Schmidtfire
-
Posts
1891 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
2
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Schmidtfire
-
-
So is there yet a clear verdict regarding the SD10 with AIM120C API?
PL-12 is just an interim mod to test and will most likely not stay, as it is not used on the JF-17 in real life. Focus should be to get the SD10 where it needs to be.
As for beefing up the J-11A with PL-12 it’s another discussion. Good for variety and Redfor multiplayer diversity, but maybe a bit of a stretch in terms of simulation?
-
1 hour ago, Elliot said:
i can't kill this stupid f4, all he does is stay high and in the two circle and i never have enough energy to gun him, the only chance i have is if i stay vertical and wait for him to come around for a headon (but even then, with how low the gun is i can never pull enough lead to kill him)
it's honestly making me question if his flight model is made even somewhat realistically, especially after all of these 'flight model updates'
You are dogfighting DCS AI. They will out climb you like there is no tomorrow. They will out rate you like there is no tomorrow.
They use a simplified flight model and will defy physics at times. If you want good dogfighting you need
to fly online. Or use missiles. Dogfighting against AI with missiles is viable. But I cannot recommend guns only.
It will only leave you frustrated
-
1
-
-
15 hours ago, Six Gun said:
If you change jesters controls to 1-8 and then his menu button to another letter or number. Would it be possible to bind the controller to those? I did that with voice attack and it works so far pretty well. I haven't tried it with different buttons yet. Hoping this works for you.
That won't work.
6 hours ago, Despayre said:It would be another option, but that's not nearly as fast as dialing to the right position would be. I don't think the 2 options are equivalently as fast.
And how are we supposed to do that?
Rotary encoder is out of the question with that method.
Using a POV hat? good luck hitting the exact button and option every time. A next/previous type option would work well not only for
those with Rotary encoders, but for those that have few buttons available aswell.-
1
-
-
Guess this falls under some sort of wish or request. Would it be possible to implement keybinds to control the Jester UI wheel with a rotary encoder?
I have a few of them on my HOTAS base with push function (WinWing Orion 2 throttle) and it would be really nice if I could scroll left or right around the interface by rotating the knob and then select the highlighted "slice/option" with a push.-
1
-
-
The issue is really that we have no sense of forces in game. It’s very easy to over G fast and snap the wings. Not something that happens on a regular basis IRL.
-
No growl unless the armament position switch is up and the electrical circuit is activated.
THANKS for that fix!!!
-
Can we get this to work with ME triggers without using scripts?
Long term it would be nice with a supply UI (like the rearming menu) to deliver or pick up inventory when playing a mission.-
1
-
-
1 hour ago, Kalasnkova74 said:
Would you prefer no early Phantom II variant at all? Because that’s the realistic alternative. Not only were the early variants not exported to many countries (just Iran & Spain), but it’s much more temperamental to fly and the missiles are far harder to effectively employ.
I’m not trying to rain on anyone’s parade, but if you’re a studio looking to make a profit on time & development investment the first variants don’t have a business case. It’ll be years before HB makes a full Naval variant module, since in detail it’s a very different Phantom to the Air Force variants (and they’d be remiss to leave out the UK carrier based variants, adding Dev time). So the choice will be VSN or nothing for the foreseeable future if you’re a Naval Phantom fan.
Personal preference, but I would not choose a mod over a full fidelity module. Even if it lacks the carrier ops.
I also understand that some players are fine with lower fidelity as long as they can fly their favourite aircraft. Just look at the F-22 mod!
There is probably not one bolt in the correct place in that thing, but many players love it anyways. The don't care if it's 20% of the real deal.
That is ok, but it's not for me. Fidelity is what got me into DCS in the first place. Also, having dealt a bit with mods (even created some) I have noticed that
it's likely to mess with your DCS World install in some way. There is no right or wrong here. But mods and modules are two very different things.-
11
-
-
On 7/29/2023 at 11:56 PM, Kalasnkova74 said:
I’ll point out HB does not feature the only DCS F-4 Phantom II module. Yes, the VSN Phantom II mods have flaws, but that team’s done a great job with it so far and have patched many of the issues it had at the start. With Heatblurs F-4E covering the Phantom IIs later iteration with slats, early PGMs, and so on VSN is free to gradually improve the F-4B/F-4C to deliver the historical Phantom experience.
Having the F-4B/F-4C mod -which I hope one day will equal the A-4 in detail and popularity- will deliver the historical F-4 experience alongside the later F-4E. With both modules in play, everyone should be able to fly a Phantom II they want.
HB does feature the only DCS F-4 Phantom II module.
Not to take anything away from VSN, they have done a good job. But there is a vast difference between a mod and a module.
Even the best of mods (like A-4) is not really comparable to a commercial product with full SDK and access to the ED team. It sort of looks like the real deal, but isn’t. Also, running mods risk messing up DCS World on different levels, so it’s not for everyone.
-
3
-
-
I get your point on the underlying issue. But moving DCS to Deferred Shading was a deliberate choice that left us with what I might consider some of the worst
shimmering in any of the PC games I have played for the last 20 years. It's quite bad on a regular monitor and worse in VR. That's not even touching
other ongoing issues with the engine like color, lighting, view system etc.
On a positive note, I really hope that FXAA/TAA and Vulcan will make it better.
-
1
-
-
A new love
in M-2000
Useless due to awful accuracy?
Mirage 2000C has hands down the MOST accurate CCRP delivery of all DCS modules. Just designate properly and your iron bombs will hit with jdam accuracy.
-
2
-
-
6 minutes ago, draconus said:
SSAA was fully supported in DCS. Plus you have PD for VR.
You are right, I forgot about SSAA. Does anyone really use that? From what I understand it's very resource intensive... Either way, none of the options will solve the shimmering.
It's not news that DCS World still has a fair bit of issues with it's graphics in certain areas. It is what it is. Maybe it will be improved as time goes on
-
1
-
-
On 8/5/2023 at 11:10 PM, Kageseigi said:
I know there's a lot of talk about AI, but has anyone seen any general improvement in kill percentage against human targets?
I have tried the new changes over several sessions this week. It is still more or less a useless missile against human targets.
The new improvements does not offset the initial issues.
Most of the time AWG9 track will be lost post launch. I don't know if it's due to server desync/lag or if it really was that primitive in real life.
In a very busy environment, against different targets at different altitudes, I would say 80% of my shots never held the track all the way to active.
If the AIM54 actually goes active properly with track intact, anything at 15k feet or below will have a easy time defeating it due to missile low velocity and long RWR warning time.
Despite it's flight profile, seems like the missile does not enter RWR blind spots during the dive. There should be a switch to change target
size to small for later active/warning, but it seems that it does not work properly at the moment.
My advice is to mainly stick to AIM7 with STT in multiplayer. It is a better missile and more reliable against humans. Not saying HB did a bad job on
the AWG9/AIM54 simulation, but there are reasons why few players fly F14 online. BVR you deal with lost tracks or trashed missiles (at best). At closer ranges
heading towards the merge, you are trying to get Jester say anything but "unable" or "no can do that, boss"
-
2
-
-
On 8/4/2023 at 7:13 PM, SkateZilla said:
shimmering on lines and edges is a common MSAA problem
I would say it is more of a DCS World problem. On old version 1.5.X shimmering was not an issue and we could also crank up MSAA.
On version 2.X.X (after deferred shading switch), shimmering everywhere and limit to 4x MSAA (with no other AA options available).
Deferred Shading, while looking great in many circumstances, came at a very high cost. Lot's of jaggies and shimmers.-
2
-
-
Great design!
But 3.999 USD (on sale) for the front panel? It will put your products way out of range for most DCS/JF-17 "non-professional" customers.
WinWing has the complete TOP GUN MIP with UFC + 3x displays for 825.90 USD. So it's hard to understand why the
Wefly Thunder JF-17 Instrument Panel is that more expensive. Unless it's aimed at the professional market.-
1
-
2
-
-
3 hours ago, karasinicoff said:
Thanks for updates..However,
Would you please fix the Mistral bug?
It keeps ringing and beeping no matter what the sight retracted and even run out of ammo.
Also there is no key binding on weapon panel on/off
Mistral audio has nothing to do with sight being retracted or not. That was fixed in the Gazelle update and correct as is.
Audio when out of ammo seems like a bug.
-
What is the status on this fix?
I played a small coop mission with my friends yesterday and the Realistic ASP reticle/Special Option is still an issue in multiplayer!
Unless we play on a server with good knowledge about MiG-21bis module, the Special Option is not working on public servers either.
Please, please, please fix this. Or make the special option default (or something).
-
Sounds great. The periscope will be a very welcome addition. Not many countries use the Viviane sight. Also good for a ”Cold War” environment.
In fact it is also used on the M variants together with the Viviane system. But I don’t know the details on that integration. Here is a video of periscope+ Viviane sight in action:
-
1
-
1
-
-
14 hours ago, YoYo said:
This screenshot is very interesting.
No Viviane sight on roof but with HOT missiles. And looking closely inside the cockpit, it seems that the gunner/co-pilot is looking through the previously missing periscope. At first I thought it was the NVG’s, but now Im pretty sure it isn’t.
-
3
-
-
@Dannyvandelft I aggree. Against AI the Phoenix is good enough. For some reason it does not work well against other players. If you try the exect same shots against a human player, they will miss (unless that player forgot to turn on the RWR)
3 hours ago, draconus said:This is not the way. Fix any bugs, make the missile specs and behavior as realistic as possible according to any known data - that's how it's done.
As realistic as possible, yes. But known data is just part of all data needed. Gaps need to be filled by the devs or the overall accuracy will suffer. Going only by known data will result in an inaccurate implementation. If devs need to add 20% qualified guesswork to get a more realistic outcome, I think it’s better than to leave things out.
-
1
-
-
After some more testing the main performance issues seems go be:
AWG-9 inability to hold tracks until missile goes active, combined with relatively low kinematics and easily defeated missile seeker.
Tested over and over in PvP multiplayer against other fighter sized aircraft. My verdict is that Phoenix is a near useless missile in that scenario. The pk under most conditions will be too low. From a realism standpoint it’s hard to reach a conclusion. If it suffers from DCS-isms, server lag, flawed missile code or if it’s actually right on the money in it’s representation. But unless running scripted PvE scenarios, it’s not something I would use if the target can A; get an RWR warning and B; pull >5g
-
1
-
-
Just to add to this discussion.
MiG-21bis module has anti-jamming/interference filters that will filter out the jamming signals when activated. When used, it’s impossible to move the TDC (for some reason).
Just find it a bit interesting since parts of Heatblur team worked on the 21 module and might know how to implement a similar filter on the Viggen. But obviously very different radars and complexity.
-
@uboats
We need to get a better grip on how the API shift will affect the SD-10.As for voting. Players want different things. Some users want SD-10 with double performance, others want the most realistic SD-10 possible.
I think a good first step will be to discuss if the new change will make it behave more realistic?
For starters, we know It is not an Amraam. Without knowing all the details, it sounds more like a Chinese R-77 clone with another body/rocket motor aimed for export market. If Aliexpress sold FOX3 missiles, this would probably fit the bill. Actual performance is difficult to get figures for, but the most common is that it is somewhat competitive with the old AIM-120B model. Not saying it’s a bad missile, but would be nice to have the characteristics that sets it apart from the 120.
-
3
-
-
La-11 would have fit nicely in a Korea scenario with F86, MiG15, P51 and upcoming F4U.
The La-7 is a bit.... in the same spot as I-16. Im sure it will be very well modeled, but a bit out of place given the current AI assets and other WWII birds.
Im pretty much buying anything Redair, so I guess I just have to deal with that
Switch SD-10 to new scheme API used by AIM-120C
in JF-17 Thunder
Posted
I recall that uboats mentioned that the J-11A don't carry PL-12 in service. Maybe only for testing purposes? Otherwise it would already be standard weaponry for the module.
Anyways, I'll leave it at "plausible"