skimming and throwing those new 500 pounders at it. It generally takes two runs through. First go pops radar or launchers or CIWS so I can go for a space dive with more conventual anti ship weapons like 250s or 500s traveling at mach fuck

>>65075766
Yes now sell me the custom titanium welding rig that was designed and built just for the F14 program.

>>65093919
Because assets change how the game plays and how missions can be designed. A ship in particular isn't just something to be bombed. It's an onion of AD and CIWS with implications for both your efforts striking anything near it and what it can in turn strike at range. Larger ships require a more deliberate peeling of the onion and/or more coordinated strikes, but any asset that either introduces a new capability or puts it somewhere it wasn't before is worth pointing out to players.

>>65076002
>metric aircraft instruments
disgusting. why not make the heading in gradians if you're at it.

>>65094343
cope, imperial scum

>>65094343
NTA, but in NO it's hard to keep an altitude: if you use the metric system you may see the last digit move around even when trying to fly level, but in imperial you have three times the resolution, which means your last two digits will keep fluctuating incessantly giving you no real extra information.

>>65075766
>Are swing wings an obsolete technology?
yes, and they are also considered pretty gay. don't even mention them in a private setting unless you're ready for it's a codeword

>>65075889
nope it needs to be symmetrical or else we don't want it thanks. take your agenda elsewhere

>>65089073
heh

>>65089159
I just want to land safely and sleep. is that enough? I'm done.

File: BV 141.jpg (16 KB, 300x221)

16 KB JPG

>>65095301
Coward.

>>65075766
>Are swing wings an obsolete technology?
The benefits are too minor to justify the maintenence costs. Compound delta wing is almost ideal.

Swing wings won't come back and if they do it will be ornithopter wings with dexterity like a bird.

>>65094343
You know there's an option in the settings to switch it to knots and ft?

File: shipslop.jpg (693 KB, 1920x1080)

693 KB JPG

Mission makers be like
>instead of a sensible scenario, how about I slap down 500 ships and make abysmal 5 FPS dogshit

>>65096337
Nothing else would be a speedbump to 20 players

>>65096410
Maybe they could try limiting player counts?

>>65096424
Or you could not play with 20 players and not play missions meant for them if you dislike them?

>>65096337
>downloading dogshit Korean hyperwar super navy slop
>Not downloading having to escort the president to the weenie hut jr. before time runs out

What the fuck are you doing anon?

>>65096594
The game desperately needs more missions and better discoverability of which are good

>>65085007
Well we are constantly trying to figue out how to make strong/lightwieght/minimal maintenance joint structures anyways, for all sorts of applications.
What I'm getting at is that, maybe after another 10 years of advancing material science the sticker price for R&D will only be in the ballpark of 1B.

>>65084023
Long range naval fighter?

>>65096337
>>65096594
This is a problem as old as time. In some interviews, Volition talked about not wanting any more 'Battles of Endor' in Freespace 2's campaign and it still plagued lower quality fan-made missions. Regardless of how fun it actually is, people just conceptually find it hard to resist seeing how many entities they can spawn and make shoot each other.

>>65089073
Honestly, if the Alkyon is PALA's answer to the Darkreach then I'd say BDF got the better aircraft. It's not as flashy but the missile truck does much more consistent work.

>>65097531
>takeoff
>spam 24 tuskos at random shit in the distance
>land
>repeat
You're not wrong, but the Darkreach is not a particularly exciting machine. Alkyon can at least go to space and rain scimitars on everyone if it so chooses, that's fun.

>>65098216
All it takes is one nerd flying a Medusa and that plan goes to shit.

>>65098511
Good thing Scimitars will home in on anything that tries to jam them now.

>>65098216
tuskos are overrated, load up on 250LRs and you can blanket bases. Haven't tried that with the new stealth cluster glide bombs but waching AA scramble to take out 68 bombs is hilarious

>>65098879
250LR spam is better vs ships than any of the actual anti-ship weapons too.

>>65098879
I've tried that, a mixed load is best. Take like one bay of 500s and the rest 250s. The 500s will make it through and wreck any radar or turrets and the 250s will finish it off

>>65089873
please tell me there are places other than shitcord to get mods from now...

>>65100713
Lol that reminds me that the developers of a large mod got really pissy when people requested they distribute on github and/or moddb

>>65100713
>discord only mods
The future is grim.

>>65100829
>>65100725
it really is, and out of all games, it has to be for NO

File: 1642821290174.gif (3.47 MB, 384x480)

3.47 MB GIF

>>65100713
>>65100829
>mods only found on trooncord
>go to discord for mods
>modders require you to join their own personal trooncord to download their mods
Enough

>>65075935
Only the innermost pylons on the f-111 pivoted with the wings, you retard. That loadout limits the f-111 to having fully extended wings all the time.

>>65089873
One of these days I'll have to try Operation Rising Toilet Water 3.

>swing wing topic
>no pictures of swing wing aircraft

>>65102149
Aside from all the pictures of swing wing aircraft

>>65101882
it's really AIDS. for the longest time I thought the game's modding community was dead looking at the steamworkshop. nope, a fair amount of new planes and other additions but only on their discord. really bizarre way of doing things.

>>65103484
To be fair, you can't do the injection-based modding to do new or replacement aircraft from within the game's workshop support. That's outside the scope of what's currently supported so no matter what you'd be needing a third party resource.
Discord's a fucking horrid one though, yeah.

>>65077042
It's rank 6, and has no factories so every loss past the first like 2 is going to result in you paying a shitload of money for another strike or even just the dude who showed up to R6 late

File: based.png (1 KB, 434x512)

1 KB PNG

>>65075766
Nuclear Option mentioned

>>65090474
it's so ugly though

>>65104088
its got a bit of a fridge body I'll admit but its fun to zip around in and very capable for the money

File: do I need that.webm (3.92 MB, 1152x648)

3.92 MB WEBM

>>65104088
It looks amazing in desert pink

>>65104304
The game needs a dynamic kill mark system on your aircraft, resetting on death naturally

Yeah cause we are all about flying doritos now

>>65098553
You can actually take advantage of that by jamming all of the scimitars aimed at your teammates and then using the laser to shoot them down. It works surprisingly well.

>>65075766
>>65103958

legitimately one of the only vidya I've been excited for in a long time. The modding potential is absurd.

>>65100713
There mods are on github. And the mod launcher iirc

>>65100713
>>65100829
>>65103484
congratulations you lazy faggots
here you go
https://github.com/Combat787/NOMM

>>65105808
Progress!

>>65105298
Defensive jammer seems safer than the laser

>>65105808
thanks for doing the needful

File: 1715645582846091.jpg (25 KB, 518x518)

25 KB JPG

>>65103742
unrelated but i've been learning how to mod through studying NO mods and it seems like such a pain. it doesn't help when there's several files in a mod that seem to ultimately be doing the same thing and you can't ascertain whether it's just redundancy/something they left in because they didn't give a shit or if it actually serves a function. all I know how to do is start removing shit and seeing when it stops working.

>>65076002
what game is that?

>>65109262
Fission Decision

>>65109262
Atomic Consideration

>>65109262
Fusion Finance

>>65109262
WMD Deliberation

>>65109262
Hydrogen Conundrum

>>65109262
Fissile Choice

>>65109262
Plutonium Decision

>>65109262
Neutron Negotiation

>>65109262
Uranium Obligation

>>65109262
Criticality Dissertation

>>65109180
They could be files that they copied without know what they did. A few years back I made a lewd portrait set mod for Stellaris and hosted it on loverslab. I went through a few revisions locally before finally uploading it, and somewhere along the line I apparently fucked up and had a vestigial file in there that wasn't referenced by anything and just say there doing nothing.

Fast forward a year and I downloaded some different space sloot portrait mods for my empires to conquer. Look inside: Some of them contain the very same do-nothing file that I accidentally uploaded a year ago!

File: oops.webm (3.93 MB, 1280x720)

3.93 MB WEBM

Sheridan? Sheridon't.

>>65110044
kek

>>65110044
VBIED

>>65109262
Explosi- no... Atomic- no someone already did that...... uh......umm........how about Nuclear Alternative.....fuck im so unfunny im sorry im sorry im sorry

File: agm.jpg (40 KB, 200x168)

40 KB JPG

*does nothing*

>>65111950
It's good on the darkreach for mop up operations but that's about it.
Payload of 32 of them, de facto infinite range.
Are harpoons as bad IRL as the game portrays them? Is popup a net negative in all cases?

>>65110044
>>65089873
I downloaded this mod via NOMM but I can't get it to take off, even with minimum weight. All the other aircraft mods work fine.

>>65112503
I think NOTT breaks the Chimera right now

>>65112322
Real harpoons can be programmed to use a mix of different terminal attack patterns (popup, waterline dive, weave, corkscrew) within a single salvo to force the enemy to split their fire.

>>65113102
Ingame they split between popup and waterline, I think they maneuver
The popup just means half of them are killed more easily and splitting fire doesn't really help because of how fast CIWS adjusts targets

>>65075863
>Why do people like you post about aircraft when you know so little about them
Good question, why do you do it?

>>65095297
not nearly as gaped and gay as stealth

>>65075766
I was just thinking the other day, AFAIK the only swing wings still in service are the B-1 and Tu-160. Do swing wings somehow make more sense on bigger aircraft or is it just that there's less motivation to push bombers out of service compared to fighters?

>>65113291
Given that the US is still happy with using a 1950s era strategic bomber as the backbone of its bomber force, I'm inclined to believe the latter.

>haven't played in a while
>see thread
>start playing again
>try to nuke airbase
>nuke get shot out of the sky by a SPAAG
>stop playing again
Same ol' bullshit I ses

>>65114111
I've never played it. I'm waiting for it to exit early access. I hope it becomes a full game soon.

>>65114111
>Anon is upset that anti air defenses defends the target
Just load up with a bunch of 125s as chaff.

>>65114111
When the air defence defends the air

>>65114307
>when your nuclear munitions are vulnerable to SHORAD
Come on, that's bullshit. Nukes should be fuzed to detonate if they get struck after release. A suboptimal air burst is still better than nothing.

File: night nook.webm (3.47 MB, 1280x582)

3.47 MB WEBM

>>65114111
>>65114716
It takes mechanism to even half-trigger a nuke. Having your nuke suddenly ripped appart isn't going to ensure a failsafe explosion. IRL bombs already land undetonated and -their- explosives are much easier to trigger.

Beside... would you HONESTLY play a game where any player can suicide-nuke without effort?
Me I'll take a few semi-realistic balance nudge over needing to make server without nuke to have a challenge.

>>65114148
>I've never played it. I'm waiting for it to exit early access. I hope it becomes a full game soon.
Don't tell that to the dev, but it already feels more of a full game than many "full game" out there.

File: tac nuke.webm (3.92 MB, 1066x600)

3.92 MB WEBM

>>65114111
Go faster

>>65114866
>Me I'll take a few semi-realistic balance nudge over needing to make server without nuke to have a challenge.
Originally nukes couldn't be destroyed by g-force, so the meta was to just kamakazi at mach 2 into the base and drop it last second before crashing into the ground.
>>65114716
I think ALNDs do this actually, arming like 10 seconds before impact and detonating prematurely if damaged. Send them behind a screen of AGM99s to soak up enemy fire of course.

File: THERE WAS NO OTHER OPTION.webm (3.74 MB, 1208x680)

3.74 MB WEBM

>>65114111
>try to nuke airbase
>nuke get shot out of the sky by a SPAAG
umm... bro? your other nukes?

File: Special delivery.png (1.34 MB, 1303x791)

1.34 MB PNG

>>65114716
To be fair, nuclear weapons operate on very sensitive Loony Tunes physics*, and require a Rube Goldberg-esque mechanism to tick over just right for its little bang to turn out as a earth-shattering kaboom.

*(I mean, squeezing something together hard enough to cause destructive results? Is a nuke just a comically large coil spring? An overstuffed suitcase? Come on now.)

>>65109262
Radiating Selection

File: billions.webm (3.93 MB, 1280x720)

3.93 MB WEBM

>>65115131
>Originally nukes couldn't be destroyed by g-force, so the meta was to just kamakazi at mach 2 into the base and drop it last second before crashing into the ground.
That's why I said that, it was no fun at all.

>>65116128
>infinite bomb
Number is a quality on its own but using smaller bomb as decoy work better

>piledriving the entire enemy backline because everyone else is dogfighting over dustbowl and not looking at the map
The game really need a tutorial mission that shows people how to intercept them because I'm not sure most players even know that they can be intercepted.

>>65117092
I've almost memorized the IRMB launcher locations now since seemingly nobody wants to go after them. A compass can break that thing up and absolutely save your ass late game

>>65076305
They can't fire ARH at if you aren't in radar range, which is trivially easy in stealth configuration.
If you are detected then you either have poor situational awareness and didn't realise you got real close to a known enemy asset, or you got real unlucky and someone else is flying stealth in the same chunk of sky you're in.

>>65117245
Or you're playing heartlands and are detected before your wheels are up

File: 1770547090497009.png (1.69 MB, 1024x1293)

1.69 MB PNG

Yes, all it needs is a bellend

>>65117261
Turn your radar off

>>65076740
I think a lot of people underestimate the differences external stores and even larger empty pylons can make. If you take the Ifrit with single fox 3 externals for hardpoints you can really feel just how much smaller your RCS gets with each missile you fire, since I think with just the small pylons you get back down to more-or-less clean RCS once they're empty.

>>65118173
The difference between a fully loaded revoker and slick vortex is hardly noticeable on heartland

File: HHM0dseWIAApEca.jpg (197 KB, 1420x860)

197 KB JPG

Jesus this woman can't stop adding amazing shit. Aviation cruiser time

File: HHGuiAvW8AAIh62.jpg (251 KB, 1961x876)

251 KB JPG

>>65120771
>This is the ugliest goddamn ship I have ever modelled
>Length: 215m
>Width: 53m
>Hangar capacity: 14 aircraft
>Displacement: Stupid
>Armament: 96x AGM-99 cruise missile VLS, 64x RAM-45 SAM VLS, 3x twin 30mm/IRRAM CIWS, twin 130mm deck gun
>Power: Gas Turbine

File: the white person face.png (161 KB, 449x400)

161 KB PNG

>>65120771
>nuclear option
>every ship is diesel or gas

>>65120818
Nuclear is optional.

>>65120776
Those life raft canisters next to the CIWS look very inconveniently placed.

File: 20260501161122_1.jpg (327 KB, 1920x1080)

327 KB JPG

This game is tedious.
Just playing solo against bots.
>I take off
>I drop bombs
>50% chance i shred the enemy
>50% chance the bombs get shot down
>I die
>Repeat
For 2 hours and the game didnt end.
Cool nuclear strikes though, happened to me.

>>65120881
The AI has improved slightly but is still dumb as bricks sadly. Multiplayer is better.

>>65120881
you could try either saturating the target with smaller munitions to overwhelm air defenses, fly in your bombs at lower altitude and higher velocity without lobbing them up, jam the enemy radars with active jamming pods, or just play anti-air to allow your allied bots to do the darkreach dirty work.

depending on the target, there are usually specific strategies on how to overwhelm them, for example you can take down a shard cruiser by fully loading a chicane with kingpin missiles, flying closer than 5m to the ocean surface until you're well within the kingpin's firing range (the closer the better), and dumping all of the missiles into the shard.
you might lose your helicopter doing this, but trading one chicane for a shard is always worth it.

radar SAM becomes relatively useless once you take out all of the fixed radar installations and ships on the map, which is doable if you use a medusa with arad missiles and radar jamming pods. flying really low in a cricket and shooting the radar up close works too, but arad+jamming is an easy standoff way to do it.
once radar SAM is down, you can use glide bombs like PAB80LR, PAB250LR and GBM500LR relatively freely, since they don't have IR signatures, and air defenses will have to rely on visual targeting, which is more than nothing, but much less reliable than radar.
i especially like using the GBM500LR because it releases little submunitions before reaching its target area and each submunition picks its own individual target and flight path, meaning that at least one or two submunitions usually make it.

>>65120881
I both like and dislike the nuke launchers
>help break a stalemate or force a victory/loss instead of a slow grind
>if they target the carrier group that usually spawn around the time they go up, usually kills them leaving them as a nonfactor
>look eerie and cool as hell seeing dozens of nukes get launched ala judgment day
They help sell the "oh shit" factor of a war going nuclear: either get in the air to try and shoot them down or get the hell out of there.

>>65121042
Piledrivers only punish bad teams. They're easy to intercept if you're paying attention.

>>65121190
With the new cluster bombs they are pretty easy to kill.
Take a revoker fast and low , select the center, and do a short 200m climb at like 2k out and you'll shread the entire thing if you drop 2 500ERs

>>65121914
It's fucking hilarious that you have to deploy a hundred+ km glide vehicle basically drone mothership at 2 km for it to function

>>65122464
tbm launcher sites have high tier AA in place.
if you want the big glide bomb to hit distant targets, hop in the fast bomber instead and use the jamming pods to make sure no radar installation cucks you

>>65122469
Obviously such an advanced device should be able to maneuver to avoid AA until it deploys, it's basically useless in most applications as it is now

>>65122479
i've been using it in place of an ARAD and it's basically the same thing but better
>no IR signature
>comparably fast given a good launch speed
>capable of hugging terrain unless you stratodrop it for some reason
>takes out the radar you targeted AND anything nearby
you should still use radar jamming, but that's neither difficult nor much to ask if you're launching something from a safe distance at one of maybe 10 high value targets on the map.
do that a couple times and all that's left are IR SAMs, laser trucks and SPAA, all of which have sub-par range compared to the boltstrikes you're dealing with at the start of a match, and can be easily overwhelmed with lots of ordnance at once, or just hit directly with a gun run.

>>65122464
The main reason I'm releasing it point blank is not really to avoid AA shooting the bomb down but to avoid getting shot myself. If I fly a typical attack profile for glide bombs I'm almost certainly going to get intercepted in my revoker. I have to stay low and fast to make it to the target area. Otherwise I'm dropping those bombs like 30km from the target and that's just too much time on the air

>>65084982
>The concept of a 100 year old armor design in service is ridiculous. Why would you want an lorica segmentata over a (probably cheaper) mail haubergeon?

>>65122668
Are you retarded?

>>65120881
That's just because you take your time.
When you play coop PvE you usually have someone holding the whole team by themselves.

The problem is that above 10 players it either end too fast or so many NPC are added it's a nuke fest.

>>65121042
I once had a game where I spent most of my time protecting Sandrift airbase
Racking 10x time more point than other players.

>keep firing AA across the map because Heartland is small
>boat start spawning
>load my Ifrit full of Fox 2
>intercept 14 cruise missiles at once
>TBM NUKE LAUNCH
>kill some enemy bombing Sandrift air defense while I desperately try to stay ready
>oh shit oh shit oh shit the piledriver are coming down I'm not ready
>Point up, ignore incoming missile alert
>try to select only the nuclear missiles one by one with my few Fox 3
>sucessfully protect Sandrift from everything as I see all our other base got nuked

>>65124176
i should try playing MP some time

the mk2 eyeball is honestly really powerful at the start of a match and possibly even later if your team doesn't do proper recon

>>65125799
You never did? Wow, you really should.

Fair advice: Take a server with only a handful of players.
For now Heartland is so small that it's why too easy to killsteal or nuke each other.

And if it's a custom map you'll also get gigantic fleet of enemies that require teamwork.

NTA but I never did either. I play on a Steam Deck and I often slow down time to handle things that require mouse or precise inputs, so I always thought I'd be at a severe disadvantage if I were to drop in a server. How's the experience compared to single player? I enjoy workshop missions for what is worth.

>>65126688
Planning and map awareness matter a lot more than reflexes. You can top the scoreboard without ever fighting another player just by being sneaky and focusing on objectives.

>>65126688
A lot of servers run co-op missions, might be worth trying one of those if you don't want to risk feeding the sweats.

>>65126688
>How's the experience compared to single player?
PvE is much easier actually and more fun.

Even if much more AI spawn for each human player, you usually (not always) have a good player fully protecting the sky, freeing you for job like deploying those repair trucks.
Some will be jamming boats that really need to be jammed, allowing you to can swarm them.
When you reach a dozen players, the game pace can move very quickly.

That said, now that AI learned to notch, you need to be closer to use even radar guided missiles.

>>65075935
i built a model of one of these when i was a kid and glued the pylons in place but the wings were moveable, so when they were folded back the bombs were all off angle and it made me so pissed off in my autistic mind i lit the model on fire

>>65128810
Man I blew up so many model tanks and planes when I was a kid. You can fit firecrackers in almost anything

Nuclear Option really goes to show how cool modern warfare could be if countries weren't totally deindustrialized paper tigers and improved optical sensors, air defense, and DEWs ended the faggy droneslop meta

>>65102025
The inner four stations pivot, you retard, even just those and the bay, and not the outer four station, are still more than double an F15E's load.

>>65109262
Central Branch

>>65120818
Yeah, it's an option, dumbass. They just choose not to take that option

>>65075766
I'd say the cockpit in that gif is outdated too

>>65131975
Side by side >>>>> tandem

>>65130550
The last update basically added a drone carrier that deploys FPVs

File: osaka.png (1015 KB, 736x735)

1015 KB PNG

>>65132731
?

>>65132856
I assume he means the new cluster glide bomb when it's just based on the canceled JSOW B with the guided skeet warheads from the CBU-97