Bogey Jammer

Weird, that F-14 left me a little bitter taste in my mouth.

RaTzo, why so serious ? are you loosing money ? Well, people here are just asking if theirs has been well spend that's all…

Not normal at all but known behavior. F-18 is not affected.

You can try to remove the gradient effect into the texture file [DCS install directory]\Mods\aircraft\F14\Cockpit\Resources\IndicationTextures\HUD_Elements.tga There is no alpha channel to tweak so that may be located in some script file. But I don't have enough time to check this. Anyway it's an old tech HUD, supposed to be barely readable IRL. However I can read it just fine with my rift CV1.

Well, when you try to work something up to help somebody, and that somebody refuses to implement it, human nature dictates to be fed up.

Well those people including me have paid… The issue is not the lack or not of transparency. The problem is that the stuff is not yet delivered. When people starts to ask news, that's because the expected product is going to be awaited for too long. It's exacerbated if it's radio silence from the devs. People are starting to worry and get nervous. Something's fishy. Now the devs have told the truth. Being grateful or not is irrelevant. The point is the result matches worries about the development status. Yeah thanks ED to be transparent but that transparency cannot repair the current DCS situation, and that's what people are focusing on. At least we can blame 2.5.6 for this :D

I don't want to wait another year for getting the F-14A

I would not like to be the texture guy for that landing gear

Technically, what prevents the F-14 to be interfaced ? I thought that it could have been an aircraft dimensions difference only.

That's a very cool move. Finally an opportunity to test drive all those virtual machines.

I'm still waiting for the A before buying it. Yes, the wait is a torture.

About the gun dispersion reduction : Why the aircraft affected are 100% murrican ?

Well, if the purpose of the monthly fee is for the full dynamism engine development, I understand, but the initial semi-dynamic capabilities are awesome already from a single player view like mine. On top of that it seems very enjoyable already despite being developped in *just* 6 months… But I fear the real cost would be more than 1€ honestly.

Excellent idea, but a monthly fee, sorry I pass. I go back to try to make my own dynamic campaign engine ;)

What's wrong with you guys ? HB announced nothing exclusive there :doh:

Jealousy. Anyway the best is to wait a couple of days after release to watch the drama first, then to collect more reviews to reduce the average bias of opinions.

Just quickly set a scenario with a MiG-29S VS any AIM-120 launcher aircraft, record and watch the results with Tacview. 5 minutes effort.

From himself. Since he uses google's translator, he probably posted the original text just in case. The паранойи word couldn't be coincidentally used everywhere…

So in the end, RAZBAM will not do it ?

The general audience uses the stable version. Only people willing to help by finding bugs should use the open beta version. It has been officially stated that the open beta version is not for everyone. If feature greedy consumers really want to stay on open beta, better to watch the forums a couple of days after the release of the last version before upgrade. Sometimes, a bug ridden beta version release is necessary to gather mandatory feedback at that point.

Hello Wags, why not stick to a fixed official target value which would serve as a solid base for lighting development ? Also, as a suggestion, I remember that some games use some sort of quick calibration method consisting to make almost disappear a dark square on black background to visually set the intended gamma result independently from any user's display device gamma setting, originally "calibrated" or not.

This is the most hilarious DCS bug ever

hovring is the viper2097 of M3 :megalol: