karambiatos

most of those things mentioned there are standard for any modern engine.

That show always has some amazing shots, like the one where the mig is landing and you can see rain in the distance.

Weapon collision with Trees is necessary since you can use forests for cover against something that has fired at you, if you are in a helicopter.

when will people stop with the whole physx shenanigans, it isnt going to happen, and besides look at arma3, a lot of good that did there, absolutely nothing that couldnt have been done with a different API or an in-house physics engine.

but seats that are smaller than stadium seats?

nope, but the name is equally as lame http://solarsystem.nasa.gov/scitech/display.cfm?ST_ID=2566

no all we would need is a mission with some clouds on it, preferably with rain falling out of them.

so you could keep your radar in the same mode as when a missile is launched the moment you lock something? or i guess as long as you are in HPRF, if that is indeed correct.

doesnt that apply anyways, as long as the radar is on?

but couldn't you constantly transmit the same type of signal the moment a lock is achieved, why would you need yo switch frequencies?

and the funny part is that driving in arma3 feels worse than DCS CA and blastcore visuals from arma have nothing to do with physics.

and itd be kind of pointless, since you can do it with a precomputed effect.

sorry does anyone know how to open the .dmp files none of the non MS programs seem to detect them.

whole lot of facts being thrown around here, but not a lot of actual facts, and it goes for everyone.

for example the vikhr will only let you shoot once within 8km from the target, but you can successfully engage targets 10km away if you launch override

Ive tried using it, its sort of hit and miss, i spam it a bunch of times and hopefully the AI will take the command, FYI never ever go into the lead vehicle of the group, it will completely screw them up.

well you could complain, if russian planes were able to share data between them, but they cant you need an awacs or EWR so it and only it can share data with the rest of you, now lets start with the fact that datalinks dont disappear after radar looses contact with them, sometimes they stay thee FOREVER, then the russian TWS is completely useless it locks up everything automatically, and last the R-60 has the same flare rejection with the r-73 and ET, though im not being fair the aim-9m flare rejection is horrible as well. is that so? people would be getting a lot of kills if you gave them a shovel and a bunch of rocks, that argument doesnt defeat the point that it doesnt do something that is known it can do. finally i dont think this version of the f-15c shouldnt have datalink if it has it in real life.

if you set AA units to green state theyll turn their radars off, when you jump in a vehicle you press i and itll turn of the radar.

you are wrong on that one you can turn the radar off both in first person view and through the command screen, but only on pilot able vehicles which is a damn shame.

Rocks with a rocket engine in the back and a magnet for finding planes on the front?

i've noticed if you arent tracking and launch a vikhr, afterwards if you move the shkval the ranging will go to the exact same distance the vikhr is, effectively trying to lock it, its most noticable during night since you dont get tracking, ill try to get some tests in later.

well its still not simply lock on, and it wont be that much different in DCS, since thats how it pretty much works. but there isnt anything quite like fumbling with switches, and playing with light intensity knobs.

so spamming flares while barre rolling is an actual realisticish thing to do? just asking here

you mean working as intended, or need further improvement?

its pretty bad as an RTS, there are some basic RTS UI features that are missing, and yet there are some features that a very few to no RTS games have which is funny. but at least driving in CA is better than ARMA :)