David Hingtgen

Thanks, but few things I like less than sports games. Though I did take a look and Tiger Woods does look like I'd have lots of fun designing a character (LOTS of options)--just not playing as one. Anyways---so, if there's no "perfect" game out there, what ones offer the most choices? Either lots of little changes, fewer (but big) ones, etc. One of the neater options was actually in SW:KOTOR. While it didn't really affect "proportions" your initial job would affect your character's height. Soldiers would tower over a scoundrel, regardless of other options you chose. Or to be more specific---what game would offer the most possible variations of anime girls? Especially purple and/or green hair if at all possible. (see avatar) Or elves (especialy dark ones). Or heck, just humans with unrealistically large swords/elaborate armor. Basically---I'm tired of playing as generic RPG hero-man. Give me a female lead, or a non-human one. Or non-human-female. (Yes, I like dark elf chicks, they wouldn't be in so many games if they weren't popular)

This kind of goes along the lines of many recent RPG's--PSO, FFXI, and Morrowind, etc. I'm just looking for a game (preferably offline) that has loads and loads of options for designing a character's appearance. And color variations aren't nearly as important as actual physical differences. If there's 4 types of ankles or 5 knees to choose from and 26 torsos, that'd be wonderful. I want way more than 3 bodies, 4 faces, and 6 hair colors like many games offer. Any games with a very complex design? (Well, I know wrestling games often get pretty complex--but I'm looking for more like an RPG, with fantasy races etc)

99 mil? It's not worth that, literally. Also---you know, I expected a lot of fake bids, but most of them are by people who have hundreds of points, with like 0-2 neg, and wouldn't risk "blowing" their good status.

ECM stuff's always removed whenever taken out of service. There's nothing "sensitive" in a Hornet-A besides that. (Well, the radar, but that's certainly gone) C's and later though would have quite a few "little" things. Think about it--that airframe could be nearly 25 by now, no "aerodynamic" secrets in it---Hornet A's suck, which is why they're all gone and replaced by Hornet-C's. Which suck, but suck less than an A. Also--it's a Blue Angels plane (almost all the Hornets from that production block are). All the "good stuff" is already gone. (Don't believe the airshow "they can be fighting in 24 hours" line---nope. There's a LOT of stuff taken out to reduce weight, many ports/vents are literally welded/bolted shut, etc--they are for airshows, nothing more. Heck, the entire cannon area is replaced by a smoke-generator-oil set, and civillian ILS/NAV equip, etc) A Blue Angels Hornet has no chance of ever fighting again, not without a LOT of work. PS---on one of the main airplane forums I go to, there's a guy who's part of a "club" who have (flyable)F-104's, Mig-21's, and are looking at an Su-27. And they have looked into this F-18, but the price is getting high, quickly. But the exchange rate is quite favorable for ex-Ukranian fighters... Only history I could find on the F-18 for auction is this: "161973 was Blue Angels aircraft. Offered for public sale by Air Capitol Warbirds as of Feb 2002" ::major edit:: Here's the F-18 being rebuilt: http://www.airwarbirds.com/f_a-18_pics.htm They've got lots of F-5's and A-7's it looks like, too.

AFAIK, a lot of those planes aren't flyable though (or at least, would be pointless---what do you plan on doing with an E-3? ) The theory is that there's 130 *planes* in the game, not 130 planes you can fly as. PS--Graham, it's the A-7 without an afterburner. And F-105's are fast because all planes of that era are fast. Hey, a Jian-Ji 8 Finback---and a P-3. Hmmmmmmmmmmmmmn. (Make your own mid-air-collision-forced-to-land-in-China joke here)

I have no idea which Flash is on TV at the moment. I too want Rayner as GL (at least he was mentioned once). My guess is that we have Stewart for "diversity" in the cast. (Though you'd think a martian would be enough). PS--Totally Spies *is* surprisingly good. If nothing else, it's the only animated show I know where the main characters actually do change clothes every day. Outsiders---I read it mainly because Jade's in it.

Love 'em both, but like TT more. (currently not feeling the need to expand upon my thoughts)

Omega Supreme---the "train" is the epitome of "we SAY it's a train, so it is". That's a "vehicle" connected to another "thing". Not a train. I'd love a train. TF trains are rare, and 90% of them are bullet trains. You know, there's FREIGHT trains too. Ship half---sigh. Tidal Wave's carrier is clearly based on a real carrier, too many details to be guess-work. But OS's "battleship" is so off, it's cleary along the lines of "hey you, make a battleship" and the guy just went straight to work off of fantasy images in his head, not even glancing at a pic of a real one. PS--just look at the "train" pic, and turn your head sideways---WHAT transformation is there? It's his right half, laying on its side.

E3 is a million times easier to get in.

Here you go: http://www.toy-tia.org/Content/NavigationM...al_TOY_FAIR.htm But you can't just "get in". First thing they want is your Hasbro/Mattel/Palisades/Bandai/etc ID.

Just wondering if anyone has enough connections, etc to get in this weekend. I'm fairly sure somebody (Kevin Lam?) from here went last year. Odds of Macross stuff being there isn't *too* high, but Toynami's sure to make an appearance, and of course Bandai. And even Hasegawa should show, as it's not PURELY toys---lots of model companies come. Never know what will show up, or who might have acquired what license. Maybe we'll all be surprised if Yamato shows up.

A big thing for me is accurately modeled aircraft (of course). For anyone who has the game, can you tell me how the F-4 and F-14 are? Basically, when you roll the plane--what does the game show for moving control surfaces? These two planes will instantly highlight how much (if any) research went into the flight models. AC4's Tomcat is so far off it bugs me every time I fly. The F-4 is unusual, but so highly documented and so old (40+ years) there's no excuse not to get it right. (And for the F-14, I need wings swept and unswept--AC4 is even more wrong when swept). Sigh, I hate it when things get worse--AC2 had overall more accurate control surfaces for most planes, AC4 actually made it worse on most. Tornado's the best. Ironically, the Tornado is really close to how the Tomcat SHOULD be. Sigh(2)---a LOT of military planes do not have ailerons, and/or do not rely on them much. Nobody seems to notice that.

rdenham---yup, they're pretty washed-up/high contrast. PS--Ironically, I have nearly the exact same F-4's, only the Corgi versions.

Yargh! My first draft specifically mentioned the non-Sea Harrier. But I couldn't really think of a good way to say it. I hold the current FRS.2 Sea Harrier as a great BVR fighter. Ok, I'll try again: The F-35 is way better than the AV-8B+, and the GRS.Mk7 current-issue ground-attack/CAS non-Sea non-air-combat Harriers.

If there's one thing truckers chrome (after the bumper) it's the stacks. (then air cleaners, then fuel tanks, then wheels--because chrome on wheels just doesn't last long on a truck).

I'm pretty much agreeing with Graham here----internal payload is almost nothing, and has almost no close-range air-to-air capability. And if you want it to carry anything more than 2 JDAM's for offense, your stealth is gone. The F-35 is superior to a Harrier in every way. However, most everything is. But to make it an F-16/18 replacement? Very apprehensive about that. It should be used for a niche stealth role, IMHO. Of course, if we had naval YF-23's (or even F-22's) we wouldn't have that problem... (I am a fan of *big* planes---they are inherently better IMHO---you don't see them heavily modified to add fuel, fuel tanks, range, fuel, missiles, pylons, more pylons, and more fuel every five years---they're big enough to carry decent fuel and payload as is). If nothing else, the F-22 is big, and that right there solves a lot of problems. Big enough to start with. Coota---you're right, the intake wasn't stealthy on the -32. One of many reasons the X-35 was way stealthier.

Same way nuclear ships do. Shielding. And you can probably rather easily incorporate extra shielding into an over-tech flightsuit.

Yup, the Fujimi has by far the best fit. But it still needs work on the intake undersides, IIRC. And now they're hard to find/expensive. I currently have the following attitude towards models: if there's a good affordable diecast version, I buy it. Thus, I buy 1/72 and 1/400 planes, and 1/18 cars. There are currently no ships anywhere near the price/quality range I want. Ironically Franklin Mint makes one of the cheapest, the $600 Missouri. Which is painted totally wrong. Everything else is either painted even more incorrectly, or costs several grand. Thus, I slowly build my own ships. Finish/fit aren't as good (I am not that good a modeler---mass-produced stuff made by poor laborers in China can and will do a better job than me), but at least they're painted right, which is VERY important when we're talking about camoflage schemes. Nothing annoys me more than seeing an all-grey US battleship, when NONE were ever painted like that. Even in peace-time, there should be 2 or 3 colors on the decks. Dragon's planes rock because they are basically pre-painted diecast versions of Hasegawa's kits. At half the price. (And this has me fearful that Dragon's F-15E will have the same errors as Hase's)

That 1/64 Corgi looks to have a nice finish, but it's the infamous "almost but not quite a D", and the overall shape just looks off. Too short/squat. Anyways---I want a consistent scale if at all possible. Dragon's F-15 is delayed, but it IS coming. (March is current best guess). Ironically, the weapons sets are already out, so you can tell how the missiles will mount, since the AIM-7's are clearly intended for F-15's only. (Makes me wonder what they'll do for the F-14---Phoenix only?) Tamiya---all F-14's are inherently more difficult and time-consuming than any other plane, which is why I don't build them. Even a Tamiya. Also, the excessively high price is another. (Their 1/350 ships are several times larger, fit better, yet cost a lot less) I'd like one of the Gaincorp Flankers, but the price is a bit high. Will snag one if they ever go down. The Su-35 looks especially neat.

Which explains why I have stress marks and a chip in my Sideswipe's arms. You know, it's impossible to TF Smokescreen like they show it, too. Dear Hasbro: how hard is it to photocopy the Japanese black and white instructions? A monkey of moderate intelligence is able to do that, can't you. Why do you persist in doing your own, messed-up instructions lacking half the steps which only lead to broken TF's? And anyways--the ugliest cars are the Focus, and Echo. THEN the PT cruiser and Aztek.

Yeah, but like 99.99999999999% of space is empty. On TV, everything always takes place practically in-orbit, or near a really cool-looking nebula, just so stuff looks interesting. But you can assume that most of the time, you'll be in a pretty featureless area--aka "deep space". Not "3 hours out from Earth".

I've always been fond of the "giant mirror" theory for space camoflage. Just chrome-plate the whole plane. And depending on how scientifically sound the plot of the movie is, it might deflect lasers too!

I'll second that--the gun handle will "click" into place at like 80% retracted---push harder and make sure you've got it 100% retracted. The clearance is small, but it is there--and there won't be any if the gun's not completely closed up.

zentrandude---frontal area is the critical for stealth, at least for fighters. Then rear. (For all). mikeszekely--whoa, hey---I give the YF-22 the edge in close combat, but BVR? Where do you get that? YF-23 is stealthier, and faster--it can launch AMRAAMs from longer range at a higher speed (the two go together), and is harder to detect/counterattack.

The main problem is requiring visual ID of targets. And even that doesn't work sometimes. Doesn't matter if you've got a 100-mile range missile, if the rules of engagement require you to actually see it before you shoot it. F-14 is still #1 in that regard. PS---the "real" name for the F-117 should be the A-11A. Right after our beloved Warthog.