Mad_Shell

Bump! As Tippis wrote, there are various coefficients applied, but I still don't see why for some HE fragmentation warheads expl_mass is the total mass of the warhead, while for others it's just the mass of explosives in the warhead. Would be great if an ED dev could confirm it's working (or not) as intended.

@BIGNEWY I did some tests, and the SA-19 missile also eats T-55 and T-72 front armor for breakfast. I believe it has more to do with an incorrect calculation of HE damage against armor in general, because MBTs HE shells also work really good against others MBTs, better so than AP ones, which it shouldn't...

I totally agree. The Apache will be a fantastic addition, but like for all helicopters, the core game needs serious improvements for it to be enjoyable in the long run. The ground AI is non existent: they don't take cover, don't hide, don't do barrage fire, the "dispersion under fire" is ridiculous. All they do is fire and die. The tanks don't do pop up attacks, there are tons of essential ground units lacking (infantry ATGM post, machine gun nest, trenchs...), etc... Currently for all the air to ground, it's more Digital Shooting Range Simulator. I really hope that changes with the dynamic campaign, as I don't see how it could work without vastly improved AI. Edit: ground units don't use any counter measure too: no smoke or evading maneuver when lased for example

Currently it is impossible to make a ground unit use reverse gear. It's especially limiting when trying to make realistic tank behaviour, since they use it a lot for masking/unmasking

Since ED is beginning to implement some form of jamming for radar, and plans to also add it for upcoming communications system, I think it would be great to also add GPS jamming. It is well known that in a medium to high intensity conflict GPS jamming would be widely used, to disturb enemy navigation, but also GPS guided munitions. Of course, just like any jamming tech most data must be classified, but just like the basic jamming effects already implemented in DCS, a GPS jamming based on guesstimates will always be better than nothing :)

Wanted to make a mission with Blackhawks firing their guns during a commando drop-off, and... it's not possible?!? Please ED, we need it, really ^^'

Nineline on Hoggit about upcoming mission editor improvements: "Some cool little things, like shapes for trigger zones coming, drawing tools are not quite ready, but should be coming soon, following 2.7." link: https://www.reddit.com/r/hoggit/comments/mdqm2n/dcs_mi24p_hind_preorder_video/gsbhqge?utm_source=share&utm_medium=web2x&context=3

I agree, imo a lot could be done to help users to understand modules, the mission editor, the units/weapons.... Better access to DCS and modules manuals, with an updated encyclopedia would be a great step in the right direction!

And bumping! Yup the CIWS dispersion and rounds speed are very wrong in DCS currently...

BN said he saw little to no performance change, and he's using VR. He has a pretty beefy system though

ED staff said that the impact on performance is pretty minimal, and by looking into the lua files I think that the new clouds will come with 4 settings: low, medium, high or ultra quality

oh interesting, never knew that! Thx!

Bump! Seeing under the NVGs in VR would be a real QoL improvement, and I guess easy to implement

See attached pic, doesn't look like a MLRS to me

AI (be it planes or helos) will always launch flares to defend against any IR missile, except when it's a Mistral. AI never, ever drops flares (I tried all the flares utilization options in the mission editor, without success). bug_AI_no_flares_Mistral.trk

The newest clues suggest that we're in fact getting a more recent Apache: https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/97330-dcs-roadmap-unofficial-no-discussion-here/?do=findComment&comment=4585956 That explains why we get MPNVS and MTADS

What is worrying me is that ED staff seems to totally ignore the few threads pointing out that issue...

Hi @NineLine @BIGNEWY As LucShep mentionned in one of his comments, several threads are pointing out the lack of optimization for textures, wasting large amounts of VRAM: https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/243199-suggestion-to-ed-and-3rd-parties-devs-size-and-formats-of-dds https://forums.eagle.ru/topic/248043-32-bit-normal-maps/ In none of those threads there are any ED staff reply. Is this problem aknowledged by ED? Is it intended? Is it looked upon?

Even low level hovering or slow moving helicopters can be really hard to lock on for radars, despite the moving rotor. Here is an extract from a very recent publication (full publication: https://data.epo.org/publication-server/rest/v1.0/publication-dates/20170208/patents/EP2033011NWB1/document.pdf ) " A hovering helicopter’s body Doppler, however, has merged with clutter and only the return of its rotor assembly extends outside of clutter (due to the rotation of the rotor assembly). Even if the helicopter were moving, different flight geometries could put the helicopter’s body Doppler within the clutter region. If a seeker tries to estimate the range and range-rate of the rotor return, it will find conflicting range-rate measurements since the rotor return constantly changes with time and scintillates (both in amplitude and angle). Thus, the seeker will disregard a majority of the helicopter’s rotor return, and the rotor return samples will not be used to classify the potential target as a helicopter. [0009] There remains a need for a robust technique for detecting and classifying hovering and slow-moving helicopters that is compatible with the existing base of Doppler radars "

Here is the track. But with the whole replay system being bugged, the problems I described never happened a single time when I watched it... bug_Gliding_A20G.trk

While the missile is still burning, its speed suddenly becomes almost constant. I observed that on SA-2, SA-6, SA-10, SA-11 (perhaps more, didn't test them all). A few videos below(too big to drop here, check missiles speeds at the bottom) https://imgur.com/a/vHPZtCJ

if several aircrafts are incoming, SA-2 and SA-3 (and perhaps more, didn't test them all) won't fire at all. It seems they constantly switch target... bug_SA-2.trk bug_SA-2_bis.trk bug_SA-3.trk

From what I've found, the SARH missile requires the ground radar to emit continuous waves to be guided. The RWR will easily interpret those waves as a missile launch and guidance. Anyway I don't want to pollute this thread with this discussion for too long.

Oh I just checked and you're right! I guess ED has to correct the in-game encyclopedia then, it's written that 5V55 missiles do have TVM guidance, while they don't

Yes there are a number of problems with SAMs in general, not just SA-2. The guidance modes are not accurate: IRL SAMs switch between several guidance methods (two points method, three point method, proportionnal navigation, etc...) depending on the terrain, target altitude, speed and maneuvring. For example if a target flying at medium altitude plunge toward the ground to try to defeat the SAM, the method guidance can switch from pure leading to 3 points method so the missile won't crash into the ground. Or if a target begins to make high g evasive maneuvers the guidance will switch from leading to 2 or 3 points methods, so the missile doesn't lose all it's energy too fast. In DCS SAMs always seem to lead targets, which produces some ridiculous situations (https://www.reddit.com/r/hoggit/comments/iuqn1a/how_to_defeat_sams_in_dcs/) Some missiles speeds seem to be incorrect or have strange behaviours: SA-10 max speed: IRL mach 5.5 ; DCS mach 4 SA-6 max speed: IRL mach 2.8 ; DCS mach 1.7 SA-11, SA-6, Tor, perhaps more: missile speed suddenly becomes constant while rocket is still burning (check missile speed in the below video https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/543358251694292992/805117090621030430/Digital_Combat_Simulator_Black_Shark_2021.01.30_-_17.13.01.02_Trim.mp4 IRL SA-10 has track-via-missile which allows to not give RWR warning, which isn't modelled in DCS Not related to guidance, but as shrapnel is not modelled, kill distances in DCS are smaller than IRL (kill distance was around 60m for SA-2)