currenthill

Thanks!

I think you misread my post. I agree with your priorities. I was merely pointing out the fact that you clearly have priorities, which of course controls your output. Nothing more, nothing less. I work as the CPO at a large insurance company, I very well understand the prioritization balance act required.

I personally think you're doing a great job, especially at keeping the quality high. I mean, the change logs clearly tells the story with all fixes, changes and additions! And I don't mean to be argumentative, but if you were to put all your resources at creating AI assets, wouldn't the outcome have been very different? Hence, that is per se the definition of prioritization. That said, I don't disagree with your priorities, it's a balance act for sure.

That is actually a good point. I mean, think in LODs. Maybe the module aircraft should have the highest of quality, the AI aircraft a bit less, and the ground/sea units could have a somewhat lower (not to confuse with low) good enough standard. The old compromise/balance between quality and actually getting things released.

Yep, as I said, if you create everything from scratch and have high quality standards, it will take time. And that's part of the issue, when is good enough?

Well, I would argue the TurboSquid models are allowed to use commercially (in DCS), if you do it correctly. Check the license details. In the case of DCS, the requirement would be to export to the EDM format. But I agree, if I for example were to build every model from scratch, it would take a lot longer to release a new asset. But that would only add the mesh creation time. I know for a fact that I can create everything else in my described process at a rather high pace, because as I mentioned before, it's my main priority. That is the key. I have released over 100 (in my opinion) high quality assets this year. Just to be clear, I'm only speaking for myself and my own work, I don't want to criticize or review others.

I think I've mentioned it before. The plan is to add the lighter weapons to the US Infantry pack in the future. This would include the M4, M4/GL, M249 and M240.

No worries, I just thought it would be a good opportunity to explain my process. Since there seem to have been a lot of confusion of how I do things. Thanks for clarifying your thought process.

Thank you, I put a lot of time into going through the error log and making sure there aren't any latent errors lurking in the reeds. I also define almost all of my weapons and ammunition myself, to minimize the risk of external dependencies.

Sounds like you need to clean up both your main DCS folder and your saved games DCS folder.

RWR and HARM ID version 1.2.0 released! Changelog Version 1.2.0 Added Project 20381 Steregushchiy Class Corvette Added Type 022 FAC Added HQ-22 SAM

Nope, but I added the SR for 360 coverage. The base setup consists of the LN and the STR.

HQ-22 SAM (China) version 1.0.0 released! Changelog Version 1.0.0 Release version

Haha, thanks for the deep insight regarding my process. Unfortunately you couldn't be more wrong, and I'm not a big fan of assumptions to be honest. There are a couple of main reasons why I can release assets at a high pace. The fact that I buy the basic 3d mesh isn't the secret sauce. The main reason is that I prioritize the release of new AI assets, which (understandably) ED don't. They are a company and need to make money to keep running. If ED wanted to release AI assets, they could release them in numbers that immensely would surpass mine. But in order to do so they would more or less have to shift all their business priorities. Back to my process, here is an overview from the FAQ on my site. HOW DO YOU CREATE ALL THESE ASSETS - DO YOU MODEL THEM? It's a combination. I first try to source a suitable model (checking format, vertices, quality of the mesh etc). But even in the best case scenario where I find a really nice model, there's a lot of work that I need to do with the mesh. I restructure the model, group objects, split objects, rig it for animation, create uvs, add missing details, add additional objects, replace stuff that doesn't look good. I then either increase of decrease the amount of vertices. Lastly I animate it and export the uvs to SP and continue with creating the textures (I make my textures from scratch). In some cases where I really want an asset and there's no suitable 3d model available, I make it myself. But since I have bought a fair share of models and already created a lot of stuff I can often put stuff together with what I have. That's what's good with the military stuff, there is a lot of standardization going on. And that really makes my life easier. So while the work on the model (mesh) is a lot of work, that's just one part of the process. I also model more or less every missile/projectile myself. Here's a quick overview of all the steps involved: 1) Research, 2) Mesh, 3) Uvs, 4) Animations, 5) Textures, 6) Code, 7) Sound, 8) Destroyed model, 9) Collision model, 10) Testing, 11) Documentation, 12) Publish, 13) Support I have created a very efficient workflow, which relies on me being the only developer. But as I mentioned in the forum thread, I cut some corners since I do this as a hobby and do not work for ED. For example, at the moment I don't create several LODs, and I don't spend too much time on optimizing the model (mesh and textures). This makes my assets pretty heavy to run. But these are cons I'm prepared to accept to keep getting now assets released. But that is all I'm prepare to accept, I really try to keep the quality high in regards to realism of the weapons, I make every ammunition and weapon type myself so that I can tune and optimize their performance. I add all the details like small detailed animations on the assets, custom sounds etc. I'm not interested in creating the same assets with different 3d models. And as to the part of a "bit of coding", I don't copy paste code. I have written and maintain almost 100 000 lines of code for my assets at the moment. Another thing that takes time is R&D, since I have to invent new ways to emulate modern weapons in DCS. A lot of my weapons or systems doesn't have an equivalent or template in core DCS to use. And finally, in regards to AI aircraft. ED hasn't released the new AI flight model (General Flight Model, GFM). So until then, all AI aircraft share the same basic flight model (SFM). The SFM configuration doesn't become more advanced because an ED employee enters the numbers.

I don't know why, but it's a lot harder to find good 3d models of western SAM systems compared to Russian and Chinese. The difference is enormous.

That is very much correct! HQ-22 launcher with four canisters HQ-22 H-200 Search and track radar HQ-22 JSG-100 Search radar

Sneak peek of what's coming next...

No problem, I see what you mean now. I will fix the inconsistency.

Another name? It's the third one called LAV-AD.

No problem! I will continue to create modern assets so that we don't need to use the old ones in-game.

I looked at your mission, and it was pretty easy to identify the issue. Just as @bennyboy9800 said, the different generations of DCS in-game assets is very evident. I just switched out the Mi-26 to a Ka-50 III and the LAV-AD tried a couple of Stingers (which was defeated with flares) and then took the heli down with the GAU/12. Also, in your test mission, the incoming A-10 was taken out with Stingers, which shows that both the missile and the modern asset have working configurations.

Thanks @Gundamator for spotting the issue! LAV-AD SPAAGM (USA) version 1.1.0 released! Changelog Version 1.1.0 Fixed issue with wrong FIM-92 model

Then you probably have an other mod overriding the DCS sound. This have been mentioned before in this thread and on the forum.