sorcer3r

I would be already happy with a modern equipped UH1. Seems to be really hard to implement modern stuff (e.g. MWS) in DCS modules. :(

Dynamic Campaign = War = almost impossible to know what exactly will happen. I guess Ralfi is famous for his special missions. :D

Naja Lasergelenkte Mavericks, JDAMs, Datacartridge etc. würden das Spielgefühl der A10C in DCS sicher noch weiter pushen. Aber ja, man kann auch ohne leben. Diverse F16/F18-Varianten oder andere Mehrzweckflugzeuge lassen sich durchaus auf A10-Niveau simulieren. Werden sogar vielleicht mit JDAM-Feature daherkommen. Auf eine alte F4 muss man da nicht zwingend zurückgreifen. Mir wäre da ein Tornado lieber. ;)

Erste F-18E waren (sind?) mit dem gleichen Radar wie die späte F-18C ausgestattet und die Funktionsweise daher nicht ganz soo top secret (soweit ich weiß). Was Eurofighter angeht, bin ich auch sehr skeptisch. Allerdings haben die Entwickler Kontakt zum britischen Militär und wer weiß, was sich daraus ergibt. An der A10C sind auch ein paar Sachen top secret und in unserer Version nicht drin. Eine 100% Simulation eines einigermaßen modernen Jets werden wir kaum bekommen.

At some point during the Korea campaign China will join the war.

When you are flying with the F16 on a certain altitude/speed your stores will start fluttering without maneuvering, And you will notice that not only by looking at the stores. And during longer ingresses in bms you want to avoid that by changing altitude/speed so that your viper is flying smooth. ;) Anyone knows if other planes have the same effect?

Apache, Cobra, Hind, BlackHawk, Lynx etc. etc. there is some much potential I can not understand why all 3rd party devs (except BST) are only producing fixed wing aircraft. Really wondering when we will see a "modern" helo in DCS equipped with MWS and RWR. :sleep:

It does not matter on which software a "DCS-IVC" would be based on (teamspeak, ventrilo or whatever). The point is it should be integrated into DCS and independet from the teamspeak client you have installed on your pc. just look at BMS-IVC. You connect to a server and and at the same time your IVC app connects to an IVC server (IP given by BMS-server). So every Client on the server will be already on the same IVC-server. (ps: bms ivc based on ts3-sdk ;) )

Anyone knows how do they aim? Something helmet mounted or the gums on the wind shield? (or nothing because the target was just the island? :D )

hi, UH1/Mi8 removed in current version?

I recommend TeamViewer.

I think we will see crimea with EDGE. New engine will handle larger theaters I guess. So ED just need to copy&paste. ;)

does the sound get triggered before the clients are on the server?

I can confirm. Is it already reported? In the mission there is a group of 2 vehicles which spawn 1-2 miles close to an airfield. Then they should move to this airfield that it will belong to their coalition. But they just stop driving after maybe 0.5 miles. :megalol:

Already UH-1N with some modern stuff would be enough for me. But finish UH-1H first ;)

*bump*

when this server crash happend the mission was running without probs for about 2h. Then a Uh1 droped the frist cargo load in the mission and after that it crashed. maybe that was the reason? Logs.zip

In any case it is good to hear that someone still tests out the MP limits of DCS. :thumbup:

IMO a missile warning system is more important.

Since more 3rd party devs decided to go back to ww2 aircraft I think there is a lack of inspiration on their side. Maybe this will bring it back: ;)

Then the WW2 direction is a bad decision IMO. Because WW2 modules will bring WW2 features first. So we need more modern modules to improve the core(?) of DCS (modern combat). 3rd parties go modern, please! :D In an "Afghanistan" scenario UHs are very nice to fly. CSAR operations etc. (coop with A10s) are not so bad. I think it is very good to have UHs (UH1 is currently only reason why I still fly DCS). They could be just a bit more modern. Right now it is a bit "half modern" having flare dispensers without MWS for example. Agree. It is also a bit disappointing that Belsimtek is currently the only 3rd party/partner doing helos (unfortunatley not helicopters only). And there is so much room in DCS for UH60, AH64A or some post-vietnam AH1 etc. Better than all WW2 planes together. ;)

This. :) Progress of improving modern (air) combat in DCS is already tiny and hopefully won't be affected by WW2 era (at least I want to believe). And instead of going into WW2 I would rather see a Panavia Tornado announcement by VEAO Sims. :D

That was my point. (sorry, maybe my english is too bad) But I do not say that TARS is a simple/bad software etc. It is just limited (ts3 dependency ...)

ED could do a kickstarter for DCS IVC and maybe we will get enough $ for the TS3 licence. (Would be also interesting for DCS WW2 community) Or just use open source stuff like mumble. TARS works already so it is possible in DCS. Easily? I don't know but it is possible. The fact that there is a 3rd party F18 flyable mod with F15 pit doesn't prevent ED from developing their DCS F18 (hopefully ;) ). Just imagine that as a server host you could preset an IP for an IVC server in DCS. So every client who is joining your DCS server will connect to that specific IVC server. We have hifi DCS modules with 2-3 radios in the pit. So we should be able to use in MP. IMO just a "logical" consequence of my understanding of DCS standards. ;)

Also in bms the IVC can be hosted on a different server. IVC is standalone but integrated in bms. Could also work for DCS. :smartass: ps: IVC = teamspeak(based) which knows what's happening in bms :D