wolfstriked

I can only imagine that the reason there are no counter measures is money wise.I have read here that you can actually shoot down an incoming missile if its fired from enough range so you can get a lock and since Tunguska attacks are usually done from far away.A tracked attack with guns?Heck even walls that hydraulicly lift up and surround tank at least allowing some dissipation of the blast.Force field?:P What I would love to see is amazing modeling of tank AI though.What I mean is no driving out into open fields.Always near tree lines and actually driving around buildings is what I think they do to remove any lock that an incoming missile has in the same way we pilots use terrain.Its even easier for ground units since they can position the armor at areas with quick escapes.This is where IMO the bravery of the AAA crew comes from. Now of course if DCS were to model true to life Tunguskas and allow players to wage true modern air to ground combat....well I would pay a monthly subscription.:)

Do tunguska's have counter measures?I mean they are either the bravest warriors ever or are told they have advantage in an air to ground attack.

Priceless!!

My difficulties were the reason you made your tweaked cockpits.Just felt off in the cockpit and I think its a personal thing.Also I now have my LCD monitor sitting a foot off my desk and this is very comfortable way to view instead of my eyes being above the top edge of the actual screen as was before.Now my eye level is centered on the LCD.:D Here is my tweaks if you like to check it out....of course back up your SnapViewsDefault.lua.Its basically the default cockpit view with the zoom out view clicked a nice amount and the seat raised till the FPM is at upper edge when on ground.I did remove the tilt in cockpit so it looks like you see slightly more of the dash. Snap[11][13] = {} -- Default cockpit view Snap[11][13]["y_trans"] = -0.0275 Snap[11][13]["x_trans"] = 0.36 Snap[11][13]["hAngle"] = 0 Snap[11][13]["viewAngle"] = 92.0 Snap[11][13]["vAngle"] = -0 Snap[11][13]["rollAngle"] = 0 Snap[11][13]["z_trans"] = 0

Thanks Mvsgas,I understand your questions perfectly and they ask great questions to which I have found a cure.I played around with the default SnapViewsDefault.lua and have settled on an IMO sweet feeling setup with one slight annoyance.I changed the FOV then changed some other settings so I can see slightly down the front dash to give a bit of the feeling of sitting very high gives.Now the annoyance is that the FPM and horizon line are right at the tippy top of the hud on takeoff but moves down slightly when airborne.The guns reticule is slightly higher in hud but perfectly useable though. Then another thing that made me feel more in-cockpit is the height of my monitor.Before I had my monitor bottom edge sitting 2inches off my desk and now that I raised it it is about 12inches off desktop.My eyes are now level with the hud top edge and feels better for me.

The pilot in outside view is sitting with his eye level with top of HUD frame.What I think is wrong is that most games make the focal point the center of the screen.Its the same with an FPS.I have asked for devs in past to lower the crosshair so that when you lay prone with weapon you feel prone and not with weapon high off thr ground....if that makes sense.With flight sims the hud is the focal point so devs will place that dead center on screen and you run into this issue of an offset cockpit view from reality.

Peter I am using your mod already and it improves what I am looking for but as you said any higher and the HUD is unusable.I just want it as high as it can go if thats possible to do.Is there a way to mod the actual HUD placement so its not centered?

Ok,I am the bringer of pain and I just want ED to know that I love them in that adoring customer way.They bring us what the world said went out of fashion a long time ago.What I would like to know is if its possible to raise the seat to its highest setting and get the HUD centered.This issue I bring up reminds me of the FW190 days where the viewpoint was too low and the HUD made deflection shooting way harder than it seemed it should be.I just wanna say that I had no part of that long debate and was just a spectator and that if ED says that its an engine issue as reason they can't then I will leave it alone. The reason is I just was playing around and put the seat at its lowest setting and its like a wall of gauges and switches and amplified the feeling that I got when I first saw DCS:A10c.But when I did the opposite I was suddenly sitting high in a cockpit....or thats how I felt;).Everything seemed more real.Then I checked in outside view and the eyes of pilot are actually above the HUD frame so it seems that when seated at the highest seat height setting the view in cockpit is more true to life. Taxiing feels more real,landings feel alot more real especially when the nose drops,takeoffs and even just looking out the sides or checking ones six get an immersion boost.Also seeing down the sides of the HUD seems more realistic.This also makes the front panel less obtrusive and I find that I can zoom in a bit more and that also adds to immersion making things look more real. The problems arise wit the HUD.Its now too high and its unusable.So is this an engine limitation?I ask this because the main gun now impacts way higher the the actual HUD frame and there might be an issue where the bullets path looks wrong when shooting at ground like in IL2 days or so Oleg said.:cry: Anyone wanna check it out and post if I am crazy or not?:thumbup::thumbup:

WW2 planes are a blast to fly.Turn off the HUD in the A10 and do landings in varying weather.Heck even take offs and flying seem more fun to me without a HUD giving you tons of info.Then add in the prop effects and I can see legends taking off.And lest we not forget that WW2 is all about the dogfight. ;)

Maybe a modder?Arma has blah explosions and the modders make them extraordinary.

Ahhhh the canopy being ripped off,I get amazed at how it makes me jump in my seat every dam time!Raise volume/look backwards and then raise canopy and tell me you do not jump in your seat.:)

Its been mentioned before that you can play with icons on but I find them garrish looking.Would rather have a single black dot placed right over the targets and viewable by a simple deduction system where light and fog comes into effect governing the distance at which you see the black dots.This way you can scan visually and when you spot dots then you can start scanning with TGP for identifying etc.

Would it be crazy to think that Thrustmaster has plans to bring out a new stick with each DCS release??

Firestick,as mentioned your trying to land at stall speed and so the plane drops down hard blowing tires.Plus you mentioned landing under full load at 120 and no wonder you blow tires every time. At full load stall speed is way higher than 120.Try landings at 150 and then lower to 140 then 130.130 is ideal with no load and so when you flare your touching down at 120 right before stalling.

I love landings so it works for me:thumbup: I turn on the standby-hud mode,lower the seat and just do touch and go's in the A10 with varying crosswinds.That alone is worth price of the sim for me.:megalol:

Carrier landings with the Hornet on swaying carriers is pure fricken gold DCS style!!!.That said the DCS legends with pure dogfights is gonna be gold also.Its a win win coming our way IMO. :)

Why are you blowing out tires?

Was flying tonight and noticing as normal that when I opened the air brakes or lowered flaps the plane felt super smooth when it should have some sort of turbulence feel to it or so I think it should,may be way wrong here.;) This got me thinking that maybe the SHIFT-J function could be tied in to opening or closing of flaps or air brakes to give a sense of a non-clean airframe.Whenever I fly I always strive for wing seat as I love watching the small nuances that occur during flight.Wing flex is one but also the shutter when flaps are lowered is another immersion boost for me.;) In reality cockpit jiggle is always off for me when fighting since the ground is jiggling also and its hard to spot ground units. Any way to have it so that the cockpit jiggle comes on in intensity in tune with an unclean airframe?

Love it thanks. :)

LOL yep that is definitely an oxyMORON. :P:megalol: But truthfully when I do dabble in fantasy like play I guess I like my magic realistic.I guess I feel that a world is a world and like ours where science balances the forces.Ever notice how a modern battlefield has things that are stronger than others but there is always something that counters.So a world of magic where fire flowing from fingers cannot kill a beast faster than a sword etc.A kinda intelligent designed world as if a god or gods created it.:D

Killer kool game but I quit very quick into it due to being a realism nut.Just ruins immersion for me when you can kill dragons and giants etc by yourself and by end game you can one shot kill them.If they were to make a realistic Skyrim game ala DCS(hint hint)LOL;) where you need 10 highly skilled warriors to take on a dragon like the first one you battle then I would of loved it.I ran the whole map just exploring and got to level 15 then quit sadly.:(

Sorry but you need a hotas.Right now I just fly around and practice ILS,radio etc.I have a hard time hitting G for landing gear and CTRL-B for air brakes and SHIFT-B top close air brakes and so on.How can you fly this sim with all its inputs with a simple joystick?Just asking because it appears I did not get an Christmas bonus this yr so I am hoping my tax return is enough to finally dig deep into the meat of the A10. :) And BTW Merry Christmas........;)

Can someone enlighten me on combined arms.Will I be able to pilot an A10 or a KA50 against ground units that are being commanded by a real person?That would be most excellent!!

Its that good??:music_whistling: EDIT.....I wanna see finally a realsitic yaw model on takeoff.No sim has ever captured the fact that you do not go full power on a Corsair until your a good way down the runway....from what I have heard.There was a beta version of IL2 that the beta testers were raving about due to the excessive prop effects that were annoyingly realistic feeling but the final version was just way washed down sadly.

Would love to hear a beta tester give a quick review of how ED is doing with modeling prop physics.