Rhino4

Yeah this vid just illustrated the deficiencies in the AI for me...You shoot the guys wingman and he just keeps flying straight and level...I kinda doubt you'd get that shot off if you put them at angels 3 and told them you were there...I've shot down too many helicopters in lockon to consider them much of a threat to anyone in a fastmover....

The stream there is EXTREMELY choppy for me. Believe me, I have already tried to watch everybody's vids, but it's just a series of pics with chopped up music for me. :(

#2 = AWESOME

Nice flying and good timing on the eject lol. You flew right over that fireball like you planned it.

Man with all the stuff I've heard about blade collisions and whatnot I'd be afraid to try even half of that stuff. Awesome skillz dude.

Awesome music! Awesome shots. :) Can't wait to give multiplayer a go once I finally get BS to work for me.

Any chance of a youtube appearance? My computer says that the download has been corrupted and can't extract the files from the .rar...Don't worry, it's not you: my computer is a piece of $#!+ that does this for almost anything I download over 50 megs or so. Just to give you a glimpse of my sadness: I bought the online version of BS and downloaded it only to have this same problem. :(

A few interesting links for different gloves or ideas for gloves: http://www.instructables.com/id/LeD-Light-Glove-Of-Power_1/ http://www.talk2myshirt.com/blog/archives/494 http://garage.mechanix.com/detail.aspx?ID=8 http://www.dreamrave.com/super-light-fingers-p-49.html

what if, instead of a wii remote, you used a webcam (kinda like headtracker)? Would that work?

On Topic: The Ai in DCS:BS has a loooong way to go in order to be convincing. As it stands now, the AI only does what it's told, rather than what is in its best interest for survival. Units that pop smoke and get the hell out of the AO when faced with overwhelming force would be a breath of fresh air...As would units that split forces and attempt flanking maneuvers/feints/retreats to fortified positions/ect and generally make a mess of anything that the mission planner is...planning:huh:...The AI in BS flows on rails defined by the roads or waypoints that the mission planner gives them. As such they are entirely predictable and easily dispatched by someone sufficiently skilled. Off Topic: The only way to fix this (disclaimer: IMHO) is to overhaul both the AI logic and the mission editor. Instead of allowing the mission planner to decide the route, allow the mission planner to set targets, mission objectives, attack points, fallback points, defensive and offensive priorities as areas that the AI may move within and let the mission planner decide which units spawn in that area. These areas would be color coded in the mission editor and their size would be determined by the mission planner. Then, allow the ai you put there to do whatever it wants within those areas to accomplish the goals you set for it by following its own AI logic such as attack/pin/flank/call fire for effect (if you give your forces artillery)/retreat to a fallback point after attrition/ect...This allows the mission planner to stack the deck one way or another while still creating the feel of a "dynamic" land force and allowing the mission planner to still set mission completion goals. Because of this, the way the AI operates within the game is both more "realistic" (have to be carefull slinging that word around:smilewink:) and yet remains controlled. Way Off Topic: Another thing that would help immersion would be allowing the player to interact with ground forces in some meaningfull way over the radio. Having the AI call for artillery if it's present is nice, but it would be nicer if they could call for your help too. Way Waaay Off Topic: Everybody here is discussing the pros and cons of dynamic campaigns. Some said that they don't have the time/energy/motivation to create missions that they would then play. Others said it would ruin the fun if they knew what was coming (paraphrasing heavily). That's why I don't play missions I create except to make sure they work well for others. If I want suprises, I download missions from others...As for whether or not DCS should get a dynamic campaign, I'm all for it as long as they can find a way to make it work within the framework of the existing mission editor and fix...I shouldn't say fix: improve the AI first. Make some kind of campaign builder where your given control over unit makeup, area assignments, mission objectives, and overall victory conditions. Then let the builder insert prebuilt missions at strategic points to help further the plot line or overall force balance. Then start the campaign and let the good times roll. Once the campaign is started, don't let the player control unit assignments or mission objectives. He is, after all, just a lowly pilot...Combine these two arguments into one success that addresses some people's need for random elements while still letting the mission planner reign supreme. It can't be easy, or else everyone else would already have done it, but there has to be some way to combine scripted missions with a dynamic campaign to improve everyone's experience. I have definite ideas about how this would be accomplished, but this post is too long already...Sometimes I just talk too much...

Maybe they will release the patch with the a-10c. It would make the most sense as they have always stated that every time a new plane/helicopter came out, everyone would receive an update to their game whether they bought the new jet or not. The only difference for people who choose to not buy the plane would be that it's not available as a flyable. One of the reasons for this was for stability and to keep everyone on the same page as far as multiplayer goes, if I'm not mistaken.

Okay, everyone keeps asking about buddy lasing...But when you fire a missile at a target locked up with the schkval (correct spelling?) your own laser would fire automatically anyways...If you turned your laser off, then you would not recieve launch authorization. So the whole discussion is rather moot. I don't see what the big deal is... If you HAVE to have buddy lasing, then wait for the apache module...Or perhaps they'll figure out a way to incorporate a ground faac for the A-10 module. Time will tell, but until then...

@ GG: The whole stabilization 4m AGL being turned of thingy (post #16) is for when you are in vertical descent mode. When in hover mode and doing an automatic descent the descent will be cancelled and you will stop going down at 4m true altitude.

This whole activation thing...If and when we run out of activations, will we need to purchase DCS again or will we be able to ask for more activations? I checked the FAQ but it says nothing about running out of activations/deactivations...Any info?

Additional thoughts after reading all 7 pages (Based on personal experience): 1: The only time an apache hovers is when it is at a controlled firing range. In real combat they keep moving. In open areas, stay high, and in tighter areas stay low. The reason for this is that in open areas they have wider views and seek to maximize them while giving themselves ample opportunity to identify and evade threats. In tighter areas where it is harder to see individual threats, stay low to bypass the threat's line of sight as quickly as possible OR use scout helicopters (OH-58D) to identify threats low while you stay (really) high and wait for a lase to shoot at. 2: Whoever said (can't remember and don't feel like going back to find out) that a hellfire wouldn't/shouldn't be used on a toyota pick-up doesn't surf youtube enough. If ya got 16 of 'em and the enemy doesn't have any real armor and just cars/trucks, then you use them on trucks. Does $58k per shot sound reasonable for 3 terrorists and a $10k (usd) truck? Maybe it's overkill but I'll let the generals and supply clerks decide that. I'll just stay in my own lane. 3: Someone posted a video (again can't remember) of ah-64s in afgahnistan and said there was no killing...I suggest you watch it again... 4: As far as hiding behind trees, the tactic is dangerous and stupid in more ways than one. Those who romanticize the tactic should think about the fact that the woodline they are hiding behind is the most likely spot for an enemy general to see and say, "I bet they'll attack from there...I should put some manpads there." Sadly, ground generals (infantry generals) often romanticize hovering as much as rotorheads. "Everybody wants their own personal elevator"... 5: I DO however think that tress should be collidable simply for realism reasons (NOE flying) and for the simple fact that you shouldn't be able to track/lase/fire upon an enemy hiding inside deep woods. They might fire on you as you fly overhead (preferably at high altitude and speed), but they shouldn't fire THROUGH trees...That's just rediculous...

I like the look of that forward operating base, but...no fence? No guard towers? No entry control points? Did you build it or is it one of the missions that came with the game and ed is slacking in its research? Last pic is my favorite btw. Sooooooo cool and I love that particular skin. Thanks for all the photos. :)

I just can't wait for the different modules to start coming out. Have you guys considered how many choices we're going to have in hyperlobby once 4 or 5 modules are released? Rotor: A2G coop/head2head Fixed: A2G coop/head2head A2A coop/head2head MIXED!: A2A cover for A2G fixed covering A2G rotors in a full-blown war! The possibilities are endless, and just imagine what will happen once they implement the new engine! Personally, I will fly both and therefore will never tire of one singular role. I may prefer one over the other most of the time, but I will always be able to switch at my leisure in order to keep having fun. This sim is going to last for yeeeeaaaaars.....

Left landing gear wouldn't come out....OH NOEZ!!!!!! But he did an admirable job of landing it anyways.

All the ILSs are like that no matter what plane you use. Try doing an autopilot decent and you will crash 50m short of the runway even though the computer shows you still perfectly on glidescope.... As for the waypoint question....not that I can think of...

I would remove the big "canada" sign on the side..To me, that makes it seem like it's part of an airline. Just mho :)

Well, I'm in a wishing mood, so..... ME enhancement: It would be nice to be able to set the loadout for certain ground vehicles (troop transports, ammo tanks, ect.) in the ME. Being able to load the back of a troop transport with actual troops would be good becaaaauuuuuse... AI Enhancement: In a city a convoy attacked by aircraft will generally dismount troops (hence, my above comment) to get them out of vulnerable soft-shell vehicles and into a defensive peremeter while anti-air vehicles will move to more open areas to get a better shot at the enemy. Tanks will generally form into a herring bone formation, or in more open areas will form a defensive box. In more open rural areas where lack of cover is a concern, convoys will generally speed up and drive erratically instead of stopping in order to make themselves a harder target. Most convoys always have at least two backup routes planned ahead of time (as well as air cover/medivac transport/artillery support, ect. ect.) in case anything goes wrong ie: a bridge being blown, 50% casualties... If those fail, they turn around and run for home or someplace with decent cover. It would be nice to see the ai using this logical progression of planning ahead and then executing depending on the level of threat. I cannot emphasize enough the value of a good pathfinding ai... I figure this has already been covered in other "wishes" or is already planned, but I figured I would ad my 2c as to how it might actually be implemented...

Funny, how our analysis of these videos has suddenly become so much more detailed, lol.

Oh my god, LOLZ, HAHAHA!!

OH-58D..scouts rule..."If You Ain't Cav, You Ain't...."

As I said, it was downloaded multiple times on my computer as well as on other people's computers and then transfered to my own. Tried with both firefox and microsoft explorer. Obviously it's something specifically wrong with my computer and not the software, but I'm flummoxed as to what it could be...I would say that it was the software and not the computer, but every time I try to force the install it stops in a different place. Sometimes it goes nearly the whole way before giving me the error message...I just don't understand it...Very depressing...