Night Owl

Yes, I understand, we indeed have the random failures option off. However, what I meant is that there are a default base line level if random failures anyways which are not controlled by that checkbox, those we have left in the missions. They do occur, but are quite rare. What the checkbox does is make them more frequent. It's not very logical I know, but that's how the failures system works Anyhow, I personally find your idea good, as it will be left to the player's choice. We just need to discuss it in the team first before I can comfirm anything

Thank you very much, and also thanks for the suggestion, we'll discuss this among the team Currently there are already occasional random failures, simply the base-line levels which are present by default unless you specifically remove them ine by one. They are quute rare though.

Seems indeed to be an omission which would be nice to correct

This would be great for making cinematic missions while limiting performance impact

No, unfortunately not. There are too many possible exploits and cheats which would be enabled too. At the moment we have to content ourself with the massive visual improvement of the Normandy 2 map, and with a tad of reshade if desired. I also don't think the mod makes it more realistic tbh, for the old map surely, but now I would not say so. It contains too many brown crop fields for Normandy.

Wunderschön, toll gemacht!

Confirmed, for all of our players

Not really made to stop bullets, mostly frag. But yeah maybe it would hold. Guess it depends what bird also

That's likely true, I guess the biggest danger would be from a bird smashing the wind screen and fatally injuring the pilot. The feature is rough in DCS, but what is nice is that it potentially makes flying very low a bit more dangerous. Irl flying very low is a trade-off, while you are less visible, you are also way more vulnerable. Birds, AAA, and a motivated guy with a gun could all get you if you fly on the deck. So this should be a conscious decision, that you fly low when you have to and it makes sense, but not when you don't have to. Though this feature is apparently very rare in DCS, it won't be that you will hit birds all the time.

Yes you are right, the composition is another issue. Most of the sites had Wassermann systems ir even onlx Freyas, Mammut was quite rare, only few sites had it. As well as the number of individual arrays like you correctly point out. I ommitted this aspect from my wish because for me the correct historical position is the most important thing, and it would also require way less work than to make the individual sites more correct in their composition, since this would need completely new 3D models. Basically I am wishing for little things at a time to have more chances of success I am conscient that we will probably never have all the different historical Wassermann L, Wassermann S, Calais, Mammut, etc. models. So from a historical mission maker's point of view I'd rather have a mammut at the historical location of a Wassermann, than none there at all. I think the first step should be to move them to the historical locations (of any type of bigger radar like Wassermann), and then maybe at some point later add different 3D models.

The newly added German Mammut radar sites are an awesome addition, they look nice! However, it is a bit unfortunate that they were not placed at the historical location of German radar sites. There are many radar sites for which the exact historical location is known, we have actually research these precise positions for many of them for our missions. I'd love for the radar sites on the map to be moved to the correct locations. As an example below is Douvres radar station. This one is very famous, since it was held for a long time by the Germans after they were encircled at the first day of the landing. Today, there is a museum there, and most bunkers that had the radar antennas are still visible, even on google earth. Yet on the DCS map, the radar was placed on the nearby coast, 5 km from the correct site. See the pictures below for an illustration:

Let's keep the thread open, that may change, you never know

@motoadve It can occasionally happen that kills get missed. We have managed to make this much more rare with the custom 4YA kills logic script, but we can't avoid it to 100% since at some point we still have to use core DCS features. Unfortunately nothing we can do about those rare cases. Though I like to think that historically they also sometimes weren't able to get a kill confirmed

@bkthunder One question, did you buy the ww2 assets pack? Because the server requires it to work properly, if you don't own it then you will for example not see the flak, only feel it's effects.

@Gunfreak This is unfortunately a multi threading bug. Aircraft, ground units and balloons will render in front of clouds at longer distances. If you can fly in single threading I suggest to do that to avoid this confusing bug.

@13sq*Axe Since the server is focussing on historical realism we won't allow free choice of liveries and custom liveries. But we offer a mod pack for nicer, historical liveries made specifically to fit the server's need. You can find the download links in the 4YA Discord https://discord.gg/GY8PY7Bv The way the livery mods for 4YA Project Overlord work is that they overwrite some of the default liveries, which are almost all not fitting for the time period and squadrons of the Normandy campaign, with custom made historical liveries. Those were made with great care for historical accuracy based on reference photographs and other sources of squadrons that were involved in the Normandy battle.

Well we can assume that most people here own a gaming pc, some hard ware, and maybe even a VR headset. So I think it's safe to say that most people in this community don't depend on these 5 $

Looks stunning, thank you very much!

I'll never quite understand how people can get worked up for having to pay the prize of one or two pints more for a product born from several hundred hours of developer work

@Reflected Wow awesome skins, thank you very much especially for the 2nd TAF variant with invasion stripes as used in Normandy, that one is perfect for the server Now one with half invasion stripes for July-August would be fantastic

For everyone who is looking for the most realistic gameplay with coordinated, tactical flying on a PvP server, you should try out our new Dynamic 1-Life Campaign. This campaign builds on our highly popular concept of 1-Life Events, 2 hour long events during which all players get just one chance, if they get shot down or die or ditch outside of a friendly airfield, they are out. These events create a completely different dynamic on the server, where players coordinate together, fly as groups, and choose their engagements tactically and carefully, since your survival matters more than kills. Building on this concept, our Dynamic 1-Life Campaign consists of a series of 1-Life Events, the results and actions of which determine the next mission in the campaign. The missions are custom built for every event to combine as best as possible dynamics and realistic, manual unit placements. From mission to mission we see front line progressions, local break throughs, bombed and deativated airfields, newly opened airfields, and many more. The campaign runs every other week on Saturday night, the next one being on the 12th of March.

We will implement some sort of FAC action in the future when we transition to the new map. Those types of missions for sure existed, although by far not as common as you might think. The vast majority of fighter bomber strikes were either pre-planned strikes or strikes against targets of opportunity during fighter sweeps, both of which we currently recreate precisely based on operational record books. As for ground battles, those have a massive impact on performance for a meaningless cosmetic effect, so we prefer utilising the performance overhead for other aspects. In general we are happy with the nature of the server and it's historically accurate character. Of course a server will never feel realistic for those who choose to only search for the quickest dogfight without ever looking at the mission briefings and accompanying informations. But if you form a squadron, plan a mission, and use comms to talk to others to coordinate your flight, you will experience a maximum of immersion.

Let's keep it friendly please shall we. @303_Kermit I don't think our server qualifies as simple sawmill dogfight server given the unprecedented amount of research an attention for detail that goes into building the historical missions. That being said, many of the things that you mentioned will improve a lot with the new map, since this will create different gameplay which will not be suited for those who only want quick dogfights. With the new map you will find longer flights, targets deeper behind enemy lines such as factory buildings and marshalling yards, and more spead out action, a change which I am sure you will enjoy. But we are not going to become a ww2 Enigma server. This is because we do not share the same view of how a mission should be, and I do not think that this type of server has very sophisticated gameplay. Enigma did a fantastic work with his server and it is great fun to play, but it is not the way we want to make our server.

Thank you very much yes I use GIMP for my liveries, but I was just unsure because of the spevific mention of photoshopnin the instructions.

A G6 would be awesome! I'd however go for an early G6 with the option of adding GM-1, so basically a G-6/U2. Those were more common than the R2 with MW-50 during the Normandy campaign in France, and also GM-1 with the different altitude to power output curve would be another thing completely different from the current K4