OxideMako

This. The FSX prices are either insanely high, or DCS is stupidly cheap. Either way, the DCS community in multiplayer is going to be split already with Nevada/Hormuz/Normandy (especially if they all cost the same as Nevada) and splitting it further is not a good idea if ED want multiplayer to continue to thrive. However, it has been stated that the vast majority of DCS players are offline, so maybe the multiplayer users will be left behind regarding the terrains.

For most uses, 4xMSAA should be more than enough. Going higher than that will kill performance. Most games these days utilise post-process AA (SMAA/FXAA) instead of MSAA, as it a very expensive AA technique. It also has some issues under DX11 IIRC.

Is this a big corner, or a little one? :D

It has also been mentioned (by Wags IIRC) that Tonopah AFB is being considered for potential addition at some point.

This. It is very obvious in game for me, although I use headphones. Actually love the new effect! Adds a lot to the atmosphere.

Credit to reddit/hoggit user Teeter477

Looks great, getting a bit of an A-10A vibe. Analog instruments always looked cool!

I'm not an expert, not by a long stretch. However if 15 R-27ERs fired from a head on aspect or very close to it, failing to hit from <20km is realistic, I think ED picked the wrong plane to model..... I understand it was a look-down situation, but 15 missiles. That actually explains a hell of a lot. Can someone from ED actually state something about this? It seems like we would need to know if this is intended behavior or not. (IE will this get better/worse if the missile AFM is still WIP?)

Yep. Give me an F-16C of any kind, although LANTIRN is cool, and even I am worried what kind of cash I would fork over for that. Also, there is an open-source AFM built for DCS of an F16 floating about somewhere, and ED has the cockpit stuff at least partially done..... :music_whistling:

Very helpful app, thanks for the work on this!

Do you guys have EU squadrons at all? I noticed you have a few UK players. Been meaning to get into a virtual squadron for some time now, as the best way to improve is to learn from others!

Aw hell yes! :pilotfly:

This. It is nice after so many issues and delays across the board with DCS, that everything is beginning to go smoothly! Keep it up Aviodev!:thumbup:

Do you know something we don't again Sith? :D Also, that Mirage is looking pretty!

One of these is a mod, and I agree it was dubious, but Nevada (I saw this in the actual browser too, with my own eyes) is not available outside of ED/3P devs. At least not a version compatible with 1.5. However, discussion of closed threads is a bad idea IIRC, as there is always a good reason. ;) So lets not let this get too off topic guys!

Reminds me very much of Chernarus (ArmA II) Astonishingly beautiful shot Blaze.

Exactly, it is at the very least another little hint. Also, keep an eye on the MP server list every now and then, specifically the map column... :smilewink:

I just want some conformation on this dammit! Wags, just tell us when, our wallets are ready for another beating!:pilotfly: EDIT: Found this - C:\Program Files\Eagle Dynamics\DCS World OpenBeta\Sounds\sdef\Aircrafts\F-5E. Seems odd right? Considering only flyable aircraft, bar the F-5E and Spit IX have their own subfolders here....

This is probably the major issue with the current system as it stands, the same setting will have vastly different effects depending on the display resolution. The normal setting at 1920x1080 personally seems perfect(aircraft wise, ground units are still a little too big IMHO) but that is probably the single most widespread resolution out there at the moment.

Will the M2000 be able to utilize the JTAC functionality within DCS World, such as the MiG-21 is able to?

Trying out the L-39C.

I personally think enlarged is over the top already, being able to spot hawks/other light jets at nearly 20NM. IIRC fighter sized targets are on average 12-17nm, (about the normal setting now) unless all pilots in DCS are Giora Epstein-level. That said, I am not opposed to the option. Also allowing servers to disable the enlarged setting (but not the normal setting) would be a good idea, as normal solves the age old DCS visibility issues without being unrealistic.

Honestly this seems like the best approach, but requires dedicated servers first. As what we have now is limited, I can understand requiring the server to own Nevada etc. Once dedicated servers are released, it SHOULD be another story, as you would not be able to abuse that system as you could potentially abuse the current one. (If maps were free for servers)

The new mirrors are pretty cool!