Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Kang

  1. Probably someone mentioned already, but: the fact that you can't see the 'latest reply' thread title when looking over the subforums is quite annoying, among other things.
  2. Guess what makes it feel so bad to me is seeing how the Yak-52 is a comparably simple module and a reasonably completed state is not that far away, as in a lot of the fixes it needs could probably be done with comparably little investment. Might be wrong though.
  3. I like the idea, but doubt it's worth to put in the effort of tracking single leaflet trajectories, really. It's not like that sort of thing develops perfect convincing power on fighting units if hit directly or such. A somewhat simple cluster munition kind of particle effect and a reaction to the 'bomb in area' trigger would probably do and in fact not be a bad idea.
  4. It at least used to be that you could keep on trucking for a limited amount of time (24h? 48h?) but would have to reconnect after that.
  5. Addendum: as long as clouds themselves simply disappear if you switch cameras once too often, the proper simulation of raindrops is probably secondary.
  6. I'd concur with recommending the MiG-21. Despite a few issues it is a great module and it's definitely something different than what you've done so far. The F-16 would in large parts be 'more of the same'.
  7. Nice as it would be, I think we only just got raindrops on windshields at all, and as they're not much of a thing for fast movers I don't expect ED to do much about them.
  8. It would be so like 2020 to just keep dragging on for five more years.
  9. I think the much more interesting point is that why the 'introduction' chapter of the Black Shark 2 manual keeps insisting that the Ka-50 is the superior Russian combat helicopter of the 1990s, literally going on for pages on how it is much superior in every aspect to the Mi-28, when you can't help but notice that in real life the Mi-28 happens to be a thing.
  10. This. The Mirage is a very good module. It's also a great plane, rather unique among the ones available in DCS. If you feel like you might enjoy it, go for it. I haven't got any regrets. If you are mostly interested in getting a plane that is a superior fighting machine... yea, probably not a good idea. The whole fact that you have to actually manage your systems and don't have the semi-automatism of FC3 is going to be trouble.
  11. Have you tried instead adjusting the Su-25s Rules of Engagement? It's very finicky to get the AI to actually attack defended targets in a non-suicidal manner, but playing around with the options there can help in many cases.
  12. Am I the only one who is certain that this thread is going to have terrible consequences?
  13. It is possible to use guided surface-to-surface missiles, obviously. It might not work if you just mod a specific naval weapon into any random vehicle.
  14. You could check your game options, see if unit visibility is set to off or 'fog of war' or anything else than visible. I'd wager they are there, but you don't have access to their camera or map marking in mission.
  15. I've actually suspected for a while now that (at least visually) the wheels all spin according to the current speed of the aircraft. With something like a Harrier transitioning in and out of hover it is somewhat observable.
  16. Don't worry, picking off MiG-15s with AIM-9X at high boresight angles should work in daylight, too, even if the scary Rooskies can see you then.
  17. While you do raise a valid point, I find it frankly more of an issue that tank main gunners get accurate, instant, real-time lead computing when locking onto aircraft.
  18. Good luck with that. General consensus is that you are lucky if they simply play back correctly.
  19. Since you deleted my message saying 'yes, do want Taiwan for Marianas map' as being off-topic... what thread do you mean?
  20. Is the whole 'naval focus' thing that was the plan for the foreseeable future when F/A-18 went to the market actually still a thing? Apart from the Stennis and the Supercarrier module (which has gotten ab it quiet as well) there hasn't really been much maritime news.
  21. Would be a nice map for sure, but I agree that it's very unlikely. It is so densely populated that it's bound to be a performance nightmare, plus plenty of work to set up, plus doesn't have any proper kind of semi-natural boundary to it. We don't have a lot of 1980s stuff to play with as of now and people who frequent the mystical realms of wherever these kind of quotes turn up repeatedly said that ED at least has absolutely no interest in making any of the famous cold war planes beyond what is confirmed in the pipeline at this point. Concluding I think having a Baltic Sea map would be the closest one could get reasonably.
  22. Well, those were both made by Belsimtek and at least here everyone keeps quoting that they recently stated that they had zero interest in making any more of the ilk.
  23. I'm sure this has been previously reported, because it has been an issue in DCS multiplayer literally for years now. When flying something equipped with a RWR system the system will show read-outs from other planes at times, specifically one quite often will get lock tones from enemy forces that are decidedly out of range coinciding precisely with the times that other, friendly flights engage with fitting types in combat. Yes, I am aware of radar fields of view. Yes, I am aware that passing behind the locked target could in real life produce such an event. I highly doubt that's properly modelled in DCS, really. It definitely is not a thing that should happen when somebody fights over Gelenzhik and I happen to be flying near Nalchik.
  24. That actually makes it even more confusing that ED seems so completely disinterested in making any iconic cold war era planes. At least to me it seems like that would be a 'middle ground' sort of thing to bring together jet and WW2 communities both in players and developers. But maybe that's just not true.
  • Create New...