TheJay15

RAM wouldnt have anything to do with either of those issues. If the game is on an HDD that is usually what causes bad loading times and the poor graphics could be an some form of graphics bug or incorrect settings. You have deferred shading on correct?

Thankfully I have DDR3 so I should be able to get some cheap, possibly this weekend if I have the time. I am above minimum requirements for everything else besides RAM GTX 970 i5-4690k OC So long as I can get at least a stable 30fps with decent graphics Ill be content.

I dont play too much multiplayer besides small coop missions with friends. Will the 8gb be at least servicable in SP until i can get more RAM?

I have similar setups to everyone here but only 8gb ram. Will I still be in the clear?

This is why I think it was a bad idea to pick 1944 France as the theater. With the current DCS engine there is just no way to accuratley depict the conflict. They can lovingly craft every side walk and street light in france into their map but none of it matters if they dont have any bombers or even attackers for that matter.

Says the guy voting for what is considered one of the worst combat aircraft in history:) (although you have a point that the 104 doesnt have the greatest record)

I sense a troll.

Is it not true that the K-4 was more or less an effort at standardizing the late model G variants to ease production? Actually does anyone know the true reasoning behind the K-4 and D-9 being chosen? People have said that it was because there was more information present at the time but I find that to be highly suspect as they were fairly rare aircraft and as far as I am aware there are not any flying examples of either.

I just jumped back into the 109 as well and I have to say, this is probably the only 109 sim where I can actually see why many pilots disliked the aircraft and thought it was difficult or dangerous to fly. It's really the only one that makes you feel the consequences of all of that added weight and have it feel like a unique aircraft.

Map it to a button on your stick. You have to "uncage" it to allow it to follow the radar.

You need to map the slave function. Should pop up if you search magic slave.

Yeah I assumed as much but it doesn't seem to go away when I lower the ASP backlight.

Is there supposed to be a constant dim red glow on the front of the canopy frame at night?

I think that we need some good pre-90's campaigns for most aircraft but especially the M-2K. I am growing tired of all of these "kill the insurgents" missions that I keep seeing. We need someone to make a good full scale air war scenario against aircraft of comparable capability. It would also be interesting to see the campaign built around interceptions rather than achieving air superiority. Interception is, after all, the original purpose of the aircraft, not killing everything in the sky.

It seems people are just really annoyed that they cant find people while flying NOE. It's a radar designed in the 60's for high altitude. Even the Russians have said the radar was poor at low alt. I think people expect too much out of it.

The radar doesn't seem to have problems at higher altitudes as long as you aren't looking down. Wasn't it previously established that the radar cannot detect targets easily below a few thousand feet.

Just out of curiosity why was there such an odd change in aircraft FM from release to the previous FM to the one we have now. It doesn't seem like a natural progression, more like you made the original, decided it wasn't right, changed it to the second verson then said that wasn't either so you just rebuilt the whole thing from scratch and made what we have now. Just a side note, I have only recently been flying the Mig but I have heard a lot of people "discussing" the change in FM and am going off the information that they have presented.

I did notice that the pylons looked glitchy but I just switched to R-13's/R-3S.

Well this doesn't seem to be a problem with aspect angle or anything. The missiles just do not seem to lock on to a heat source in MP. I was flying directly behind a two different occasions and the missile did not track at all.

It is worth noting that the R-60M isn't entirely all aspect. It normally isn't able to track a target from directly ahead but it can track them from oblique angles.

How is the R-60 buggy? People keep saying this but give no explaination. I did a few test flights with the Mig against an AI F-5 and the P5 seems to be easily spoofed by flares in a head on situation (which is understandable) meaning that the Mig should still hold the head on advantage provided it can obtain and maintain a lock. The R-60's small warhead is less of an issue due to the small size of the F-5. I have not yet failed to destroy a tiger in one R-60 hit. If the R-60 is fired outside of minimum range (Ive found around .2nm to be the magic number) It will usually be able to at least track to the target even in a high g turn.

I wonder how popular the Mig vs. F-5 servers will be. Hopefully they dont fizzle out like the Korean ones.

you guys have to remember, though, that the R-60M is not completely all aspect. It cannot shoot a target from directly head on so for a head to head engagement the 21 has to use an R-3R. I'm not sure if the P5 was completely all aspect or limited like the R-60 but when it is mounted on the F-15 it guides as quickly as any other Aim-9.

It is just a mod. You dont have to use it if you want a more realistic cockpit.

So has anyone explained how to avoid striking the engine after landing. I can almost always grease the actual flare and touchdown but if I try to aerobrake the aircraft seems to be pulled backwards so I am forced to slam my nose wheel into the ground or risk burning my engine off.