Punkmonkey22
-
Posts
96 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Punkmonkey22
-
-
Great info and news, but I can't see anywhere WHEN this is all being added?
-
23 minutes ago, Tanuki44 said:
I contacted on the discord too, but no answer, I wonder if the authorization is really necessary... or just simple thanks...
I'm biased because I can't wait to see the new version, but I'm pretty sure most mod amendments just get credited. Especially like in this case where the original creator isn't active.
Maybe release it as a linked fork of the original on Github? That way people will know where it came from
-
1
-
-
On 7/24/2025 at 2:16 PM, Tanuki44 said:
Waiting for the authorization of Nibbylot, for the publication of the submod,
there are two grenades or a mortar shells or two lazy smoke bombsSubmod Features v1.0
***********Add HUD with vertical view for dropping with Velocity Vector, Slip Indicator, Ground Speed, IAS, Altitude, Heading, Bank
Add Camera View inclinable 0 to -90°
Add 'LOW Battery' alert if <= 10%, red flashing
Add 3x ammunitions droppable
Add SunVisor
Add NVG viewImproved ground stability
The angle mode is selected by default at startupAdvice
At start, the engines must be started with the lowest power level.Zip archive is OVGME compatible
Any idea when you'll get approval? Nibbylot hasn't been on the forum for a few weeks
-
How easy is to add weapons/stores to it? A smoke marker would be really useful, or a laser designator for doing JTAC. Keep up the great work!
-
1
-
-
Will we have English cockpit labels as an option?
-
14 hours ago, Ramius007 said:
While I understand that modern Fulcrum is not possible, and would be require new external and cockpit model, I still dont get why modernized variant of some NATO country cant be done, and I assure everyone that it's possible, you can get material about those upgrades directly from companies that make those modernizations, plenty of public availble info is possible. I m totally ok, that we get 9.12, but very far from ok, that we get ONLY 9.12, when 3rd party module makers, already offer us multiple variants of same jet, OTOH, ED cant even allow us to remove DL and helmet permanently from Viper and Hornet, to make them compliant for MP or SP content that include some sort of older setups with historical filter. Even little things like GPS on MFD would help a ton in modern scenarios, situational awerness was Fulcrum achilles heal, and was preety much always improved among practically all operators
Or they could release the version that was widely exported, and can be used in a similar timeframe to many other modules - the cold war. We even recently got a map of the region it was built to fight in, in the era it was introduced.
Modern stuff is pointless when all the adversaries are cold war or 90's.
-
3
-
-
5 hours ago, Beta Sokol said:
Sorry guys, i just don't want discussions about necessity of things, details are important. DCS lacks of so many assets, it's EMPTY and BORING. They throw out module after module, yeah another grey plane, deal with it ! NO !
For instance, can you imagine Sperenberg airbase without the An 12, ok there is a mod, but just too simple (nice smokelayer!!!), the scrappy washed out greyish Il 20 -missing-, we have the An 26 but not the RTR, An 24 -missing-,
Gross Dölln (Templin) airbase without an up to date 3D model of the Su 17, every plane in unique camo, Großenhain the same with MiG 27,
Where is all the ground equipment, all the special trucks driving around on an airfield.
We need asset packs or modders for this cold war era for WarPac...
Play with your grey plane and throw AMRAAMS and have fun !
Bit confused here.. you state you want the correct train, but then go on to say you want correct military assets for the era? One team can only work on so much at a time, it makes sense to focus on the military stuff in what is called Digital COMBAT Simulator. They have plenty of time to focus on fleshing out correct civilian assets once the map is fully released, it won't affect gameplay for the vast majority of the playerbase if the wrong train or car is used.
Also unsure about the "Grey Plane" comment. The last 10 releases in DCS were the OH-58, CH-47, F-4E, F-15E, KA-50 v3, MB-339, Mirage F1, AH-64, Mosquito & MI-24P. One "Grey Plane". One.
Half of those fit the Cold War era you are asking for more assets in...
And in the future modules, nearly all are Cold War too! F-100, G-91, A-7E, F-104, Mig-29A.....
-
2
-
-
3 hours ago, OneEyeRoss said:
Because for many of us, this was, or is, home. And when you fly over a place you KNOW, it helps with the immersion if the little things are correct.
That's great, and I do agree about immersion. But I don't think having the right type of trains or cars on the road should be a priority at this stage. That seems more like something to look at after phase 2 releases.
-
3
-
-
16 hours ago, Beta Sokol said:
@Maestro so hello, i'm so impressesd by the videos, awesome ! BUT there is a little detail which isn't correct. In some videos an elecrolocomotive is driving around, the map represents the late 80's, the locomtive is clearly a BR250 the so called Energiecontainer and belongs to Deutsche Reichsbahn and has the wrong colors for the time period (and it's driving in the wrong -imperialistic- part of gemany)-just for fun-... All (or the most) locomotives of DR had beside of the older green ones this much nicer and darker bordeaux-red instead of traffic-red or orient-red which came later after reunification and the merge between DR and DB mostly after overhauls or retofits.It's hard to find any pictures, but there are still some original paintet loco's around.Here is an example of an model showing the correct color scheme.
btw this model costs more then 300 Euros !!!
Please correct this, many thanks !
Maybe you can keep the other other paint and make some kind of liveries...
I'd rather they focused on aviation facilities, landmarks and optimisation before checking the trains are correct personally. I'm not sure why there's so much discussion around trains and this map to be honest.
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, SlipHavoc said:
It seems there is a language inflation thing happening over the last decade or so. Things are not merely bad or suboptimal any more, they're abysmal, abhorrent, terrible, disgusting, worst ever, etc. And things aren't good or better any more, they're fantastic, amazing, glorious, epic, brilliant, etc. It's really annoying. No wait, I mean, it's abysmal, abhorrent, terrible, disgusting, and worst ever.
Drive a tank around Afghanistan or fly a helicopter and all you see is a smear of blurry low res textures and jagged edges layered together. It honestly is a huge step backwards visually in an attempt to look realistic. People need to remember that this isn't just "Drop a JDAM from 30k ft" simulator. They sell Combined arms, helicopter modules and ground attack aircraft, but at the altitudes they operate, these sat-image maps look Playstation 2-esque. Compare that to the screenshots and videos Ugra have shared with this new Germany map, it may not look "photorealistic" and is clearly a pc sim, but it looks GOOD at low level. And if the other maps they have done are anything to go by they will look amazing high up too.
If the community don't speak up, how will the map makers know the feelings?
-
1
-
-
What year is the map set in?
-
1
-
-
Cold War Germany look amazing, thank you so much Ugra.
It unfortunately also shows though how abysmal the last three map releases looks though. This has none of the sat images, is all as far as I can tell the "old" style, and looks sharp, colourful and polished. No blurry, baked in patches here..
-
1
-
-
Great to hear! Just curious why this isn't being developed as a paid module though?
-
1
-
-
6 hours ago, YoYo said:
The first half of the year will be a beach. Don't count on much (La-7 maybe). The earliest something will probably start to appear is around Q2 (I bet MiG-29 in June), or World War II (F6F, AI asset, Marianas map update ) maybe April/May. However, I agree about the Afghanistan map. From a period of 3 months (for the next part) it has already become a period of 8 months and this is quite strange, because during this time there was not a single update of the map. It seems that they were waiting for the release of Iraq in a new form, which was very well received. Now this technology is probably being transferred to the Afghanistan map, but here again we are talking about several months that have passed and there are still no updates. So maybe March update, I hope?
Meh, the more I've seen of actual use of the Iraq map, the more it looks like Flight Sim 2004. The high altitude shots released when it came out look pretty, but below 2,000ft AGL it is just awful and blurry. Very glad I didn't buy it, and hoping that Ugra don't switch to this "new tech" for the Germany map.
LA-7 looks ace, not a plane I'm very familiar with either.
-
On 1/6/2025 at 10:31 PM, Stackup said:
Technically the last update was March 12, 2024, although it was only on the Discord.
Has anybody actually got a link to the Discord? I can't find any active links
-
9 hours ago, Zabuzard said:
Cobra explained it on Reddit once.
You can't use that template as-is because it cross references multiple files from private servers and has some complex setup, also with ED.
There is quite some work involved into making it into a standalone paintkit that can be distributed and used by non-employees.
At the moment there isn't much to say other than you will get it once it's there.Thank you for explaining
-
On 1/22/2025 at 2:19 PM, Zabuzard said:On 1/22/2025 at 12:32 PM, Semaphore said:Now Jan 2025 with no template... when will HB release it please?
No ETA.
Surely you have some sort of template/file used for making liveries in house? Why not just release that like the other developers?
-
I have the same. Massively annoying as dual rack is basically required for bombing missions in JF-17. But with this bug you can't amend any other aspects of the loadout after the first time.
-
51 minutes ago, LordOrion said:
Interesting...
Here is the list of all planes named in this thread (excluding the ones already present in the game):
- F-117
- C-141B
- CH-53E
- AH-1W
-
AMX -
F-102 - F-16A
- F-104S
- AV-8B+
-
Su-25 -
339 C/D -
M346 - F-111
-
J-22 Orao - B-2
I've barred out the ones that does not meet the criteria (no italian/european, take part in recent EU conflict).
My guess: F-111 or F-117
Please be the 'Vark... 30 Mk82's coming your way!
-
21 minutes ago, bies said:
Cold War F-16A, especially early like e.g. Block 10 “small tail” would be fantastic in DCS.
All dick no balls! Pure dogfighter, all about close air combat, close CCIP manual aimed bombing etc.! Not all about staring on display inside a display and remembering some long procedures to program standoff weapon. And far more nimble then our digital heavy Block 50CJ.
BTW: F-16A Block 10 scored overwhelming majority of RL F-16 air kills in the biggest air battle since Korea, over Bekaa Valley.
We already have an F-16. I'd much rather a completely new airframe before a variant of one we have.
AMX would be amazing, and like the Jaguar, fill a gap between multirole supersonic fighters, and trainers capable of CAS. I know we have the A-10, but it doesn't have the speed or agility for a contested space.
The Gina will give us ground pounders some love in that space too though, but it looks to be a neglected area in DCS.
-
2
-
-
25 minutes ago, Convoy said:
Sure it can. Let's take for instance all the 3rd party devs that are laser scanning their modules. Think ED has laser scanned Fat Amy?
Like I said in the other thread, nobody is stopping the other devs from continuing this level of detail...
-
1
-
-
5 minutes ago, Convoy said:
Not how it works. The point is, is the module has to be of a certain level of realism and quality to be "worthy" of DCS. the bar shouldn't be lowered to allow a module. Because then all we're going to get is "that'll do" modules.
This isn't new though. The Black Shark 3 is largely guesswork, the JF-17 is guesswork adding block II features to the block I. ED making what is going to be essentially an FC-level jet but with clicky cockpit isn't going to prevent the likes of Aerges and Heatblur from continuing to make intricately modelled aircraft. What it does do is allow some more people who don't have the time to invest in learning 400 pages of manual to take part, just like FC does. It isn't going to "become Warthunder" like people claim, it just opens to door to simpler aircraft for less serious players, and allow more airframes to be added to the roster.
I don't understand why you people feel the need to gatekeep. Nobody is stopping you enjoying what you do the way you do it. I presume you already have modules you own? They aren't going to suddenly become "arcade" versions. They will still be the same level of detail they currently are.
-
3
-
-
On 1/13/2025 at 12:49 PM, Holbeach said:
Sounds good.
Compare it to the real version.
Pump up the volume, if you can take it. Idle whine is painful.
..
It really makes me think that the team at Razbam never actually saw one flying in person. Compare the sounds from 04:30 - 06:00 on that vid to what we have in DCS, it's not even remotely close!
-
51 minutes ago, waterman said:
Level playing field - Be careful what you wish for ...
How about a Digital Combat Arcade with a level playing field -
Just use your imagination its now only a game.
Have fun
Blue USA F35A`s
VS Red Russian F35A`s
Have some good old Shoot em up Arcade Fun see how long you last !
Let's repeat it again for those at the back of the room who didn't hear it. NoBoDy Is FoRcInG yOu To BuY iT. Don't like it? Ignore it!
-
4
-
DCS Update Summary | Afghanistan Development Report | Currenthill Pack
in Official Newsletters
Posted
Ah I already had the original packs so hadn't noticed. The wording on the article said "will be" which is where my confusion came from. Thanks all