SonofEil

That’s true. I gave the C-17 as an example but you’re right, there are definitely quite a few more in dire need of attention. (I just really want an AI worth a damn regarding behavior. In the last three hours of gameplay my Ka-50 wingman hovered down into trees, an F-16 SEAD flight flew straight and level into terrain, F-18 wingman refused to engage bandits and immediately got eliminated, all adversaries go into loop mode during BFM...I mean, DCS is ten effing years old, twenty if you count it’s heritage. IMPROVE THE AI!!)

You certainly seem to have trouble with the obvious fakes: This thread was fun for a minute but now it’s not. Good luck out there everyone!

Probably. Occam’s razor applies. Still, I recently listened to a long interview with Cmd Fravor on the Fighter Pilot Podcast and that was enough to instill some doubt in me that they’re gov’t black objects. (youtube linked because the fpp website is currently down for maintenance. also, notice the top comment for the video.) Multiple highly trained and credible witnesses across multiple days and recorded with multiple disparate sensor platforms. Assuming these incidents, and ones like them, actually did occur as described (and I believe they did), it’s hard to believe the US gov’t was/is operating a bleeding edge black aircraft with a novel, heretofore unknown propulsion method, just...out in the open. Interacting with fighters, civilian aircraft, ships, etc, and risking potential engagement with the military. That’s simply not how black programs work. A foreign government, then? I guess that’s possible too, but much less likely for a huge variety of reasons. Also consider that these specific instances were recorded in I think 2004. What’s visible in the videos is an operational aircraft representing literal decades of research, development and testing. Then factor in the 15 years since the videos were recorded...and we still know nothing about them? In our current environment that alone is amazing. I’ll stop now because I could argue with myself (or anyone here ftm) about this all day. Suffice it to say that the answer is still ‘probably’ a LM or NG black project, but if you haven’t listened to that interview, you should. The whole story is damn fascinating.

I’m personally ok with lower poly AI aircraft, something that looks decent at, say, ~100 meters is fine with me. (Flyables need to look amazing of course.) There are still a few glaring exceptions like the C-17, where you can count the triangles from a half mile away. I’d rather have ugly AI aircraft with good, uh, AI than brand new million-poly planes with the absolutely worthless ‘intelligence’ currently implemented.

Dude, I’m on the take-all-the-time-you-need side, but you can’t argue with... Actually, screw it. Doesn’t matter. I’m excited and rooting hard for you guys!

Not entirely the community’s fault, no. There was this:

This. I’m a patient guy and I paid my money on day one fully expecting a March 20th EA release, but christ, Heatblur have done themselves exactly zero favors in the meantime. Hell, maybe fake release dates and forum chaos is their actual PR strategy. If so, *George W Bush Mission Accomplished*, I guess?

Roger that. :thumbup:

I mean, somebody updated the steam page. If you have unauthorized people changing very public dates on your steam page then that sounds like a problem. :smilewink:

I’ve skimmed the pages of this thread and I haven’t been able to determine if there is a consensus if Loft mode works or not. My personal experience is that it used to work. Months ago if I lofted a 7 it’d climb upwards to cruise at a much higher altitude. In my (admittedly limited) recent utilization of the 7 it’ll only track straight and level off the rail.

bump :smilewink:

Why is there a minute of dead air at the end of the video? I was really expecting a post-credits sequence! (Video was good btw, just giving you a hard time. Definitely appreciate you helping out the HB crew.)

Yeah, the same thing happened during the Hornet buildup. HB has given out the modern equivalent of review copies, or press access, or screeners, or whatever you want to call them. They didn’t invent the concept, it’s been around for literally centuries. It’s mildly amusing to watch all the temper tantrums and bald faced ignorance in this thread though.

While the black strobing/flickering is much reduced for me from the semi constant occurances in the Dec-Jan OB’s, I do still get the occasional flicker. Maybe once or twice per 30 minute mission.

http://www.heatblur.se/F-14Manual/index.html

Looks like the Heatblur manual is available now: http://www.heatblur.se/F-14Manual/index.html

Manual is out now. http://www.heatblur.se/F-14Manual/index.html

Something I’ve been curious about, are the low poly AI 14’s and magical Phoenix being replaced by HB’s 14’s and Phoenix when they release?

These sorts of things give me the utmost sympathy for the people that, for whatever reason, have the passion but don't have the time to deep dive this sim. I totally understand that frustration. I even took a number of years off because life simply said I couldn't play. This sim demands multiple hours per week to stay proficient for actual gameplay, and hours more each month to hit the manuals, youtube tutorials and forums. Time that many, hell, most people don't have. I'm currently at a point where this isn't (too much of) a problem for me. But that could absolutely change tomorrow. At the same time, I didn't and won't blame ED/DCS if such a situational change does occur for me again. ED should maintain and expand the goal of absolute realism, whether I can participate or not. Despite all the faults, they do it better than anybody else and I recognize how fortunate I am to be here.

My current wish list now lies solely in helicopters. I’m excited the Mi-24 is in development and I’d absolutely love to see any variant of Chinook, CH-53, and MD-500 family of choppers in DCS. I’m happy to say that once the Viper and Tomcat arrive my fixed wing ‘dream sheet’ from long ago will actually be fulfilled. I’ll still purchase whatever ED and a select few 3rd party devs produce after that of course. Gotta support the cause.

I’ve been noticing some quiet updates also. New SU-34 looks great and so does the new E-2. Hopefully the C-17 gets a couple extra polygons soon. It’s engines are practically squares.

How many threads are you going to post this in? We get it, AAR is extremely hard for you. It’s hard for everybody at first. If you spent more time practicing and less time griping on the forums you’d get better at it. The wake turbulence isn’t going to make it harder because you shouldn’t be flying in the wake turbulence while performing AAR. If you’re doing it right you shouldn’t even know it’s there. But you already don’t like it? Give me a break.

That's one of the most perfect .gif's I've ever seen, I can't spot the damn loop cut at all! Re this thread, I think it serves a purpose and shouldn't be closed. Perpetual EA is a growing problem with no easy solution. If anything, threads like this allow devs to see their customers tolerance and frustration levels to said problem. It also looks like there's a 3rd party or two that are testing the bounds of that tolerance. But yes, the thread's current state is as your .gif describes.

I also want AAR to be harder. Before going VR AAR was pretty difficult for me. I got 'good' at it with practice but it was always a white knuckle affair. And that's probably a primary source of complaint: even when you can do it, on a 2D screen AAR just isn't that enjoyable. It just becomes a process that highlights the limitations of the simulation hardware. In VR it's...kind of easy tbh, and fun! You still have to learn it and practice but in the grand scheme of things it's not too difficult at all. I'm glad we'll finally see wake turbulence (depending on the meaning of 'coming soon'). Hopefully we'll get basket physics sooner rather than later too and maybe one day atmospheric turbulence. I want the challenge back! They were actually pretty good for their time 20 years ago. And the things accomplished with FF and BMS were damn amazing. I drifted away from it a while ago but it earned it's place as one of the greats in my book.

“And in the F-14, most likely, they simply take the relative coordinates of the nearest aircraft and at a certain position begin to shake their own.” That’s kind of interesting. With the announcement this morning I assumed Heatblur was just flying their pre-release 14 in a pre-release World that includes the wake turbulence. But Yo-Yo is stating that they’re actually using their own sort of proximity cheat. There is no wake turbulence but the F-14 is ‘pretending’ that there is. I could see this as potentially a major source of conflict once ED releases the actual wake turbulence.