...

They should first fix the behavior of the infantry. That has been the priority for a long time. If the infantry does not go where it is needed, the transport helicopters have little to do.

Helicopters are a bit useless at the moment. The troops and infantry behave quite erratically. I've tried launching a mission, but the soldiers are behaving stupid and I can't get them where I need them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r1o0Nm2tCnk

The gunners continue to attack the armed towers with priority. A waste of time and waste of ammunition. This would be reasonable if there were a soldier on duty in each tower.

16GB here. I love the map, but at 30,000 feet it's like flying over a plate of mush. Not only are there no textures, but the green hues disappear into the distance. I think that at high altitude, in the absence of textures, it would be necessary to resort to an orthophoto. It also depends on the configuration of each user. My Computer is very fair. Medium / low height is perfect.

Grados • WO-Waveoff • OWO - Waveoff propio • _OK_ - Pase perfecto • OK - Desviaciones razonables con buenas correcciones • (OK) - Aceptable. Desviaciones razonables • --- - Sin grado. Pase por debajo del promedio pero seguro • C - Corte. Inseguras, desviaciones graves dentro de la ventana de waveoff • B - Bolter Errores principales • AFU - Todos "ensuciados" hacia arriba • DL - Derivados a la izquierda • DR - Derivados a la derecha • EG - Pistola facilitada (empujó los aceleradores hacia atrás para ayudar a ajustar el gancho para el arresto) • F - Rápido • FD - Cubierta sucia • H - Alto • LL - Aterrizado a la izquierda • LO - Bajo • LR - Aterrizado a la derecha • LUL - Alineado a la izquierda • LUR - Alineado a la derecha • N - Nariz • NERD - Velocidad de descenso insuficiente • NSU - No configurado • P - Potencia • SLO - Lento • TMRD - Demasiada velocidad de descenso • W - Alas • LLWD - Ala izquierda aterrizada hacia abajo • LRWD - Ala derecha aterrizada hacia abajo • LNF - Nariz aterrizada • 3PTS - 3 puntos aterrizados Marcas de distancia colocadas después del error: • BC - Llamada de bola (antes del primer 1/3 de la senda de planeo) • X - Al inicio (primer 1/3 de la senda de planeo) • IM - En el medio (1/3 medio de la senda de planeo) • IC - En el cierre (último 1/3 de la senda de planeo) • AR - En la rampa • TL - Para aterrizar (entre AR y el primer cable) • IW - En los cables • AW - Después de los cables (Usando traductor de google) Puede contener errores.

My opinion on this matter is that I would like a 100% human role military simulator and that includes ships, tanks, infantry and transport planes. But I think a C-130 would be a very easy target. You would only get to your destination 30% of the time. You would need a permanent dedicated escort for cooperative missions that could be considered serious and realistic. Assuming you've accepted that, I think you'd be one of the few interested in taking a 20 minute preflight to die 70% of the time. We already know how AIM-54Cs launched at 40 nautical miles work. You would need an escort of three or four planes just for you. Anyway, your wish is as valid as any other and I hope you achieve it.

In the last two connections, the server was full, as always, with more than 10 participants on each side. I always join the side that has the fewest participants, so that it is balanced. I like both roles.

I'm not sure, but I think if the last communication was from COM1, the keyboard shortcut sends the communication to COM1. This also happens to me with the AWACS. If my last communication is COM2, the keyboard shortcut will send COM2 communication. I may be wrong, but this may be a clue.

Felicidades por vuestro proyecto chicos, he visto la página de Facebook y tiene buena pinta. Espero que crezca y se establezca. Un abrazo desde Madrid.

Yes, unfortunately there are people who would turn off the sun, because it dazzles ...

This looks spectacular, does it pass the integrity filter? If so, I am interested in downloading it. Thank you very much!

:thumbup:

This looks brutal and greatly improves what is seen by default. The default wet track looks horrible.

I don't really like the wet platform effect. It has a uniform appearance of oiled steel. It should look more like asphalt with a rough texture. I think there is a mod that simulates the wet track effect much better, but unfortunately it does not pass the integrity filter. https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=274704

Does anyone know if there is any mod available for dirt on the crystals?

+1

Thank you very much for the reply. I thought I was doing something wrong.

Dubai at low altitude is still well below the quality that the Supercarrier offers, there are many buildings but they are simple textures, they are not dynamic textures, but static. The Supercarrier is graphically superior to anything we have thus far and it was predictable that it would have a huge impact on performance. Shadows don't just affect the Supercarrier, they have a huge global impact, just like the Hornet's mirrors. The ED team has already reported that it is being [iNVESTIGATED] and they just reported that the problem has been reported. I can simply say that I am very satisfied with the performance, much better than expected and I can operate in this module obviously with conservative graphics settings and without filling the platform with additional static objects. If they improve it, it will be good for everyone, but I would consider it a computing miracle, honestly. One thing I like about the Supercarrier, is that it casts high-quality default shadows, regardless of whether the general settings on the main panel are flat shadows and I honestly wouldn't want this to change.

I will always respond proportionally to people who derail and disrespect.

Didn't you say you were going to ignore my messages? How can you have credibility if you don't have self-control?

In reference to one of your previous posts. I repeat it. You get rock-solid 60 FPS on the rest of the map, in any situation, because DCS maps are made up of low-resolution textures. I have already attached an example, tree texture and buildings so that you understand that they are textures that do not consume too many resources.

Huge efforts to prove what? How do you improve the FPS by eliminating the deck crew and turning off the shadows? Right from the start, comparing the performance of the Supercarrier with the performance of the Stennis has shown that no one can beat your way of making a fool of yourself. I am not here to please you. It is not my fault that this matter takes away your sleep and you do not accept that there are people who do not see the problem that does not let you sleep. All that I have contributed, opinions and examples, are completely valid, however, you are here fighting against mathematics and anyone who does not see it as you. Opinion number 1 The Supercarrier has high-quality modeling that justifies its high graphic demand. Opinion number 2 That watching the island reduce the FPS is not an exclusive problem of the Supercarrier, it is something that also happens in Nellis, with other planes and also in other simulators. Opinion number 3 Custom settings offer a worse quality / performance balance than presets. Opinion number 4 That removing deck personnel and disabling shadows improves performance, is not something that adds much to the subject, because it is obvious. If this seems stupid to you, it is because you have entered an infinite loop from which no one will be able to get you out ... Eagle Dynamics will manage to improve performance, but we all know that miracles do not exist and that the Supercarrier cannot match the FPS of the Stennis, pure mathematics. About your attempts to hold Eagle Dynamics responsible for the Hornet SA page problem, caused by an NVIDIA driver, we'll talk another day if you want.

You said that 20 posts ago. You said you didn't want to argue and you have argued. I hope this time you will listen to yourself. You have published nonsense, one after the other.

You are also losing your tone and forgetting that this is a space for different opinions. Mine is worth as much as yours and you have no right to call it "nonsense" We have a descendant of Einstein here to tell us that turning off shadows and removing deck gear improves FPS. What would we do without you? Anyway, wait for the (Russian) developers to fix your problem, we are not as smart as you. :megalol::megalol::megalol: