Legolasindar

The AH-64A/D does not exist, only AH-64A without radar and AH-64D with the radar Longbow

Great video, see the great immersion producing interactive cabin and operation of all complex systems of the avionics is phenomenal. You are doing great work, both developers and beta-testers. I look forward to the video of the sensors and next of weapons.

SAR4 and SAR4 medevac not run correct at my. Only recognice CH Pro Pedals, not Cougar, apply patch 1.00 and same problem. I search in internet and SAR4 not able to recognize mutiples inputs, OMG, this is sim? You have any solution for recognice my Joy Throttle Pedals? Thanks

AH-64D Apache Longbow

Pay for a demo? yes yes, i pay Lockon :music_whistling: the full release is DCS:BS true?

http://www.cruzdesanandres.com/articulos/SistemasAAA.pdf <-- Sorry in Spanish.

Thanks EvilBivol-1, that is essentially what we asked. Are there plans for a future add AI soldiers as part of destructible vehicles? Do ie Crew? So that, for example, can destroy an artillery piece with bullets fired to soldiers, and not only with bombs or missiles? Maybe in the future game engine? Thanks.

You are talking about one thing and I another. You are talking about complex reactions of the soldiers AI, and I only speak to consider the soldiers AI as a part of most vehicles, which can be damaged, as well as to include soldiers as AI units, like vehicles, it is not need to act in complex ways. Do I am speaking in English so badly, that I am not able to understand my post?

First, my English is very bad and that is why I am speaking as best I can, so some mocking comments is not always a wise option. Still on the subject, is part of what shamandgg said. I am bored with having to kill a piece of artillery with a bomb when a simple burst of cannon could kill the soldiers that handle, that's what I mean. When trying to remove a vehicle enemy we have two possibilities, damaging the vehicle or kill their soldiers. Besides always attacking armoured formations, but that simulators attack formations of infantry? I am not asking to be filled in a fire or throw grenades, or ask a doctor, I talk about how our interacts Ka-50 against enemy soldiers.

Will BS use of a realistic infantry? (I am not talking about ability shootem'up) The simulators always based action to destroy enemy vehicles, tanks, cars, ships, artillery pieces, trucks, etc. ... But never include infantry as a goal, and in the few cases that if they do so very simple. But really all those vehicles not function without their crews. Take, for example, a patrol at any simulator the only way to end that threat would completely destroy the boat, seeing how exploits, when really only shoot with the barrel with conventional ammunition could kill any soldiers ship. On the battlefield not only fighting armoured vehicles, also face platoons of soldiers, which are the most important goal, because those are really fighting, either as infantry, or inside vehicles, such as tanks or aircraft. That is why we would like to know whether BS intends to use more advanced infantry?. As platoons on foot, as a crew vehicle land, sea and air. Sorry for my english.

The texture of terrain is very cool.

and other. http://www.go-l.com/home/index.htm

New video, BS play with train. Sorry if this video had already been published but I would not have seen our forums.

Periferical vision. One option. Two option. http://www.ionlitio.com/images/2006/09/fs2002_02.jpg No perfect but...:music_whistling:

Gracias amalahama. Amalahama Thank you for that clarification, with the translation did not understand that it was a joke, in part because apparently it translates poorly :) That certainly is the translator of Google. And so it seems from Spanish to English well, but from English to Spanish as the Google translates quite wrong. :( And now another bad joke ;) What tells one death to other? -- Would you like wormys?

My English is very bad and I have to use a translator to talk online. As if that was not my phrase is understood to be wrong, or I have misunderstood his. I said that to me, the tags are never a solution, and it would be good to explore alternative methods, what you say that if I am going to go? What if I am going to leave? Or the online translator translates poorly or not because I understand that answer. So I include in my own language if someone can tell the misunderstanding CASTELLANO Mi ingles es muy malo y debo usar un traductor en linea para conversar. Por lo que no se si mi frase se entiende de manera errónea, o yo he entendido mal la suya. Yo he dicho que para mi, las etiquetas nunca son una solución, y que sería buena explorar métodos alternativos, ¿y tu dices que si yo me voy a ir? ¿que si los voy a abandonar? O el traductor en linea lo traduce mal o no entiendo porque esa contestación. También lo incluyo en mi idioma por si alguien puede indicarme el malentendido.

The labels are never a realistic option, and only be used for training and practice. If it is true that the images in two dimensions offered by computer screens very difficult vision, there is no perception of depth, there is no perception of movement (2D images, the screen is flat), the scale of everything is very small . Yet the labels are never the solution. Alternatives should be explored.

Oh sorry, Silver_Dragon spoke Spanish and I forgot that these forums are speaking English.:P Repeat in english:music_whistling: It said that I sounded your name, do not you of your Escuadron 111? Furthermore, I believe that if we met at the campus in 2005, I am Viper, we sat 2 or 3 seats to my left XD

Ya decia que me sonaba tu nombre, ¿tu no eres del Escuadron 111? Es mas, si creo que nos conocimos en la campus del 2005, yo soy Viper, te sentabas 2 o 3 puestos a mi izquierda XD

I suppose because having opposing aircraft will be playing missions encountered online, and because this is pleased to supporters of western and eastern planes.

The BS will come with various profiles for different peripherals control of the market?, Talked mostly clear of Saitek and TM (including the magnificent Cougar). It is always much better to adapt a decent profile to make a new one from scratch. He inevitable, the many profiles I used to different simulators, created by different people, some better than others, there is only one that did not have to change anything, it was that of Jonas "Stalker" Johnsson for the Forgotten Battles. In the other always had to change something, but were not enough. So although it is difficult that we do not have to modify a profile already established, is a great help to have already created a profile only have to adapt to our needs. And now that I am with the subject, but none of the developers will see it, to thank all those who spent some time in their lives to create a profile for a simulator, and publish it for the enjoyment of all, because I have done a lot flights easier and rewarding.

I had read that at the moment we could not collide with the trees, then that if, in the end I am not quite clear whether the aircraft can and weapons colliding with trees, and if it affects the vision of the enemies (besides ours of course). Thanks and sorry for my english.

See this post. We talk about it. http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=27515

Interesting.

I do not want to confuse the focus of my question. Therefore attempts to clarify if possible. What I say is that if you make a simulator for Ka50, another A-10, another Apache, etc. .. There is also the possibility of making another eg M1A1 Abrams, another Rangers, etc. .. I mean that the issue is not the level of complexity of AI in the series DCS, the question is about manageable units that are not air.