@Nerfaddict Well, they shouldn't.
In reality, a railgun should only have the energy and durability to fire a few times at most in a short amount of time, so any realistic railgun shouldn't break the treaty regardless of their one-punch-kill nature.
Looking at the auto-tags/obligatory tags and I'm just realizing how many people are involved in M-War II, this is gonna be the biggest collab of the year lol (I didn't even include some spectators or anyone else joining, since I just referenced one of my earlier M-War II posts)
@Dracul0Anderson Actually I've been preparing stuff since early February
I just haven't posted any because of my schedule (making thumbnails is already hard-ish for me since I like to aim for a more "scenic" appearance, but it becomes harder when you include editing, finding a good time to post, and of course the inclusion of War Thunder removing the R2Y2 next month prompting me to grind more)
@JSTQ I mean, the wars we've done have never really incorporated full-function realism like serious politics, production limits, monetary concerns, spying, or even what kind of aircraft to use (mind you the M-War had WWII era vehicles, and the S-War saw a fighter from the 30s). Adding such mechanisms may take time to adapt to.
@Boeing727200F I'll have to test performance, but by looks, potentially.
May have trouble keeping up with the field though, most aircraft are gen 3-4, with some 5ths probably on the way.
@Nerfaddict Well, they shouldn't.
In reality, a railgun should only have the energy and durability to fire a few times at most in a short amount of time, so any realistic railgun shouldn't break the treaty regardless of their one-punch-kill nature.
@Graingy So far no issues
I would suggest using portals though
@JSTQ Oh
+1Well I'm fine with that lol
I genuinely forgot if I specified, so just to be clear, this is an MDA and therefore Loyalist aircraft.
M-War II Special 3:
@SPSidearm
@Boeing727200F
@SuperSuperTheSylph
M-War II Special 2:
+1@LunarEclipseSP
@SamuelJamesCastor
@NerfAddict
M-War II Special:
@Monarchii
@JSTQ
@Dracul0Anderson
Mailing List 5:
+2@windshifter1
M-War II Special:
@MonsNotTheMonster
Mailing List 4:
@Karroc9522
@SuperSuperTheSylph
@KPLBall
Mailing List 3:
@B1BLancer
@IDK0
@LoganAviation
Mailing List 2:
@MIGFOXHOUND31BSM26
@YarisSedan
@blt
Mailing List 1:
@TheMouse
@CrestelAeronautics
@PrussianAirlines
Noice
Also I'm just realizing Short Launch is the name not the edition lol (I thought there was like a Short Launch/Medium Launch/Long Launch or smth)
This actually looks pretty cool
Don't remember the last time I saw a trijet
@Graingy Aite thanks :D
@Boeing727200F To put it short, yes.
+1@Apollo018362 Yes, it's official
@CrestelAeronautics Hmmmmmmm
Maybe
@Dracul0Anderson That is interesting ngl
+1I might make a tank for that
@JSTQ You could, that would be helpful :D
Just remember that only 3 people can be tagged per comment
Oof...
War Thunder tho
@JSTQ Well yes, but regardless we'd still need to get everyone else on board
+1@Graingy Aite, thanks :D
The Stupid Idiot makes a great incendiary weapon btw
@Boeing727200F Pepsi lol
Noice though :D
Looking at the auto-tags/obligatory tags and I'm just realizing how many people are involved in M-War II, this is gonna be the biggest collab of the year lol (I didn't even include some spectators or anyone else joining, since I just referenced one of my earlier M-War II posts)
M-War II Special 3:
+1@SPSidearm
@Boeing727200F (new MDA member wooo)
@SuperSuperTheSylph
M-War II Special 2:
+1@LunarEclipseSP
@SamuelJamesCastor
@NerfAddict
M-War II Special:
+1@Monarchii
@JSTQ
@Dracul0Anderson
Mailing List 5:
@windshifter1
M-War II Special:
@MonsNotTheMonster
Mailing List 4:
+1@Karroc9522
@SuperSuperTheSylph
@KPLBall
Mailing List 3:
@B1BLancer
@IDK0
@LoganAviation
Mailing List 2:
@MIGFOXHOUND31BSM26
@YarisSedan
@blt
Mailing List 1:
@TheMouse
@CrestelAeronautics
@PrussianAirlines
@Dracul0Anderson Actually I've been preparing stuff since early February
+2I just haven't posted any because of my schedule (making thumbnails is already hard-ish for me since I like to aim for a more "scenic" appearance, but it becomes harder when you include editing, finding a good time to post, and of course the inclusion of War Thunder removing the R2Y2 next month prompting me to grind more)
It's pretty neat, but I am curious, whose side is it on? (I forgor, is it both?)
+1T
+2@LunarEclipseSP
+2I swear I've done a terrible yet beautiful thing introducing the SimplePlanes community to flying T-34s lol
@Graingy .-.
@JSTQ I mean, the wars we've done have never really incorporated full-function realism like serious politics, production limits, monetary concerns, spying, or even what kind of aircraft to use (mind you the M-War had WWII era vehicles, and the S-War saw a fighter from the 30s). Adding such mechanisms may take time to adapt to.
@JSTQ I see, but if you want it could still help
+1@JSTQ For the spies mechanic
@Boeing727200F Not with that attitude!
I just hope my iPad can handle it lol
@JSTQ Well, I'd label it anyways so they're easier to find
+1They're still gonna be used in the M-War II, no?
@Graingy Oh
Finds jet
Finds jar
Shatter103.mp4
@MonsNotTheMonster @JSTQ
+1Alright so:
If it's made for the M-War II then yes
@JSTQ
1. Artillery noted
2. Of course :D
3. Potentially, but it may be complicated to use in large-scale
@Boeing727200F I'll have to test performance, but by looks, potentially.
May have trouble keeping up with the field though, most aircraft are gen 3-4, with some 5ths probably on the way.
@Graingy I THOUGHT YOU SAID YOU WERE IN A JARRRR
@Bugati87 I definitely will, tryna get this plane in War Thunder before they remove 'er
+1