SimFuelDump still work in MP :(
-
Should be a Btest feature only.
-
Should be a Btest feature only.
Add the ability of lighting it up with the afterburner, it will make things more interesting !
Falcon 4 - Operation Flaming Fart
-
Should be a Btest feature only.
The only âuseâ offline of it is to make performance benchmarks under different Grossweights⌠but in MP it really has no purpose nor justification.
PS: It is not only about the probability of others maybe not playing fair⌠as much âathmosphere-poiseningâ ! is the probability of others suspecting âyouâ too.
-
@A.S:
The only âuseâ offline of it is to make performance benchmarks under different Grossweights⌠but in MP it really has no purpose nor justification.
But I do not think code will introduce more active anti-cheat (you can always cheat anyway) ⌠and look, equal to dump fuel, you stay full Afterburner with AB in low level, tanks are also empty in few minutes ⌠and what if if no more fuel => the other win.
-
Fuel-management is part of the matchplay. Eta 8min AB combat time yes.
PS: it isnt really an ACP expansion⌠just a little fix as was done similarily before by removing the 1.5x thrust-mulitplier callback from .32 to .33.
-
Please⌠fix itâŚ:roll:
-
@A.S:
The only âuseâ offline of it is to make performance benchmarks under different Grossweights⌠but in MP it really has no purpose nor justification.
.
it has one
when a player is kicked off from a TE, when he rejoins, he will get full fuel, in that case , fuel dump is usefull to get back the original fuel quantity before losing connection (of course you can cheat and keep full)
so in that case, fuel dump is an anti cheat feature
-
heheâŚfrom that perspective yeah. thx for addressing it btw Mav ! Good man.
-
Please remember to leave a fuel dump option for carrier AC. Thanks.
-
Yep second that request, Hornets players may need to dump fuel before landing on a carrier.
-
Simple⌠just disable it in the dogfight module ⌠and keep callback functioning in TE and Campaign. I think that is what he will do?
-
You missed the point (well, color me surprised). Use whatever justification you like for your request, but dont use as justification that its not realistic, because that is not your concern - as highlighted above.
Instead say what you mean, that you want it to be an anti cheat device for the game you play.
Didnât realize that you were in charge of how people justify their requests or what they state in their posts.
Note to self: All posts concerning justification must go through the blue pooch first. Got it!
-
Could we change its behavior slightly from dropping 1,000 pounds per callback press to a toggle that dumps fuel at a more realistic rate? Pretty please?
-
@bill_3810:
Didnât realize that you were in charge of how people justify their requests or what they state in their posts.
Note to self: All posts concerning justification must go through the blue pooch first. Got it!
Nah, if I was in charge, the thread would simply have been deleted for not going through me first. The ones in charge of what you state in your posts are the hosts, and what you are allowed to state in your posts is quite clearly laid out in the forum rules.
Still, those rules do not prohibit pointing out logical fallacies in others posts, so here we are.
-
heheâŚfrom that perspective yeah. thx for addressing it btw Mav ! Good man.
He didnât address it. He has a better view than you because this was already thought about before
You guys only see the direct issue, you need to see the big picture and the consequences a change may have.
The answer is maybe to avoid playing with cheaters.As for Bluewolf, please understand that ppl perfectly have the right to voice their issues and discuss it.
Itâs not because someone requests something that it will be defacto happens. I like to think that the dev team does have a big picture in mind - most of the time thanks to teamwork)
So no need to be sarcastic with your answer and once again no need to abuse the reporting function because you donât like the answer
Moderators decide the infraction to our forum rules, not you !! -
Could we change its behavior slightly from dropping 1,000 pounds per callback press to a toggle that dumps fuel at a more realistic rate? Pretty please?
The callback is used for stock TE by script (.run file) for EX: in Refuel Training Missions and need to dump fuels quickly. We need new another callback to dump fuels with F-18.
-
@Red:
As for Bluewolf, please understand that ppl perfectly have the right to voice their issues and discuss it.
Itâs not because someone requests something that it will be defacto happens. I like to think that the dev team does have a big picture in mind - most of the time thanks to teamwork)
So no need to be sarcastic with your answer and once again no need to abuse the reporting function because you donât like the answer
Moderators decide the infraction to our forum rules, not you !!Well, if this is where you would prefer to have that discussion - I see no issue with people voicing issues, nor discussion of those issues.
The purpose of reporting something is to bring it to moderators attention so that they may decide whether something is an infraction or not, of course. If the purpose is assumed to be to mark something as definitely being an infraction, it does make it senseless to make that system available to anyone who is not a moderator.
I have no issue with the answer, rather the trolling response (as per forum rule #7s definition).
-
Perhaps we can ask Tacview dev to implement fuel management check and see if someone used fuel dump cheat after each game?
-
Is that actually possible? Didnt think fuel remaining was captured by ACMI.
-
okay, letâs loose a bit of time, since we have to explain everything to you Bw:
you reported that post for violation of rule7 & 12
for the record, here is your first post and the answer to that post:
@Blu3wolf:Real F-16 also cant spawn midair either, so please disable the dogfight module in the same patch please
@bill_3810:
Didnât realize that you were in charge of how people justify their requests or what they state in their posts.
Note to self: All posts concerning justification must go through the blue pooch first. Got it!our rules
7. Trolling, Attacks and Flaming: These are always forbidden.
â˘Trolling is posting in a way that provokes emotional responses.in my moderator perspective, the answer you got isnât any more sarcastic than your initial intervention.
in police work, itâs called justified response equal and not escalating.
so if i have to consider that answer to you as trolling or flame bait, i have also to consider your intervention as flame bait.
Now since Bill has never been warned about anything but you have been warned multiple times due to your behaviour on this forum, guess what would happen?â˘Attacks and derogatory terms of any kind are not welcome
â˘Flames are messages that personally attack or call any people names or otherwise harass. These, along with any generally condescending posts will be edited or removed at the moderatorâs discretion.
â˘If a thread is flame-bait (appears to be intended to start an argument or is likely to cause an argument rather than enhance discussion, as in trolling), it will be locked or removed without notice. Individual flame-bait comments in a post will be deleted or edited at the moderatorsâ discretion.
â˘If the thread turns into an argument, it will be closed to further comment or removed without notice. Sometimes a moderator may split the thread or remove certain portions in order to keep the discussion going, this is not always possible.
â˘Continuous or deliberate attempts to derail the topic of a thread.are not applicable part or rule 7 to this issue
then we have this last point:
â˘Repeated attempts to push the boundaries of any element of this entire policy that in the opinion of a moderator amount to a provocation or annoyance will result in sanctions just as surely as actual failure to follow the entire policy.
whoâs pushing the boundaries here, Bill or you?
And to be complete:
12. Thread Drifting/Steering: Please keep discussions on topic. Please post in appropriate forums, under appropriate topics.
once again, the first who tried to drift the discussion out of its meaning was you, implying the dogfight module and not bringing anything of value to the discussion
if you want to play trouble maker, grow a thicker skin and please stop coming to cry on our shirts when somebody does the same to you - in the same sarcastic way