Leaderboard

I'm attempting to compile a list of the particle effects in DCS world, along with ratings, comments and constructive criticism. Lately there have been some quite good ones added, and as some of these are hopefully improved I'll update the list. Please let me know if I'm missing anything major! Explosion 1 Rating: B This effect is appropriate for larger missile impacts, such as Mavericks, and smaller bombs. Not suitable for cluster weapons due to impact on framerate and size of the explosion. Needs to be scalable. Explosion 2 Rating: D Unrealistic explosion looks like a firecracker going off. Not really suitable for anything at the moment. Explosion 3 Rating: B This effect depicts a less violent explosion, such as a fuel-air fireball with a billowing cloud of smoke. Smoke needs to last longer, and the flames could use higher resolution textures. Explosion 4 Rating: C "Ammo cookoff" explosion with flaming debris and smoke trails. Smoke dissipates much too quickly, and the ejected fire and smoke trails are low-resolution and fuzzy. Impact 1 Rating: B Ground impact plume for armour piercing and smaller calibre shells. Needs to have better scaling for different calibres - currently small-arms fire causes the same size effect as 120mm AP. Impact 2 Rating: A Armour impact effect - visually effective and well-scaled for different calibres. No improvement necessary. Ground smoke Rating: A Burning vehicle flames and smoke. Scalable, affected by wind, nicely animated particle textures and low impact on frame rate. Possible improvements include an increase in plume height, and a gradual dissipation of the effect over time. Generic dust and smoke effect Rating: F Used for rotor wash, collapsing buildings, vehicles popping smoke and MBT main gun firing effect. Noticeable impact on frame rate in some cases. Needs to be replaced with customized effects. Cylindrical fire Rating: D Animated object that needs to be replaced with a proper particle effect. Cylindrical fire is somewhat effective on fast-moving aircraft. Looks terrible when stationary on the ground. Tire smoke on touchdown Rating: D Similar to the old vehicle dust effect. Too dense, particles do not fade out properly and the wheel emits them for too long after touchdown. Needs an overhaul. Water splash Rating: F Also not a particle effect. Crudely animated splash object; does not fade out smoothly, but disappears before the splash is finished. Needs a particle effect similar to Impact 1. Vehicle dust Rating: A Dynamic dust effect, including mud spray on tracked vehicles. Visually pleasing and realistic; needs no improvement. Aerial explosion Rating: D 3-pronged explosion with quickly fading smoke. Needs a more dynamic and irregular flash and fireball, and smoke should linger for about twice as long. Aerial smoke Rating: D Currently looks like a thick grey line in the sky. Could use more variation in the smoke trail and better texturing, like the ground smoke. Aerial gun smoke Rating: B Effective for the most part, but has some peculiar characteristics, such as 'sticking' to the gun barrel while the weapon is being fired, and then letting go afterwards. Can also appear flat from some angles in the Black Shark. Rocket exhaust Rating: C Acceptable, except for being the wrong colour. Needs to be changed to an orange hue. Contrails Rating: D Lots of flickering, emitted from the engines in 'chunks' at regular intervals. Reportedly causes an FPS impact (Quirk). Wingtip vapour Rating: N/A Currently broken. Previous versions of the effect did not fade in or out - appeared and disappeared instantly. Sparks Rating: N/A Currently broken. Previously worked great and made belly landings on the runway look spectacular.

Тут всё сложно. Все серверы переехали в DCS:world, с модульной системой. На данный момент нет ни русской версии ворлда, ни модулей к нему. И когда будут не известно. Так что, если у тебя русская версия, тут 2 варианта: 1) Либо присоединиться к армии негодующих и ждать, пока сделают русские версии, и тогда ты сможешь использовать свой ключ от ча-2 для соответствующего модуля. 2) Либо, если не терпится, купить английскую версию и играть.

огонь в воздух из ПЗРК:) хех 10000 пост:)

Надо разрешить 77-е на Су и мы все дружно сделаем вид, что летаем СМ. :) По моему, нормальный ход, раз уж так неудачно вышло с русскими самолетами. А если ещё и МФД сделать... хотя бы перебором, было бы шикарно.

Купил ключ, все установил активировал, а сервера не ищет, что не так, кто знает подскажите?

Нельзя ночью писать много буков. ФрогФут теряется. Какого луча?

Есть сомнение, что рули большей площади более эффективны рулей меньшей площади? особенно на УА. И еще нагрузку на крыло не забываем - какая площадь крыла у Р-77, AIM-120B и С. Почему Р-77 и Р-27 не наводятся на цель, если курсовой угол больше 30 гр.? Тут в свое время авторитетно мне доказали, что предельный угол отклонения антенн РЛГСН 60 гр. Даже если их запускать с 10 км (без этапа коррекции), они летят как НАР. Особенно косячно это выглядит с Р-77 - полетела прямо при угле 38 гр, потом вдруг опомнилась и на угле 45 стала доворачивать. Зато у F-15 семерки наводятся даже при 50 градусах. И что самое интересное, не имея этапа РК, они на больших дистанциях все время корректируются - РК им как "прикрутили", так и оставили. Как это все понимать? Кстати, ФрогФут, коль уж взлись приводить углы прицельных систем, в той самой книжечке про МиГ предельный угол зоны автосопровождения по азимуту 65 гр. Запиши в багсписок :), а то при 60 в ГС2 срыв идет. Tacview.rar

The Inlet compressor guide vanes are not completely static. When the engine is in flight they pitch each on their own axis to adjust the best angle for air injestion. On some engines, probably most of them you can still see the rotor behind them. If you want to be picky you can add that visual effect. :) Correction: Military Pratt engines usually have fixed IGV's in fornt of the fan (most commercial models its the other way around), but becauss they stand nearly edge on, you can still see the rotor spinning.

Version 1.0. Enjoy

Only because you asked. To do anything in the mission editor [although improved] is very difficult, which does 2 things. First, it discourages those that get intimidated by it from using it and second it takes forever to accomplish anything you want in when you finally learn it. I am very familiar with the arma 2 editor, the falcon TE, and modding of various other games; however, this editor is by far the hardest to learn and implement to get it to do what you want. Even when you know what you are doing, it is very difficult to obtain the results you want and usually just settle for what you get. I have no experience with FC series, I only own the DCS series [except p51], and the campaign is not very interesting or replayable. There is no satisfaction or apparent effect of your efforts. They do not come with MP compatibility [which is kinda rediculous regardless of how easy it is to change]. Comparing DCS to most other games, the campaign feels empty. Best example is that most the campaign missions I played in DCS-a10 were completed by allied aircraft before I even took off, I dont remember what version but it was still a very dissapointing experience and boring. Yeah, and most missions that were not updated to support the new patch got left behind. And like I said, the mission maker's effort is more than appreciated, however, there are too few and too little. And I know of no other game that ships and says here is a plane make your own experience. At least certainly not for the cost of this series. There is not enough content to satisfy a community at the moment, regardless of the efforts made here. Its not that I dont understand, that is my problem. Without any backbone there is too little to build the community on. I mean the briefing screen and UI is poorly designed, you cant join as a part of the same flight. You can only assign AI as wingmen. There is way too much coding to be done to get the AI to feel real. Ends of missions are empty, when they work. No online logbook. Mission editor has all the missing elements to make bigger and more creative scenarios that are DYNAMIC (without way too much effort), etc.... All these things break the game where it is critical to have strength. If the core of the game or building blocks to designing missions is weak, you can not expect the results to be great. A new house built on a broken foundation is still a broken house. I agree it has improved, but it is still very sub-par compared to other games with the same features. Its not by getting more people satisfied with the basic plane in the box that community grows. Regardless of where you stand, the divide is already apparent as the FC crowd are not used to the locked servers and the DCS crowd have never complained about it in the past. The community is broken because there is nothing worth playing together. Missions that are usually fun for the DCS people need to be locked or the mission is ruined by JIPs, thats the types of missions I play. So if there was a dynamic campaign where all these fancy planes could be used, without having to code for years, would this not better the community? Or have missions where there is no effect by JIPs, or the success is not ruined by having someone leave in the middle of the flight. And not everyone like you has/plays Flaming cliffs. I dont own the series and neither do any of the people I play with. We enjoy high fidelity models, so yeah, I guess thats my choice right? I still dont believe FC3 has any buisness in the DCS world. DCS is a highly accurate simulator. Does not mean my opinion cant change with new missions etc... We will see what the "community" does to fix that. There is no rethinking needed. I am not a bad guy like you want to make me out to be. Anyone who has shown up in my TS to play has had the red mat rolled out to them. I have also gone on other clan's TS to invite them to my server. Just by looking at the number of empty public servers, this should tell you something, and it has nothing to do with the locked servers. Even if I make my server public and lock it for events, it will remain empty until an event rolls around. So guys like you should leave guys like me alone, I have done nothing to anyone here and you dont know me, so you cant say "guys like [me]".

Rounds are not tracking through the centre of the Gun Director reticle. See jpg below in 1G flight. Rounds cross the left horizontal arm of the gun director cross. Should obviously be going through the centre. Not checked MIG29 or SU33 yet Balanced flight.

Great! But, we have some another bugs, sorry.

Thankyou, now corrected please check first post for new download link. Also fixed the nightlighting for the MiG-29 G-meter gauge.

А было-бы здорово внедрить модулем Стрижей и Русских Витязей в АЭ, чтоб не перерисовывать каждый раз места, стоянки и оборудование...

Приходит вирпил к проктологу и говорит: мне бы геморрой, а то жизнь какая-то не реальная... )

yuplay.ru

Насчет оси тормоза на педальки - дома буду отпишусь. Я сейчас на работе.

Неохота кричать кругом читеры ,но бывает зарубишся в горах и вроде уполз по ущельям но хоп и сбили без захвата в радаре. Значит видят и очень хорошо т.к берут или в шлем или БВБ ,режим 3или4. Закрыть нафиг эти файлы от редактирования.

В принципе это уже давно понятно , обидно :(

Ok guys, ANOTHER updated version uploaded, this time the corrections are made to the Su-27 and 33 pits, the GUN/MSL indicator is now correctly localised into russian, also reverted all warning lamps in the MiG-29A-S into russian.

Also, "everything is subject to change"

Hey RichardG, thought I might provide a response to your original post since this thread has gone every which way already, including two different flame wars. I liked your original post/question primarily because I have just taken to learning the DCS World Su-25T myself. For me, there were two major thoughts that came to mind: First there was the question of ... what is this plane's capabilities and how do they compare to the DCS A-10C... in other words, "why would I fly the Su-25T over the A-10C?" Second in my mind was, how is the Su-25T model (originally from FC) different from the DCS A-10C. I love learning to fly new aircraft, learning their systems, learning their strengths and weaknesses, and when / how to employ them to their best effect. It leads me to learning a lot about their history and design intent... and also how they get used out of plain necessity. Just so everyone knows, I have unfortunately never flown LOMAC, FC1 - 3, or BS1 - 2.... for now, I'm just a DCS A-10C guy (I will be getting FC3 shortly). Here are my initial thoughts on the DCS World Su-25T after flying the DCS A-10C many many hours (primarily in Multiplayer missions). I am going to make the distinction that I am speaking solely about these aircraft in terms of their existing implementations in DCS World 1.2.2. I am going to talk about my take on how they can be used in DCS World's model of "reality" as it were, NOT how they are, or should be used in Real Life. I was struck by how much ordinance the Su-25T can carry and by how much more range some of it's weapons have over the A-10C (e.g. Kh-25, Kh-29, and the Anti-Radiation Missiles [ARM]). On the other hand, I was struck by how difficult it is to acquire targets in the Su-25T in comparison to the A-10C (in general terms), due to the TAS / SADL / TGP of the A-10C. Here are the differentiators, broken out in a list: Su-25T Advantages 1. Carries more, longer-range anti-tank munitions than A-10C -- Can carry 8 vikhr anti-tank missiles PLUS a bunch more stand-off missiles / bombs / rockets / guns / AA missiles, the thing can carry a TON of hardware (it flys like a cement truck when loaded up like that) 2. Faster than A-10C 3. SEAD capability -- A-10C cannot employ ARM (drat!) and doesn't have weapons that make it properly suited to this role... yes, you can do pop-up Maverick shots, yes you can stay out of the Tunguska, Strela, Shilka, MANPAD engagement envelops and kill them, but... anything with more range / capability than that outclasses the A-10C's capabilities -- With ARM missiles that have over 20KM range and an AI that doesn't do too much AA trickery, the Su-25T actually has the capacity to eliminate most ground-based, radar-guided AA threats in-game A-10C Advantages 1. Avionics, TGP, SADL, Markpoints, FMS make the A-10C far better in terms of locating and eliminating targets if they are not exactly where you expect them, plus night time capability and TGP allows for constant target visual lock (so long as you maneuver smartly and don't block the camera's optics) -- In the Su-25T the targeting optics are limited to a forward-facing field of view, so you basically have to find targets with your eyeballs, that your wingman has already located, that are near a recognizable landmark and are pointed out to you by some other source (or mission briefing... hope they don't move!), or get shot at by them first! 2. True night/day capability (not a huge differentiator in terms of DCS) -- Yes, the "Mercury" pod gives the Su-25T night capability, but it's limited to viewing forward and only has 4x magnification, so it's limited compared to the A-10C 3. Seems to have more endurance than the Su-25 (without external fuel tanks) 4. Better flight characteristics -- Less pilot workload, though this can be mitigated in the Su-25T by employing the Autopilot well 5. I've read in the forums that the A-10C has better anti-IR-missile defensive flare programs (so more survivable) 6. GAU-8 ... I mean... that thing is awesome! (yes, the Su-25T has a nice cannon and can add external gun pods too, plus it can depress the gun barrels for relatively level strafing runs, neat! but still the GAU-8 is just unique) So really, for me, it seems that in the current rendition of DCS World (discounting FC3 aircraft), the Su-25T has more capability in terms of adding the SEAD role. It also has more options in terms of AA missilery (not a huge perk, but hey, I'll take it!). And the Su-25T can take out targets using precision laser, or TV guidance from a much greater range than the A-10C. Also, the Su-25T can move faster in general so it can get to / from targets in less time. On the other hand... the A-10C can actually find targets at standoff ranges even if they've moved / are underway, can share targets via SADL, is more survivable against certain IR AA threats, and can find targets and prosecute them better at night/limited vis. Plus, it's cannon can really kill tanks handily. Ideally, though perhaps not what would occur in RL, a flight would have an Su-25T with ARM / SEAD capability and an A-10C to locate targets. Once the Su-25T blasts the big ticket AA items from range, the A-10C hammers in and the Su-25T helps clean up. (I primarily fly with one other wingman, so I think in terms of 2 aircraft, since that's all I can usually muster... would love to try it with more, coordinated pilots of course!). In terms of DCS World, I'd expect that the Su-25T in practiced hands could probably outscore an A-10C if the Su were loaded all-out and all targets were located along the planned waypoints. As soon as the environment gets "dynamic" the A-10C's avionics start to weigh more in its favor. On the other hand, if there are significant ground-based, radar AA threats then the Su-25T (if properly armed) gets a leg up... well... as long as the threats make themselves known before the Su is overhead :) Overall, the Su-25T is a fun addition to DCS World and would not normally be an aircraft I would even consider. I'm very glad to be able to try it and I have found it very satisfying to learn how it compares to the A-10C and how they can interleave to make a unique flight package capable of much more than just A-10Cs or just Su-25s. Part of the fun of a SIM for me is that you can mix and match in ways that would not necessarily occur in RL, but are also not impossible in absolute terms. Happy flying everyone! See you in the skies! :pilotfly:

Да и Су-27СМ уже в частях летает и Р-77 есть, на сухом некто gosha писал, судя по всему чел в теме, но низзя травмировать психику заокеанским "партнерам"(с)

I find the following tactic very useful when you have a human wingman. Adopt trail formation at the Initial Point (about 10 nm from the target area). The lead aircraft aircraft goes in a "shooter" and the trailing goes "cover". The trailing aircraft has two objectives: 1) keep sight on the shooter, and 2) look for AAA or missile launches on the shooter - and call out when he sees them (and probably an imperative, "Break left! flare! missile 3 o clock low") If you are not hearing warnings from your cover then the missile is not aimed at you. This especially works when other players are not on comms or not calling "Rifle" for their shots. Once the shooter is out of missiles you both extend back to the IP, swap over roles and the previous cover is now free to shoot with someone spotting for launches near him. This is the ground attack equivalent of air-to-air attacker and wingman (where the wingman has the exact same roles: keep visual on lead and watch for threats). With more practice you can swap between shooter and cover roles quite quickly as the situation arises. The important thing is that if both of you are concentrated solely on attacking then you are vulnerable to lots of threats. Make one guy offensive and one in a defensive posture and you will both kill more targets overall and both make it back. This is why Western combat aircraft *always* plan to work in units of pairs or multiples of pairs for such "search and destroy missions". Pre-planned target missions appear to be run differently, with all attacks occurring simultaneously from multiple directions (make "one pass, and haul ass" outta there). Plus it is a lot of fun to work together as as team :)

Its pretty simple in DCS. If everyone you're flying with calls "Rifle" when they fire a missile then you should have little issue figuring out when its a false alarm or a genuine scrotum shriveling moment. As always, it seems the solution to the toughest problem is better teamwork and lots and lots of comms.

Я прокомментирую:-). Как моделировать никому неизвестный и по сути, наверняка ещё секретный принцип наведения АИМ 120последнихпоколений- так пожалуйста. А как добавить списание времени до попадания Р27 в цель- нет ресурсов. Сделать- обстрел 2х целей миг29С- говорят, что нет такого самолета или нет у них РЛЭ. Однобокая принципиальность! Су35 уже поступил в ВВС- сделайте его , все что нужно переставить принцип работы РЛС из ф15 и добавить сушке Р77х Но понятное дело,что не селают, так как тогдавсе пересядут на Су. если даже сейчас несмотря на опускания- многие успешно летают на них.

Unpack the contents of this ZIP into game directory and run the newly created revert_to_1.2.2.7122.bat file. revert_to_1.2.2.7122.bat.zip

Су-27, V=1150, H=500, режим РЛС Сканирование, частота импульсов - авто V вертолетов = 200 висенее/встреча/догон CH-47 - 55/81/28 Ми-26 - 57/83/27 Ка-50 - 35/52/19 AH-64D - 35/52/19 OH-58 - 35/52/19 AH-1W - 38/57/20

а как подписи своей машины сделать заимел 690 может кому интересно отвечу позже 2 день в запое спасибо всем за мои глупые вопросы буду ждать ответа сколько смогу

Есть отказы, которые не сильно влияют на выполнение задачи, к тому же летат на задение в группе, а не одиночкой, так что при отказе нав. оборудования можно спокойно выполнить боевую задачу при работе в паре. Так что о чем плач Ярославны? О том, что большая часть онлайнищиков летать вообще не может и не умеет возвращатся на базу (это их проблемы)? Пусть будет инструмент - а использовать или не использовать решит миссиодел, к тому же сквадовые мисии или межсквадовые делаются при некотором уточнении деталей

ИМХО отказы были бы в тему.

Actually, it's not that hard. It was hard when working with it first time. Now, the Photoshop files are still present and ready to be adjusted. :) I can try something on blue colour. I'll post a few samples when ready. Thank you for suggesting.

And then the forums would collapse into anarchy as each side argued with the other over something lol. Still, I'd look forward to it. I'd hope for a more modern Flanker too as I just can't get used to the HUD's the Russian FC planes currently have, but I'd take any Flanker offered. In all honestly, a week of DCS A-10 made me as comfortable with the plane systems wise as I am with FC planes. I have an easier time starting the A-10 cold than the Su-25T because I can't remember the key command for the battery. And if you select runway or air start, you'll be in the fight as quickly as you would with a FC jet (though even from a cold start, the DCS plane won't necessarily fall behind).

Two possible issues to check out. Wrong module (BS2 full module instead of upgrade?) or you need to download the latest file posted from the DCS website download modules section. Re-download and install the BS2 upgrade module again. The version that worked for most is now on the website. The filename is KA-50_bs1update_en_1.2.2.7122_23.exe LOL with your "legitimate customers being punished" comment. I don't call this punishment I call it "funishment". Also maybe not the best approach for gleaning an answer to your query.;) Anyway I hope this helps. Out

У меня готов очередной пример, что можно сотворить, если использовать Scripting Engine для написания миссий. На прошлой неделе Edwardpashkov предложил идею реализовать работу ПВО, так чтобы она выглядела более реалистично, ну вот и сегодня у меня готов пример такой реализации. Как и в прошлый раз это миссия только пример, показывающий способ реализации, но если вы хотите в своей миссии реализовать такую же работу ПВО этот пример вполне может быть взят за основу. Если вам этот пример покажется интересным, но будет не понятно как его перенести в ваши миссии - я могу ответить на любые вопросы или помочь перенести этот механизм в ваши миссии. основные особенности демо-миссии: Предложенная реализация пригодна для использования как в сетевых так и в одиночных миссиях. Никаких особых требований нет. Демо-миссия протестирована мной на DCS World 1.2.2. Ниже приложил два варианта миссии: sam_ambush - с A-10C и sam_ambush_su25 с Su-25T (т.к. пока русский world не вышел, модули есть ещё не у всех.) В скриптах в этот раз комментарии не писал, я думаю код у меня итак вполне читаемый и понятный. миссия содержит всего три скрипта: mission.lua - скрипт с основной функциональностью, в него можно вообще не заглядывать, т.к. он универсальный для всех миссий. init.lua - содержит функции-обработчики событий вхождения в зоны ПВО и выхождения из зон ПВО, связывает обработчики с конкретными юнитами и объектами. on_kill.lua - содержит код, выполняемый при уничтожении некоторых элементов системы ПВО. Будут вопросы спрашивайте. P.S.: жду предложений какие ещё фичи было бы полезно реализовать. :) sam_ambush.miz sam_ambush_su25.miz

Магазин 1с интерес,МЕГА Химки,пираток не видел.

ok found a way to convert to PDF and here is the list of key commands for F-15C in FC3 Keyboard.pdf hope this helps:) jefx