RvEYoda

What you need in that case is a full users manual, something I really don't have time for. Maybe when I get time to release Leavu/ERI 2.1 I may release such a manual. I really don't agree with this. It is nothing personal towards you Crunch, but I must not do anything. I provided those who enjoy this program a free immersion enhancement tool for the game. This does not require an explanation or excuse. Those features you listed there will likely not be completely true for the 2.1 version, and thus I am reluctant to release detailed specifics about each feature. The overview I listed was a simple overview of the program's functionality. In all honesty there is not enough time or space here to go over the full features to every new user. Again, this is not meant as anything personal towards you Crunch, but I feel this needs to be said. From now on: See signature.

It isn't connected to awacs or GPS. FDL and INS only, and remember the current version isnt final by any means. 2.1 will be final. Like stated, some servers like to enforce the vanilla setup for various reasons, so make a backup. Current version lets you see: Your payload screen on second monitor. Your waypoints on second monitor. Your radar screen on second monitor. Export your TEWS/RWR to a secondary monitor Your Wingmen and what their radars have detected on second monitor. (FDL for those that have explicitly connected to the same datalink network)

Target step, maybe you are familiar with it from the falcon4 series?

Indeed it is an ERI master arm default key, numpad 2.You can change it or disable it entirely in the eri_radar.lua. If you want to see if Master Arm is on or not in the game, look at the MPCD in BVR or CAC mode, if there is a box around [COOL] then master arm is ON! If there is no box 'COOL', then master arm is off. There will be documentation when the official/final version of ERI is released. Right now the versions out are basically a mix of development versions Oh and btw, ERI master arm capability will likely be default disabled in the final version, seems like too many people are having issues with it.

Here is my idea of missiles in 2.0

I think this is also an issue in SP, does it happen for you when you shoot down someone in single player? (it does for me) I think something like this. 1. Player gets killed 2. Major local stutter due to things being loaded in some inefficient way 3. Lack of network transmissions from "all clients" during "2", since they are stuck in the stutter 4. Because "2" is of different size on each computer, the people with fast computers will see the slow computer guys warping - Just my theory

You should write "Flight model performance of aircraft X is too high in regiemes ... kts to ... kts, to reproduce fly ... kts and make a sustained turn." One sentence, easy to test, very easy to fix. You cannot solve a problem if you don't know where it is. For example : 1. Something seems fishy 2. Find where the problem is or what conditions can cause it to be reproduced 3. Solve it If you cannot find "2" you can _never_ solve "3" properly. I test as much as is reasonably possible without killing myself. I've spent several hours daily on this project tryin to iron out as many issues as I possible could find and improve on.

This is wht you told me to do, and you can talk to Fusion about that if you want. It has nothing to do with GG. If you are tester for some product and you say "something is wrong, I can feel it", then they won't change anything. I cannot go in somewhere and say "something is wrong". Well tough luck the program is 1 million code lines long and we cannot scan every letter for it. In fact the testers dont even have access to the code, only the devs do. It's like you build a billion dollar cruise ship "something is wrong"..oh....what is it? Too much space too look through. Must be more specific. Trust is not wrong AS. Drag in certain regiemes were wrong. Because you were specific "this is wrong", it was possible to test, and verify a bug, which is now to be fixed.

AS both you and me know this is not what happened. 1. You told me there is something wrong 2. I asked you what 3. you told me "test this this and this" 4. We tested these regiemed together, you and me on ventrilo, and it and it matched real data. Then later on, a different flight model regieme was tested - reported by another user. (we cannot test for 48 hours straight, we are doing this for free. We are testing this because we want improvements.) All tester groups for all games require straight forward specific reports, with specific instructions on what part of the game must be tested. We all test our best and I sure tested the best I ever could do given your description. What was wrong at the end? - Drag was curves were wrong. Nothing about the engines actually. If somebody says "engines are wrong", we dont automatically fly at 50.000 ft at mach 3. We must know what conditions the stuff is wrong at. Otherwise there would be only 1 bug fix for an entire game and 1 gazillion other bugs left behind.

The UserInterface.dll crash has happened for us without any 6dof mod I belive. Also without/before servman

nono, that IS leavu2 you have there. The next version is 2.1 :). - bug fixes - performance fixes - realism fixes

Thanks for reporting! More people getting the userinterface.dll bug please write here! Did you remember what you did when it happened? we are trying to find out the exact cause of the bug.

I will not say "based on this" or "based on that" before I have decided on any implementation and have understood how this works. When that is done there will be links. Right now I am leaning towards removing it all- together, because we do not have access to modify the correct systems needed for the passive ranging. I will get back to this.

I also get Userinterface.dll crash without such mods, it has nothing to do with the graphics mod. However the d3d..dll crash definitely is very likely related to that mod there. AS has had the same crash (Userinterface.dll) quite frequently

I belive we did put in a new report for it. Unfortunately from what I know the effect of "round nose" is hard coded in the game, however one could remove the "round nose" state entirely through lua and just slightly increase the drag compared to the ER. However we'd need some range graphs, preferably from flight manuals to indicate exactly how much the round nose should change things. Even then, it would be up to the devs to decide if it should be changed or not

Nothing aimed towards you personally, just kind of a preemptive statement to some people. ;)

It's not classified info, but a lot of people providing input into both lockon/falcon and mods are professionals who don't wish to get attention, even though they are just releasing unclassified documents. We should respect that and be thankful that they are willing to help.

I'll let him reveal himself if he wants to. Once the decision on what/how/if to implement eccm ranging in leavu+eri 2.1 has been made, then I will write what sources the decisions were based on, and if he wishes, the person who provided some of them may write here. I think we can make some really cool ranging with this :)

Currently getting some interesting information from a good source about ecm ranging. Very interesting. Will definitely look it over before 2.1 comes out. I will explain later. Looks like both sides of this debate have been wrong :P

Just so it's clear, this is the old ranging which is too accurate. The new algorithm (which will be released in leavu+eri 2.1) will not give you such a precise ranging unless you scan him with the proper LOS changes for about 30 seconds or more.

Test outside the sim first if they work there

For now you can do it by creating a frameless MFD and navigating it with keybindings. Maybe in a later version we could make it standalone.

Linux doesn't use dll files. You need to download the runtime .so libraries for JOGL if you're using linux

Planned news in Leavu+ERI 2.1 - Single installation pack: ERI and Leavu are bundled together from now on - Flight datalink update rate based on number of network participants - ECCM ranging realism improved, depending on time spent ranging and the relation of velocity vectors between you and your target - Consisent rws/tws hsd representations - small bug fixes - code and performance improvements ------------------------- Small explanation on how to use ECCM ranging: To achieve a consistent ranging solution, you need to scan the target frequently and make sure he is not mirroring your motion or flying parrallel to your own flight direction. Example1: Flying straight towards each other will never achieve a ranging solution Example2: Both beaming will never achieve a ranging solution Example3: A cranking attacker vs a straight head on flying target will achieve a ranging solution The ranging solution gets updated every time the target is scanned, but the visual representation updates take at least 5 seconds. Each radar update may either improve or deteriorate the overall ranging solution, depending on how well the conditions above are met. To ensure a good ranging solution, unpredictable cranking and high aspect maneuvers should be used for about 25-40 seconds. It can take longer to achieve a rangingsolution depending on how "willing" your target is :) Scanning a target too slowly will slowly break any already achieved ranging solution or simply never achieve one. Wide scan RWS/TWS in F-15 will not give a ranging solution. You must either use the narrow scan or even better, go stt on him. If you stop scanning a target for a while and them come back to him, your solution will likely be completely broken. NOTE: An inacurrate ingame ranging solution will appear after shorter than 25-40 seconds mentioned above, however it will not be very usful until the full 25-40 seconds have been reached, you will be able to see it improving over time. There is no point in displaying the ranging already from the start because it would be annoying when your radar starts dancing all over the place. -->Remember, the ranging starts when you detect him and scan him fast enough, NOT when you lock him stt.<--

Currently no. Maybe for a later project. if you want to you can use netbeans to checkout the source code and edit the default position?....not that handy, but it works ;) Maybe it will be in leavu2.1, but that is for after the weekend to see.