Slaunyeh

Stalking e-bay, waiting for BS, waiting for 1946 be released in my country. Conquering the world in MTW II, working like an ox to escape from a downsizing, studying like a monk.

You never tryed a cobra in a K-50 ? Ho my so poor of you .:D

The usual nicy but drawny.... more polgon won t do any good until light and colors are modified.

Indeed, FBW can be "reduced" but not disabled. I think there s another disable for limited timefor an "if" fbw cannot trult acess the real situation.

Indeed awesome pics.

Army prefer .. cheaper.. " Remember, your weapon come always from the lowest bid" - unknow Infantry quote.

hehehe Dowhat i did buy a REVELL, a 1/32 or 1/24, and assemble it with care, it´ll take you hours and you ll be proud of the results.:thumbup: Unfortunatly in my country i only found a 1/48:noexpression:, i ll post it when ready. Or buy a RCS :D Cheers

Yeah, well... afaik BS is much better in look and performance... unfortunatly it seems to loose in maintainance costs, and combat repair readiness. This last seem a weak argument since usually, a hurt helicopter never reach the base, pilots want to land as quick as possible, due to low survive rates on helo crashes.

Men this mi 28 is probably the uggliest attack helcopter ever designed... Looks like " ho hell we´ve forgot that where can we put it now" there's! seem to have enought place.

What about a more realistic model for ground/air explosions. There is a pletora of video of armament test, real explosions taped in real battles. Nothing ingame ever seem to look at least a bit near what we see in the footages. Usually game effects looks more like bollywood explosion, dramatic to the comic and absolutely unconvincing, why push programers and hardware when reality is much more simple. Lot of sudden dust/smoke, few flames, almost no bilowing ones same for fuel tank, this when the explosion doesn t blow the flames out.

Impressive, i hope this is incremental, and related to the hit zone and not some you got X% damage this appear....you got XY% damage you got visually X+Y. I have still have faith....

I envy you all that are able to have a little taste of it beforehand.

Which one you guys think will be best ? and why ? I m tired of loosy fps, and AAO doesn tfit the bill anymore, maps too tiny.

Will DCS damage modeling get near what we see in Il2 ? Or will ot only be a skinned version of the Lomac weak damage modelling ?

Im always skeptical about 3d glasses.... Once you have them on, your unable to see keyboard. Since we need keyboard on sims (unless you can virtualy activate switches in a virtual cockpit) i m not sure they represent much. But maybe in fps if they are quick enought.

Game and makeup are 2 diferent things... As far as things are we can only see the make up.

Sincerely i don t care about graphics. I really dont give a damn about the improvement shown on the 2 apaches. I don tsee much diference on the rivers too, gamewise speaking. This is good for movie makers. Now if i had to choose vehicle modelling (air-sea-ground) and food low terrain for an helicopter sim, i ll choose the second without a tought. Since 3d modelling of the vehicle has been 3rd partyed, why buildings etc trees couldn't, and so on ? And between these two and a scenario that have believable collision i choose the last one, and sent the 2 options above to hell. Why? Because 99% of the time you won t be the modellings near enought to make any diference. This is good only for movie makers. Gamewise its one of the less important issues. Graphics are updatable over time. Game engine mostly not. I am extremely disapointed with BS being a new title. More so by the fact DCS:BS doesn t even have a dinamyc campaign, not even something near 1995 title DID EF2000. IMO it is lame that the company call it battle simulator, unfortunatly falcon 4 as released in 1998 can claim this title with more reason than DCS:BS in its finals feature, at least the ones proposed at this point. Damn, even even ef2000 is above any canned mission game, no matter how beautifull it is. Battle simulator ? Marketing only. As for LOMAC update, i find it extremely LAME that ED havent even proposed to pay for the fixes. As much there would be some people bitchg, the majority would pay it gladly, me included. Anyone know how much fixes can be hard to do. Now someone could claim that i should see this as a payd upgrade. But with the loss of so much, its impossible. This is business some would claim, i agree. But it could have been handled in a more honest way toward the "fan" base. Its plainly understandable that more than one feel backstabed, no matter how good DCS:BS will be.

I just posted on his Orkut, saying we where quite laughting at him for stealing others job.

Now isn t apache a 2 sitter ? This mean we ll need to be 2 to fly ? How will this be managed ? Well if 2 seaters are really a go, i prefer a hundred time the f14 than lousy f18. And hind from apache. If we are to guess something, i ll bet (and guess upon state): ka 50 (doing/done) X apache (??) A10 (doing/done) X t25 (done/raise lvl to ka50 detailing) i can guess SU33 (done/raise lvl to ka50 detailing) X f18 are the next. F16 is nice but make no sense in the counterweight approach ED always took. But i guess this can radicaly change if they are approached by others military contracts. (but even those two are a guess. 2010 is a too long guess for BTS, since game (whatever they are) is usualy no more than 3 years. I guess by then will be in another lomac -> BTS switch and people will be pissed/hoping again. Actually i'm very happy if 33 is taken to KA 50 accuracy lvl. But i would be happyer if it comes wich su 35. There s a lot of differences but mainly internal not so external or FM. And we d have much less payload as pilots.

2010 ?

I wonder if all those people hadn t their licences timed out. :lol:

And the cook mood...

To remain on the 90 years pack, HIND, SU 30/33 , F14, f16

KA50 ETA 2125 with possibility to early realease. At least this way if it comes earlyer like 2008 you ll be extremely happy.

Weapon with cameras already exist, but they seem to have a long caacity and are usually accoupled like a 203. I ґrmember seeing soldiers in GW2 with them, but they didnґt seem to have anything linked to theyr equipment. I donґt think they were actually used as project landwarrior... yet. It would be a good way to review operational action, control cop suspect of not so lawfull actions ..couple them to their weapons and add a double trigger... first stage initiate camera second the normal shooting. Weapons donґt have to be heavy, there are tinny camera today.