shagrat

Das ist kein Wert im Model, sondern generelle Kalkulation gegen einen Faktor des Hintergrundes. Macht weniger aus als seitliche Bewegung, Dunst, Sonne, Umgebungslicht, aber es fließt mit ein, da gab es zumindest damals einen Faktor in der Detection. Ist ziemlich her, aber ich denke nicht, dass sie das geändert haben... Das größte Problem ist nach wie vor, dass Spotten letztlich als Zeitfaktor funktioniert, sobald es grundsätzlich eine Sichtlinie/ maximale Entfernung unterschritten ist. Das kann einige Zeit dauern, aber am Ende, wird dich die KI entdecken.

The important point is, unlike the TM MFDs whose development costs have long been covered by "the other F-16 Sim" and benefit from industry level mass production and cross-financing from other products, this is a small company with a very narrow customer base. The real question is, do you want to hassle with a mix of Cougar MFDs, augmented by another self-made button box ( which including USB board, switches, encoders, cabling etc. usually costs upwards of 100 USD in materials, plus building it), buy another button box or StreamDeck and fiddle between three devices, or replace the cougar MFDs with a ready to use AH-64D MFD frame, with real life button layout and encoders for the dials? If the goal is, to have a cheap solution... Well, your keyboard has enough buttons and modifier options. Only thing missing is ergonomics, especially in a stressful attack run.

Well, first an installer/Compiled Version would be a bold move to enable non-developers to try it out. I am not sure, how many DCS players have a version of visual studio installed, or are well versed in building their own software from provided sources, maybe 1 out of 100 ?

Sounds like the soldier is set to invulnerable. If they run into tail rotors etc. they usually die. At least a while ago, they did. Hmm, may be the WWII infantry model is different?

As long as we get at least one unarmed(!) in the same color as the one with a Dshka or similar, I am a happy man! I want so badly to introduce ROE issues to my missions since the DCS: A-10C Beta... It's what makes COIN operations challenging. The requirement to not just shoot everything, but to make sure, to shoot the right thing. If everything cries "Kill me, I am the enemy" by the visual model, already, and the closest "challenge" is to distinguish, between an Ural Truck with barrels and crates and an Ural Truck with Zu-23-2, it gets old quickly. Bluefor has currently the ONLY two vehicles coming as armed vs. unarmed: the Humvee armed vs. the unarmed... but that's difficult to use for enemy forces. Looking at Eightball's liveries for the Insurgent AK-47 and the Georgian Soldier M4, I really wonder why ED isn't adding his liveries to the models, or invest a few hours to slap different camo patterns, color shifts to the original textures. With the Apache and Syria there will likely be a lot of missions that could benefit from more diverse insurgent forces, real ROE challenges and last, but not least, a mission editor option to restrict BMP/T-72 from using the Warsaw pact ATGM, to better reflect the late SAAF, ISIL and JAN/Al-Kaida forces that fought in the Syrian Civil war theatre. Not everyone outside the Soviet union and Warsaw pact had plenty of Russian ATGMs lying around...

That's just the .50 Cal/Dshka version, the real killer would be the same(!) 4x4 without weapons(!) so we could add "neutral" unarmed ones that according to ROEs should not be engaged. Ultimately requiring pilots to not simply kill "everything that moves" without proper identification of valid targets. I've seen it all the time "cluster bombs" on villages, rockets on a bunch of vehicles, because there is no incentive to adhere to Rules Of Engagement. Neutral faction and cows is the closest we can do today. But we really need proper non-combatants. Even a simple Insurgent AK-47 without (!) the AK-47 would be a tremendous asset, as an unarmed/civilian and require proper visual identification of weapons.

Just because you can download it on the internet, doesn't mean you have clearance to use for a commercial product... Just saying.

Getting very urgent now, with the Apache and Kiowa in the line up... and civilian versions of Pickups to have ROE have an impact. Would love to see more diverse insurgent infantry, tripod mounted Dshka, soft vehicles of all sorts with Small arms and AAA.

What is this mod? A link pleeeeeeaaaaaase!

Another realistic option is, to pull just enough torque to get into ground effect, then seek a free and mostly flat or declining corridor and pick up speed with the support of the ground effect. If possible turn into the wind and finally, shortly before the tree line pull collective and let the cyclic move back just enough to climb high over the trees, then immediately forward cyclic to convert height into speed and above translational lift. If you have enough space to maneuver, you can even circle in ground effect, until you picked up enough speed, but I think most LZs in the campaign are a bit too tight for this... Mind the approach direction, pass around the hill make a smooth 180 to approach west to east and keep north of the guns. That worked pretty well for me.

Be the AI with a simplified flight model that "bends" the laws of physics a little bit.

That's the UH-60L Theme, "Ballad of the Nightstalker". It's on YT: https://youtu.be/kNBMgENckHk

Check your audio settings. There are two separate sound outputs for the cockpit/helmet and environment. Both need to have your desired audio output selected, normally speakers or headset. Also there is a "Hear like in helmet" option, that dampens non radio comms sounds, but their should still be audible engine noise etc. With this on. Though if your volume is dialed down you may miss it.

I'll never understand, why Microsoft did never reverse the stupid decision, to hide the file extensions, by default. It makes it hard to identify files, causes problems with changing file extensions and ultimately is a security risk, as it's easy for malicious scripts or executable files to hide their extension or fake a harmless one...

Well, that's exactly what I wrote: "I wasn't addressing the community..." I was pointing out to you, that it came across, like you value other people's time as "less valuable" than your own time, as you "could not be bothered". I pointed out that other people may like to spend their time on actual flying themselves... As I found that "attitude" a bit "rude". No need to apologize, but you may not be surprised if others won't "bother themselves". The intent was not any personal insult,but pointing at the double standard... Or did I completely misinterpret, what you said, initially?

Stimmt so nicht ganz, ich meine es wird ein Kontrast zum Hintergrund er-/gemittelt und der fliesst als Faktor in die Kalkulation für das "Spotting" mit ein. Das Problem mit der KI ist, hat sie dich erstmal gesehen, weiss die ganze Gruppe wo du bist und sie verliert die Sicht nur wenn du wirklich die LOS unterbrichst. Aber es macht anscheinend tatsächlich einen Unterschied, ob du gegen den hellen Himmel sichtbar bist, oder eine Berg-/Hügelkette hinter dir hast. Ebenso wie "Dunst", Tageslicht etc. den Kontrast beeinflussen. Nur Nacht und optische Sensoren sind etwas "merkwürdig", da die KI ohne IR quasi blind ist. Die "Strassenbeleuchtung" hat anscheinend keinen Effekt auf die "Sichtbarkeit". Ich konnte nachts mit einem Huey, mal auf 20m im Tiefflug an eine ZSU-23 ranfliegen und landen, dann mit der Minigun (kurz in den Doorgunner gewechselt) die ZSU ausgeschaltet. Die hat mich nicht sehen können, obwohl ich fast genau unter einer Laterne stand. Ist aber auch schon ewig her... Müsste man aktuell testen. P.S.: natürlich hat der KI-Doorgunner auch nix gesehen, weil war ja finstere Nacht.

Solange du das Fenster aufmachst und am Geruch erkennst, ob es ne russische MiG-29 oder ne F-4 ist, gebe ich dir recht... Ansonsten gehe ich einfach Mal davon aus, dass die Fachleute der entsprechenden Streitkräfte ihre (guten) Gründe hatten ihre Jets so zu bemalen/tarnen, wie sie es getan haben. Das Einsatzprofil bestimmt den taktischen Nutzen. Ein "so muss das Aussehen" gibt es halt nicht. Natürlich, können wir jetzt jeden Einzelfall durchkauen und das für und wieder bei jedem Einsatzprofil diskutieren, aber ich denke, die Leute deren Leben und Missionserfolg von solchen Dingen abhing, wussten schon was und warum sie da tun.

Der Nutzen ist ja nicht der Punkt, es geht um den individuellen Geschmack... Wobei in DCS es tatsächlich einen Unterschied machen wird, wie gut du eine getarnte Maschine vor einem begrünten Hintergrund siehst. Schön am Bild mit der leuchtenden F-16 im Vordergrund zu sehen... Dunkle Livery gegen hellen Himmel oder dunkle Livery vor dunkel bewaldetem Hügel, macht durchaus einen Unterschied. Wenn du natürlich nur aus grosser Höhe Bomben fallen lässt, macht hell/grau schon Sinn, aber die bunten "komm lass uns Ritterspiele machen" Bemalungen, haben in der Tat, wenig taktischen Nutzen... aber wenn es dem Piloten-Ego hilft? In modernen Streitkräften siebt man diese stark egozentrischen Typen heutzutage eher aus... Das gute ist in DCS werden wir uns ganz individuell unsere Liveries aussuchen können. Und notfalls gibt es bestimmt zeitnah alle möglichen aus der Community. Also am Ende sind hoffentlich alle glücklich.

Mod ≠ Module Mod = Modification (you can Google it) The DCS folder Mods is the abbreviation for Modules, but does not reference community Mods... and yes, it is somewhat confusing.

No, nix dagegen.

I wasn't addressing the community, just pointing out, that it is a bit strange to emphasize the value of your personal time while asking others to invest their time in doing a review for you... Especially, as the UH-60L comes with one of the best install guides and manuals, I've seen for a community mod. So why you won't just read the manuals 2 pages on the install and setup of the 4-axis (cyclic, pedals, collective), everything else is clickable in cockpit. Just my 2 cents.

No, nothing like an indicator or light. You must remember to hold FTR and release it after you have stable course and attitude. My biggest issue is, when I accidentally "wobble" the button, as I don't concentrate and it is recognized as multiple presses, quickly changing the center. That's where you need "Trim reset" to adjust the trim back to the physical center. This "trim reset" is a DCS thing, the trim / FTR in the real aircraft doesn't move the physical center, but keeps the stick and counterforces at the "new" position of the stick after trimming. Basically it has no spring that enforces a center when the stick is upright, but "creates" a center at the current stick position when you release the FTR... Hope that is understandable.

Oh, that was a bug in the Huey, as well, for quite some years... I have more issues with the excessive speed, but it's basically what is early access and I am very happy with what we have so far.

Try setting up a demo mission in the Mission Editor, put a UH-60L on the ramp, with Skill: "Player", Waypoint: "Start from ground engine on". That way all systems are set and on. Do you have the same behavior? If not, it's likely any or some of: SAS 1 & 2, Boost not activated or Stabilizer not in "Auto". If the behavior persists, I would look into my controls setup. Multiple Axis assigned to the same? Only one Column should have an Axis set in any row! Axis set inverted/not inverted, Setup correct? Check with RCTL+RETURN that axis follow the inputs as expected. Check you use Force Trim Release correct. Press and hold FTR while you maneuver, do NOT just click it multiple times, as it will quickly re-trim your center. Again, monitor the Controls overlay, the red diamond is your stick position, blue the trim, green seems to represent the SAS corrections...

Well, then it's simple. If you can't be bothered, don't bother... Why should someone waste time on writing it all down, if you may not try it anyway? Instead we could spend that time much better doing some flying... Why is your time more precious then other people's?