galevsky06

Oh. Into 1.2.5 changelog, we read: FC3 - Su-25: Bombs falling short when using CCRP has been fixed. Does it concern Su-25 only ? Will the fix be for all bomb-away-able aircrafts ? :ermm:

No matter, and thks a lot for your reponse time (a few hours later with the night break in the middle)

:huh: so true man, I read it because someone pointed me to this particuliar post like you did, but please, post below messages to tell him to create a new post for each week, or one read-only post !

But we don't mind: just read first post as I do. I see no extra mess but clean&official weekly status. Which is very good for such a project :thumbup:

Same Here, usually my nice SSD brings me to fly in less than 15 sec. from the Mission Editor, but now it is 1 min. at least. Some guys tell that there is no change, maybe it depends on modules you have (I have all), but it is clear that there is a big regression on loading time for some modules/PC at least.

I like the weekly status done by ED and studioBECZL. Others don't do that ? What can we do ? :noexpression:

read that.

We already do that. Just put no weapon below any planes' wings. I agree. Only if ED gets bored. And all of us know that it won't happen for next decades. :smoke:

:lol:

And Frosbite4 kicks in the ass ArmaIII engine for sure. But, since it is not several-countries large, there is no interest for us. Grass bends when you couch ? What for in DCS ? We don't mind, sincerely, what we want -on the contrary to what you said- is to fly over whole Georgia from one corner to the other, with great realism, but since frosbite4 engine could not be used to render so big maps regarding PC performances, we will focus on what is important as an aircraft pilot: almost true mesh, nice far and closed textures, nice 3D objects (towns, civil traffic and so on...) and we won't focus on the points that made frosbite4 and ArmaIII good engines. :smilewink: Tank simulator ? I don't think that DCS is the right location to get this kind of sim, because you will have to do both jobs: air combat + ground combat, and switch between engines to get the best performances when you are on the field. It is not a deal for ED. It is not adeal for Bohemia (their ground sim is very nice for infants, but ground vehicules are far from being simulators, and I don't want to speak about aircrafts). You want a nice tank sim ? Please start to implement nice tanks units in ArmaIII, you will make benefit from a very nice environment, looking at very nice soldiers and other nice-looking vehicules. You will be able to hide behind trees and everything. What we expect from DCS environment is just montains not being 3D polygons like pyramids. :D

?!??? You really don't understand the 2-seaters matter ? It may be a big deal, or not, depending on network code mainly. We know that the network code is nice to host MP single-seaters, but we have no clue about strong dependency between 2-seaters into the same plane (the first client needs to provide the exact location for POV computing to the second one without delay or freeze). And POV must be able to be computed from data coming from another client.

Ah, if it is ugly, things are done...... :lol:

ArmaIII island as a map for DCS ? What a joke :prop:.... 20km*20km square ? :megalol: You can put tanks and infants on the map, but you cannot make them play the same mission, I mean even if they are on the same server, they won't drive for one hour to join the mission objectives (no NAV shared), and they will juts attack targets (maybe others, maybe the same) in their own, with no relation to the aircraft strike..... unless you go to BF3-stylish game, where both F-18 and infants have to care about each-other. (:megalol:) Even in Arma, the most serious servers just use helicos as means of tranportation for very short troops deployment (which is NOT simulation), nothing more. But this is NOT what we want for DCS, of course. ;) The remaining main issue is the fact that the current world is not able to provide good ground battles, due to the cheatd IA who can find you immediately when you are on the LOS, and the LOS goes throughout trees, buildings sometimes and so on.... Want to play J-TAC role ? You have to set your unit as invisible, in other case you won't be able to hide and mark before dying under ennemy fire. :mad: So far away to be DCS-T90 ready, isn't it ? :music_whistling:

winz :clap_2: It was SHIFT key.... thks :thumbup:

We don't get fresh info about it, but it was already on the go...

Or wait a bit to get all DCS cockpits having true 6-DOF compatible 3D models :prop:

Ah.... possible (due to Warthog keys mapping). Let me chek with no profile loaded :music_whistling: You could be my hero :megalol: :thumbup:

Absolutely nothing.... Dual boot with Linux, but on different SSD, so Win7 ignores the other. It happens suddenly, during two flights (recursive mission design+ testing), RTB to desktop and need to reactivate the whole set of modules. In the DCS interface, all modules looks activated :huh:

?!??? All AFM will come through DCS update, so all FC3 aircrafts will be updated also in one shot. Anyway, why do you want to install them separately ?!?? I don't get your point :huh:..

Same here :(

+1 :thumbup:

I know that it is about (2 more weeks) * BIG_NUM, but..... no choice :)

I am very happy to read Matt answers, since the global plan suits me perfectly ! Mig-29 and Su-33 won't be forgotten, all efforts are going to bring fast movers that we love to DCS hardcore modules in the end. :pilotfly: Keep going to that bearing, boys, all we need is FC3 jets as amazing as A-10C is ! :thumbup: So happy to see you working on AFM, advanced 3D models, and onboard systems as a next step... This is what we expect from you ! You made us worry about P-51, but now DCS Su-27 ans DCS F-15C are on the way... :)

Yep. :(

With no doubt. If somebody wants them all, FC3 remains a better deal, but if Lock-On licence is a matter, it could be worth to pick up one plane instead.