twistking

i still don't understand. why would 16gb equal 2gb? is this some kind of inside joke, or am i missing a bit of technical context?

@BIGNEWY any news on this?

Yes, smart weapons is a big one as well...

so what?

you made a disgruntled crawler chuckle...

It sounds bad, because it wasn't sold as "special". When i bought it, i assumed it would be developed at a similar pace to other modules. It wasn't and currently aspects of its simulation are definitely not on par with other ED modules.

Perhaps, the mission designer WANTS the player to do the actual planning. Currently the mission designer creates the scenario AND does the mission planning. Ideally mission designers could choose if they want the player(s) to make their own planning. Additionally there are several rather important things, that cannot be preset in ME. For example CMS programs... It will also be important for the "upcoming" dynamic campaign, where the scenario is procedurally evolving and players are asked to come up with own missions and mission planning...

Good points.

I think the calculation of the apparent size of a light source is so simple, that it can just be done in software without any disadvantage. Modern material shaders, are - generally - way more complicated. For the sprite size, you could probably do the math in your head even. It's basically just the result of apparent brightness and distance. More advanced effects would probably be done in a post processing step afterwards. Atmospheric effects f.e. What we see in DCS is not a limitation of sprites, but just a super lazy and broken implementation. That said, i honestly don't know if there are more advanced techniques emerging. I could see the simple sprites struggling with atmospheric situations like fog, haze etc. But then we're already moving into the realms of volumetrics...

Thud

I think it could be fun to fly against an F-35. You could team-up against it, or design the mission in other ways that gives you at least a fighting chance. Surely would be interesting... That said, i could think of dozens of aircraft, that would make much more sense to add as AI, so i'd still agree with your notion that the F-35 wouldn't be a particularly good choice to add...

You mean as a PP effect that is calculated on a "hardware shader", or do you mean as a material property? I think it would be possible to do it as a PP effect, but the question is, if the benefits would outweigh the costs (both in processing and developing). Sprites are so common for distant lights, because they are easy, cheap and look "good enough". I would guess that those AAA games that have very beautiful distance lights, still use sprites, but add some PP on top of it, to give that distant haze effect f.e. or make the "bloom" more physically correct or "cinematic". Are you aware of games that do distance lights without sprites? I think that you'd always need some form of sprite as a base, because you'd want some uniformity in visibility. A pixel-based effect, could flicker in and out of existence if the light source is subpixel. I'm speculating only, so please correct me if i'm wrong.

it has the polycount of a cybertruck.

I don't know why you want to drag VR into this. Turbulence is equally dull in 2D/pancake. What we have in DCS, i wouldn't even call turbulence: It feels more like small gusts...

is the flag defined (FLAG SET RANDOM VALUE) before you check the value? Maybe the issue is that the events check for the flag value when the flag is still undefined? Just guessing...

you can also create helper-lines. use the zone tool, another flightplan or the drawing tool to create the straight line and then use that to align the waypoints (zoom in a lot!). after that you can delete or hide the helper line...

We'll initially only get the manpads themselves and then we'll have to be very patient until ED eventually adds the crew.

I would really enjoy the option to spawn as a pilot and then walk to and climb in my aircraft. I think it would be a great immersive element. Those aircraft just hit differently when looking at them as a fragile, little human. Wasn't that - at least at some point - part of the pitch of the supercarrier module? Spawning in briefing room and then making your way to the flight deck? Maybe it was just me wanting to read it that way...

The solution proposed in the video is not good enough honestly. Adding some "proper" light objects is not that much effort for ED and would really help mission designers. Not just lights for FARPs, but all kinds of light source objects. DCS WWII would also really benefit from some era appropriate illumination.

I endorse this message!

This is a very modest wish: In the last newsletter ED teased the option to change the visual appearance of bombs. This is mostly to allow Navy aircraft to equip USNavy-type bombs, with ablative coating. These come in green and grey and are visually distinct from the non-coated versions. In the gamefiles (see @Silver_Dragon's latest video) all these variants are already available, including versions of Navy-type GBUs with grey guidance kits. However the grey guidance kits seem to come with the Navy-type coated bombs (both grey and green) versions only. The non-coated general version currently only exists with the "old" green guidance kits. Why does that even bother me? Meh, it doesn't really bother me, but the grey kits look way cooler and they seem to be common these days not only with Navy jets. If you google, you'll find a lot of images of grey/green GBUs (green standard non-coated GP-bomb-body with grey kit) on non-Navy jets. So, i humbly wish for the option to also have the "modern" grey/green version without coating for all the Vipers, Warthogs and Mudhens to make their load-outs look a bit more 21st century.

After seeing @Silver_Dragon's latest videos, it seems that currently the grey guidance kits are only an option for USN versions (ablative coating). Would be neat, if those were also available for the general versions (without coating). Grey kits on green, non-coated mk-gp-bomb-bodies are seemingly quite common these days.

I see. I do wonder what the fairing is for. One would guess that the two parts were easily connected by just some wires. The fairing suggests that there may be mechanical linkage (why though?). Maybe it's also for electromagnetic shielding? @BIGNEWY Any plans for those modern grey kits? They are soo chic! Green kits are for boomers.

That makes sense. The question remains about grey guidance kits outside of USNAVY use.