gavagai

And it took 6 years to get the 6 WW2 fighters we have now.

Obviously.

I enjoyed this post from a while ago: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=170676&page=3 Forget dueling guns only with the F-15E, but otherwise it will do alright, even with the CFTs.

My suspicion is that many don't realize how exhausting/unpleasant it is to pull 6g, let alone 9g, or 12g.

Can someone explain how server-side hit detection would work in a flight sim with jets moving at 400 knots? I can see how missiles would be handled, but what about bullets (or other unguided weapons)? Even with a good connection, ~50-75ms, we're looking at 10m of discrepancy between the server and the client. ---------------- P.S. cheating is far more rampant in shooter games than flight sims :)

So, is it fair that some DCS modules have critical over-g limits and others don't? I think not. Like I said, it need not be structural failure, but the simulation will be more accurate when there are consequences for over-g'ing the jet repeatedly.

@Mortalcombat, My reply wasn't to you. You must have posted just before me. FWIW, the F-14 will disintegrate with enough G. No damage required. Something is awry with the simulation when other jets can be over-g'd repeatedly in the same sortie without any risk of consequences (need not be full disintegration).

I try to keep as many things as possible the same so I can copy/paste. I edit one airfield and then paste to all the others. Of course, it still doesn't excuse every patch breaking the warehouses.

What a rambling response. Flight simulation is a genre of video game. Some of the aircraft in DCS suffer structural failure with over-g and some don't. If the damage modeling were more accurate Mover could strike a few of those rules from his list. No idea why you're advising us that it's Mover's tournament and to follow his rules. Hopefully you understand why the rules are necessary for meaningful competition; they are not arbitrary, they are not mere opinion.

Yes, that website is a cudgel to try to force Australians to spend more on national defense. It's a political thing. If SD-10 is bad right now the Amraam is in the same place. From I understand DCS doesnt actually simulate chaff... there is a long way to go.

There. And make no mistake that anyone who defends the status quo because "some F15 pilots have over g'd their jet before" is over g'ing his jet as a matter of course in the simulation. Why wouldn't you? There is zero chance of structural damage.

Thank you. I hope ED is listening. Also, please know that some of us "gamers" have shouted into the wilderness about over-g before. We are not a monolithic group.

This always happens in DCS, but it shouldn't be so. Did you post a bug report?

What is early access? Many things will change during the development process. Have no doubt that some stuff is incorrect right now. Don't know about the AB fuel consumption specifically, but there is a lot of room for improvement for the Viper (wheel brakes and NWS are in a much worse state). The Hornet has the benefit of data from Boeing, while the Viper lacks the same level of support.

Very, very late to the party. I tried out the Mig-29A a few times in anticipation of the DCS version. I don't think there is any module where it is so easy to damage a tire. I have no trouble landing, but it was a quick lesson that you have to be careful with takeoff. So much for rugged Soviet design.

That is really impressive. How much did you spend on parts? I am always on the lookout for the next msffb2.

Quickest fix is to open the ME and set the messed up warehouses to unlimited stock for everything. Close the ME, reopen it, and the columns and rows should be back to normal. Then you can re-edit, but if you want each location to be different then yeah that will take a long time.

Notch+chaff works really well against the 120C right now. Target only needs to notch for 1-2 seconds, too. See the video in bugs\weapons section. It is an obvious bug.

Coherent planeset + appropriate map Right now we have neither, and the channel map made it worse!

No, I haven't experienced that because I don't play FPS games. This is how it has been in flight sims since the old days. It probably has something to do with the velocities inherent in flight simulation. Like, how would you know where to align your gun pipper if the hit detection were server side? Bullets are much faster than people walking/running, but that relative difference isn't as large when the engagement distance is a half-mile and the target is doing 400knots indicicated.

AI are extremely reticent to fire guns at ground targets. I see them do it once in a blue moon, so it is not a problem with mission orders or triggers, etc. AI prefer air-to-ground missiles first (Maverick or Vikhr), then (maybe) bombs, almost never the gun.

His post was not about radar or the training of its crews. The flaming cliffs F15 is the only jet in the game that can do 12+ g break turns repeatedly without risk of structural failure. F14 pilots try to follow them and their wings come off. The usual white knights will dismiss it or say it is not a big deal, but the fact remains.

Don't test against AI. Mig-21 is much better now, but you're not going to outmaneuver a human flown, flaming cliffs F15.

Except for the F-15, which has no structural g-limit. It can do 12+ g break turns all day long without consequence.