Napa

Run the training for all aircrafts first, read the manual, play the single missions and then the campaigns for ALL aircraft. Hopefully that'll tire you out enough and you'll join us in DCS Warthog :D :P

Devil's cross always starts from ramp.

Thats neat. 2 of them on 1 vehicle should be better. :D

It seems that the sim has been optimized to run a lot better around those i7 920/GTX 275-280-295 combos. I have not seen any users with this combo AFAIK having any real problems yet. Knock on wood :music_whistling: Is this due to that most of the testers are around those rig configs??

I haven't noticed any stutter except from the usual half sec on the very start once I'm in the cockpit. Complete smoothness throughout the entire flight. Defragging and restarting with scandisc HDD must have helped too. Fps around 35-75. Excellent patch.. looking forward for the next one. Edit: Forgot to mention that Loading times are the same for me. Didn't notice any difference.

You'll need to be more specific Yuya. Do you want to create an online flight club for DCS pilots?

New nVidia Geforce drivers released 270.51 http://downloads.guru3d.com/GeForce-Forceware-270.51-Win-7-Vista-x64-download-2702.html The 270 drivers family is out in the open.. :D Edit: There's another thread already.. didn't see it.. sorry.

or probably hired him

Personally I don't give a rats ass for a DC (done properly or improperly). Right now the scripting system in ME allows for a fixed YET flexible campaign system which is much more advanced than any other sim at this time. A huge step forward for ED is to make a carrier ops sim (properly) with F/A-18C or any other. An F-16C is generally closer to the A-10C "envelope" except for the A2A part. Its also the most probable considering the amount of data released to public, even though AFAIK ED still has to sign contracts to allow more "sensitive" data to reach their hands in order to surpass all previous falcon sim developers and produce it as real as it gets. The A2A part regardless of the next aircraft (because we all know its a US fixed wing FIGHTER) should receive a tremendous upgrade in DCS environment (proper modelling of AMRAAM, Sidewinder, Aim-7 other AAMs and of course the radar and countermeasures which the model will be using).

I've seen the video and they're taking off. Going to Libya possibly.. The hog is the only way to support the rebels. Damn.. no politics :doh::wallbash:

Another one here :joystick:

You do remember that ED needs a contract to sign first before model anything that flies right? Edit: Hey you are newcomer.. don't worry about the attitude. Usually we're very friendly.. Welcome to the forums :D

An F-15E could be 1st of April fool joke.. An F/A-18C is kinda believable and I would never consider F-16C to be April fool joke.

I do have that. It requires the original CBA to work though according to the readme file. Here's the code: "C:\Program Files (x86)\Steam\steamapps\common\arma 2 operation arrowhead\ArmA2OA.exe" -mod=@CBA;@CBA_OA;@mb_rocks;@WarFX-Blastcore;@WarFX-Lighting;@WarFX-SunLight;@WarFX-Tracers I will, thanks for the help everyone.

:lol: It doesn't anymore.

Mine still does

More refueling and carrier ops... No way you're gonna bum us out this time.

Everybody's havin' a good time. ITS A HORNET!!!! :lol: :P

I guess I'll have to buy ArmA2 (original) as well. That'll fix the issue right?

;)

I'm using the WarFX Blastcore mod - Visual Effects (Dusty + MuzzleFlashes & Shell Casings) - Lighting (Takistan & Zargabad have the same lighting as the Desert map) - Sunlight (Removes the sunglare) - Tracers (Updated Tracers) Mikebart's Rocks mod and of course the CBA addon (along with CBA OA version) I'm running ArmA2 OA Standalone Steam version with BAF DLC.

I fixed the CAWeapons3 message thanks to Lordwolf +1. Now, once I'm in the menu GUI I get this message "No entry bin\configbin/CFGworlds.utes" The hell is that? Anyone had that before?

CBA = Extended event handlers??? Didn't know that.. I'll remove that and keep only CBA. Thanks :D I'm using the WarFX mods and a rock mod.. I soon as I finish work I'll post the shortcut launch parameters so you guys can take a look at what I'm doing wrong.

Playing around is a different thing from simulating ;)

I don't care whatever modification or how close to RL they make VRS Superhornet, its still flying in FSX. Comparing 2 aircrafts is a one thing and comparing 2 different simulation engines is another thing. - DCS can simulate true to real life warzone with armor, infantry, gunships, ships, frigates, carriers, bombers, fighter aircraft fighting, destroying, communicating and cooperating with each other. - FSX can simulate almost true to RL airport and airspace Civil traffic environment. One thing I give to FSX here is the fact that air navaids are more advanced from DCS... don't worry, the tide will turn eventually. - A-10C's true to real life simply because the producers and dev team have classified documents and RL pilots provided by U.S. Airforce to help produce the sim by signing contracts. (I wonder how much money both sides paid those lawyers to prepare the contracts) - VRS got info on the superhornet how? I don't think the U.S. Navy is giving away classified material for VRS to simulate their Superhornet without a contract. The fact that RL hornet pilots found it realistic enough doesn't mean much to me. And the graphics.. Yeah FSX graphics are good and the strong area of its looks is the terrain. Can it simulate a real battlefield like DCS?? No.. FSX is an aircraft museum. Mower will take care the rest.. he's a big FSX fan :P:D edit: Even with the Tacpack I don't thing it will make much difference.. only more features to play around with.