Jump to content

animaal

Members
  • Posts

    155
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by animaal

  1. If the server could disable the AI, what would happen if a number of pilots chose to fly the Tomcat, and nobody took the second seat? I think that's a realistic possibility, when most people might want to actually fly. I have flown other WW2 simulators/games, where some of the planes could be populated by a second human as a gunner. However, it's not uncommon for somebody to jump into your plane and not be much help. Or worse still, shoot up your own plane (To be fair, unlikely in a Tomcat). But at least the pilot can choose to lock down the second seat, and let it be populated by an AI instead.
  2. That is an impressive trailer. Am I reading too much between the lines? When the trailer says that the Jester AI will "allow you to fly and fight in the F14 in single player", it sounds like it may not be usable in multiplayer?
  3. To repeat post above, a dynamic campaign. I appreciate that's tough to implement, so something I'd love to see in the interim would be a "dynamic mission". This would be a single dynamically(randomly?)-created mission with a specific target. The user would use the mission editor to create the flight packages, set up waypoints, ToTs, etc. The enemies would largely be invisible at this stage. After that, the user gets to fly the mission from cold-startup.
  4. I treat it like a slow plane. To begin with, line up a good distance away. aim for a point at the start of the runway, and fly towards that point, losing altitude as a plane would. Very gradually reduce thrust (collective). As you do so, the copter will lose altitude quicker (like a plane), so you'll need to nose up a little. Hopefully, you'll be fairly slow and low by the time you reach the runway. Final adjustments to slow to a hover, and then drop gently as possible. It's not how the experts do it, but for me it minimises the required sudden and pressurised movements.
  5. Maybe the Yak? It's the only module I don't own, and I'm not planning to get it. However, I have that niggling thought that maybe I'm missing out. It has happened before - I was slow to buy the Viggen, and now it's probably my favourite module.
  6. DCS is expensive, no doubt about it. But it does give everybody an entry point they can afford. $0: SU25T and TF51D in the Caucuses map. For the price of a normal game, you can buy FC3 or a map or a study-level module. The way I see it, I remember years ago buying an Apache simulator, Longbow. It was fairly expensive. Later I upgraded to Longbow 2, which costed the same again and brought the simulation up to date with current technology. If you had bought the A-10C for DCS years ago, you would have had it upgraded to the newer 2.5 engine for free. No need to pay for an upgrade. And it looks like that will be the case into the future. Any modules you buy now are likely to receive upgrades to work with whatever new technologies are applied to the DCS framework. It's good value for me anyway.
  7. I find it much simpler to have a single Logitech (/Saitek) profile for DCS, and set up the controls in each DCS module. It allows DCS to look directly for DirectX events from the HOTAS, rather than an interim step requiring virtual key presses. No clashes between modifiers. And the bonus that I don't need to mess with different Logitech profiles. Have a look at a post I made some time ago... https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=199177
  8. Thanks, I was thinking about that general time period - maybe the 50s-60s. I was wondering more about how the bombers could be protected. As you point out, the Mig-19 is relatively small and hard to detect. If you're planning a mission for the bombers, what could you do to protect them from interceptors in low visibility settings? I can't think of anything that could stop the bombers from being attacked by Radar-carrying Mig-19s.
  9. This is a great thread, very interesting. I see that planes like this are designed with night/low visibility interception of bombers in mind. So I can imagine a scenario where one side might send a flight of B52s to bomb a target, and use low visibility to make interception more difficult. In return, the other side would send up a flight of Mig-19s with radar to intercept. How might the bombers be protected once discovered? Would they be protected by fighters that would also need to be equipped with Radar? Would bombers be sitting ducks once discovered? I could imagine a Radar-equipped Mig-19 locking and destroying an incoming bomber, but I can't imagine fighters from this age dogfighting each other at night.
  10. ** Edit: apologies, I misinterpreted the question - by asking how to "get into" the graphics upgrade, I thought you were asking how to work up enthusiasm for it. I'll leave my answer below anyway ** I tend to take the Caucus map upgrade for granted these days. Then I watch some Youtube video set in the old 1.5 map, and I suddenly appreciate the 2.5 ground features and more organic shape of the mountains again. If you're looking for a good time to appreciate the scenery, I can recommend the Huey. Low/level, not too fast, not too many systems to monitor. If you're not into the helicoptors, I like the Albatros for similar reasons.
  11. Thanks. I had thought there was a range issue, and I was altering the release point to compensate. Reading the two posts above, and the linked thread, it looks like even in real life RR mode is more of a "last resort", and accuracy could be difficult.
  12. How accurate should radar bombing (RR mode) be in the Viggen? I'm having accuracy issues, and I'm not sure whether the issue is my lack of skill or my lofty ambition. I've set up 16 vehicles in a square, on the 'X'-shaped Kobuleti airstrip (see red square in image). The Viggen is fully loaded with low-drag bombs in "series" mode. Flying head-down, instruments only at night, I can pick up the vehicles as a small return on my radar. I line it up so it looks centred when the radar range is 15km. I quite often get the range about right, but I'm nearly always to the left or right of the targets. Not by a lot, but often there's a runway-width between the vehicles and where the bombs land. Am I pushing the Viggen too far? Or is this something that should be achievable?
  13. Rex854Warrior, that sounds like a valid point; it's not a side of DCS I know much about.
  14. Thanks Chuck, I really appreciate these guides. I always keep them to hand when I'm returning to a DCS module. Might the descriptions of the course needle in the Mig-21 and L-39 guides be a bit confusing? The course needles in the Mig-21 and L-39 appear very similar. However, the Mig-21 guide says that the pointy side does the pointing. The L-39 image shows the thick end of the needle pointing to the runway, but the 3K knob description seems to say that it's the thin end that does the pointing. Mig-21 guide: L-39 guide: Looking at the official Mig-21 and L-39 flight manuals, the needles are described as working with the thick end pointing to the runway. Mig-21 flight manual: L-39 Flight Manual: I'm not sure if this makes any real difference, but I thought I'd mention it in case this needle feeds something (e.g. the bank director?) Thanks again.
  15. If it's anything like industries in which I've worked, I think there's a fairly straight-forward answer. ED has relationships with multiple aircraft manufacturers. This can be seen in the company logos on various modules' splash screens, and the cooperation that is in place to allow the Hornet module to use the in-plane voices provided from the manufacturer. I wouldn't be surprised if some of the data used to produce flight models was provided from the manufacturers too. In order to maintain (and grow) these relationships, it doesn't help to upset these partners. It's doesn't help that the release of a document is technically legal, or whether a link to a document legally/illegally released elsewhere is legal. If the manufacturer likes what you do and how you do it, you'll get far more cooperation. In the longer term, I think "playing ball" in this issue will serve us better. I think it's a pragmatic decision to disallow recent documents from the forums, but to allow the sharing of them with ED on a non-public basis. As somebody with no relationship to ED other than enjoying flying in DCS, I will be more than happy to accept a ban on publication of documents if it helps to eventually bring other manufacturers (especially Russian ones) in from the cold.
  16. I have a small update on this - although it may only be relevant to me. I have a track recording of a mission from the Viggen Red Flag campaign, about 90mins long. I tried replaying it a number of times last night with varying results. I used the latest DCS OpenBeta for both the original recording and all replays. The first replay attempt, the Viggen startup went fine, but the plane taxied into the grass verge and got stuck there The second replay attempt, things got out of synch early on during Viggen startup. Originally (while creating the track), I had changed the channel selector dial on the radio, but the replay changed it to the wrong number. the third replay attempt, The replay went perfectly for a while (perhaps 45mins?). It was only when landing that I noticed the plane was offset perhaps 100m to the right of the runway. But the Viggen is a hardy bird, and had no problem landing on the desert floor! The fourth replay attempt, I again had a problem with the radio being changed to an incorrect channel during startup. I wonder if it's a performance issue while replaying? It looks like the recording itself is ok, given that it works well at least some of the time. I don't have any issues with A-10C recordings.
  17. My replays get stuck in the grassy/sandy verges as well. Running latest Open Beta, 2.5.2.20143.
  18. :) I'm very happy to know that, thanks.
  19. Thanks! I'm going to spend a bit of time this evening changing the loadout on my practice missions :D
  20. For me, the things that could help with immersion aren't changes to the maps. I find the map very atmospheric, I have no serious complaints there. What I hope to see over time are: - mission-configurable ATC voices. I'd like to hear a British accent when I'm flying a spitfire over England - More AI WW2 bombers. At the moment I don't think there are any British or German bombers - Some options (other than labels) to help with visibility. My poor eyes just can't make out the tiny ME109 or Spitfire at any distance at all over land :) - An AWACS replacement? I know AWACS didn't exist at the time, but (maybe) the land-based radar stations provided a similar function at the time? - To push my luck, maybe the V1 missile? Would make for some very interesting intercept missions, and historically accurate too.
  21. Plenty of interesting points on this thread. When choosing loadout, is there any advantage to choosing a Sparrow over an AIM120? In real life, I would guess that the Sparrow is lighter and cheaper. In DCS, is there a significant weight difference, or ability to make tight turns, or any other reason somebody might choose the Sparrow?
  22. I haven't tried landing an F-5 on a carrier. I assume there's no way to take off afterwards? The F-5 needs a good length of runway to take off, and I don't imagine it has support for catapults... I hate abandoning aircraft, so that would put me off making a habit of it :D
  23. Some are difficult, I agree. Have you tried the Museum Relic campaign (for the F86 or Mig15)? I would describe my flying as "challenged" rather than "casual", but I found this campaign scaled well with my skills. A lot of the missions are easy to get through but difficult to master. I often completed a mission without really feeling I did very much, then replaying it with a better idea of what I should have done.
  24. Most of the little missions I create for myself could be described as soulless, because I think that's likely to be most realistic. I would imagine that real-life mission planners aim to "get in and get out", with minimal excitement and every action pre-scripted. I find that while many of the DCS DLC campaigns are great fun (and great value!), I can't help thinking that this fun is sometimes at the expense of realism. In real life, would a single actor have a major a continued influence over the entire campaign? I also find that many campaigns/missions are like movies - I'm waiting for the "expected surprise" that leaves me with a narrow opening to victory. Having said that, I'm currently working through the Viggen Red Flag campaign, and it feels very real/immersive. Without wanting to spoil it for others, you feel like you're following a carefully coordinated plan as part of a large team, playing a small but important part in each mission.
×
×
  • Create New...