Cunning_Fox

I know about the ground effect, but I thought it was meant to stabilize you, not knock you out of place. I am actually trying to reach it so it would stop swaying.

I'm embarassed to admit this, but every time I try to land the gazelle - it goes crazy. It starts acting like its namesake if it saw a leopard chasing it. When I ride it into the battle or otherwise I am flying ninja around buildings - it acts fine. Like a broken in horse that knows how to act around gunshots. Steady and responsive. But when I try to land it, it turns into a Bull-from-hell Rodeo. It goes all over the place. Suddenly, it starts drifting to one side completely unexpectedly. As I try to correct it, it turns into a polka dance and soon, my pilot is either going into the local ER or is wiping his lunch off the windshield. What do? I have positive curves for roll and pitch at around +15-17 and a deadzone of 3 For pedals I use my joy twist with -7 curve and 4 deadzone. It seems to work when I'm flying, but not when I'm landing. Using X-55 https://drive.google.com/file/d/1SO8mt0fvt6-vAEyELxw-xyeth8V_YUUG/view?usp=sharing

The point is not boasting, the point being - I can kick ass on Mac. It's like saying "My car is good enough, to win the race. If you want proof - we can race right now." I realise how it came off looking, but I can't find another way to say what I mean. And, I wanted to say something to the people who have a "platform superiority complex", posting pics that demean macintosh and people that use them (I know, I was one of those guys that giggled at people that said they game on Mac way back).

Well, fair enough. I've already been banned on Steam Forums for daring to speak out against VEAO that removed a key feature from the Hawk module and therefore I was insulted and banned by the moderator. ED forums are the same, perhaps. Makes you feel like you're on a beach vacation, but there is a sniper in the coconut trees watching your every move and if you don't smile - you get shot. On a side note, perhaps investing in that rig is a good option, since I DON'T want to melt my already overpriced Mac. The whole point of my posts is that you CAN game on it.

I think they fixed the temperature problem waaay back. It's not as bad now. P.S. Why do people post their specs on the bottom of their signatures? That is what gives me "chuckles". That's the DCS dickmetrics, or something?

I've been gaming since the 386. One of my first games was "Test Drive" on big diskettes (it took 5 of them). I've had Pentium I, skipped to III, then my own power rig. Then about 10-15 laptops (which I didn't like since I've built all my computers beforehand myself, of which I could remember about 5 or so). I've had NES, Amiga... err... What else? PS2, XBOX 360. I have started sims with "Test Drive" then moved on to things like F-15C, F-117A, Retaliator. Then continued on to Team Apache, Longbow 1/2, IL-2, Apache-Havoc and KA-52 vs RAH-66, A-10 Cuba!, Hind, Strike Fighters 2 and pretty much every sim you can imagine. Now I game on Mac and I've been gaming on a PC before. Pretty solid in Multiplayer (was an instructor for MiG-21bis when it came out). Yes, yes you can game on Mac and I'm gaming on it now. And I could probably kick your asses while at it, since I own all the modules and know every platform (except maybe the Viggen) in DCS off by heart. Problem? :spam_laser: :matrix:

On windows 10 the resolution lower than the desktop is not working - the mouse is misaligned. Since the game is so poorly optimised - I can't run anything in desktop resolution, since that would melt my potato that meets the minimum settings for DCS. "What do?" --- Okay, well I've found the solution in my Intel Graphics panel... Now I have another problem - how do I delete posts?

Horrible business practices, horrible treatment of customers, both on steam and here. We've had Starforce on Alfa: Antiterror, and that killed the game. You are making piracy seem feasible. You can do this whilst you're the only sim on the market for air combat, but it won't last long. I also love the fact that there are like 2 modules that are actually released, both engines, the 1.6 series and the 2.0 series are in eternal Beta. What a good way to remove yourself from responsibility of release. I don't think people should put up with this, if you bought a module it should function, or there should be refunds. I shouldn't have to learn how to code or edit registry for my product to function - that is your job. Otherwise pay me for making your stuff work, or at least give me the money if I'm doing the job for your programmer.

Thank you!!:pilotfly:

When I get my hydraulics busted by one of the Gepard's 35mm, I can't make it far enough to land at Sochi, so I end up in Krasnodar or similar place "over the hump". I finish the mission - but there is no success. Another time I am flying after tearing a column up with NAR and quit half way through as my plane is struggling with two flaming engines, thinking I need to restart, but the game progresses. Like it's meant to be used - a troop support choice, not a frontline bomber like Tu-22M3 is. That's their job. Remeber 08-08-08? Did you see Su-25s Charge over the border and wild-weasel the enemy? What about Afghanistan? Chechnya? The only time it was used like this is against Angola when they tried to drop FABs from 5000 meters to hit the 32nd in the bush and then quickly turned and ran - whether they hit the target or not. Whilst I myself am being a little hypocritical here as I add a lot of "background noise" to my missions to bring immersion, here it feels very poorly done with some units having 20 or more waypoints (cluttering up the comms with acknowledgements), the unit types aren't used in the right way as they fly too low for an interceptor and get mixed up with the ground attack flights, the numbers of units in flights do not correspond to what realistically would happen. You see four MiGs in several "Hunter" groups, but PVO never flew in anything more than a pair (even in total war scenario as that is unnecessary and creates more problems for the unit due to complexity). I would think that in a total war, an ongoing battle would be more realistic - specific packages flying to and from the battlefield, destroying the AA before the arrival of the Ground Attack planes. Not a "glorious charge" across the frontline, this is not the Russian way despite the stereotypes. Sure, yeah. You've got Beslan and Mineralniye Vody. You've got plenty of places there. Why not, just out of design logic, put the advancing units a little further into the map? Not towards it's edge where scenery starts to disappear. Besides in Chechnya Su-25s operated quite close to the combat zone (not that Chechens had much of an artillery). This is what I do all the time (it's not the first year I'm flying sims you know, and I'm not bad at them seeing as how I was in an IL-2 clan so I know about these things), but, like I've said earlier - this isn't what Su-25A is designed for. It feels wrong to use it in this way. The mission design is just one big "charge" with no forethought and no afterthought. It is one of the worst campaigns that I've ever played in any game, let alone sims. This isn't supposed to be a WW2 movie, it isn't supposed to be Stalingrad through the prism of Hollywood. And if the designer goes for showmanship - it fails too. It goes into the uncanny valley of too realistic to be a light-hearted arcadey type mission and too wacky to be taken seriously by anyone with at least basic knowledge of how Airforce assets are used IRL. Not about approach, see above. Offtopic: I'm going to diverge here and speak purely from the perspective of the campaign premise itself. I know the person had the aim of making a playable campaign for a 1980's plane on a Caucasus map, so naturally - WW3. However, the NATO would have been nuked before anything this radical would have happened (a limited amount of tactical nukes would have been used, by either side, something along the lines of 5-10 kiloton). They (Mbot, was it?) could have just gone the easier way and create something along the lines of "on-going local conflict, civil war in Georgia after it's 1986s revolution and separation from USSR, as it gets help from NATO". That would have been more believable and easier. There could have been sea-combat, with US carriers in the Black Sea (offshore from the immediate combat zone, like they were located in Korean/Vietnam war). That way you don't have to use the edge of the map, you can build up the difficulty gradually as "Georgian rebels receive better western equipment as the war progresses" and the scenario itself would be fairly belivable rather than "NATO makes it to Krasnodar without Berlin being a giant irradiated hole".

Is there a list of user-created content with the best models to date? It's impossible to look through a gajillion forum pages for a mod of an airplane you want to download.

Every time my game crashes, I can hear the sound of release from the hydro system/canopy/breaks (or a similar one, sounds like depressurisation) just before CTD. This is the latest changelog (quoted). I believe the problem is item #4. Anyway, I'd look into these things first.

New Update The update from 23rd Sept. crashes MiG-21bis now. My guess is it's something to do with start-up sound. Anyway, it is unplayable on win 8.1. Crash.rar

On a side note that missions in the campaign are broken and win for the most part is unachievable (as most triggers are illogical and broken), the SU-25 is used as a "kamikaze dive bomber" (like it was misused in Angolan war, except the kamikaze part), the resources in the mission are not used to their full extent (map is filled with useless flights and assets that amount to nothing) and the fact that it takes a painfully long amount of time to fly to the mission frontline just to be destroyed by ridiculous amounts of AA, the cold war "warrior" campaign is the only one currently available for SU-25A. Seeing as the aircraft has a long history of military service, it would be nice to have an actually flyable campaign for it. ED made several for A-10s and KA-50s, whilst most other flyable aircraft that were around for ages are just "sitting in the hangars", even the FC3 ones. The campaigns are 2004-ish, with little to no changes. I remember some of them from Lock-On, way back. I think ED is oughta make a proper, playable, flyable, FREE campaign(s) for most of the aircraft they released so far. Especially for a legend like SU-25.

Yeah, I can't get the communications menu to work in the air after I take off. If I don't exit it I can give one command to my Wingman. This is for latest (2/25/2016) stand-alone. Any solutions, or is it a known bug?:pilotfly: