71st_AH Rob

Will MT be coming to this soon?

They are not an improvement....

They didn't have visors on helmets yet, they typically wore sunglasses or goggles. The hard flight helmets were a new invention introduced during the Korean War, early Sabre pilots would have looked a lot like a Mustang pilot from WWII with a leather helmet. The pilot we have is an anachronism though and should be replaced.

Back to sleep then...

And Normandy 2!

If, under Options=>Misc., you have "Synchronize Cockpit Controls with HOTAS at mission start" checked, it will not matter how you set up the cockpit, this will override it and you would need to set your HOTAS controls to the settings you wished for the air start.

Please don't, it would be extremely annoying and distracting.

Everyone has their own opinion(s) about this map, based on their own expectations. Some people have unrealistic expectations. Do we really expect high detail in the middle of Patagonia where there are really no people. Who cares how detailed the wildlife trails are. At most you might see that for a few seconds between hitting the ground in your parachute and hitting the ESC key to select a new aircraft. Almost every update the developers add several new airfields and they have a plan to complete the map published and are following it. Most of the complaints are whining. I really see great potential once we have a few more critical AI and a period correct Mirage and Harrier.

Running the mission on my dedicated server, players see labels if they have them enabled and have checked that box. So far I have not been able to prevent them from seeing them.

So I have not found a way to stop players from enabling Labels, that was in fact the first indicator that we had a problem. So far, nothing that I have been able to implement on my side, mission or server setting, has been able to prevent players from displaying the labels as per their preferences unless they uncheck that box.

No fix is planned, it's a feature. Unless the new DServer has a fix...

Nope, ED added an option in the Gameplay tab of Settings at the bottom right under a light blue heading called 'Presets'. There is a check box that is checked by default with the inscrutable description "No force from Mission, use Mine" Hopefully the new MT DServer that allows map selection will also have a method to override this in MP. @FLANKERATOR

Unfortunately, players can override your choice with a check box that is enabled by default. It overrides all your choices, external views, labels, g-force, simplified flight model etc. Makes setting mission parameters a waste of time.

Please post the video!

This is a very old and opaque issue. When I get home from work I will try to find the appropriate posts. I believe that the belt composition was corrected five or six years ago, the problem is incorrect muzzle velocity. This is a problem that is systemic to ED and I am heartened to see they are taking steps to ensure that it doesn't happen to future modules. Currently there are two M20 rnds, one for WWII and one for the Sabre. The one for the Sabre has a lower muzzle velocity than the WWII rnd. Similarly we have the GAR-8 and AIM-9B, identical Irl, different in DCS. They are the same missile but there was a change in nomenclature dictated by the Pentagon. Why do we have two different missiles?

And the fix only takes five minutes, it's not like there is months of research and coding. Five minutes. Six lines if code and only a couple of characters on each line.

I would guess that it will not be released until the promised new DServer is ready. The new DServer is supposed to allow selection of maps to reduce the overhead on rented servers which are fast becoming unaffordable. I suspect that we are also waiting on MT to be incorporated in the DServer app as well now so my guess would be 5 Apr, we will see a new smaller footprint DServer that incorporates MT and map selection along with a couple of new maps, Normandy 2 and Sinai maybe.

Well, lets look at your points one by one: First, as you note, this official sub-forum is under ED and not a third party so that should be a clue, also they did say that it is Nick Greys favorite aircraft. Second, there are only two varients, the -3 and -5. I would bet that they will give us both since the differences are minor, just like they did with the P-47D -30 and -040. This is of course not counting the Night fighter and Photo reconnaissance sub-variants since night fighting and Photo recce are not a thing in DCS world yet, they would not add anything. Third, since we have not seen a single image yet, I think it is safe to assume that it is indeed at a very early stage of development, maybe still in the info gathering stage. Fourth, if they had anything else that they could share at this stage they would have. Does that help tamp down your hype?

All military vehicles are like that, the only time they look new is when they are delivered. I took my wife to the local airshow at the airbase near us a few years ago. The aircraft were interesting but there was an Army display and I wanted to show her what I worked with day to day. Then I saw a Chinook and took her through it. Something didn't seem right. It was pristine, none of the wear and tear, none of the dark brown stains that no matter how hard they seem to clean, seem to remain between the floor boards and on the webbing of the seats that you try not to linger on. And it smelled like a new car on the lot, just after they removed the plastic protection from the seats, instead of spilled JP 8, vomit, urine and fear. I asked the copilot how many hours it had, it was a brand new CH-47F, with less than a hundred hours, probably about the same as him. I like the Forge elements, but please, no Smell-O-Vision, I can already imagine it.

Working tail numbers?

Nope nope nope. In the Defense industry it isn't "two weeks, be sure", it's "two years, be sure", oh and the price will need to increase because of fixed overhead, etc.

So I watched your track and it did not play out as you described. While you were attacking ground targets you were hit by 20mm FLAK and lost control hitting the ground so you never got to the 109s. I didn't see any of the odd behaviour that you listed, I did see a 109 fly upside-down while on fire, which they often do before bailing out which the pilot did. There was one Mustang of Acorn flight that behaved a bit out of sync but I think that was just the length of the track. I'm not sure what to tell you if you don't have any mods or your version is up to date except try a long repair and try again, this was a bug a while ago but I have not seen it since it was fixed. If you check reflected's forum and search about a year ago you might find posts about it.

This is not an AI issue or a FM issue but it is a bug that showed up a about year ago I think. Are you on the latest Open Beta? Do you have any mods installed?

That may be but our recent experience on my server was quite frustrating. The missions I made all had labels forced off yet some members could see labels anyway. My conclusion was that it was this tickbox that recently became checked by default which is frustrating since it was never documented. There may be a way to override it for MP bit that is also undocumented.

As a mission designer I find it very frustrating but as a Server Owner I am dumbfounded. So now everyone needs to have a password and promise not to uncheck this option or it might as well be WarThunder in Arcade mode. I find it inconceivable that ED added the new oppressive IC to prevent cheating in MP that is so restrictive that it prevents players from using Viacom, an app that adds to immersion, yet adds an option that allows players to override the servers realism settings so they can add big colourful labels so they can spot en ac across the map and gain ad advantage.