M1Combat

Also make sure you try the dynamic campaign generators... The Liberation RC10 is pretty cool...

So they must be using more than one light source??? Watch the 2019 and beyond vid (or maybe 2018 and beyond??) and there are ground based missiles that generate their own light as they fire... Illuminating the ground. Or I don't understand the subject which is quite possible :).

I guess I am... I just think that from your perspective the visibility setting should be tied to the takeoff airfield of the player aircraft. From my perspective that doesn't make sense. It makes more sense to set the visibility based on sea level visibility... so if you need 200M vis for whatever airport you're trying to work with... you set the sea level vis to somewhere lower than that so it's correct at your intended target airfield. It's not super difficult to work that out... and then it makes more sense... what if you have a MP mission or a complex SP mission where you have available planes at multiple airports??? Where should visibility be set then??? At sea level maybe???

I agree with him 100%. What follows is not directed at anyone in particular :)... What the folks who don't agree aren't catching is that it would be a volunteer system. It wouldn't be forced on anyone at all. It would be a choice that allows you to build a pilot in such a way that you would "lose something" if the pilot died. It's not some BS "leveling" system as you suggest. It's a form of investment. Easy come, easy go as it were. The idea proposes that if you've worked for something (your pilot capabilities) then you will take steps to protect it. You will act MORE REALISTICALLY when flying with that pilot. Not less ;) You say you want "realism" but then you just want a full on monster BFM super pilot that's "matched" to all other pilots you come up against and you don't want to worry about how you play the game. --> Ask Lex... :)... Was he worried about losing his "Pilot" throughout his career? I suspect he took great caution in order to not let his pilot be killed and have to start over :). So... Who exactly is asking for more realism? Please understand a concept before you decide you should sweep it under the rug :). Also please understand that in servers where the option is disabled, and in single player if you don't check the box... you will indeed have your maxed out veteran super pilot.

And it shouldn't be anyhow... It makes no sense to reference the weather at a specific airport when building a mission. Maybe when you take off and you ask tower for weather info sure... they'll report relative to that airport and maybe knowing your flight plan they'll tell you other useful info... But when building a mission it SHOULD be reference to Sea Level. No. It shouldn't. Are you saying that if you set the soup layer to 300M thick or 500' vis for an airport at 500' ASL then go to one at 2200' ASL you should still have the same fog? WTH? No man... that's not how it works. The visual effects in DCS may be a bit "sub par" relative to many/most other anythings that have graphics engines made after about 2008 but... Referencing weather relative to the MAP in the mission editor is absolutely 100% certainly for sure the right way to do it.

Please keep in mind that I'm only suggesting that this be implemented in single player, and only as an option. Maybe it could be an option for MP as well... but the player stats would be kept on that specific server. Please continue to read for how this would work. I propose that ED re-work the function of the log book. The logbook would be encrypted such that you can't directly edit it. It could be comprised of multiple files so some could be directly edited if that's deemed necessary (We all enjoy mods...). Maybe even have the non-editable part be stored on ED servers. To get to the point :)... The point would be to lock down the stats side of the log book so that they could be used for at least one specific purpose... Player connection to the sim and the smallest bit of introducing real world consequences. It will have a profound impact on the "feel" of the sim during combat. If any of you have ever played games in "hardcore" mode you know what I'm getting at. There is a very specific tension that is not subtle and is very thrilling when you know that if you make a mistake and die, you have to start over. Google the term "RogueLike" or just try a game like "Path of Exile" in HC mode. How might that actually be accomplished??? By re-developing the progression and tie-ing that progression to subtle benefits that you would lose when you are killed in combat. In our case I feel that the best way to do this would be simply with G-tolerance of your pilot. Kepp in mind... I am only proposing this for single player, or as a server specific option in MP. I propose that you would start a pilot with a generally agreed upon g-tolerance level. I know there are a hundred ways to argue this... like maybe if you start a uruguayan pilot you start with 5 max, and with an Russian pilot you get 8 max to start... but lets not go there :). The progression would be based on kills or flight time since your last death... and you would lose when you are killed in combat is your G-tolerance "experience". So.. You start a pilot and you're given 7.0G tolerance before you start to black out. You then gain very small amounts of g tolerance based on whatever criteria makes sense... like flight time or kills or even awarded medals or something to that effect. Up to a sensible max, that's also used in MP servers where this option isn't enabled. I would propose that the difference between minimum and maximum "Pilot tolerance level" be pretty small. Like maybe .5G at the BOTTOM level, and no difference at the top. Functionally... A "low level" pilot would only have G effect onset at say .5 G lower than an "experienced" pilot... and the top level pilot might see the effect happen a small amount slower as well.. so might be able to pull a similar G level for a slightly longer time. So... what's the point? It's not about competition or "building" a pilot that's beyond human capability. It's simply about starting out as a somewhat inexperienced pilot that will learn the "tricks" of staving off G-effect for slightly longer as they gain experience... then... Losing that as a player if you die in combat. I guarantee it will make you play the game differently and in a much more realistic way if there's ANYTHING real that you'll lose if you die. Keep in mind the actual numbers I've used here are just a suggestion... the actual numbers can be firmed up later...

I think there should be a G tolerance hook based on how many flight hours your logbook pilot has since their last death. Boom. Done. Headed for the wishlist.

I think only the clouds would be nice... All the rest... Nah. It's not done "right". It just looks great from 10K feet. Try in a heli? Yeah...

I just completed the first mission in Nevada of the first serpent's head campaign... When on the last leg of the carrier landing in mission two I dropped it in the drink when I got a phone call. I knew I should have paused it :). Anyhow... I jumped out, ended mission jumped back in and now it says I have to start at the first mission again. I don't want to. Also... I understand this is a standard DCS campaign structure and many campaigns do this. So... There wouldn't happen to be versions of the BOTH Serpent's head campaigns that let you retry missions without having to go back to the mission before if you fail the current one?

As I understand it's a system designed to create missions all on it's own in the context of a full dynamic campaign... So having your own missions to insert would be somewhat redundant. It's like a mission generator that does so with an entire military conflict used as the basis, and your successes and failures in performing the missions you accept will affect the progression of the military conflict. Also... I would imagine it's not replacing the Mission Editor at all. It will be it's own separate entry on the right hand side of the main menu I would guess... Right along side of instant action, campaign, Multi-player etc...

Thumbs up. Would be a SUPER good map for all kinds of things.

How bout now?

I’d really prefer the F-4S

On an SSD? If not try Chkdsk on the drive it's installed on. Try renaming the folder where it's installed... then re-install. I know you've reinstalled but it likely installed to the same part of the drive and it "might" have issues. Less likely with an SSD though. Copy your saved games DCS folder to another location before you re-install. Try adding a hangar mod so there's a different scene when it boots.

It would be pretty awesome to have this...

There's isn't a system out there that does this. I mean it clearly depends on your definition of "reasonable" :)... My system does this for me... but only with flat shadows and one step below max view range. No other super good stuff turned on (SSLR etc...). Plenty of regular stuff turned on... Like high textures/water/AF/trees/smoke/etc... It's easy... turn off the heavy hitters... turn on the easy stuff... crank up the MSAA/PD until you get to acceptable frame time. To me... it looks pretty good. It can be better with cockpit shadows, ground shadows etc... sure... but the immersion of VR is a trade off you have to make.

Is it maybe the lenses in the headset producing something like godrays? Which headset? Does the glow get worse as it gets closer to the edge of the lense/field of view, but not as bad near the center?

Nice Barthek... Nice...

Interesting... I feel lik eit used to load it up and then close the file immediately so you could make damn near real time edits... I mean you'd have to go through your export workflow and all that but then you'd just hit refresh in the viewer and bam... good to go :).

Stop making fun of people who have English as a second language Zhukov. It makes you look dumber than you make them look... And it makes you look rude to boot. Be nice.

Didn't you and I just have this discussion in another thread? There are ?seven? (I think that was the number... not going to go look them up again) released modern jets. Not including the SU25 or A10 or anything in EA or WWII birds... Not 1. Seven. If it was you I replied to in the other thread and corrected you... please stop lying to people :). If it wasn't you... Well, now you know :).

Maybe.

Isn't the earth actually flat in DCS??? Or did they fix that with the new terrain engine with like 2.2 and Nevada/new Caucasus a while back?

I'm pretty sure the bit isn't ever going to fail for the FCS anyhow... Unless you turn on random failures then maybe like once in your life? That said... I'm pretty sure that they're just talking about the animation of the control surfaces during the BIT... like with the F/18. You run the FCS Bit and without the stick flailing about in the cockpit... the surfaces test themselves. I'm thinking that the 16 does the same thing... but they just don't have the surfaces "logically" hooked to the requests of the BIT at the moment... so you don't see the surfaces move when the BIT is happening. Way to assume all sorts of negative stuff with no base there man :). Chill out dude :). I mean yeah... I'm assuming all sorts of positive stuff in the same way :)... but I'll bet I'm right :). "basic avionics functionality that should have been there at launch" Ehh... It hasn't launched yet sir. If you've purchased the 16 then it was stated all over the place during your purchase that this was "Early Access". As far as actual priorities... Yeah I agree with you :). But... ED has done it your way in the past generally and they constantly get flamed for not implementing some neat feature that the average folks who just do ME missions starting at bandit's 6 want... So... Now ED gives everyone a vote. I'm from America and even I know that's not always the best path to the most optimal situation :). People have to be "informed" for that to work :). They mostly aren't though... They vote based on shiny, pretty and neat... in that order as far as I can tell :).

I don't really fly the 16 much so I just put.. Cockpit View Pilot Model, Landing and takeoff handling tuning, Travel Pod, Animated Tail Hook and Air Show Smoke Pods as most important so I don't mess with the importance level of other stuff... I'm just kidding I didn't do that :). I didn't answer any of them because I don't fly it enough to know what's both "actually useful" and "missing" :). ;)