Post reply

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.

Note: this post will not display until it's been approved by a moderator.

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview

Please read the rules before you post!


Topic Summary

Posted by: Father Tim
« on: June 06, 2020, 11:09:03 AM »

It would also likely produce "correct" answers for BFC size such as pi/4 or root-two-over-two.  I can think of situations where the best possible beam fire control would be 'the smallest size that is still one HTK'.
Posted by: alex_brunius
« on: May 26, 2020, 06:10:23 PM »

Quote from: amram on May 26, 2020, 08:48:29 AM
Why not numerical input over a drop down? 

Have all the granularity you want, without the absurdly huge drop down to go with it.

I suspect because that would require making a separate UI just for BFC ( like turret, missiles and other customizable components where you have such inputs have ) rather than being able to use the current shared one.
Posted by: amram
« on: May 26, 2020, 08:48:29 AM »

Why not numerical input over a drop down? 

Have all the granularity you want, without the absurdly huge drop down to go with it.

 
Posted by: Jorgen_CAB
« on: May 26, 2020, 01:47:04 AM »

Quote from: DFNewb on May 25, 2020, 11:08:35 PM
As title says: 2/3 Size / range BFC's are a must. 50tons for a BFC on a fighter is reasonable, 75 is not, 38 is ok but you usually could spare the 12 tons for extra damage.

I agree a bit more granularity for the range would be nice... I would like to see 2/3 and 3/4 range as options for the range. This can be useful for smaller and cheaper DP fire-controls too.
Posted by: DFNewb
« on: May 25, 2020, 11:08:35 PM »

As title says: 2/3 Size / range BFC's are a must. 50tons for a BFC on a fighter is reasonable, 75 is not, 38 is ok but you usually could spare the 12 tons for extra damage.