Tree_Beard

Sim mode. Always take off with flaps set to half. Flaps set to half for takeoff.

Usually I just push the T/O trim button during cold startup on the carrier and ignore the recommended trim per weight, since the plane doesn't really seem to have any trouble launching at 12 degrees even with a full loadout. However, I have recently been getting the annoying "CHECK TRIM" warning on my left DDI after takeoff, and every time I spool up the engines, even 30+ minutes after launching, I get a master warning light and beeping. Flaps being set to auto doesn't seem to matter. So, I decided that from now on, maybe I'll start doing things by the book and trimming the aircraft correctly per weight for launch. Here's the problem I am having now - While hooked up on the catapult, I use my trim hat to pull the flaps back to 16 degrees, referencing the checklist DDI page. It seems to take a weirdly long time for the flaps to move from 12 to 16, holding back on the trim hat, but whatever I guess. Then comes the real issue. I launch from the cat, and the jet immediately wants to pitch up really hard, so I have to press hard nose down to keep it level. And at this point, even when I flip the flaps switch to auto, the jet continues pitching up. Like my trim will not go back to neutral, whether I set the flaps switch to auto, press FCS reset or a key that I bound to trim reset... the trim wont change. I am sure I'm doing something wrong here, can someone figure out what my problem is?

Moderately annoying having to do trial and error or calculate how wide an orbit is going to be in the mission based on the speed you set. How about the AI will adjust its bank angle based on how wide and how fast you want the orbit to be. Sometimes I want to set the AI to do a really wide orbit without having the jet going extremely fast.

I've only had a chance to play very briefly so I haven't done any additional testing, but I will once I can sit down for a couple hours and fly again.

Was Air to Air AI improved or changed in this update? I have a simple intercept mission that I play fairly often on the Syria map where I take off in an F15C and intercept a single MiG29S at about 25k ASL. Before this update, my first AMRAAM launched at about 30 miles in TWS would be probably a 90% PK, and if that first one didn't get him, the second missile was basically a guaranteed kill. Thats how it went virtually every time. After this update, the AI MiG was not only able to defeat multiple fox-3 launches, but also managed to defeat both of my 9Ms as well, dumping a ton of flares in a way that I haven't really seen AI do before. We eventually merged and I needed to use my gun to splash him, which had never happened before in this mission. I'm certainly no ace pilot, and maybe this was a one-off fluke, but has anyone else seen a change in air-to-air AI behavior?

Just curious if anyone else has noticed a big difference in their created missions. I didn't really see anything in the changelog. I have a simple intercept mission that I play fairly often on the Syria map where I take off in an F15C and intercept a single MiG29S at about 25k ASL. Before this update, my first AMRAAM launched at about 30 miles in TWS would be probably a 90% PK, and if that first one didn't get him, the second missile was basically a guaranteed kill. Thats how it went virtually every time. After this update, the AI MiG was not only able to defeat multiple fox-3 launches, but also managed to defeat both of my 9Ms as well, dumping a ton of flares in a way that I haven't really seen AI do before. We eventually merged and I needed to use my gun to splash him, which had never happened before in this mission. I'm certainly no ace pilot, and maybe this was a one-off fluke, but has anyone else seen a change in air-to-air AI behavior?

I don't have any data to point to, but I would guess that most players who try DCS for the first time do so on Steam. This means that the two-week trial thing is not relevant for them. Anecdotally, I've recommended DCS to two people I know, who downloaded the free to play game on Steam and tried out the two free planes. Neither of them stuck around to buy any modules. I think the F15C should also be free to play.

Since you seem like you know what you are talking about, can you help me understand what to pay attention to prior to the merge? Like how am I supposed to know what the bandit is trying to do as we fly straight at each other? Surely you have a general sense of what speed you want to be at to give yourself a chance to counter whatever he does after you merge? And the idea that there is no such thing as better in 1c vs 2c also confuses me... For example if it was a Hornet vs an F16, surely the F16 is going to try to force the hornet into 2c to play to its advantages, right? I'm thinking primarily about guns only, FYI. My knowledge of BFM obviously has a ways to go.

Do you think the Su27 is generally better in a 1-circle fight or a 2-circle fight? If you are trying to go 2-circle, what airspeed do you want to aim for at the merge? (assume 10k feet ASL) What is the optimal corner speed for max turn rate at 5k, 10k and 15k ASL? How often do you override the flight control system? I am discovering that if I don't push that "cobra button" at the merge, I get smoked every time if the other bandit goes 1-circle unless I'm very slow at the merge. Is there anything specific to the Russian doctrine as opposed to the NATO doctrine that dictates how you are supposed to fight in this jet after the merge? General tips are also welcome. Thanks.

Yes, I agree 100%. If only ED opened up the map making tech to the modding community too. Unfortunately, I think selling maps at $60 a pop is probably just too lucrative for them to not want control over it.

I'm not sure what you are trying to say here, sorry. My point is that the maps are separate and will remain separate for the foreseeable future. So it'll be what, 5 years before these plans might come to fruition? Probably even more than that? Not even worth discussing today, in my opinion. I don't know the history of this Kickstarter thing or which party planned which module years ago, and frankly who really cares at this point. If there are things that they had to do based on the Kickstarter, or something else, then use that as a base to build the rest of your ww2 simulation around in a coherent manner.

Everyone keeps assuming this is the case, but as ED says below, they are not going to be combining these maps at any point in the near future. Modders don't have access to map making tools, so they obviously aren't going to be able to it either. The map is L-shaped so ED can continue selling their Channel map going forward. That is the only reason, because like you said, why would anyone buy the channel if Ugra did model it in their newer map. Once this new Normandy map comes out, we will basically have not one, not two, but now three separate terrain products, confusingly all focused on the exact same area that isn't relevant to the assets that exist in the game. I'm glad that work is being done on WW2, but I think people's frustrations with the general direction are mostly justified.

So you can, for example, suppress a position like a treeline or building without having to actually kill a unit as a condition for a trigger.

The smoke and fire options looks great. How about some other cinematic effect options? One example: tracer bursts going from point A to point B with C time interval.

On the topic of better infantry, I'd also like to see some different "relaxed" poses for the units. Like instead of every soldier holding his rifle at the ready exactly the same way at all times, maybe you have a guy with the rifle slung over his shoulder or smoking a cigarette or something like that. Just a way to make them slightly more natural looking.

I am creating a ww2 CAS mission and I want the following situation to take place: - My plane flies into the combat zone, triggering a red smoke marker on the roof of a house that I have designated as an enemy position. -I do a gun-run, and if I manage to get rounds on target (into another small trigger zone placed over the house) I get a message that the enemy position has been suppressed. The problem is that there doesn't seem to be a "bullets in zone" or "rounds in zone" trigger condition. Is there a way that I can achieve the equivalent effect? Again - all I want to do is have rounds landing in a zone trigger a message to red coalition.

To clarify- I use a Delan Clip head tracker while flying and its attached to my Sennheiser HD280 headphones. Works great. One annoying characteristic of this setup, though, is that obviously you can't hear anyone talking to you with the headphones on. Occasionally friends will come over and want to fly with my setup, which is great, but the problem is I can't tell them how to operate the jet without pausing the sim or turning the game volume down extremely low, which is lame. Ideally what I'd like to be able to do is talk into a mic and the audio comes through in game through the pilots headphones, just like how a real instructor would speak to you if you were taking flying lessons. Is this possible and, if so, what hardware do I need? I already have headphones (obviously) and a variety of USB mics, so I'm hoping I can rig something up without buying anything new but I'm open to all options. Let me know, thanks.

I have a mission where I air start at ~30k feet and pass head on through a formation of B17s. I downloaded the 2.8 and jumped into this mission to try out the update. However, less than 10 seconds after mission start, my engine just dies. every time. Is this a bug or is there something intended happening? Again, this is an air start and the engine turns off before I have changed any radiator or governor settings.

A ww2 Caucasus map would be great. I doubt we'll ever see one. If only ED allowed community built and modded maps...

Out of curiosity, does anyone know how flying the G-6 would compare to flying the K-4? Like would it just feel like flying a weaker version of the K-4? Maybe more nimble? Thanks.

So if I am following correctly, this map is not a simple improvement to the old Normandy map, but instead was completely built from scratch with brand new map making tech. While new tech is certainly exciting, what I’m really struggling to wrap my head around, then, is why the decision was made to develop literally a third map of the English Channel, when that setting still has very limited relevance to the assets we have in the game.

Please add options for unlimited ammo and indestructible for any group of ground vehicles. This would be so mission creators can much more easily set up atmosphere around combat areas with tracer fire and explosions without having to mess around with timing triggers and ammo.

Do any ships already have these? If not, please consider adding them. This would make night missions attacking ships over the Channel more enjoyable.

I often enjoy setting up ground battle scenarios between two AI forces in the mission editor to simply spectate and watch the action unfold. In general, the sounds of the battlefield are very immersive. Explosions boom and echo in the distance, plane engines roar overhead, and air-to-air gunfire (both WW2 and modern) sounds great. For whatever reason, though, ground based machine guns and small arms sound completely anemic. The DCS battlefield could be much more immersive, especially for CA users, with the crackle of distant gunfire, snapping of supersonic rounds passing nearby, and a more vibrant report when I pull the trigger on my own guns. ED, please consider this improvement for CA. Thanks.

I can see a briefing room feature being appealing in DCS if the goal is to allow the player to give al little bit of atmosphere to pre-mission briefings, instead of just looking at the lifeless text and images that we currently have. Like give the player a lot of control over what the presentation looks like in Mission Editor and allow video and audio files to be embedded and incorporated into the briefing.