Ala13_ManOWar
-
Posts
3501 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Ala13_ManOWar
-
-
As well as the Fw190D-9 which was in development by ED at the moment. So you may wonder, what was really RRG working on?EDIT: Here is the kickstarter page that started all of this WWII stuff (except the P-51, which already existed).
S!
-
As always you keeping a cold head my friend. That's the point :thumbup:.Last, this isnt a history assignment, ED isnt trying to write anyones participation out of history, they are building a flight sim first, so we need to put that into perspective as well.Should I rage because I haven't seen any reference to Republican Spaniard units liberating Paris in first place? It would make no sense, though historical fact. So what?
S!
-
I think you go a bit far on your statement. Provided we will be in 1944 probably there would no need for many French forces, but you forgot to mention the French Vichy government fighting along German forces for the most part of the war… should we include that also? Maybe they should and so lest we forget also that part in History :huh:.If we don't have French soldiers, at least we could have French resistance and some french civilian vehicles (citroen, renault trucks) and some fishing boats! They had a significant role in 1944 with sabotage and guerilla warfare, blowing up German's logistical support like trains or depots, signaling and clearing landing zones at night for coalition infiltration, helping downed coalition pilots to exfiltrate back to UK, and paving the way for the June invasion.Frankly, this total lack of French forces, whether in the air or on the ground is really becoming insulting to the 210,000 french soldiers who died during this war, the 8,000 FFI forces KIA, 25,000 shot and ten of thousands deported to camps. You do know that this map is located in France, right?
S!
-
AFAIK the turbocharger in the P-47 is manually operated, that's why provided you pay attention for all the time it will be smoother than any automatic supercharger, but also a means a way higher workload for the pilot, especially during descent in which you can over boost and blow your engine up quite easily.Wait, does the P-47's supercharger smoothly regulate manifold pressure with altitude as opposed to the jarring "high gear" transition we get in the 51/spitfire?S!
-
I'm not sure, youtube video compression doesn't really show us the real deal, may it be a vid trick.klem, Im actually talking about close range, when the "object" is much bigger than a single dot. It looks much clearer and "defined" than it does currently in the sim. This in my opinion, is crucial for WVR combat. Then again, I could be just imagining things.On the other hand, nobody comment on the moving grass? Has that been said anywhere previously? If so I didn't notice. Hope in the future that can be adapted to interact with modules, helicopter's rotors moving grass may be? :D
S!
-
Thanks for the read Jcomm!! Really interesting one, and yeah, I also felt like, "wow, that's exactly how DCS 109 behaves". Everyone should read that before rushing into forums complaining about the beast.
Well, I won't speak about how G-forces should be or shouldn't in the current module. Anyway, interesting viewpoint from the writer. IIRC, seat position in 109 is just a coincidence. There is no spare room for a "better" or proper, seated position in the 109. Some people here shall correct me should they know better about it, but I never read anything about Messerschmitt designed the seat on purpose, 190 may be, though.The G-lock modelling should be improved though:"The geometry of the 4-point seat belt attachment is perfect for emergency negative G flight. Get ready to laugh at G forces. Let all the Spitfire pilots burst their blood vessels straining in their upright seats. Did you think this anti-G posture was invented with the F16?"
S!
-
:shocking: :shocking: :shocking: :shocking: It's been a while since last news we had about P-47 3D, but that model render is so dodgy it looks like a completely different simulator. WoW.… From the latest photos of the P-47 which are from 2014, lol. …S!
-
Channel crossing probably.
S!
-
Interesting film regarding Normandy. Restored to 60FPS it seems so lively as recorded yesterday.
S!
-
3
-
-
Yes, absolutely different FM.
Well, "absolutely"… a bit different though obviously related I would say. I don't think changing a bit weight balance (we already can experience that in DCS, changing actual aircraft, or through P-51/TF-51) is such a dramatical change.
S!
-
It would be great a map expanded to almost half Europe with time. Anyway, I asked in FB and ED answer was it's sort of a buffer with low detail to prevent problems with map borders in "the end of Earth. So if it comes it will be in the distant future I think.Sith,Just curious, has the map been resized for later expansion for the time period? Ashame London is not there right now, but it appears to leave room for further work. Regardless, amazing stuff hands down, will be my favorite map..........UNTIL Vietnam!
S!
-
Well, I wouldn't say just eye candy since I think you will want some target to fire at, wether Shermans, Tigers, flaks, or a B-17, later expanded with several other IA aircraft units. I would say that's pretty much necessary in a full environment, not just eye candy :thumbup:.ASo eye candy as you fly around Normandy map and also used in Combat Arms module.S!
-
They aren't bound at all, just installations aren't yet merged into new 2.5 version supporting several maps, and Alpha 2.0 is currently the only version available with that feature. If you don't own or ever planned to buy Nevada it's fine, just to use Normandy you will have to download anyway, at least at first, the 2.0 version in order to run it.Question: For people who don't own Nevada and not interesting to, do they have the ability to install Normandy? Is 2.0 bind with Nevada? Or we just have to install 2.0 then select Theater?S!
-
Exactly. I own all of them, will fly all of them also. Why choose?All of them...,and, because I can....
:D:D:smartass::pilotfly:
Sorry, just couldn't resist...:)
S!
-
Quite true, but do you realise that's the daily life with mods in many other games out there? Nothing new. Your mate like this or that mod, you like other, then a third mate jumps in and he likes another one. Then think of a virtual squad with 20-25 people. Always, every time a mission is launched, somebody, may be a couple or three of them, will have or lack a mod preventing them from joining and nobody knows what's due to.Now I decide to stick a flack canon in there I gotten with my mappack. Buddies can't join the server anymore because of 1 canon in the map. Sure, as the mission designer I can remove it, but it'l mean checking every single time with all of my buddies, who has what asset pack, what assets pack are the same so we can use, what not. etc. etc. Is going to become a big pain very fast. Instead of just "What are we flying tonight lads? Caucasus!, aight"Hope DCS doesn't become just that, but anyway it would be easier, you have a module or you don't.
S!
-
But German rockets were never intended for ground attack. You probably will come with "there was a time when they were used in a ground attack…", still they weren't intended for that.I think it would be a huge step ahead if the current LW types would get their ground attack loadouts like rockets and more types of bomb ordinance.No flyable, but provided we get the Fw190A-6 and A-8 variants like it's been said, their F variant would be probably there in loadouts, and that's a real Jabo, even though AI.
S!
-
What if somebody wants the WWII units, but don't want the Normandy map? They have an option, that's all. And you still can buy the pre-sell price with everything included for a discount.Thank you. But then I still dont see how this is coherent to the current mechanism, where I am able to place a module from eg CA or any other DLC aircraft as AI. And if I want to drive all the ground forces I need to buy CA. Instead now I will need a second module even though controllable ground forces is the very selling point of CA. I dont mind the money as the kit price is very reasonable, but I simply cant quite get behind the logic of this decision. Why not sell the map for 60$ and include the units for free. Noone would have complained, as it stands now I basically pay with my purchases also for stuff I dont care about, such as new SAM models and Igla soldiers and whatnot. But I dont care about that at all, but its ok. They can neither be used for WWII nor Korean scenarios. And now suddenly WWII models are excluded from the usual treatment. I really dont get the point of it.S!
-
C'mon mates, we don't even have a pre-order day and you're already asking for features without even knowing or tasting the full ones we get with this. Human kind is incorrigible
.
Sadly I didn't see your message until now I already know Normandy is being released to hype myself a bit. Thanks m8 :D :thumbup:.Hopefully the upcoming trailer won't look too shabby either .. :DS!
-
I think in this moment it's pointless to emphasise such a terrific job is ED team developing, but looking at those gorgeous latest pics… Oh man, that's going even beyond my expectations. Such a stunning look they have done :beer: :notworthy:.
S!
-
+10000 Always baffles me how some people always find the tiniest and most idiotic excuse to complain/moan about the most irrelevant thing :doh:.Always amazed me how people find an excuse for discussing everything.Even the most absurd things.
I also was waiting to watch Wags' livestream, but we're probably getting the map sooner than expected mates, just look at that.
S!
P.S.: for the record, I haven't ever seen ANY other game more honest with teaser vids than DCS is. Edited or not, as they have be in order to make a vid, they are always exclusively in-game footage as opposed to everything else.
-
-
Well, as this is a simulator it depends on the settings you use in ME, but IRL warmer days means usually also lower pressures, and no, it's a huge difference flying in warm (low pressure) days, than cold (high pressure) ones.You need to really hammer the temps or the air pressure to throw the calibration out. Climbing by 1000 feet has more than triple the effect than simply moving about the map globally or conducting the test on a warmer day.Well, may be in Northern Europe where you don't usually see the Sun :D it's not a big difference, but it's for instance here in Spain@300sunnydaysayear. In particular where I live, Seville@48ºCintheshadowinsummer, the same C152 can either take off in 400m in winter while in summer the whole 1000m runway isn't enough to get airborne… it's a difference mate. But you're right, it's pressure (so density) what makes greater difference than Temperature itself.
S!
-
I only perused the thread, but was about to say that. Every time I see you people talking about speeds always forget to say in which conditions that took place.ISA - that's the key point, because all tests was reduced to ISA.Just as a reminder, IAS = TAS @ SL (but sea level, not 500, 200 or 1000 ft), only when atmosphere is set to standard values, 15º Celsius, 1013,25Mb(= 29,92" Hg = 760mm Hg , I guess in DCS ME).
Any other values means not only IAS ≠ TAS, but TAS can be either higher or lower than current IAS.
Whenever you all make a test with a same atmospheric values you can start comparing those max. speeds you get, but not sooner.
Whichever atmosphere, that's out of discussion :D.Whichever way you look at it, the Spitfire is an absolute beauty.S!
-
Though F-5 was, just not much used as that.I don't think Viggen was designed for unpaved runways. Short/provisional yes, but not grass.S!
Normandy Map Discussion
in DCS: Normandy 1944
Posted · Edited by Ala13_ManOWar
Saw no comments about the naval assets video. Is that water colour a new one? Is it only for harbours or the entire Channel? Just curious, it's definitely good looking, but I don't recall having read anything with regard to different water colours or any similar eye candy in the new map.
S!