sirscorpion

I would add APKWS, and DMT sidewinder slave

I kinda agree with you, the AV8b gets it to the line for me alone. prolly the other selling point for me is the Hot spot tracker "which i heard nothing about so far" and the Aim9 slave and JDAMs" all of which will come in due time but an update on the final cut is always nice. I think a small update on the planned list for the AV8 will reduce the "finish this first" crowed

From what i gather ED said they wont do it "saw it on hoggit" but i am sure there is a quote that the APKWS wont be coming to the FA18c as its the navy one that is being modeled. In regards to how easy it is to make, I would say the weapon already in game "S-25L", KH29L, AGM65E all operate in the same way, only thing that needs to be modified the the 3D model and use the Hydra HE M151 FM. The APKWS should in theory be able to deal with anything up to a T55, so in an online target set, having that much PGMs with that light wight package is significant. most targets are light armor "10mm steel to 30mm aluminium for IFV" and soft skin which the M151 warhead can easily deal with. it is IMO a very huge selling point. This is the post that sold me on the AV8, sure it was under consideration but technically speaking should be easy to do. I am not sure if the new weapon API allows Lock on after launch, but thats a small technical issue that can be solved down the line https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?p=3136637#post3136637

is there any updates on the APKWS? this is really one of the major reasons why i got the AV8, such an important weapon for Mplayer.

I would love this as well, and yep its after a hot rearm "basically i think it just gives u a cold pod"

Disappointing, a step back, total disconnect with the customer base, I honestly have no words.

Honestly if they do add all of those areas even with lower detail in buildings and so on, just higher res ground texture this map will beat the Caucasus for the standard Mplayer map

currently the map is missing some major Airbases and airports even in the "detailed areas". But i assume those will be added. For a wish list I hope we get Airbases further out "even if temporary copy paste" ones in Qatar, Bahrain, North western Iran, and Saudi Arabia. As long as they int he location of their real counter parts. This is important for Mplayer so that we do not see a repeat of NTTR online.

Posted this in another threat but those are also missing "red arrows". The one i forgot to add is Abu Dhabi international & Ras Al Khaimah International Airport but those are both civil https://www.google.ae/maps/@24.28214.../data=!3m1!1e3 https://www.google.ae/maps/@24.25373.../data=!3m1!1e3 https://www.google.ae/maps/@22.77816.../data=!3m1!1e3 https://www.google.ae/maps/@23.64690.../data=!3m1!1e3 https://www.google.ae/maps/@23.64690.../data=!3m1!1e3

Su-24M "Fencer-D" Panavia Tornado GR.4 Those should be DCS level as the information is there and they are older air frames, all the others are ok As FC3/4 level.

Point tracking and Area tracking should not have any effect on the missile performance as it needs to track the laser spot despite it being on a point/area. At the moment the point track "and you are right it works well 80%ish with point track under 9nm, the missile should have a range grater than 12nm depending on alt and weather" But that seems to indicate a gamy solution and not an actual simulation to how Laser tracking works. Other issue it seems there is phantom laser spots that do not go away even if the designating aircraft is gone.

I am about 80% sure the TGP laser is bugged at the moment. Just done with 3 hrs of testing on the new map. with a few findings 1. Laser wont track unless its in point track mode. Area track seems to be 50:50 if will track or not. 2. Laser spot will some times be stuck even if the laser user is not there any more, it happen a few times when the designation aircraft was shot down while the laser was on. It created what we suspect to be a permanent laser spot. 3. Laser will lock a random fast moving object we call it the UFO, it will be no where close to the spot. we where only able to notice that using scope on the 65E. 4. Laser will some times spot the lasing aircraft, even if it has clear LOS on the target "we had 10 out of 30 GBU12 drops from a M2k trying to chase the lasing AV8b" 5. Laser does not appear to work with any consistency over 10nm, we got some shots on target if you lase at under 10nm and drag it to 13nm "ish" but I would say that was about 10% of the time with GBU12, with the 65E the missile will self distruct or turn randomly chasing another gohst laser spot. From some of the guys that fly the A10c "i dont" they said that this bug was around before in 1.5 with the same strange stuff going on. I hope this gets fixed, the inconsistency with laser in Mplayer is frustrating, of the top of my head 30% hits,30% did not track at all, 30% chased a phantom laser spots or the aircraft thats lasing even if lasing aircraft is not even remotely in the FOV of the GBU/65E, I am talking about doing 90 degree turns and pitching up. we had about a 20% chance for the menue to bug out on the 65E "aka it wont uncage" so you have to turn on and off the pylons and the TGP to get it to work and even then its not 100% sure to work. we did a few server restarts, ping was decent 130ms max, and a few client restarts Edit "This was Purely a test for Buddy lasing", Self lasing works about 90% of the time

Multiplayer performance, Lack of Redfor, MissileFM/explosion/damage model performance.

Mig-31B/M or BM > Su-30 > J-10 > Mig-31 basic > Su34. IMO for M.players sake REDFOR needs some love, with the amazing bluefor line up we getting "F4,F14,F18, and ones still on the list like A7,F15E,A6, and maybe the F16" i fear Mplayers servers will be stacked on blue for years. or worse we go back to having mixed nations

While its most certainly true for unreleased products, I think Sold Early access should be treated differently when it comes to time until completion. And not just for ED but all devs. it should be a rough estimate and if dates are missed explanations should be provided "which usually reduce the but hurt a bit" Thats good industry practice when it comes to Early access

I want to get this map but at the moment its too compact for "blue flags" like Mplayer, I think a few more in depth airbases in the UAE it self will go a long way for Mplayer environment. I know the map will be extended but putting those in the links below can be done in quick way as they are nearly all in remote locations. https://www.google.ae/maps/@24.2821431,52.5838255,4357m/data=!3m1!1e3 https://www.google.ae/maps/@24.2537303,55.6095912,14128m/data=!3m1!1e3 https://www.google.ae/maps/@22.7781677,55.061311,10606m/data=!3m1!1e3 https://www.google.ae/maps/@23.6469002,53.8100786,9438m/data=!3m1!1e3 https://www.google.ae/maps/@23.6469002,53.8100786,9438m/data=!3m1!1e3

From the looks of things and what other 3pd are working on it looks like we will get a good solid Nam scenario. If that is the case i would like to see more capable aircraft, I would say F105G is possibly the best option since it can move into 80s scenario as well. F100 is also far more interesting for possibly the same amount of work

More APKWS testing

Great work HB, I cant wait.

Yeah jamming is simplistic in DCS at the moment "from what i gather the radar system in the new engine with the hornet will crank things up a notch or 2 from a fidelity point of view" But even assuming that does not happen, AA can engage Weapons "as long as you switch them to do so", having fake contacts on A2A radars as well can be interesting game as well in PVP. I was flying on Blue flags once in the M2k, GCI directs me to a hostile AJS37, and cleared to me to engage, I drop my radar low and see the AJS, and suddenly i see 4 more contacts, I knew i was not going to win a 5 v 1, I called on GCI for back up and that i have 5 hostiles where he told me there was 1, only for him to sell me those where BK90s. Since then it became easy to spot them but I would assume something dedicated and programmable would cause lots of confusion Even if its Vs players only. From a game engine pov, it should be that AA should treat them the same way ships treat all incoming threats. pretty sure stating on the TALD "i am an aircraft" sorta trigger will work easily. Also BK90 tests I did seem to get every thing to shoot at them. I think the BK90 in game atm is basically a Hack to the engine where they are basically "AI" aircraft "hence why they also have IFF"

Why? do you mean from a game engine POV? It already "kinda" works with the BK90 and RB15. They do show on radar and you can program them with INS way points "and for some reason they have IFF" but you can for sure lock and shoot them "Even locking the Bk90 with IR"

Not a weapon per say but an interesting system, Basically a decoy missile that has Radar enhancements and chaff and can be programmed to fly in way mimicking aircraft behavior, according to wiki Hornet can carry 6. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ADM-141_TALD USN used the TALD-C since 1996, got the MALD in 2009

Any word on the AIm132 ASRAAM? I know it was not used by USN "tested?", but the RAAF use them

If your cap/cas is Unable to take out aircraft taking off, or clear an airbase in the amount of time needed to stop them from spawning then the defenders have every right to conduct a successful counter attack. Trying to hand hold some Mud pushers b/c their in ability conduct a proper attack in the window that cap provides "which from my many rounds as GCI observed over and over again" simply makes the game feel empty. The Best possible approach is to add back the old bunker = spawn system to the airbases, take those out and no more spawning at the target airbase. I would argue for anti runway tactics but ED cant fix the FC3 aircraft being able to fly over craters. And even then, Adding wait times for what is possibly the majority of the game time, for a situation that happens 10% of the time simply kills the game flow.

Still does not explain the effect on the game play you say fighter spam, I say it has a bad impact on the game. The fighter spam is limited by lives already, why the double/triple nerf some of them. You have a server where it works by people "FLYING" how is alt-tabing people on the ground for 8min a good idea? Fighter spam is limited by distance if the attacker has the upper hand, the dead time basically means that the defender ":If out numbered" will always have an issue putting up remote defense. On the note of putting people to quick reaction fighters, If they where F4/Mi23 Sure, But the Gap between 21/F5 and modern fighters is so massive its not practical on average. This system and we have been saying it for 5 rounds now is counter productive, has limited positive effects and way more negative ones. It fly's in the face of all logic and proper game design.