Vee.A

As I've seen mentioned before, the dirt around every single paved area also looks pretty strange. Most airfields in this kind of environment in general only consist of well kept short grass.

By the way, in case you didn't know, there's been a feature for a while now that lets you navigate the menu with HOTAS binds. It also takes priority over other binds while the menu is up, so you don't need modifiers. They also seem to break it, so don't use them.

The flare system seems like it's complex enough to be capable of simulating it reasonably well from what I've read. Chaff seems like a bigger issue. Though of course, if ED overhauled those systems and released a whitepaper about it we'd probably get folks upset about why they're working on that over something else. And by the way, if I recall correctly the old F-5 and the FC2024 F-5 use the same folder path for liveries, and all of them are compatible. That's only not the case with the F-5 remastered since it has an entirely new model.

Canada always makes the best liveries.

On a similar note, the LN-33 is the one Nineline was looking into for the F-5E.

I do believe the best solution to many of the "balance" or scenario issues across eras is simply more AI units. Apparently CubanAce is working on a AI Su-57 to submit to ED, which would be very helpful. As for PVP, I don't think any good ME would allow F-35's to roam around free in the mission. It'll obviously always be for more creative missions.

Damage model certainly needs work along with a lot of other modules, but keep in mind there's a long list of failures you can activate with the mission editor. The underlying systems logic is there. As far as graphics, it's not quite as good as the newest ones, but I feel as though you live in an alternate universe if you find it that bad. The Viper is better modeled in some ways, but worse in others. The Tomcat has plenty to be worked on still as well.

To be fair, what ED has done with Iraq looks quite good. Ugra makes great stuff, though the Germany map might not be as detailed as Normandy given how small Normandy is compared to the others.

Why Wags? There's a handful of people that make the trailers, GlowingAmraam being the most well known. And it's confirmed for Jan 16th.

dcs.log Sorry, didn't realize the first log was just me opening and closing the launcher.

Examples: heatblur.trk dcs.log Here's an example of it working correctly for the F-5E Remastered

A simple solution if this isn't a new bug would be to have a CASE level force option in the ME.

It works fine for me in singleplayer, but in multiplayer it causes massive CPU bound FPS drops.

The visor is fully animated (the internal cockpit body even uses his hand to move it), it just doesn't tint the screen, which I believe is intended currently. Same situation for the Hornet and Viper

Are you talking about damage from weapons, or just period? Because last time I checked the rather long failures list in the ME includes engine related things.

At the end of day, using an airplane that was clearly originally designed as a very fast interceptor with little focus on maintaining good low speed handling as a fighter-bomber is quite the strange choice. The RCAF also used it in the strike role. You have to wonder if there were some political games going on behind the scenes as well. Nonetheless, it's a very cool airplane, and I'll be getting it.

No issues. AMD.

You can do that in the launcher now.

I tested default versus flat with the trees on max and got a 20FPS difference.

I have noticed that effect. Depending on tree settings it can take a good 50% or so of FPS. No stutters, just raw FPS. But I recall having that issue for a very long time, so I'm not sure if it's specifically a new bug or not.

What happens if you turn forest details factor down?

This is an issue with the entire weather system. It's just more annoying with fog in particular. There's a lot that's needed for more realistic weather (which is planned), but the most basic thing we need first is localized settings for clouds, wind, and fog. As per the whitepaper, currently auto is just tied to the time of day, but will include a lot of other factors later

We did also see other things like ground AI changes and dynamic slots. If you look through the changelogs there are indeed some good improvements that have been made. There's always a lot more to work on though...

I do still maintain the position that some of the most popular (and probably profitable) modules are ones like the Hornet which are 5 years old. A gift that keeps on giving. Maybe they're on slim profit margins, but it's hard to tell. It's very easy to squander success even with very large ones, however. More money doesn't always fix things. I also think they'd have a very hard time recovering from the fallout, since the core population that keeps things moving along have put a lot of money into DCS already.

At this point I feel like DCS would be missing something without his strange directions : )