Winston 60

dimitriov, I would be interested to know the following: 1. What is your servers upload and download capabilities/speed as measured on speedtest.net? 2. What is your servers bandwidth allocation in it's autoexec.cfg file? 3. What do your clients have for bandwidth allocation in their autoexec.cfg?

Rebooting while playing resource demanding games is nearly always a power supply failure or under wattage. Always look first at your power supply as the culprit in this type of behavior.

There are no WWII trains in the release version. This needs to be moved to the 2.0 Open Alpha Bugs and Problems topic.

"Intercept" is a defensive role and requires that the intercepting aircraft is constantly being sent targeting data from a ground based or airborne radar, or the interceptor flight's radar is locked on active search. You may override the default setup in advanced commands but it doesn't work as well as just using CAP with it's default settings. "CAP" is offensive by nature although the flight may be defending an area. No other ground or air based radar is required as the default setting is for the aircraft to use their radar (if equipped) as necessary. On CAP the enemy should be very aggressive.

My experience exactly. Installed the Warthog adapter on a Cougar grip and put it on a Gladiator Pro Mk.II and flashed it, doesn't work. Removed the adaptor and put the Cougar grip back on the Thrustmaster base and it works fine. I'm looking now to buy a completely factory assembled VKB stick with the MGC grip attached and working out-of-the-box. Plus I don't like the idea of having to buy the KG12 grip just to throw it away. :smilewink:

Change "Intercept" role to "CAP".

:thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

Will I someday be able to purchase, from VKB, a new Gunfighter or Gladiator Pro Mk.II with the MCG Pro grip pre-attached and properly flashed and working out-of-the-box?

In ver 1.5 it's always been that way. On the Kuznetsov you cannot touch the deck short of the wires without exploding.

:thumbup:

Still NOT resolved in 1.5.6 ! Works in Russian aircraft. Does not work in A-10A and F-15C!

Reflected, as a test check to see if they are visible if you don't late activate them. Can you see the trains if they are started at mission start? It may be a similar problem that ver 1.5.6 has when I late activate ships. I can see the ships' bow wakes... but no ships are visible.

@ Basco1 ... There's no beef. It's just that people, myself included, are expecting to read about the release version in this topic and not the 2.0 alpha. This is the topic for the release version. The only release version is 1.5. The 2.0 topic is 2.0 Open Alpha Bugs and Problems located two sub-forums down from this one. You have mistakenly posted a 2.0 problem in the 1.5 topic. Please note the different locations for release version and 2.0 alpha, thank you. Without order there is chaos, without structure there is instability.

This is off topic. This is the topic for release version 1.5. Will a Mod please move this?

If ver 2.5 is going to be released this year, will year 2017 see it as: a. 2.5 early release? b. 2.5 open alpha? c. 2.5 open beta? d. 2.5 stable release?

He appears to be using an ultrawide 21:9 aspect monitor. Many companies like LG, Dell, Samsung, etc, make them in various sizes. I've owned my 34" LG ultrawide for two years and would never go back to a 16:9 or 16:10 monitor ever again.

Matt Wagner at the ED/ThrustMaster booth at E3 today. Also a good look at the ThrustMaster F-18 grip at 4min, 20sec

Does any 4K HDTV have a 32:9 aspect ratio or even 21:9?

Witchking: Your 1st drop of 97's: Released CCRP at 8600ft and you even aimed a bit long I see... the bombs look like they're gliding precisely towards your aiming point but they explode too high for the parachute sub-munitions to continue this trajectory and deploy directly over the tanks. You did get some hits though. Your 2nd drop of 97's: Released CCIP at 8000ft, same. Also close enough for hits. No comment on the 87's as it's well known that these have been falling short for years. ED knows this but have never fixed it. 87's are castrated now anyway, seldom destroying anything but infantry and the odd truck. Realistic? Maybe. Food for another topic? Dunno. I also notice that you are using 2.0/2.1 NTTR map. I don't use this... only the release version 1.5.6. Maybe there's a difference here? The performance that you show in your video for the 97's is exactly what we've been experiencing all along which is why we deploy all cluster bombs from the "A" at much lower altitudes. Maybe it isn't right or accurate compared to the A-10C, but is what we have to deal with in the Flaming Cliffs 3 simplified A-10A until ED decides to devote some time to fixing this. In the meantime try releasing your 97's from a much lower altitude (both CCRP and CCIP) and aiming long when using the 87's, and consider an even larger adjustment for moving targets. But is it enough of a problem to submit this 97's issue as a bug report? I think so. There's already a few topics on the 87's falling short from the A-10A and I think it's been acknowledged by ED long ago. Perhaps you could add your video to a new post and report this as a CBU-97 bug and see what what happens? After all it's been an ongoing issue for some years now.

Please take a moment to give thanks for the "Greatest Generation". "All gave some... some gave all".

kelpie, as a test, have you tried a takeoff in clean configuration(no weapons at all)? If your weapons loadout is asymmetrical, on your takeoff rollout the aircraft will veer from straight ahead and require some fancy rudder action to stay straight. Having a heavy loadout on one wing and a lighter load on the other causes "pulling" in some DCS aircraft. I have a lot of hours in the MiG-29s and Su-33 and noticed this years ago.

I'm glad it's working for you now. 2nm is a good starting point and could quite possibly be close to minimum distance as the distances each aircraft needs to setup an attack can vary a bit. If you're worried about the Ka-50 being too high, start it (the SP) back even farther and at a lower altitude. Then make WP1 the attack WP. He'll be less visible and look more natural starting at a lower altitude and will get whatever altitude he needs when he switches to WP1 for the attack.

Your SP is way too close to the attack waypoint. Move the attackers starting point (SP) back and much farther away from waypoint 1 until he attacks. You're not giving the AI enough time to set up his attack. Remove ROE = Weapon free or he may decide to attack another target first instead of the one you have told him to attack. You can add ROE = Weapon free at a later waypoint.

:dunno: Perhaps the 97's perform differently in the "A" than they do in the "C"? I've found the lower the release altitude the better (if your situation will allow it). I don't have problems with the 97's hitting short with CCIP on moving vehicles (starting a steep dive from 10,000ft and releasing at 3,000ft or lower) or CCRP (releasing from level flight from 3,000ft or less) on stationary ones. I'm using release version 1.5.6, A-10A only, multiplayer only and not using 2.0/2.1 at all. Dunno what could be happening in your scenario. Try dropping from a lower altitude? I'm thinking maybe it's the wind? Anything around 3,000ft should still keep you fairly safe from AAA as long as you pull up and turn immediately after bomb release.

Please read again post #11 above