PawlaczGMD

This is a weird design choice. I understand why it's difficult to do a full realistic pushback, but at least the teleport/snap could happen after you do the 180 yourself. It would be less jarring.

Thx, I will try again. Any tips on orders to issue to my flight in this one?

I also have issues with that mission. I might be doing something wrong, but the ships don't show up on my HAD at all. Yes, I switched it on. Any ideas? Do you need to enter the codes for the HAD somewhere? Still, I was able to lock HARMs from the WPN page using the correct codes. But despite launching all 4 HARMs, ordering wingmen to engage mission, and getting some launches on myself, the mission was a fail. Most friendlies were shot down, and my HARMs were intercepted. I only managed to kill a J-11. I don't think my wingmen launched anything, they immediately went defensive and got killed for free. Mission was not a success after returning to base. I feel like I have minimal impact as a player here, the friendly AI just isn't able to win.

I'll try to change the settings, I'm using Pimax Crystal with their premium headphones.

The voice lines physically hurt my ears, it's the only kind of sound in the game that does that.

I also didn't sink one of the ship with both bombs, but my wingman managed to do it. The damage to ships seems to be little inconsistent, you probably need 2 jets to bring down those ships.

After playing a few more missions, it becomes quite a pain to have to order your wingman to do obvious stuff. I think it would be an improvement to give him/her the attack order automatically sometimes. For example, in the first CAP mission when the bombers attack, it was a little jarring to find out the wingman didn't react to the dramatic attack order from the controller. It's not immersive to have to go though (and remember to do it!) the comms menu in the heat of the battle for obvious stuff like shoot the bombers that just launched on our base. Is it generally the case in this campaign that you need to micro your allies or they'll do nothing? Another thing is AI fuel management - they sometimes bingo and eject when I have 3-4 k lbs left. It could just be better to give wingman infinite fuel, otherwise they use it so much faster than the player. And finally, the audio really hurts my ears. I'm not an audio guy so I don't have words to describe it precisely, but there is so much "popping?" in the recorded voice lines that is extremely unpleasant, and it's not because of the volume. Does anyone have the same issue? Which audio slider in-game can lower the volume of just this audio?

Thanks for the suggestion, but that's not it. I tested it in a self-built SP mission with just 10 aircraft in front of me at various distances. There are 0 ground units in this mission. I was aware of this bug, but for me it looks like an issue with dot size resolution scaling. Dots were close to good for me before the latest patch. Now they're back to invisible, as they were before dots were increased across the board.

Same feedback from me on the Crystal. I'll live for now, but would like to see headset-specific settings or some customization soon.

In what sense is it perfect for you? I don't see the difference from before you've increased the dots because people were complaining about visibility. Do you see a difference from then? At what distance can you see a dot for a fighter? Genuine question, I just don't see any dots right now. Before the latest update, I thought they were a little too big, but now it's gone for me.

Interesting, but when I had this issue, I never asked for INS update. In fact, my track shows it mildly happening with an airstart.

Well, TBH until that's implemented, ED might just as well revert to before the change that made 90% of people unhappy. Now 100% are unhappy, I will not see any dots on either this or the original resolution scaling. Looking forward to device dependent dots though, that's a good idea.

This mission worked for me. Wingman attacked after issuing "engage mission and rejoin" on VHF 127.00

Feedback after latest update on Pimax Crystal and 1.1 PD: Visibility is back to before the controversial change - I see absolutely no spotting dots whatsoever. I assume they are back to 1 pixel - invisible on Crystal. Looks like people on other headsets are still unhappy as well - their dots are still too large - so you've made everyone unhappy now. I was under the impression that the current dots are supposed to depend on the headset - why does it not work for anyone then? Very disappointing.

not related to the campaign per se, but do you need to set up threat tables (I assume that's what you mean by codes here) if you have HTS equipped? Or does it "just work"?

Let's cut the yappersville over here

TBH I'm not going to refly this mission, I just took the L and points deduction and moved on. I know that higher speed will give me a greater range, but this is not the issue here - I'm releasing in range based on HUD cues the a/c calculates. The STPT would definitely move from the building due to drift - that's the issue. I know I can use TGP to move it back on, but my problem is that it's not always possible, and shouldn't be necessary.

Looking at the briefing for that mission: - 14 Apr 2015 on Syria - altitude around 20-25k ft, speed around 300-350 kts IAS, I release at around 10-20% into the max "dynamic launch zone" or whatever it's called for JDAMs. It's a GBU-31. - normal weather with heavy clouds - no sensors used, because of full cloud coverage. Just release on STPT that is preloaded from the mission ( I didn't need to enter it manually) - I assume GPS is available. I think I remember checking INS accuracy and both INS and GPS were very high. I switched it on.

I appreciate your test, but in practice, in the Gamblers campaign, my accuracy was way lower - I wasn't hitting large buildings in preplanned mode. I would agree that in your test, the accuracy is acceptable, but there must be more to it, as people are having the same complaints as me in that campaign.

This is not a good reply. You've implemented some kind of drift that makes all preplanned JDAMs miss (among other issues reported here), but the feature to correct it is somewhere in the near future (we all know what that means), and you don't consider it a bug? The fact is JDAMs in preplanned are useless in the F-16 right now. I would think that if you want to implement INS drift and Kalman filter logic (which is great!), you would also implement related systems (IDM self-correction) at the same time. How can you implement drift only but not a way to fix it? Again, JDAMs in preplanned are useless right now, which is kind of a big issue. It breaks paid campaigns among other things, and the campaign devs have no way of doing anything about it.

It isn't true that the AI uses the same flight model as us. It uses a simplified model, quality of which varies from aircraft to aircraft, notably bad in e.g. Mig-21 or F-5. AFAIK ED is only working on a General Flight Model which will make AI use the same physics as us. And while the AI might be flying perfectly mechanically, it is not making the best decisions and using the best tactics, and can be outplayed.

Only thing I can think of - is your paddle switch bound incorrectly, so it is depressed all the time?

The AI FM is not great for some aircraft types, but last time I checked it was ok for the P-47 and P-51. They are just superior (especially the Mustang) in BFM, so you might struggle unless you know what you're doing. The Anton is probably the worst BFM fighter in DCS. But I could get some wins against the AI with it - you will either need to have an altitude advantage, or go for head-on shots. If you doubt the AI, you can always try flying against people on a semi-casual server like Wolf Pack - you can get in combat in 5-10 minutes if there is pop.

Good point, I will try playing with different belts. But do I still have MG tracers in the belt you mentioned?

I also had this issue, even with process lasso. Reducing polling rate to 500 hz seems to have fixed it. But what a bizzare bug.