Flanker15

I used to play this rather primitive flight sim in the early 90s on my old computer from the 80s. It was a shooting sim, you had MGs (shoots red circles) cannon (shoots bigger, slower circles) and rockets (shoots little 3d models). You were in a plane (I don't know what) and start in the air over a green plain with blue sky. There are lots of things around to shoot, all of them were non descript shapes and objects (one looked like a lawn mower!). It sort of seemed like a demo version because there wasn't much to do other than shoot the things around, I never checked the name of it and have never seen it since. Does anyone know what I'm thinking of, its graphics level was sort of FS1 or 2 perhapse better.

Perhapse a "target of opp" check would work? Where when 2 units not ordered to attack each other, see each other they have a check to see if one will engage the other. With modifiers for distance so at long range it will almost never happen, maybe other modifiers for unit experience and unit types? A green pilot in a fighter is more likely to chase after a transport chopper, then a vet pilot. Or a fighter would be more likely to chase after a bomber than another fighter.

Seen some co-op vids but are there any good vids of Ka-50s fighting each other? Thanks!

Yes the overhaul would be where this kind of thing would happen, the engine was designed for A2A damage models mainly. Oh and does A.C.E. do all that, I should try it one day.

But I think it's safe to assume the AH-1s were above or level with the Mi-24s. Firing TOWs and other slow ATGMs against gravity drops the missile range off sharply.

I don't think a single weapon on a ground vehicle is able to use different ammo at the moment, so that could be it. Also the 100mm is generally loaded with only programable HE shells so it might only use them against light targets.

The main objective of the Windows 7 "update" I would imagine is to get rid of the Vista title and the stigma attached to it.

The damage model isn't that complex for ground units yet, damage is the same all round. Since the front turret plates on those tanks can stop a Vikhr I guess they decided 2 shots to balance it out. I'd prefer one missile though since everywhere else on the tank is vulnerable to Vikhrs, the chance of hitting the front turret plates is low and non existent from the side or rear.

Improved Multi-core support for XP?

Is the A-10A still going ahead or has it all been switched to the A-10C now?

Did some looking around and found that Russian and British SABOT shells have tracers in them aswell. Might aswell just give all the tanks tracers for their main guns then.

From my experience, APFSDS is tracer and HEAT isn't. That's the M1 and Leo (the shoot the same shell anyway) I do not have infos on Soviet shells or rifled 120mm shells that challenger tanks use.

I reckon this is one of the most bizzar Vista developments. Something that works better in Vista, who'd expect that? Should tell MS so they can put it on their website.

With the current simple damage system for ground units you can't target precise weak points on tanks so yeah the 30mm won't work. There are a few spots that the cannon would kockout a M1A2 in real life but not in the game. It proably won't work very well against Bradley armor either, atleast not the front.

The arguments I'd have for allowing A2A on choppers would be: -The Vikhr seems unreliable and overly complex to engage other helicopters and you might want to save them for tanks. People on the forum seem to go with the cannon instead. -They don't have A2A missiles in real life because there's no need for them as helicopters never run into other helicopters any more. So the work to get them to work wouldn't be justified. However in BS it is a fictional setting where they do run into each other so the work to install them may have gone ahead. -I'm not sure but isn't the Igla just a system where you point at the enemy helcopter and shoot, then the missile does the rest, no complex hud or targeting systems required? -Just to have the option there so that people who want to have them can have them in their own missions.

Have you got the missile on the right target setting? You have to tell it to explode infront or behind the target for A2A.

Damn global warming! :ranting:

Wasn't M1TP3 going to be like that, it was going to work with Gunship! multiplayer but then the game got scrapped.

It was true when I had it about half a year ago, it wouldn't run most of my games (the older ones), took a huge chunk out of my performance and basically said "I don't think you should do that" every 10 seconds. I think the last straw was when it basically went: "Sorry Dave I can't let you do that" when I tried to run an unverrified program. I might give it another shot if the UAC and DRM have been removed (have they)? Might aswell wait for Windows 7 though. I'll probably try duel booting it for BS though.

I guess the only way is to make a detailed study of the mission plan and memorise the opertating areas of all friendlies. Just hope no one is out of area (including you!). That ordering your wingman to fire on them to test IFF is a pretty good "cheat" though, ED should patch that out.

You can do it but it won't give you any boost, atleast no one has reported a boost with XP yet.

Edit. I got muddled, your doing it right.

You can set the affinity to use all of a multicore processor in DCS, but it only works in Vista (due to an interesting coincidence in how Vista manges cores). This is unintentional on the devs part but may or may not give you a boost in performance. Unless you don't play any other game or do anything else with your comp, it's probably not worth upgrading to the horror of Vista (it makes DCS run better but will make everything else run worse and drive you insane, as it did for me until reinstalled XP!). I eagerly await true multi-core support, which will give a larger performance boost to all OS's. If you have Vista and want to try it, start the game then alt-tab out and go to the process explorer. There is an option to set the core affinaty for processes.

Yes that's correct, 2 shots then you have to reload by turning the turret off at an odd angle so the launcher is over the rear compartment roof hatch. Then someone has to manually load another 2 shots. You also do have to fire from a stationary deployed posistion, which requires some time to extend the launcher and driving around with the launcher deployed is big no-no too! You also can't fire them over water or around trees and as you increase the elevation you're aiming over 0o the max range sharply drops. Alternativly you have the wireless laser controlled AT-11 fired from T-72/T-90s which has none of these restrictions and travels at a higher velocity. Also you can jam TOW missiles like all IR controlled SACLOS missiles, the Russians have IR jammers on their tanks sometimes and the USMC sticks them on their M1A1s (little box mounted on the front left of the turret roof, the Russian jammer is the very obvious "eyes" on the T-90). They just send out a IR strobe which messes with the guidence computer in the launcher (it can't determine the missiles location in relation to the crosshair), sending the missile off in some random direction. Ofcourse they don't work on laser controlled missiles. (Important to note these jammers are different than IR seeker missle jammers, which blind the IR seeker head on the missile.) With cannister rounds, they are pretty ineffective against helicopters. In SB you need to be very (too) close to hit a chopper with one and then the little balls will generally bounce off. Don't know about larger fletchet shells, but I would definatly choose a MPAT or another airburst shell over one (SABOT works well too!).

Run over and take the uniform of one of the BMP crew then lie on the ground next to it. Might work?