Zembla

I know the hill he's hiding behind I think :p In the distance there's an Avenger AA unit. At least, it was so when I last played it, and I'm not sure if the unit placement is randomized in that mission. In any case, if you're behind the hill, all it takes is dropping behind the hill again once the missiles are inbound. The nice thing is, depending on how high you go, you can still use the cover of the hill to shield you from more than half of the baddies, and take out the ranged nasty ones first. In any case, trial and error, it's one of the ways to learn the game :p -Z

I use a Dell 2408WFP. Because it has an S-PVA panel rather than a TN panel it has a higher response time (but much better viewing angle, and 8 bits, rather than 6 bits colors). The response time is fairly high, but tbh, I haven't noticed much ghosting, or anything that's really a problem. This isn't twitch gaming like CounterStrike etc is. The need for a split microsecond response time is just absent all together. -Z

VLC player usually does the trick with most files for me. If that doesn't work, then maybe it got corrupted during download? -Z

Low F-16 fly by -Z

Sometimes I find it takes a while before Radio Maykop or whatever it's called comes on. Also, I'm sure it's been mentioned before, but the lattitude in the map probably is in degrees minutes and seconds, and that other number is in a regular decimal system. So 30 minutes is 0.5 hours etc f.ex. 0.75 hours will then be 45 minutes. That can explain why your location cannot by found on the map. -Z

I don't, but I do write reviews for other instances. I'm talking in general here. It's never fun to see someone disagree with you, but in the end as a reviewer you're limited, and people often forget that. But I'm pretty sure my abundant defense compensated for your generous ad hominem attacks :rolleyes: Besides, I can reverse your statement too, "What do you work for Eagle Dynamics? Your defence of them is admirable." Anyway, this is getting far off topic. This is not about you or me, this is about the review. -Z

What? How do you 'know' ED are working on making it fly properly?? You 'activated' the Harrier? What? :eek: Three lines of text really fails to describe what you're trying to tell. The Harrier isn't even slated for a DCS release so far, unless I'm going by an outdated list. -Z

Keyword seem. If someone's opinion is different from yours, is it automatically invalidated? As I said, that's the way the cookie crumbles. You can argue it all day, but these guys have to deliver a review within a finite timeframe. Like it or not, it's a business, not some happy joyride where they can do whatever whenever. Thanks for pointing out the irony, I almost missed it. Seems someone already translated it for you. Why do you assume it's improperly assessed? Besides, as I said before, opinions can differ, I respect that. It wouldn't be the first time the media obliterates a movie I liked in the reviews, or vice versa. People are just dissing the review, the magazine and the reviewer because he has a different opinion. It's almost 2010. -Z

It's the way the cookie crumbles though. I don't see what everyone's getting all bent out of shape for. As long as we're having fun... what does it matter? Even then, how do you expect a game like DCS: BS compares to the average game they have to review? It's comparing apples and oranges. -Z

The score comes from a 51/60 for gameplay, 16/20 for sound and a 15/20 for graphics. The extra 1 probably comes from "it's better than the average that I would consider good" reasing of the reviewer. So, while something good gets a 15/20 f.ex. something that's a notch better, but not by miles, gets a 16/20. Reasoning does come into play for giving scores, it's not just a random number. -Z

They don't speak Danish in Belgium, nor in The Netherlands. I see what you're saying, but in the publishing branch etc there's always a deadline to meet. It's not productive for a PC magazine to give their reviewers months to test a game. No, they get a fixed timeframe during which to write a review. This timeframe is usually pretty standard and dictated by the average length of games. So in the current era of short lived shooters and RTS's it's no wonder the reviewer could only scratch the surface. To be fair, I think that him giving it an 82 despite only using the arcade mode is a very good score. From the looks of it though, he didn't let that influence his score, something that happens quite a lot. When reviewers blame a product for being too hard etc I mean. -Z

Those who lived 14 years ago? :p When did Longbow or D's enter US Army service? At the beginning of the article the timeframe is listed as 1995. I'd imagine A types would be most common then? Then again, I could be dead wrong, considering The Netherlands around that time also purchased their AH-64D 's. -Z

The reset trim basically was introduced to cater to the needs of people without a force feedback stick. Or so I seem to remember. People with an FFB stick won't have much trouble recentering/trimming because the stick holds / stays in the position it was trimmed to. It won't always return to center like a non-FFB stick will. For that reason it is sometimes hard to imagine where the center would be (without checking the control positioning screen). So, yeah, it's not on the real bird, but it does allow you to retrim from zero. If you've got a fairly trimmed helo, but somehow you messed up the rudder completely, it's sometimes easier/safer to reset trim than to retrim. It's not essential, but it sure can come in handy. -Z

If I recall correctly what you're saying has to do with the following: both rotors create lift. However, because the helicopter picks up speed, the blades of the helicopter that turn into the direction of flight will produce more lift than those that turn away from the direction of flight. So, to describe very very rudimentarily (|) In case of forward flight and a counter clockwise rotation. So, there's that, both sides don't produce equal lift, but there's also the fact that the bottom rotors, who rotate in the opposite direction, produce forces at a shorter arm in comparisson to the helo's center of gravity, than the upper blades. Which means a momentum is created, that will roll the helicopter in the direction you described. I hope this made some sense, and I hope I didn't miss/err too much. -Z

The Shkval sensor display recalibrates/does some built in self testing every 5 minutes or so I recall. So it's pretty normal it happens, and also it doesn't really have to do with the strain on the plane. The autopilot lights flash when there is an INU alignment problem. Or at least, that's one of the reasons they could be flashing. I'm not sure if INU drift or any of that sort would be responsible for that too, or if it could be because you took off before your INU was fully aligned. -Z

Go for the Saitek. Or at least, that's what I did. The added functionality that stick offers in comparisson to the Logitech you linked really makes it worthwhile. I don't use pedals to fly Black Shark, and I haven't had much trouble in that area with my X52. Fair enough, pedals may make yaw control easier in the long run, but I'm fairly used to flying it by "twist" of the handle for now. TrackIR, takes getting used to, but is probably a better invention than sliced bread. I used to fly without it for a long long time. Then one day decided to get it, see what all the fuss was about, and I can only say I wouldn't find flying as entertaining without TrackIR as with it. TrackIR gives you a full around view, and most of all, it gives you visual freedom so to speak. It frees up "finger workload" of operating a POV hat as well. Really, it is quite neat. Pretty hard to explain exactly how it completely changes you game experience, but it does. -Z

Everyone can dig up one link to prove a point. It's only when all links combined tell pretty much the same story that it becomes a credible source. It's the problem students are facing too. The internet offers a plethora of information, but there's a lot more chaff than wheat. Now I'm not saying your source isn't credible. I'm just saying that Kamov, and the expertise of the experts employed by Eagle Dynamics, is more than sufficient to cover this area. I find it pretty bizarre how people can keep coming up with information or views, thinking that would suddenly make it a conclusive mistake of ED of not fitting Black Shark with an RWR. It's done deliberately. Mod it if you don't like it. Wether it's logical or not is a decision they have had to make, entirely independent from your views. Sure you can try to influence it, but in the end it's their call. I'm just amazed by how people think Eagle Dynamics somehow didn't have the full picture when they built the helo. -Z

I have no idea if this will help, but speaking purely programming-wise, is it possible you misplaced a curly bracket? From what I can tell from what you say it's almost as if the viewports command only entails the "center" section. So, what if you turned your code into the following: Viewports = { Center = { x = 1024; [color=red][i]-- Starts at 1024 because of the 1024x768 "phantom" screen on the left[/i][/color] y = 0; width = 1680; [color=red][i]-- actual pixel width of the main display[/i][/color] height = 1050; [color=red][i]-- actual pixel height of the main display[/i][/color] viewDx = 0; viewDy = 0; aspect = 1.6; [color=red][i]-- =1680/1050[/i][/color] } [color=purple]<------- Removed curly bracket[/color] Shkval = { x = 3216; [color=red][i]-- as the Shkval starts at the second half of the right monitor, this is 1024 (the phantom width) plus 1680 (the main view width) plus half of 1024 (halfway across the right monitor width)[/i][/color] y = 0; width = 512; [color=red][i]-- half of 1024, the secondary monitor width[/i][/color] height = 768/2; [color=red][i]-- to keep the aspect correct, half the height of the secondary screen[/i][/color] } ABRIS = { x = 2704; [color=red][i]-- starts at the left of the secondary screen, so 1024 (the width of the phantom) plus 1680 (the width of the main screen)[/i][/color] y = 0; width = 512; [color=red][i]-- half the secondary screen pixel width[/i][/color] height = 768; [color=red][i]-- full height of the secondary screen[/i][/color] } } <--[color=purple]added curly bracket[/color] Otherwise I think the viewport code may only execute the center part, then find an "end" bracket, and skip the Shkval/ABRIS lines. -Z

From what I recall the Ka-50 itself also trims both pedals and cyclic. As such this is the trim behavior that's been modeled in the game, which cannot be customised. People in the past have complained about it too, maybe they've come up with a solution, I'm not sure. -Z

That's the point, this is purism where it serves little use. As CyBerkut said, if you're going to mount it so that you have to pull up or push down on the throttle to have an according collective input, sure, invert the axis. If not you're not gonna come close to the collective feel anyway, and you might as well go for the setup you're used to. Even then, implying pushing for power is akin to arcade mode is... misplaced elitism at best. -Z

I didn't invert mine. For that reason. Besides, the point of inverting it is to have it act more as a collective, but for that the hinge so to speak should be tilted 90°. The throttle isn't a traditional collective, so there's little point trying to emulate it being one. -Z

That T-Flight looks like a rebadged Top Gun Afterburner. I used to have that stick. Was pretty content with it, the sides can be seperated to make placement easier/more natural. Only disadvantage was it didn't have that great many buttons. And the only axes it supports are X,Y,Z(throttle) and either rudder by twisting the stick, or by a sort of button on the back (used the latter, it was pretty precise). Don't know anything about the other ones though. But that T-Flight should be fine. -Z

Splendid work. Though from the screenshots, something seems amiss with the font used for the word "MARINES". Maybe this website (daFont) can be helpful to you. They have a whole lot of Army stenciled fonts. -Z

I'm probably gonna repeat a lot of the things that have been said before, but to give you a better understanding, the autopilot in the Ka-50 will only compensate for 25% or so of your input. So, in other words, to remain stable, your controls have to be within a 25% boundary of being stable. As you said, and as many have said, you need to trim the bird to a hover before initiating autohover. Well, in fact you don't necessarily have to do that probably if you're going to keep your hand on the stick, but the purpose of the autohover is there to make sure you don't need to have your hand on the stick. So, as has been said, instead of slowing down, pushing the autohover and then releasing the cyclic, how about, slowing down, stabilising, pushing the trim button, releashing the cyclic, engaging the autohover. -Z

Why is that weird? -Z