RedTiger

If I'm buying: $2000 USD, max (This is not including monitor, speakers, mouse, keyboard, etc.). I would go back and re-evaluate the build to keep it under that amount, probably shooting for closer to $1500 USD. If somone else is...maybe double that? ;) Then again, double that figure and I'm probably putting everything I can think of in it, stuff I probably won't even use or need. Unless you're going crazy with the SLI or crossfire, $2000 goes a pretty long way.

Its strange how one man was killed from the impact but the other was not. Very sad.

Multiple GPUs on one "card"? That's always been my take on what's "next". It seems logical enough. Of course, then someone will run two or more Multi-GPU cards in SLI. :smilewink: I'm still betting that we'll see a single card, mult-GPU type of thing at some point. Call it "SLI for the masses". :D My 2 cents is this: I'm like to build my own, but I've never been interested in spending extra $1000s getting those benchmarks just for the sake of getting them. Why you might ask? Easy. A PC game like Crysis is an anomaly. The developers made a PC game fully taking advantage of the technology to make the thing look mind-blowing but with the side effect of not being able to be ported to consoles. This is far from the norm. Look at some of the newer games coming out like Modern Warfare, for example. They look pretty damn good, but it is VERY obvious that they're dumbed-down so they can also run on the consoles. Consoles are where the money is and the majority of developers know this. They'll sacrifice a PC port before they'll think of doing that for a console. I'm not seeing the point of spending extra $1000s on a PC to run games that an Xbox 360 or PS3 can run with no problems, other than just getting the benchmark for its own sake, like I said before. ;) This philosophy has made me a happy camper so far and the only problem I run into is flight sims. You have a handful of developers on small budgets making these things with what appears to be no attempt to make them less CPU dependent (doesn't Windows 7 have a way of using the GPU for processing things OTHER than graphics?), so you basically have to throw a ludicrous amount of CPU horsepower at them to get them to run halfway playable. GPUs can already do physics, I've wondered if there's a way to get them to do other stuff, like the calculations needed for flight models.

Thanks guys! As you mention about RAM, one side effect is that the RAM is running at a funky time, 712 mhz, which is under its default raiting of 800 mhz. I know from personal experience confirmed with online discussion that my board doesn't like RAM to be OCed over the default speed, so there's no point in going over that amount. I'm wondering if an extra 44 mhz on the FSB would be worth it to have the RAM at the default and faster 800 mhz. If I'm reading correctly, you all, generally speaking, don't think so.

I can't find the answer this to this anywhere. My question is simple: is their any benefit to lowering the clock ratio on the CPU and raising the frequency, or should you always leave it at the default -- which is the highest value possible? Example: I have an E6850. The default clock ratio is x9. If I want to overclock to 3.2 ghz, which is better, 400 x 8 or 356 x 9? I realize there may be other reasons to eventually lower the clock ratio, but I'm not sure if there's any benefit in a case like I described.

Weird, probably my poor understanding of physics here, but why wasn't his hand or arm injured from sticking it out the side? If you do this in a car going down the highway, palm out flat against the wind, you can feel the air press your hand back. Now imagine doing this at mach 2. :O

Is there any way to rig one of those things for constant pressure...as in like G forces building up?

Ah...I thought you were talking about it ruining the eye's adjustment to the dark...ruining your "night vision". Nevermind, I agree with you. :D

Correct me if I'm wrong, but those upgrades are being rolled out for import and foreign buyers, right?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/8200385.stm If you are a musician who's ever done multitrack recording or a guitarist, its easy to take what he did for granted. At least he lived a long meaningful life. Long live Les Paul!

The one file of his that is sorely missing from Lockonfiles is no pop-up trees.

I think realistic muzzle flashes are probably the one thing that I'd be hesitant to include in even a realistic infantry sim. Its just one of those things that doesn't translate so well to an imperfect medium like software. Realistic muzzle flashes would be more meaningful than these, but I could imagine it just being something that sounds good on paper but just ends up being irritating or clumsy in a game. They remind me a lot of G force and GLOC models in sims in that regard, only worse because of how often they happen.

Looks interesting to me, this is the first time I've seen it. I never played the original, but it looks like its somewhere on the "dirt realism" scale between something like CoD and ARMA, which is nice -- correct me if I'm wrong, here. Single player looks...well...playable! I found the original ARMA's AI to be like herding a bunch of retarded lemmings. They might as well have just had two menu options; multiplayer, and underneath that, multiplayer. ARMA was obviously meant to be played with human beings at least coop, friendly AI was pointless. I'm still waiting for someone to put TrackIR in a FPS that isn't ARMA. I don't think that will ever happen as long as the FPS is marketed to a wide player base. TrackIR isn't a widely used peripheral and could possible give a large advantage to those who use it in multiplayer. As usual, the desire for multiplayer balance messes up the fun. :P

Are you joking? I'm serious, I can't tell if you are or not. I understand what you mean about the "bigger is better", but do you seriously think its just jealousy? Perhaps because a lot of their ideas turned out to be wrong?

Bumping this thread to ask a question: What is Pierre Sprey's and the remnants of the "Fighter Mafia" beef against the F-22? I was reading something today and wondering about this. He, Boyd, and the Fighter Mafia had some understandable points back in the 70s and 80s, but I'm having trouble understanding what their problem is now unless they know something about the F-22 that others do not. Do they think that a low-observability 5th gen fighter can be done cheaper? The only point they've made that is arguable is based on costs. They make various points around the cost, like that it eats up money that could be used to modernize other equipment (no idea if this is true or not), but other stuff sounds crazy. What's their angle? In other words; why do they think the USAF would be better without the F-22? EDIT: for clarity!

I got you, that's right. I stand corrected. EULA and all that stuff. Maybe I need to RTFP. :) I think the debate tends to be software vs. other media, license vs. ownership (example: do I own my hard copy of Harry Potter or is just a license from the publisher? Ok, what if I bought it via Amazon for my Kindle?, etc.) Anyways, I hope you get that sorted out with ED, Sov13t.

Are speaking of DCS or is that your take on software in general?

Except when the CD/DVD has the same activation process as the download version, you know, like Black Shark... :music_whistling: Not the place for the discussion, but this is going to become a big issue on a very grand scale in the future. It will be interesting to see what happens. Software: tangible product you own for life or just media you pay a license fee for? Only time will tell, but the license side of the debate is currently winning, to my disatisfaction. I'm willing to bet there's an understandable reason why ED didn't provide him more activations, perhaps having to do with the legality of licenses in different countries seeing as how he used one version in multiple countries. So I guess in addition to RTFM, we have to add RTFP: read the fine print?

If you look on the related videos, it looks like someone posted a recording of his 'Conceptual Spiral' brief: This is interesting stuff since recordings, let alone videos, of Col. Boyd are supposed to be almost non-existent.

After reading multiple books about Col. Boyd and hearing him mentioned in many other places, it was cool to find videos of the man on youtube giving a presentation: He talks about the FX program which eventually became the F-15. I haven't watched them all yet. I'm hoping he gets in to E-M and the light-weight fighter program. EDIT: Even better...he talks about his more broad concepts.

The R-27 in LOMAC is capable of reacquiring a target if you lose lock IF you re-lock fairly quickly. And by "fairly" I mean it can be a couple of seconds. It sounds like lifeliberty knows this and is thinking that if that is possible, it is feasible that you should be able to lock, launch, re-lock a different target and still have your first missile track. This is a pretty logical conclusion and, IMO, not unreasonable. It makes sense. It sounds like he discovered something in the way the missiles are coded that causes them to have limited room for "remembering" different targets. I'm not sure if the real radar and missile are capable of the reacquiring ability (any experts here know this?), but I would bet that the things lifeliberty is doing were probably not intended or designed for by ED. I've always thought of the reacquiring thing with R-27s as a nice feature that allows you some leeway if you get a little too excited with your crank to gimbals and accidentally lose lock, not a way to pincushion one bandit with 3 Rs or REs.

I say if someone wants to put this much work into cheating on a PC game most people have never heard of, let them. Its their loss. "Good job on all that time you wasted. Feel better now? Enjoy your server ban."

No thanks. I'll take something that any idiot (me) can do with about 30 minutes of experimenting with the UI. Which do you think benefits more people; providing a tools anyone can use to make missions and campaigns more realistic and dynamic or giving us access to the sim's esoteric guts?

There's an interview with Oleg at SimHQ about an upcoming patch to IL2. One of the cool things is that they've managed to put in some rudimentary triggers in the mission builder: http://simhq.com/_air13/air_420b.html Is there any hope for triggers like we see in Black Shark to be added in whatever ED has in the works? I'm not going to compare IL2 to LOMAC since that might be apples and oranges, but is it possible to somehow add this in a patch?

Hey all! In case anyone's interested, there's an interview at SimHQ about an upcoming patch to IL2 and an interview with Oleg. There's some crazy stuff in the works. Triggers for the mission builder and RADAR for the F-110 G4 are not the least of them! http://simhq.com/_air13/air_420a.html