Laud

Better say it's a specific change you did to the settings within the CCC which causes problems, not the CCC itself. ;) Good luck!

Could you maybe provide a screenshot of your Catalyst 3D-Settings? Maybe somebody can figure out something corresonding to your settings.

When I served at the german navy, we constantly trained air defense with our 40mm and 76mm cannons. They're tracking the targets radar controlled and have proximity fuzes on the shells. You don't need to hit the target directly (simlar to A-A missiles) because they generate a shrapnel pattern of serious size which will likely damage or destroy the target. Also the rate of fire of a 76mm is about 0.5/s. Thats a serious threat when you approach it head on. This is common technique on all german small patrol boats, corvettes and frigates. So the approach to have ships firing at aircraft and helicopters with their guns (up to 76mm) is absolutely legetimate. I really hope this can be done! However, this will not be of use against aircraft flying 20k+ ft and engaging a ship with some kind of guided weapon so it can stay out of range...

Uhm... yah... I think I still can't describe my point... :helpsmilie: Last try: 1.) I'm considering myself as hardcore flying DCS as I did the years I flew LO/FC1/2. I don't see a change in attitude by switching the simulation. 2.) I don't call one of the both worlds better, harder or more hardcore. I just say, that the DCS aircraft and the engine provide me an environment that give me some more immersion. I simply have more fun with DCS than with FC. That's all. Not judging in quality or skill-requirement. 3.) I like the switch-flipping. But I don't say it makes me a better virtual pilot. Kuky also had some good points in his two posts, which go the same direction. Get me now??? :cry:

Sure they don't want to! The less they have to the more they can focus on killing the guy who is trying to kill them. But in the end they have to care about all this stuff! And it's one of the reasons why they pick the best they can get for the job, as there are many things to consider while flying and fighting the aircraft. Be it boring stuff like rules and limits of ATC or general flight rules, up to airframe limits to g-stress, or the engine limits you mentioned. Most here know the list could be continued with a lot more points... I personally simply like to simulate some of this stuff as well as blowing things up. Thats what I try to say. But I agree: A-A combat will most likely suck until we have two opponent-type aircraft in DCS to fight PvP. No doubt...

But the difference is not only the switch-flipping. Saying that would over-simplify the point. The difference from FC2 to DCS is the combination of the system depth and the AFM and the resulting limits you have to consider before acting. Also a lot of you seem to be 90% focused on killing something or somebody. I enjoy the possibility of coming closer to a real combat pilots work with 70% flying the aircraft, navigate, manage your systems and 30% weapon employment. This is the reason why I have never touched FC2 again since the BETA-Release of the A-10C. It's because of the overall experience and the possibilitie to use a lot (really a lot!) RL documents and procedures. Looking at A-A combat exclusively, the pvp part will most likely not be sufficiently compensated by the AI. That's something I agree with completely. But everything else is so much more fun with a DCS aircraft compared to a FC2 aircraft. I hope you get my point now, as I felt a bit misunderstood, reading your answers to my previous post.

Not knowing how to operate your aircraft and your systems will not make you an effective warfighter either... DCS and FC2 both have their highly skilled pilots and squadrons, knowing how to fly AND to fight. And for me personally (in the first line a fighter pilot) I like the DCS A-10, because the complex functionality adds a lot to the immersion and by that to the whole experience. So I'll keep flying DCS A-10 until there'll be a fighter. And I really don't care, whether there will be a compatible FC3 or not...

Well, that is a valid point I hadn't in mind. This also rises the point, that fighter AI will need some serious improvement, to make A-A-Combat with DCS fun.

But once we got a DCS-(Multirole)Fighter we won't need too much glue anymore I'd guess. ;) Except for those, who deny flying anything else than a russian aircraft... :doh:

You talk about a lot of "if"s. So it needs "if"-conditions to be added for SEAD-Missions to become fun! ;) So the mission design leaves also a lot of room for boring SEAD-Missions. ;) SEAD can for sure be big fun! ... as long as the mission is well designed. And yes, working with the AGM-88 ;) would of course be fun! :)

SEAD is only interesting, when your weapon has aprox the same range as the SAM (or even a bit less)! ;) With the A-10 it's kinda boring for example, to kill Strelas with GBU-38s from 20k ft...

@Tom: The Mig looks great!

I was thinking that the SAS only compensates aerodynamical effects caused by the deployed airbrakes. As far as I understood this whole system, it is not ment to provide different sensitive steering profiles, but to compensate and damp unwanted aircraft movements.

Starting with minimum fuel, so you have to meet the tanker at least once, is quite nice. But honestly: I like it realistic and kinda hardcore, but flying two hours straight with autopilot on, is a waste of time when you got a squadron running you need to work out trainings and missions for. ;)

As a sim-pilot you can easily forget those RL fuel-issues, as you will not fly any 2+ hours ingress/egress legs, do you? So a DCS F/A-18 would surely be a lot of fun! :smilewink:

Problem could be, that in MP the traffic isn't really synchronized. We once flew a mission where we needed to attack trains. A pilot called "Splash!" when his wingie said "Uhm... NO!" Both were right, as they reported what they saw and that was a train right below the impact-point of the bomb, and a train that was still 250m away from that point. So I don't know how reliable a timetable would be, in case someone will provide it.

In a later release of this feature it would be great to have something like a realtime graphic weather forecast map (like on TV), according to your settings. It could provide clouds, rain/snow, winds and temperatures. That way you would have quick feedback of what happens after you're changing parameters. Just an idea...

And maybe a detailed documentation/tutorial... I've just not enough spare time for a meteorology-study...

Hm... rename them to .miz?

psst... we had those charts since about 4 years already for FC1 ... just never happened to publish them. We're very happy that we finally did it with the A-10C ones. Ones our A-10C VAD-Charts (Visual Approach & Departure) are done they'll be published too, but they will still take a while.

Besides the amount of pressure deviation it depends on your position relative to the cyclones, as the winds differ.

That's what I'm stating in all my previous posts! And I don't think you're the one who decides when this discussion ends! :smartass: I'm looking forward to each and everyone elses opinion on this topic.

And where are the numbers of those who don't come because there is no DCS-Competition? As Balu said, it's somehow pointless to discuss about possible participant-numbers, as it's 1. too early to estimate and 2. never really predictable. And a personal note from my side: Saying "I will not come when things are not going to happen like I want them to happen" is... uhm... I think you know what I mean. Come or stay home, but don't try to put pressure on those who decide with such statements. I could easily say something of that kind about the JaBoG32 participants, but it's not my intention to influence the decision.

It has already been hell for the competition-leader to bring all the various aircraft of LO together. Adding DCS would make scoring just more difficult. Additionally: Those who can handle all simulations would outscore those, specialized to just one DCS module for example. My vision for a DCS competition would very much look like the concept of the F4:AF competition, except for designing it for 2-Ship teams instead of 4-Ship teams. And if I would be the one to decide: I never liked the air-race etc. I like missions, that simulate RL military aviation missions. So in my eyes the transition to DCS would enhance the level of realism and difficulty at the same time. Of course I totally understand, that some of you may have another opinion about all this.

FC2 will still be there, but there will be (eventually) no competition for FC2. The reason is simple: There is limited sponsored stuff to give away to the competition winners. That means there will not be FC2 + DCS. Ive will have to decide whether there will be a FC2 OR DCS competition. Simple as that... In the end the sim which will not be featured within the competition will remain available in the freeflight-section and everyone who is interested to built some missions will for sure be welcome to do so. There will for sure be some guys who will join and fly! But: As DCS is 1st) much more advanced and realistic and 2nd) the future of the LO/DCS-Community, my personal vote is DCS!!! for the competition.