kobeshow

This is because you have a misconception about the dot. It does not show the optimal intercept trajectory like in the F15, it shows the direction in which the radar is pointed when locking a target, so if you put the dot in the middle of your HUD you will be pointing straight at the target.

Just a quick notice: when you land at a friendly airfield, go to spectators and then relocate to another airfield, it counts your loss but your lives in the script remain the same, don't know if it is intended or not but you guys might want to look into that to avoid any problems during the round.

I agree, it is the hardest job to fly a transport chopper, all the work and none of the glory. With the airfield refueling script in full effect, CSAR missing and now limited lives, you might aswell add that capture script and kick choppers to the curb.

I think F-15 pilots are so used to 3 bags + full burn that they don't realise the strain they would put on a real plane if they flew it like that, but the G load on the HUD has a display limit of 9.9 so they probably think it's fine (; Snarky remarks aside, hopefully all FC3 planes get some type of structural integrity.

[SOLVED] Like the title says, I think I have encountered a strange bug. I was quite happy to find out that you can actually adjust your altimeter in the FC3 planes, I didn't know that. So I hopped into the editor to test it, and my engines did not want to spool at all. Tried Keyboard and Hotas commands, double checked everything, and even hopped into a SU-33 to test it on another plane, and it worked flawlessly there. Anyone else having problems spooling their SU-27 in the editor?? edit: stable version 1.5 edit2:yep, it appears that it was the throttle, but thanks for the tip Sweep [SOLVED]

Well, they are saying that it is exploitable in a way that lets you see things unrealisticly, therefore they want it "off FOR realism". That does not mean however that anyone is saying the setting itsself represents reality, it just resembles it the most atm (;

To Redfor: I see that we have difficulty coordinating even though we have all the means at hand, I again urge you to USE REDFOR HQ on the buddyspike.net website. Testing is still going on and if we want to avoid a desastrous start like in round 5 then this is the time to talk to each other about it.

well the problem is the way ED implemented model enlargement, WHY485 already found a solution for that, and from what I can tell he just tweaked the settings that are already there, so it is really baffling that his solution is not the standard for ED by now... developers and their pride I guess... http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=160634 His mod thread also describes the various problems the current implementation of "impostors" has and should point out to everyone, who has 5min to read it, why currently ANY setting other than "no enlargement" is not suitable for a competitive environment.

Regarding the numbers, some people decided to not play due to various reasons, and there was this http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2761755&postcount=1312 which probably prompted some switching. I personally find the concern about player numbers odd, last round nobody seemed to care, and whichever side got outnumbered had to live with the results.

Hi Greg, thank you for that clear statement. In regards to balance I understand that you don't like people complaining about ideas that you think are a nice twist on the mission, and I wouldn't like it either. To prevent something like that maybe you could just post a quick statement about what your thoughts were when you implemented a certain balance. I think if people for example read something like "in this round redfor has to make due with outdated aircraft against a better equipped bluefor" then the acceptance would be much higher, general thoughts and statements like this could of course be put in the opening post for the new round, which ideally would be up by the time the testing phase begins, so people can have a streamlined discussion, unlike now where we discuss 5 different issues across 2 threads (; These are just my thoughts in general on the way the testing phase has gone, and in no way am I complaining about anything to you guys, you are doing a great job and have created something that makes DCS worth playing, which is no exaggeration, I stopped playing this game for a year and came back just because of blueflag, so THANK YOU (: !

EVERYONE ! (Gary Oldman voice)

Maybe someone brought it up already and I missed it, is model enlargement going to stay at this setting?

Like Stuge said, in your scenario (5-12km) there is only notching/turning cold that will help you. If you want to stay aggressive, squeeze off an ET and dive while going into the notch.

I seem to have similar issues from time to time, but always assumed I did something wrong, will be interesting to see what comes out of this.

I would like to join as a lonewolf if it is not too late. Callsign: Skipper Aircraft: Su-27 Timezone: Zulu +1

Very Helpful I decided to come back to dcs after a long hiatus, and was previously only flying the eagle, this guide helped me a lot in understanding the flanker, and I'll be coming back to it until I get it right (; thanks Santi :thumbup:

Everyone should know this, so I believe this will come in handy for a lot of new players

for what it's worth: Pete Bonanni (author of "The Art of the Kill") wrote this in his Book: "Some other common head-on BFM mistakes are insufficient G, poor airspeed control, bad lift vector control, failure to lead turn, and trying to BFM in an F-14. (Just kidding on that last one — well, not really.)" keep in mind that he's a Viper driver though (; This is pretty much in line what others here have stated, just thought it was funny (;

Very nice, I was looking forward to you posting an A2A refueling tutorial, I'm shure it is as excellent as the others, so I'll say thanks before even getting to watch it (;

I don't know, does not seem like the same thing to me. I know what you want to say but that analogy does not fit at all (;

Hi, I'm new to all this and needed some pointers on how to set up my controls. Using your pictures I was able to get a general idea of what I will need, and I am now tweaking my setup till I'm satisfied. So thank you for providing this great starting point for a new virtual pilot