Exorcet

I found the tail http://autotraderca.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/chargerdaytona.jpg Also, YAL-1 is showing off http://www.aviationweek.com/aw/generic/sto...mp;headline=ABL Shoots Down Target, Engages Second&channel=defense Edit- Apparently there are spaces in the URL, so copy and paste. 1 down, 1 hit. I want to see it engage a QF-4.

I was talking about damage scraping, not PA scraping. Given how little PA damage EN weapons do, the PA scrape probably doesn't matter, it's as good as a miss. And on the PA scraping causing people to think there is more lag, it doesn't explain taking a MOTORCOBRA clip at 50 range without a scratch. The game just is that laggy.

I've never tested it, but I've never seen EN weapons scrape (and my staple is EN weapons), while I've seen solids do it countless times. If EN does scrape, it's likely harder to do.

I'm not a fan of Rainbow Rockets. AC4 blue-white exhaust forever.

Back weapons are on the core. Arm weapons connect to arms, which connect to the core. And this: http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2006/wireless.html

If you're talking pre AC4, I could HW quite well. I could not tank. There were enough differences, the mobility of HW's gave me something I could work with. Tanks didn't, they were a different style that I needed to adapt to. Not being able to jump or dash is a pretty big difference. When tanking, I became very OB reliant. Post AC4 is the same deal, HW legs have the mobility, and jumping/weight gives them some different styles of moving around. HW's can hop around and conserve EN, tanks like to float because they don't get much benefit by being on the ground, this may reduce the ability to recharge EN, so a more passive play style is preferred.

I actually hardly ever used weapon pick up. Sure you could bring some hulking overloaded AC and drop stuff to use later, but underweighted AC's usually had enough ammo anyway. I can't see real mechs bending down and picking up guns anyway.

Yeah, this is a change between 4 and FA then. The SR's, 47 in particular, had decent melee. Both had more than weapons like CANOPUS (124), WADOU(102), GAN01-SS-WG (159), etc. 47 was able to surpass ALTAIR (234), SAMAWA (232), EURYALE (206). However, I now think that the distance from center effecting anything was an illusion, especially in light of your tests. Unless it's another AC4-FA change.

I came up with that to explain how SR's could have more melee than LR's (for example), but still track worse. I also recall sniper weapons being a lot easier to aim near screen center (which would make sense given that you found the reticule speed to depends on how close it is to the target AC, so this might be busted already). This is all from AC4, and I don't think I ever gave it a proper test. I might look into it sometime.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ullliotY7mY

Bump, perhaps to spark topic to life. Did some tests, went to split screen (with my small non HD TV) and dashed around the lock box in various ways. -I tested snipers on SOBRERO arms, seems they have full range of motion, so maneuverability likely does not effect range of motion. -The lock box is confirmed oval. -Lock speed seems to decrease with distance from center, though it's slight. I could be imagining it, someone else should check. They seemed constant with sniper rifles on SOBRERO, but I did not count this because of the supposed tracking modifier on sniper weapons. -FA's number changes on melee are probably not in the same scale as AC4, It was easier to break lock by boosting/QB in AC4. -Cannons actually have full horizontal range of sight. -Red lock occurs when the aiming reticule (what b called the trailing white lock) is over the AC's white lock (the white lock that is always around an AC if it's in FCS range). This means that even if an AC is moving faster than the reticule, it might not be able to break redlock immediately.

UNBELIEVEABLE. I will analyze. EDIT Info is hard to come by, about the only thing I found that might be worth stating is that the avionic will be based on the Su-35's. What this means specifically, I don't know. Russia has some AESA's, but perhaps their performance was not satisfactory enough to warrent one over an advanced IRBIS PESA? http://www.en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20100129/157715602.html Weapons seem to be concentrated between intakes, 8 R-77's or two bombs. I'm guessing the weapons bays are set up like the YF-23's. http://www.en.rian.ru/mlitary_news/20100129/157717728.html

Yes, it will never die, even if I don't have anything specific to announce at this point. Though I did find some upgraded F-15 J's, interestingly equipped with IRST, though I was able to verify its performance. I'm curious to see what it offers over the F-15 J and F-15 C, though I doubt it's as drastic as Su-27 to Su-35. In other news, the PAK-FA is still making claims about being on track for flight testing apparently. The wide F-22 concept for the plane currently leads popularity.