Jump to content

Vakarian

Members
  • Posts

    206
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Vakarian

  1. Ah, the armchair project manager strikes again. It's one thing to make standalone app to do one single thing. It's completely another thing to create a new architecture that will encompass all modules that are currently in-game and those that will be added in a future, integrating that into a who-knows-how-old codebase with features that could be more advanced than what SRS is currently doing. SRS is an awesome thing, but it's nowhere near as complex as how integrated VoIP solution would be. Also, calling people like that amateurs is condescending at best. Just because they aren't working for ED doesn't mean they are amateurs. They could be (most likely are) already experienced devs who thought to do a little side project to help the community. Making a mod is and always will be "simpler" thing as most often than not you can use some other technology which could be more advanced to create stuff and then integrate it into whatever you are making a mod for. As for EDs VoIP solution, give them time. You already have great replacement which isn't that hard to setup, but also is not as easy as working radio ingame which you control just by tuning the radio.
  2. I can confirm. I did test the new tools, and after drawing a bunch of them, on a polygon I did reduce thickness to 1 and the icons were gone. Also in my case, the blue background of the menus (those seen on the screenshots in post above) turned black which was definitely weird.
  3. Well, there is an option to build a FARP yourself. The use of a FARP as a whole object seems kinda not flexible enough. Like with the current FARP, I don't like that it has predefined set of landing spots, always in a same position and with a prepared surface. By the use of the invisible FARP, you can create a FARP yourself with every object in a ME that currently exists. That way you can create much more scenery specific farps that can even blend with the environment, have as much or as little objects as you would like. I do agree that having a guide crew (or at least refuel and rearm guys) would be awesome to have and would bring up the feeling like you are in a live environment.
  4. With the attitude like that, you might as well avoid the forums in a first place
  5. Post a track as I've replied to you on other thread that Harrier can certainly take off with GW of 19klbs
  6. Then you are doing something wrong. Haven't flown a Harrier in a long time, but just for this I did a quick run and was perfectly able to take off with more than 19k lbs and land afterwards. It's not pretty, but here is proof that Harrier has more than enough power to take off and land vertically VT_VL.trk VL_VT.miz
  7. Use static template for this. This is what group I'm in uses. Basically each flight configures their flight the way they want (waypoints, radio presets, loadout, liveries, callsigns,......) saves that as static template and then mission maker just imports it. Ofc, mission they are making the static template must be empty to include their flight only, but it has worked so far for us.
  8. No, RB fixed it couple of updates ago. I believe one update after they were introduced so no biggie
  9. This was fixed for at least one update before yesterdays one
  10. F6, subsequent presses will scroll through all launched weapons
  11. Do you do startup by yourself? If so, how are you doing the alignment? Something is wrong, look at your TPOD data. All coordinates read 0, elevation too, slant range is also 0....
  12. That's not what he asked. You box MAV (still caged) on STRS or EHSD page and you go to find target using TPOD. When you do SS Depress to switch between INS and TPOD designation mode, IRMV gets unboxed so you can't uncage it as soon as you've found the target because you need to go and select MAV first
  13. R7 5800X + R9 6900XT Combined Arms Smart Access Memory was disabled Happened to me first time on saturday after ~1 hour of being on F-10 map. Don't remember doing much of the zooming in, just overviewing the action and progress of the flights when suddenly all icons and buttons were gone.
  14. Using TCP in multiplayer games (and a lot other time sensitive applications) is not really something you want. If some packets get lost, client/server would need to resend them and only after receipt of those packets have been confirmed you can move forward. That's a big NO-GO in MP games so UDP-like connection is what you want. You need to have some mechanism to make sure the continuity of the action is not lost, but also you must not rely on all packets getting to a destination as that is virtually impossible and would quickly deteriorate game experience.
  15. What new features will come with the upgrade? AGM-65L Laser Maverick GBU-54 Laser JDAM APKWS Updated, weathered cockpit textures Updated and improved external model Helmet Mounted Cueing System (HMCS) Updated HOTAS commands ARC-210 radio (not at EA release) Updated 3D cockpit to remove TISL panel New mission content Adjusted flight dynamics (available to original A-10C as well) Not seeing that the TAD updates here. Am I missing something or was it posted somewhere else? If it was, then ofc we should get them, but if it were just rumors and nothing confirmed then I can't complain that they won't be made.
  16. Well, almost all planned features are delivered, except the new radio IIRC, so we got what they wanted. The rest is purely up for them to decide to see if any other new features are feasible
  17. The point of the wishlist is for community to express their wishes (surprising, isn't it), but it's ultimately up to ED to determine if those wishes are firstly realistic for the module, can they implement it (legally or with technical limitations in mind) and also how many man-hours it it going to take so they have to see if it's feasible. Noone like to work without being paid to do so, so implementing a lot of new stuff to the older module it not financially good decision.
  18. Can't help to notice that sideslip indicator is again not aligned to it's brackets. That seems to be fixed one patch, then broken again after couple and that cycle continues on and on.
  19. Yes it does, but there is another solution for that. For the alignment on carrier, you need SINS cable (ask for ground power, that will connect it) to complete alignment. After the cable is connected, you choose SEA INS alignment and wait for it to finish. Like others have mentioned before, aircraft shouldn't move AT ALL during the alignment. Even loading weapons on should throw off the INS alignment process, so when you start the alignment DO NOT move the aircraft at all. Load weapons before aligning or after.
  20. I have some praising to do here. My brother ordered me this upgrade last year and it worked wonderfully. Couple of months ago, the X axis started to be jittery a lot, and not centering right. I contacted @Deltaalphalima1 to see if there is something to do to fix it. After some quick troubleshooting we got to a solution that fixed the issue and I though it's all good. I believe that even in the first reply, I was told if the issue couldn't be fixed that I'd get a replacement unit, but I wanted to see if we can fix it somehow. Unfortunately, after couple of days, it started misbehaving again. As I flew rarely during the summer, I didn't contact him further to try and fix the issue again. This week, I referred back to the issue, and all he instructed me to do was to confirm my address and a replacement unit was sent. No hassle, no trying to shift the blame like some other customer support services could do, ... The unit arrived today, installed it and I'm back with fully functional TDC for the Warthog. All I can say is that there should be no doubt about this upgrade or its creator. Both are very solid and will see you through . If something starts to misbehave, contact him and try to find a solution. I can assure you it was very pleasant interaction which really surprised me. 10/10 for the customer support and the product itself
  21. Tarawa is not SC compatible
  22. It's unrealistic to be able to hover with Hoggit loadout. Get it light (how light depends on weather conditions) and you will be able to hover
  23. You know, us customers would also like to know that timeframe. We would also love that that timeframe doesn't change whenever wind blows
  24. Hmm, that's interesting. Could you elaborate what exactly is wrong? I'm genuinely curious as couple of people in the thread I linked did some testing, read the charts and told that it's now supposedly correct. If you can show some evidence what is wrong, maybe we can push it to RB to get it fixed?
×
×
  • Create New...