Leaderboard

From Wags Interview: (on update) - Wags on ED from 2000 to today (23 years). - ED join on Janne´s team on 1998 and work on Janne´s F-18E, move ot NASCAR tiburon studio and after move to SSI - Wags join ED on Flanker 2.0 times and your first big project with ED was LOMAC. - Machine learning has starting to look, but first we have update AI BVR and later BFM, looking more variables about situation and be able to addapt them. Before was very basic, and now, the AI look the hostile, the airspeed, turn on one circle or two circles, from the top, and what is the better situation vs the enemy aircraft. Previously always turn on two circles and super predictable. - Wingman AI expected improve after AI make advances on BFM and BVR not much, after single ship AI, turn more complicated. Has many resources centred on BFM, about BFM tactics has more on the agenda about what is available. - Detail: ED dont like a potencial adversary use them as a trainer vs Us... - Weapons and sensors has Hardcoded. - Comunications with voice recognition vs AI has none on ED plans. Has very dificult to make yet. - Wags enter on Janne´s when F-15E was on final production and start to develop the F-18E Super Hornet on 1998. We has lost the good intros and other issues of the 90s simulator games. - Soldier and Soldiers animations on DCS has very old animations and technology, on progress with new soldier animations and technology. - About "ground combat" on DCS, (the air environment) the 4th Gen aircraft has near to reach to make all available aircrafts, move to Cold War aircrafts, Century series, WW2, moving to the Pacific on WW2, but the ground, with a level terrain on DCS, not sure if will or not come to DCS, not sure, but that is not if, as a when start to work on them (no a CA), a simulator with Abrams, A-10 and AH-64 will be great. - ED dont go to build a "Ukraine map", many sensible on that momemt. The same of Taiwan. - Dymamic campaig two layers with a "Strategic side" with two sides, assets, industry, production and targets. That generate look the targets, the assets, resources and build mission to the ATO. The player on "Tactic level" see the ATO and fly the mission, affect the "Strategy side" to generate new ATO missions. A real "vehicle simulation". - ED dont reach the actual levels without the comunity and passion. - CH-47F has On Progress and next on the pipeline by ED. Boeing helo version F with glass cockpit. - One of big issues to build a 4th gen Aircraft (include helos) has the documentation, and always with come to the game has from open sources and none secret or restricted. Meanwhile a part of the info has not open, the module develop not start. Build modules with reliable and available info and SME. If not get the necesary information, the module has "not go". - All module building by ED has by module sales, no Kickstarter or dotations. - F-6F Hellcat On Progress. That was require found the correct info, reference data, wing tunnel data to build acurated flight model. Found some veterans with fly the Hellcat, about operation procedures. - Other point has be the money inversment and the future sales (if not feasible "not go"). - About 3rd Parties with coming with a "I like build that aircraft", ED get support and get advice if other 3rd parties has making the same project to move to other proyect and not waste your time. - Heatblur working on the A-6E Intruder with a AI unit first, F-14D mayor problem has get acurated data. - The comunity put normaly DCS modules very outside of the flight evelope / system / codifications, etc and report them as bugs, when on the aircraft normal operations, a real pilot never put the aircraft on some situations. Always has required a good bug descriptions, track files, etc, to put on Jira, get a priority and intent correct them. - Over problems with a module release about "sensible" info. Before release a module, ED contact with pymes to review them, if someone has not "public" or "sensible", ED remove them. On the AH-64, a number of items was no added to the module by the actual situation. The same situation with the comunity with rise "sensible" documents on the forum, has a "Not Go". Nothing as a Category B, C, official eyes only, etc, example some Grece F-16C docs on internet. - Wags was a Degree Geography student on the university, and 10 years working on the CIA. - Wags like Praire Beers - The F-16/F/A-18C radar bug has on progress to fix. - Comunity dont like random problems on systems. - F/A-18C flight dinamics FCS has remade on progress. - Expected see advances on the Supercarrier Ready Room and complete prefly deck to the 2023 end year. - Missing info, documentations, to build a F/A-18E Super Horner. - The "Maverick Pack" get a sales spike on DCS. - Destructible trees on plans someday on far future. - One of main important features on progress has the flight directors to carriers and brown shirts from parking to cat launch, from start, sent to another and end to the landing box, and from the landing box to the parking slot. Expected build realistic comunications with the Air Boss, searching a serious voice actor. - All carrier technology on deck crew move to use them to build the ground crew / plane captain on ground bases. - Korea and Vietnam maps coming after other maps. - C-130 cargo version on progress by 3rd Party. Cargo transport funtionality as part of DCS funtionality build by ED. - ED has building pararatroopers. - Logistic side on the CH-53 / C-130 modules, not only as a extension of old warehouses, funtional on helos / aircrafts, implemented on the dinamic campaign, with players fly missions to resupply. - Kola on progress by ORBX (Wags work many time to get into DCS to build maps), - ED continue working on Whole World map and diferent eras (WW2, Vietnam, etc) and destructible terrain. - Live Traffic and Weather will coming on a future, but actualy has only a plan. - Eurofighter builded by HB/True Grit, after the F-4E Phantom II. - Polychop OH-58D Kiowa was delayed by the main programmer was sick. ED has get a evaluation and feedback, and the module is comming. - Saab JAS Grippen (include early versions) has problems with the available data. - Mig-29 version will be available, but build a Su-27 / J-11 has problems with data / aprovals / legaly available info. - ED will make a T-38A, the problem has be the limitated capability of the aircraft, has more plausible to a 3rd party team.

Thanks! Yep, there seem to be a lot of guys interested in the M777, so it's on the list.

More front turret work and Rebecca ariel

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1f9ULQ7XKll-baGQZL2LO6uV-qG4ZCWS2/view This is probably THE BEST J-20 mod we ever got

A-7E development progress from FlyingIron's discord null null

Если кто вдруг соскучился)

So these charts are useless then ? I don´t think we´ll find a decent comparison. And for me it´s not just about the share of the market, though I do think that the percentage of players/sold copies of flight sims compared to all games in the 90s was higher than it is today. But neither of us can provide accurate numbers and today it´s distorted by free to play models and such. What defines the "golden age" for me is just that in the 90s there were like two dozen different companies that competed in giving us players the best flight sim they could make. Gaming magazines talked about those games, many were nominated for best game of the year awards, etc. Yes, MSFS is kind of an oddity, it caused some hype, but it´s included in Microsofts game pass, basically everyone with an X-Box has played that at some point, so those player numbers don´t mean much. And I don´t think that flight sims in the 90s were easy or cheap to make. They couldn´t just rent the latest unreal engine, they all had to program their own engines at the edge of ever changing hardware limitations.

This is a dumb take, even for these forums. In the first place, These aircraft have very complex systems which can take a very long time to master. Real world pilots of these aircraft put in hundreds of hours per year to achieve and maintain the proficiency in them required to excel in combat operations. Various militaries around the world invest hundreds of hours of instructor-driven training to get pilots to a point where going out and practicing will be more helpful than harmful. In the second place, why the <profanity> do you care how other people play the game? Giving and receiving instruction can both be extremely rewarding experiences. Even ignoring the first point entirely, that makes a hypothetical CFI/IP module attractive to many people.

Yes. I have a few updates planned before I start working on the Strike Eagle proper.

Project 956 Admiral Ushakov Class Destroyer WIP Photos. So far the Sovremenny Class Russian Destroyer AI Ship mod is working out well. Still a lot of work to do. Weapons testing in progress If someone would like to volunteer to create Liveries that would be great as I don't plan to create any. Currently, there are only three in Service. Two are being overhauled and four were sold to China.

General life advice (unsolicited I know): don’t be ashamed of who you are and the things you enjoy

Против фантома и Ф1 - на редкость сбалансированно. Против 14 и 15 - вот так:

Workshop 109 Formation 7 Teilnehmer

Haha, yeah, it's more than 100 assets now. And they all have 4K textures, so it adds up.

Thanks! Thank you! Thanks! Unfortunately not, I can't really make one big asset pack, since it (currently) would be around 30 GB. And if I make one small code change you would have to download all 30 GB again. That's why it's distributed in smaller parts. But I just added the option to download all per country, for the first timers. I could maybe add the option to download all countries at once also.

There have been talks but we would want some more flight model progress before handing it over to them, We have a Lancaster Taxi pilot helping out and giving feedback which is helping alot As much as I love P7 we cant share this specific version as the models arent mine to give out, You can catch us a the Virtual Summer Air Festival on Sunday with both P7 and Lanc + Friends https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1D6CqF1cPYCze12ZmUIDU37prPOSNGjW6Ek0aTI-xX3s/edit#gid=170626283

Да вот и выходит что DCS это выучил абы как самолет, полетал кампании и быстрые миссии и сингл на этом закончился. Такой как бы MSFS, но со стрельбой и ИИ. В мультике баланса нет, интересно только холодную войну летать, или PvE если есть с кем. Но если хочешь это в VR, то неси 4090 и 7800x3d, и все равно будет лагать. В BMS всё иначе не потому, что у них модели низко полигональные (LOD для DCS тоже никто не отменял, если бы было все так просто), а потому что игра строится совсем по-другому. Там все крутится вокруг симуляции локальной войны, а 3D сим будто поверх этой войны прикручен. В итоге вся война просчитывается в 2D по своим упрощенным законам (по сути на вероятностях, а-ля RTS), а ты как летчик можешь летать любые миссии в 3D симуляции, чтобы внести свой небольшой вклад. Вокруг тебя и твоего оружия "пузырь" на сотню миль прогружается и упрощенный мир 2D налету переходит в 3D. Получается, не важно сколько юнитов на войне, у тебя все работает хорошо, и война эта выглядит очень даже реалистично. Никто из разработчиков не будет жертвовать симуляцией войны в пользу условных болтов на танках, у них четкие приоритеты. Также никто не будет рушить баланс невероятными способностями оружия, и если они делают систему, то будь уверен, что она не работает волшебным образом всегда и копаться в ней придется порядочно. У меня за неделю полетов уже несчетное множество отказов из-за несоблюдения режимов работы с системами (блоки целеуказания уже заканчиваются на базе, и хз когда новые привезут), мне никогда столько всего держать в голове в DCS не приходилось. В DCS я мог отлетать 3-4 миссии кампании за вечер как ни в чем ни бывало, словно кино посмотрел, а в BMS мой мозг закипает после 2-3 миссий. Достаточно увидеть, что там творится на радаре и RWR и сразу возникает когнитивный диссонанс с DCS. А когда еще выясняется, что с IFF и DATALINK не всё так просто как в DCS, и что ПВО имеют мозг, сидят в засаде и работают эшелоном, что ИИ не совсем идиот и знает базу BVR и умеет очень даже многое, то контраст рисуется еще тот. Нельзя не задуматься, как же так, почему это тут работает, а в DCS нет. И никаких тебе кастомных скриптов которые того и гляди сломаются, всё просто работает как есть в автоматическом генераторе кампании. Это я всё к тому, что летать такие кампании ну очень интересно. И ко всему этому еще и офигенный DTC, добротный ATC и возможность стартовать любую миссию на парковке, рулении или полосе, если хочется сэкономить время. Всё это не без проблем, конечно, но пару недель войны (>100 миссий) говорят можно радоваться, потом могут быть глюки. Я еще не там и глюков не вижу. Такой сингл очень существенно бы поднял продажи DCS, но пока даже намека на нечто подобное нет. DCS это наоборот попытка прикрутить к симулятору небольшого боестолкновения войну и назвать это World. Амбиции это конечно здорово, но в итоге парадоксально то, что технического потенциала прикручивания всего и вся у BMS выходит больше, чем у DCS. Даже сложно представить, что уже было бы, если бы BMS был коммерческим. А так всё держится на энтузиазме разработчиков, которые занимаются этим по сути от безысходности - если не они, то сегодня просто никто.

A video featuring some of my upcoming assets, the US Infantry pack. The first release will include: M2 HMG tripod soldier Mk19 AGL tripod soldier FGM-148 Javelin ATGM soldier (mobile) M82 AMR soldier (with and without camouflage cover) M136 AT soldier (mobile)

B-1B, P-3C, ... so many nice big planes that offer interesting game play... Even a C-130H would be awesome.

Hi, I miss a trigger in mission editor, which would react on target detection (radar/visual). I imagine something similar like "unit/part of group/ part of coalition in zone" in combination with specific unit. e.g. IF unit(radar) DETECTS unit(target)/part of group/part of coalition DO .... I´am trying to bypass it by lua script, but without any succes yet

low flyby I guess he's calling the Armée de l'air and I will be in trouble...

I would have to finish the entire pack before I could say what I'm missing. So far I'm real happy that there is so much content, great work!

Официальные документы такие. Но в них есть ошибка.

To be honest, I thought that this was some kind of misunderstanding and this "feature" would be quickly corrected. But do we really have to fly over such forests? This is nonsense for a modern map, as I think. When I see it, the only thing that reminds me of it... You know, if you do this: Then in such images you can see 3D shapes.. That's what the forest in Normandy reminds me of now. These trees are burning my eyes, Probably the situation is worsened by the fact that the texture under the trees is much lighter than the trees. Why can it be fixed by mods, but can't be fixed by developers? And by the way, why are low textures so terrible? They have the same strange repeating pattern For example, the low textures of the Mariana Islands map do not have such a pattern This Normandy map development team are real good fellows. This wonderful team has done a great job. But it is strange to see perfectly drawn plates and spoons in houses at the same time and this ancient pattern on the textures of the forest

No problem, we read the steam reviews and have passed on the feedback from them, I have also shared your concern with the team. thank you

There's no info/warning about EA when buying DCS modules on Steam, ex. F-15E or F/A-18C. Same with DCS version requirement. Many users end up with the module not working at all (because they were not on Open Beta), wondering how to download it or not very pleased with the module, because they didn't know that it's only EA - so they point out many bugs and unimplemented features to be missing. This is poor customer service and it's asking for troubles and unintended bad PR.

I think there should be a module that allows someone designated as s flight instructor the ability see and interact with the student and controls (by permissions setting). This would be for the function of the aircraft only and will not have the ability to stop the game or troll the student. The module would allow the student the ability to input the gamer tag of the Flight Instructor and the server where the training takes place. These conditions must be set in the game. The instructor would request permission from the student and the student will acknowledge either ‘give control’ or ‘deny control’. Much like how Microsoft Teams works. The instructor will have the ability to point to and highlight switches but not actually control anything unless that setting is toggled in the game settings. I think this type of module would be value added and provide a better and more realistic way to train. This would apply to squadron and public severs with the word ‘Training’ in the server name. The module will actually verify this condition. Or the server owner can toggle 'Allow Flight Instructor'.

I lowered the ground terrain setting, lowered MSAA and Shadow, aswell as putting the LODs to the minimums and putting preload radius at 55k, and clean fxo and metashaders2 when I update the game and when I update my drivers, force ReBAR and lowered anisotropic filtering, everything that used memory got lowered and now the game doesn't exceed my VRAM, giving me a very stable game, I still have stutters but they are very short and doesn't happen often, I also disabled SSAO, SSLR that give me unstable frames too, I'm now VRAM limited running at 180fps, I can't really increase the quality anymore, the freeze was mainly from my instable RAM settings I also don't use fTPM and so Core Isolation is disabled since it scans RAM in real time and would destroy performance in DCS

Nobody would force you to use the option so yes, everyone would be happy - those who want it can use it and those who dont simply dont use it.

I use button 15 on the throttle (red front, LH pinkie). Seems like a fairly useless button on most modules, and easy to reach.

So far, you've "voted" four times.

Why not let ED decide what is a waste of their time? Who appointed you the gatekeeper?

Well I prefer not to fund an Instructor Module.

@Flappie Video has just finished processing, see my post above for the track. Please let me know if there's anything I need to do differently to give good test data.

Wait... There's a manual?! - says 99% of DCS players...

He’d like to do it only once.

as sharpexb noted use another less needed button. one has to pick what they like. i personally have one on the throttle that is not used for anything else. for example i use zooming in an out a lot so i have the trim hot on the stick as in out and center. for trim which i use less, i use same hat but with the modifier. and notice that one can have more than one modifier.

btw. I checked and LOW ALT WARNING set up now its working .

Yes: an SME has confirmed in an earlier thread about this topic that the "low altitude" warning stays on until the condition is no longer true. Aka it will trigger on landing and stay active until you either shut down or take off again and climb above the altitude you have set for the LAW.

From the open beta changelog on April 13: If the blue indicator is not displayed, the hold mode is not engaged and affecting the flight controls, even if the hold mode itself is enabled. A more detailed description of each is in the Quickstart manual.

This is an interesting little aircraft - there are some expensive versions of it available, and some cheaper but quite acceptable alternatives: https://www.cgtrader.com/3d-models/aircraft/military-aircraft/alenia-c-27j-spartan-e08ad84d-39b1-4f3b-b9b1-177c6de9e872 I would happily chip in to buy this if you wanted to do it. Admiral and I did something similar with the Merlin helicopter.

Really nice work, your doing a wonderful job, Thank you

Workshop ME109

Hi @BIGNEWY and/or @NineLine; any chances to influence the authors of this map and performance problems reported here and in bug section of this corner of SA map? We trusted that it's EA and the map will only get better, meanwhile it's the other way around, and adding new objects makes it worse. The map clearly stands out from other maps in terms of performance, offering significantly smaller tracts of forests or buildings, meanwhile it works much worse. There is also a serious problem in VR. We are a more than year after the release and it's still bad. Pretty please. VR issues was reported here:

Чтоб не плодить разные симуляторы под каждый самолёт разной эпохи. Он найдёт своего покупателя и эксплуатанта как в моём лице, так и ещё многих. Ждём))

I think you can just say: you should read what ED means by "early access", its not bad marketing, its just that most people don’t understand what they read.

I doubt that, simmers are proud to be simmers, haha. It's funny how much that changed in society in general, btw, imho. I remember my friends rolling eyes at me "you do what?" "don't you rather want to go out and live life?" (as if I didnt lol) - nowadays all our guests want to see the sim setup (it aint even special just a few aficionado HOTAS and pedals, etc), and it is more like "ooh!" and "aaah!" and "wow!"

Those are great inputs after they completed the whole JF-17 cockpit hopefully they can sell parts individually. Then the user can build however they like. Behind the UFCP there are a couple of connections that look like they are for the chute/emergency pull brake/master caution/status lights which will be easier than don't require another USB connection to a PC.