kobeshow

That is just too deep for me, and is probably too deep for the server admins. Sure it is fun to think about what the playing field could look like in the future, but I don't think it would be wise for mission makers and server owners to balance their mission around EDs future plans, as we have seen time and time again that massive delays will happen and things in MP code will be broken as well as mission editor functions. I can only imagine what the guys trying to spend their free time doing something productive for their hobby (DCS) feel like, it is probably causing them more pain than joy, so it is best for them to just work with what they have and don't try to plan too far ahead, for their own sanity.

Interesting, I'm wondering if this means that labels in general are allowed on the server, sorry for the noobish question but I have no expirience with labels whatsoever

I am intrigued, what is this mod, and how does it work. Sounds like something I should have been using in the past.

Sadly the official patch notes have not contained anything regarding the Mirage since January 27th this year. I have brought this up in conversations where even Zeus was replying, and yet there is no clear answer as to why we cannot follow the Mirage's progress in the official updates. ED says "all developers can add info to the changelog", RAZBAM says "we submitted all the changes to ED" ... so someone is either lying or they are purposefully ambiguous to maintain plausible deniability.

Oh man I wanted to leave a friendly comment here, but then I saw you taunting me in the end of the video. FYI, I was willingly sacrificing myself to splash that A10, nothing to do with luck :P Good SAM action thoughnext time with better music maybe ?

Well, it might be wrong for the A10, the correct way of putting it would be "you should not be able to change the laser code mid-air" In the Mirage you have to turn off your engines, have weight on your wheels and change the code via kneeboard, so that mimics ground crew doing it for you, which I think is enough realism and still gives players freedom (not that I have heard anyone being opposed to this concept). I would expect the same mechanic to come to the Harrier eventually.

Oh don't get me wrong Ciribob, I didn't want to send anything negative your way, I think it is just frustrating that MP is such a mess now and ED is slow/borderline reluctant to fix it, probably also because of the looming 2.5 Oh and thank you for the last SRS updates I was surprised seeing them showing up. Sadly I didn't have the opportunity to test them yet.

2.1 is nice and all but not only is it limiting in terms of the map, but also in terms of planes. I get that people have been asking for this kind of setup and I am glad that they got their wish fulfilled, but pretty much no one who I got to know via BlueFlag is playing there. Ever since BF went down on Caucasus it killed the enjoyment of DCS Multiplayer for alot of people, and I personally am really torn as to wether I should pump more money into DCS when the part that I would invest in is more or less ignored by ED.

Jup, and no lives limit which just makes it fighterspam. If 16AGR get lives going and force people to pick one side for a round, then it would be way more meaningful. Right now it is little more than a training ground for coordinated attacks on objectives, which is still something (;

Thank you, but I already knew that. What I am specifically concerned about is that these items don't appear in the official ED updates changelogs. This has been going on since january and I wonder what exactly is going on. Looking for info that you definetly need for a "study sim" in different places is not very convenient, and it just looks unprofessional (just like the situation with the manual, eh I'm repeating myself).

Another update without patchnotes for the Mirage, at least the official ones that ED post have not been updated in regards to the Mirage since january. I have raised questions about this in spring when I started noticing this trend of little changes not making it into the patchnotes. ED people said RAZBAM is to blame, Zeus said he submitted the changes to ED. So something is going wrong in this process and I wonder what that is. I don't want to be a scavenger for information, I want to have a place to go to when I need to know something (similar frustrations as with the manual and the way I tought myself how to operate the M2K through the forum/videos/trial and error)

Jede Wette das ED alles versucht um die Hornet zu einem Weihnachtsrelease zu machen, deshalb meiner Meinung nach auch die sehr rohe Form des EA releases. Einigermaßen Stratup zusammenwurschteln, das nötigste um den Leuten ein bisschen was zum ballern zu geben und raus damit noch vor Weihnachten. Das ist bestimmt deren Plan, bleibt abzuwarten ob das klappt oder ob wir noch warten müssen, ich persönlich tippe auf warten.

ok thanks, edited for clarity, that is why I put qualifyers on the mentioned items.

Here are some things that you can add to the list off the top of my head: -INS update bugs (fly-over update doesn't work like it should, maybe radar update aswell, not sure about that one) -CCM bugs (antenna doesn't go back to neutral CCM position when unlocking a target to lock another one) -bombing precision bugs (CCRP at least is inaccurate 100% and you cannot fly the profiles described in the manual effectively) -when losing lock in BVR your antenna goes back to neutral instead of staying in the same position for easier re-aquisition of the target (so exatly opposite to CCM modes) -artificial runway not programmable in the INS from cockpit EDIT: corrections due to info from posters below.

Vielleicht liegt es an einem Konflikt der Waffenarten. Die Mirage soll eigentlich nicht mit fox1+bomben unterwegs sein können, ist im Spiel aber dennoch möglich und hat daher schon bei vielen zu unterschiedlichsten Problemen geführt. Wie du selbst gesagt hast läuft alles nur mit snakeeyes. Diese Einschränkung des Flugzeugs, die in der Realität existiert hat (existiert?), wurde auch schon oft benutzt um einige Fehler des Zielcoputers im Spiel wegzuerklären (kann ich leider nicht anders sagen, da kein offizielles statement à la "ja das ist extra so" vorhanden ist), und wenn man das bei bugs schon so bequem machen kann, warum dann nicht auch bei Spielabstürzen? "IRL Mirage can't carry mixed loadouts, so it's only logical that your game crashes" oder so ähnlich. Eine andere Sache die mir noch dazu einfällt ist, dass die vorgefertigten loadouts in den Schnellmissionen evtl. veraltet sind und nach Bewaffnung suchen die garnichtmehr da ist. Hier hilft es im Editor selbst loadouts anzulegen und nach jedem update des Spiels zu überschreiben.

So many thigs to say on this topic, but I'll just keep my sanity and

With persistent units that are scattered all over the place, the KA50 has a clear advantage, it is just that prior to the new mission it was a non issue because everyone knew where the targets were anyway, and placed defenses were not 1/4 as prominent. Mix the choppers up, divide only FC3 fighters, and restore the parity of round 5. It is the only solution without drastically changing the mission's design. If I am not mistaken the ABRIS is not perfect though, if I understand the "snapshot" wording correctly it will not show units that are spawned after you joined the aircraft/server?

Hey Ciribob, if you can afford to let SAMs up for 15h, may I suggest giving a JTAC a longer life aswell, 12-15h ?

Hah yeah, cracks you up doesn't it? I can only imagine the troubles you had to go through with MOOSE. Server hosters/mission designers just havo to work around alot of things that restrict the multiplayer community from flourishing. OP's reason #2 being the main offender in my opinion. But as long as there are people who just buy everything that is released and then park it somewhere without using it, things will remain the way they are, or at least proceeding at "moderate" speed.

Würde mich auch interessieren, solche mehrdeutigen one-liner von offiziellen Teammitgliedern sehen immer sehr gut aus (Achtung Ironie).

I think DCS can't handle these numbers, there were microlags all over the place reminiscent of round 5, ~60 players on the server, same problem for pretty much everyone (one dude had 330ping, no one else higher than 200)

That is all fine and dandy, but lets try to look at it objectively. What is the problem in BF, or rather what is this discussion about? Players only want to fly Mirages, and the reason for that is it's superior BVR capability compared to FC3 (among other reasons of course). So there are two ways to solve this problem. 1:Make the Flanker more competitive with DL/improved SA. (You can still restrict Mirage numbers, but then you will have to compensate the number of inferior aircraft with something.) 2:Force people to fly the inferior aircraft. (This will make players unhappy)

Hi, stop me if I'm wrong but you seem to be fairly new to this PvP thing, let me try to help you a bit. I'm not a pro but play PvP exclusively, and my point is also just common sense really. No ammount of bad missiles will compensate you if you are fighting a superior missile. We are flying a SARH setup here so if you have the longer arm, and shoot first (with good PK/parameters) the ammount of missiles fired by the Flanker have 0 impact on the outcome. The ones fired in BVR will never get to the Mirage and the ones who could get there will lose the target because the 530 got there first. Ammount of missiles only increases possible number of engagements/playtime.

Hi Buddyspkie Team, since the web based map is regularly checked by everyone for strategical updates, I think it would be great if you could check the fuelstate of airfields on it aswell. Don't know how much work that would be but it would certainly be a good addition to give people more overview. I'm very excited for the new changes, keep it up :thumbup: