Jump to content

Dudikoff

Members
  • Content Count

    2710
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Dudikoff

  • Rank
    Senior Member
  • Birthday 01/01/1980

Personal Information

  • Location
    Croatia / Lebanon
  • Interests
    Military sims, model kits, alternative music (shoegaze, etc.)

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. On one of the attempts at mission 5, I've locked one of the first two Su-27s and Jester kept insisting it was a friendly for some reason. I think that time around I actually forgot to prep the missiles in advance and switch on the coolant for the AIM-9's. It's a long shot, but maybe his dialog choices on calling them hostile when I wanted to fire were influenced by those conditions (e.g. missing the tree option or a recording for non-prepped missiles)? BTW, I'm still using the initial version of the campaign posted here when it didn't make it in the open beta patch.
  2. I'm not aware of all the relevant differences, but if it's that much of an effort, it's still relatively minor compared to making a new plane as you have like 95% of the work already cut out for you. Given sufficient interest, perhaps you could offer it as a separate module and at a significantly reduced price to owners of the original module? It's still too early to think about that of course, but I know I'd gladly pay more to have the USAF version as well.
  3. Thanks, it's reassuring to see that if I go for the 6800XT that it won't hamper the VR performance in DCS. But, to be fair, it says Radeon 6800XT OC and somewhere above it says OC means OC 115% (maybe 15% higher clock?) so I guess those are not really stock performance numbers. My disclaimer was based on the general impression from the reviews where in some games at 4K it trailed 3080 noticeably (like 10%), but nothing that would be a deal breaker. I'd gladly get myself a 6800XT if it's cheaper than 3080 even though I have a G-Sync monitor.
  4. I would beg to disagree. I had a 27" 1440p monitor before this one and it wasn't something I'd call super sharp as text looked somewhat pixelized to me, so I can only imagine the much larger pixel size on a 32" 1440p. On the other hand, 4K on 32" is super sharp which definitely helps with DCS in regards to immersion. To be fair, in Windows I use a 150% DPI setting to ease the pressure on my eyes which brings the text to about exactly the same level as 1440p would be, with the difference that everything is super sharp. Besides, if the OP is getting a 6800XT, why would he
  5. I have an 32" 60Hz 4K screen with G-Sync and play DCS with my laptop's 1080 GPU so I'm sure you'll be fine if you go down that route. For 4K, Nvidia 3080 usually has somewhat better results as it has more bandwidth on the memory bus, IIRC, but those are much harder to find due to the latest crypto craze.
  6. Dudikoff

    ORION! Pics

    Yeah, I was thinking the same. I hope they consider the fact that it might (or will) wear off with time and make the cables easily replaceable. I was hoping for a more integrated solution where the throttle arms would have electrical cables or traces integrated and there would just be some exposed contacts that the traces on the handles would align against.
  7. Yeah, it wasn't the most "serious" sim of the day, but having different cockpit arrangements was a nice touch compared to e.g. Birds of Prey which came even later IIRC. Sure, there were better sims like Falcon and Combat Pilot, but FB and Birds of Pray were only ones which had the F-111. Regarding the location, it wasn't a war game, but it was set around Curtis Le May trophy IIRC. Well, I guess that was the limitation of those times. In DI's Tornado, the enemy fighters would kind of stick on you when they ran out of missiles (flares and chaff weren't 100% effe
  8. Wasn't trying to correct you as it wasn't really a study sim as the sims were not quite there yet, was just trying to reminisce those old times. But, by 1993 already, DI's Tornado was a pretty serious game for the time and I guess offered a lot of that F-111 experience with its fast flying at low level with swept wings and a TFR set to 200 feet, A2G radar, dive-bombing, dumb, cluster and laser guided bombs, etc. with an extra twist of quite useful ALARM ARMs with their unique indirect mode.
  9. I didn't actually play that as I had Atari ST at the time and didn't have that one. Plus, it only had 512 kB of RAM so I couldn't run F-16 Combat Pilot I did have. But, I did read about it in gaming magazines. To be fair, the first more serious "study" sims only came with 386 PCs, like e.g. Spectrum Holobyte Falcon 3.0 in 1991, Microprose F-15 Strike Eagle III in 1992 and F-14 Fleet Defender, Tornado in 1993, etc. I never did get into Falcon 3.0 for some reason (graphics were kind of obsolete already I guess), but I over-played the other three mentioned (among others) on my 386DX40
  10. Since it's HB, I kind of hope they might be able to provide both TRAM and SWIP variants as the differences between them are relatively few and they already have the AN/ALR-67 done for the B Tomcat, plus ED has already implemented all these extra guided weapons for the Hornet (e.g. HARMs, SLAMs, Walleye & Laser MAVs) so they can simply be reused.
  11. Am I reading correctly that the desktop version has a longer arc on the axis compared with the big version (50 vs 26 degrees)? I guess that makes sense given the much longer radius, but I wonder how do they compare in practice in DCS, e.g. when one needs finely tuned movements for air to air refueling? I use a Warthog throttle and find that the useful range between idle and AB detents is somewhat limited. I was considering the Taurus, but I'm not sure how much of an upgrade it will be then. Not really thrilled by the layout and looks of most of the controls on the Orion
  12. Unlike in the F-14A/B, the RIO in the F-14D had an extra MFD as well which was used to show the LTS picture AFAIK (and not the TID screen).
  13. Balance is not the main reason when asking for older F-16/18 variants. Some people would enjoy late Cold War scenarios where the airplanes were not that multi-role (so, single-role aircraft still existed), the weapons were less smart and missions were probably more adrenaline inducing. Thus, IMHO, it would be great if ED would offer some older variants of Falcon and/or Hornet (kind of like A-10C II or the now defunct Ka-50 BS3).
  14. A puzzling perspective, IMHO. For me it's quite the opposite and any FC3 module is a logical candidate for a DCS level module made by ED since a good chunk of work is already done, mainly the FM. The main benefit is that after flying full DCS modules, a lot of people don't enjoy flying FC3 modules at all because of their very shallowly modeled systems, so e.g. with DCS MiG-29 we'd finally get its radar, IRST, WCS, RWR, GCI and navigation systems properly modeled with all their submodes and various limitations. These things most certainly are not in the sim at the moment
×
×
  • Create New...