Matrix Games Forums

I think we are just seeing the return of mustang191.

This entire post feels like an excellently applied metaphor for trolling/shit-posting and moderating. Nice troll my dude. Would love to hear the genesis of your username

Yes, the sock-puppet has been reported. I recognized it from the first post.

thewood1 wrote: Sun Jul 17, 2022 12:39 pm Yes, the sock-puppet has been reported. I recognized it from the first post.

Wow... Yeah, Jewws post looks very similar to what mustang191 posted earlier:
https://www.matrixgames.com/forums/view ... 7#p5000937

Has he been banned or did he just make a new account because his rep had been ruined?

This is his third time around in the last two months. Mustong91 first. Then a short stint that everyone ignored, now this one. There are specific rules about sock puppetry. My guess is he was just wasn't getting the fun he expected the first time plus he was spoken to. The second time he was ignored. This time he went back to his MO of prolific trolling across multiple threads. I'm sure this one will end up similar to the first one.

The interesting thing is the first few years we got a bunch of people/trolls like this. They were people from the Harpoon days that didn't want CMNAO to succeed Harpoon and they had some personal animosity towards the devs. Those people moved on after a couple years when CMNAO suddenly became very successful. But they would still pop up every now and then here and on other wargaming sites.

This one appears different, but I suspect is somehow related to He Who Shall Not Be Named.

thewood1 wrote: Sun Jul 17, 2022 2:10 pm This is his third time around in the last two months. Mustong91 first.

Lol, what a pathetic jerk.....

The interesting thing is the first few years we got a bunch of people/trolls like this. They were people from the Harpoon days that didn't want CMNAO to succeed Harpoon and they had some personal animosity towards the devs.

Yeah, I heard that from you before, fortunately I didn't have to experience all the unbelievable amount of shit that you and others went through over the years, I can only imagine... You are a very scarred veteran, that's clear to see

Those people moved on after a couple years when CMNAO suddenly became very successful.

A couple of years??? Were they stupid? What was their problem? Didn't they like progress???

Look up Herman Hum

thewood1 wrote: Sun Jul 17, 2022 12:39 pm Yes, the sock-puppet has been reported. I recognized it from the first post.

It's sad they don't have anything better to do or the sophistication to understand that they're really, really obvious. Like, painfully obvious. They're so easy to identify they don't even have time to enflame the community.

Rob322 wrote: Sun Jul 17, 2022 4:04 pm

thewood1 wrote: Sun Jul 17, 2022 12:39 pm Yes, the sock-puppet has been reported. I recognized it from the first post.

It's sad they don't have anything better to do or the sophistication to understand that they're really, really obvious. Like, painfully obvious. They're so easy to identify they don't even have time to enflame the community.

It is strange. My take was always it was about playing the forums instead of the game.

Discord and streaming seems to be where the rubber meets the road these days.

M

BDukes wrote: Sun Jul 17, 2022 4:18 pm It is strange. My take was always it was about playing the forums instead of the game.

One doesn't exclude the other, they can do both equally, I've met enough such people during my time on the Internet and before

My 20-year old, when I told him I had been using discord, told me discord is already old school.

Your claim that "Technology didn't improve" is citation needed. As is the premise that AIM-7 performance didn't improve between Vietnam and the Gulf War.

Also, I think that there is a very, very important point that is getting missed about the new missile fly-out model. Don't think of it that missiles are much easier to dodge- think of it that practical missile engagement ranges have decreased by about 60%.

We need dogfight missiles.

The outmaneuver scenario may only happens at the terminal guidance stage for a mid-to-long range AAM as they bleed off much of the momentum in the course and may not have enough to follow a maneuvering target.

At most, argument like this may only applied on something extreme like ABMs engaging maneuvering RVs or HGVs with Hit-to-Kill warheads, as they need to ease their way into the calculated ballistic course and terminal guidance is only for correcting measurement or calculation errors IMHO.

Aircrafts normally don't have that kind of speed and acceleration to evade something approaching hot and fast at Mach 2+ speed, if the missile have enough initial momentum to keep its speed in most of its engagement envelope or doing something to boost/keep its momentum during intercept course.

This is why we have dual-thrust rocket engine and crazy boron-laced ramjet stuff like Meteor nowadays. CMO maybe not accurate enough to simulate all aspect of these improvements, some of which still classified, but my Meteor did do better than AIM-120Ds when engaging J-20s in my scenario.

And mid-long range AAM shouldn't depend on tailgating. They should engage their target on predetermined or calculated intercept course and enter terminal guidance before the target knows its demise is imminent and build up momentum to evade a Mach 2+ incoming killer.

Recent CMO build do have a problem about keeping a AAM in the sky for much longer than useful, like letting a AIM-9C flying in 400kt+ to follow something evading in 650kt+, but this kind of behavior may not occur IRL, especially with modern missiles linking with launcher with datalinks.

And if we can't follow the plane, we can have a large warhead to blast it off the sky, just like the russian did with their AA-6/AA-9 or SA-2, even nuclear tipped stuff. You can't outmaneuver a large enough bomb.

I know I shouldn't, but for a brief moment, when still believing there was supposed to be any serious thinking behind this, I though this was kinda hilarious.