Foka1

Try to clear shaders

Don't forget AJ37 had less wiring and cooling for A2A missiles. IIRC only side pylons were ready for carrying sidewinders

Летал на Сирийском сервер buddyspike три дня назад. Мой Ми-8 там просто находили, потому что если тебя заметит любой радар твоё положение репортится на карте с помощью функционала метки. Скорее всего пилот противника просто увидел метку и начал искать в этой зоне.

Any idea what that can mean? Running as administrator. Download and install script button gives error

Wepom effect on DCS are pretty close if we are talking explosion radius. People often just lacking knowledge on how ita done in DCS and even what is real deal in real life and ask for hollywood effects. The perception of that is created because of several things, but main are: 1) DCS is not modeling fragments and shrapnell coming out of bomb 2) DCS vehicles does not have extensive damage model. Although they do react to certain damage levels and they have armor zones

I have checked mission when hosting from client and from my dedicated server. Both works. Asked rossmum to connect and check to both instances as well. I can host mission if needed. But for now I'm going to Ostankino park to eat a burger and relax otherwise I will be too angry to cooperate with people.

Mission works on my side now, I'm not sure what caused that bug, but its gone now for me. For checking further I would need Alpen to place that mission online again on his side just for sake of purity of experiment. But it seems he is busy today so far

@Alpenwolf It works now on my side. Let's check tomorrow noon maybe

So after that I spent some more time and saved track with simple mission. After I saved track F/A-18 rearming ability came back. I dunno WTF yet...

Hm.. Wait for upcoming update and check after it I would say. Also check if other simulators can handle those three quadrants at the same time or not. Maybe Saitek driver has some limitation or bug as well..

I think it would be helpful to list devices you have. Since for some of you guys its not numberof devices butsomething else.

[Vodka]LazzySeal - MiG-15

I personally think that testing SAMs on AI is very limited if you want to apply results somehow to PvP...

Try to disable "Windows error reporting service" on server machine. So far works on server I've tried that, no more crashes, but I'm not sure they will not appear..

Correction for my past statement. Mi-24P can take 8 ATGMs it seems.

Other point that I've mentioned already is IR camera. See first shoot first. while KA-50 has more ATGMs its ATGMs are not 100% killing tank in one hit. Abrams some time can take three even to die. And KA-50 Shkval doesn't have IR mode, so finding targets with it is times harder than with huge mast camera with IR that is not exposing chopper BTW. So in numbers it may be 2 Hellfires against 16 Vikhrs, but in practice it may play out that effectiveness will be on the either side. Plus in suggested setup Hind vs Kiowa, we need to look at Hind ATGMs compared to Hellfires. Hind will carry 4 ATGMs that are inferior to Vikhrs in effective distance. Most likely they will not kill tank in one hit either, moreover their guidence will be much harder process than in KA-50 with no screens at all, while Kiowa will have far better aiming and shooting capabilities from safe distances, yes it is 2 hellfires, but 4 Hind ATGMs may prove to be less effective than even one hellfire all things considered.

I would suggest to wait until we see what Hellfire will do. Also KA-50 vs Kiowa can be balanced in numbers. Three Kiowas for 1 KA-50 slot for instance. Same though can be done vice versa if Hellfire prove to be much better weapon, than Hind SACLOS ATGMs more Hind slots can be placed.

Agree about FM. Although you may have missed the point about mission design that was raised before in this thread several times. That is the thing here - balance is not historical, balance what Alpenwolf is working with is gameplay balance (means finding same capability on both sides and put it versus each other, or get as closer to balanced asymmetric balance as possible). It is hard to balance anything in DCS for cold war specific years because there are not enough assets in DCS yet to do that. If you would try "Historical background and mission design should be the only means of balancing the gameplay" you would probably see this. In theory it is logical, in practice it is nearly impossible for public 24/7 server. Historical balance may work in event based server though.

Hind replacing KA-50 I can see sense in that. But Kiowa is same as KA-50 if not more capable in regards of having Hellfire and IR camera. If you replace KA-50 with Hind and Gazelle with Kiowa you will just flip current setup backwards but with more divide between sides capabilities. Gazelle (if fixed) has same 4 ATGMs Hind has (and they have similar range of engagemnt with those ATGMs. In that regard it is more balanced. If Kiowa is there KA-50 minimum should stay in my opinion. KIOWA is more advanced and modern platform than KA-50 (although it is another role it still have access to more modern weapons like Hellfire and APKWS) so I don't see much sense in removing KA-50 and adding Kiowa at the same time. The only good opponent for Hind in view of this server is Early Apache or Cobra, as I see it. In current setup I would actually try and restrict KA-50 Vikhrs to see how it'll go compared with Gazelle and its ATGM. KA-50 without Vikhrs still have better aiming capabilities for unguided weapons.

It may be not matching because of array of reasons. Maybe you are not in parameters for it to be developing slow, therefore it slams instantly (means process stays same but it happens faster because of too violent pull).

You see, m4ti140 explained the whole process how he understand it. You just again go and say "but definitly not from 0 to 100 without any in-between like it does in game". Definitely? How you can say definitely if you just said you don;t know how? You contradicting yourself through this whole thread. Explain process how you see it and why it should be like it, or it will be another circle of self contradiction I guess...

Maybe it was a typo and they mean FAB-250 not FAB-350

@Sideburns and here is AIM-9P5 for you. https://drive.google.com/file/d/1Cm-saIOgjnvhMqpLOiJ_VXx7-s7VeGZg/view?usp=sharing Not implying you are idiot, but maybe you can get off your high horse and stop thinking others here are not worthy? You just have outdated data and did not check latest state. I have no other explanation. But if after these two videos you will tell me R-60 vs AIM-9P5 will make it "fairer" I'll have some issues comprehending that.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1W3VVpW1ta5R5mODuQqs-f7dIumxROZaZ/view?usp=sharing

You are able to shoot when you have tone. Even R-3S was able t ogive you tone sometimes head on before last patch. Having tone + ability to launch DOES NOT EQUAL launched missile tracking. They shoot head on because they don't know their hardware. Launched head on R-60 or R-13M will just fly forward. With the same luck and logic you could have say that MiG-21 jockeys are able to launch their S-5 unguided rockets head on. yes they can LAUNCH them.