Danny_P

Suggest you read the forums a little bit seeing as this question was asked two days ago: Check for your answer here: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=275952 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=281592

Do you own the Supercarrier? It's only in Open Beta at the moment. Both the F-18 and 14 are in both the stable and open beta but mind that the stable build is a fair few months old now so there's a lot of differences

^^ He's right you know.... The MOOSE guys set the bar when it comes to mission functions.

Never assume when it comes to the fixing of deck sliding. It's bad for your health. So far I've not seen any video showing the boat turning, rough sea states and or rearm/refuel. Until we have done our own testing there's no proof of it being 'fixed'.

Ping limits have been in for ages. The problem isn't really 'ping' unless you're talking silly high +400. Packet loss and line noise are much more problematic. Also having systems that remove people from the server due to such events can sometimes be 'unfair'. I like a lot of people have a very stable connection, but if something on your network decides to update or broadcast out, then it can cause a very slight spike, and then it goes. It's then down to the netcode to combat that. I'm certainly not envious of the teams job on this one at all. Maybe there could be solutions where clients collisions are disabled if connection issues are detected, heck that would even help with formation flying or dogfight and someone starts warping all over the place, though this then opens up the ability for people to cheat by purposely tricking the game into think they have a poor connection just at the right time. I remember there used to be a 'tactic' like this by alt-tabbing in 1.5 My concern is actually down to the sliding was happening in single player, slightly rough sea state, little bit of wind and then don't get me started on when the boat makes a turn :lol: If that's not fixed then there's no hope for multiplayer, if there is any form of 'slipping' of the aircrafts location then when you start adding in connections, of course it's going to be substantially worse. Hopefully this testing is being conducted in missions that isn't just sunny and calm. Anyway, the proof is in the pudding, I'd love to take their word on it but I've fallen for that one before... Loads.

I would like to reiterate this comment, deck sliding was never fixed, the symptons where just reduced. In fact a few people and myself were at the forefront of reporting and re-reporting the issue: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=217082 - note how this got flagged as 'fixed' https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=234990 It's an utter game breaking issue for me (note I am glad to see that ED are currently treating as one too), I've even purchased the SC but I will not give it go until I hear that the underlying issue has been resolved. Some of us have had to literally put hours of our own time just to show that it was so easily reproducable, being told that WE must be doing something wrong with mission settings etc, even when providing countless tracks, missions, videos and tacviews all from multiple sources. Trust me when I say I really want ED to succeed here, but this really needs to be truely solved at a low level, none of this patchwork.

Dude, how dare you post your 'work-around'

Yeah... But then where does my (and many others) entertainment come from? :D

+1 I'd agree that giving the community 'tasking' along with OB's could certainly help streamline/improve the reporting that goes on. For the community members who actually want to bug report (nothing against the ones that don't) it could help them give more in depth/concise feedback. An 'overview' of api changes would be great too, like Pikes suggests, knowing where to look would be very helpful.

Whatever it is, many people will be happy and many will be upset :D

^^ THIS! Whilst AO can be a good effect in certain cases, it just makes everything look 'dirty'. A LOT of the issues can and hopefully will be addressed with improvements to lighting and colour. Also the size of the AO depth to be visible from altitude would have to be huge. The only place where I personally think it could have a 'valid' use is just to help the building 'sit' into the terrain a little better. Again though, this can all be resolved in texturing and lighting

As a SC buyer, I think it's mental that currently (From what has been said by ED staff) non-owners will not be able to place and manipulate it in the mission editor. Mission makers are a vital part to the community, in fact I'd go out on a whim and say they have kept many people interested in the sim. Mission making isn't for all, so to be potentially limiting what the mission maker can do and who their missions target (user base) is madness. You can place airframes that you don't own, so why not the carrier?!?!

Hear hear!

I’ve watched these a fair few times. They are hands down the best tutorials out there EVER.

Hello, so I know you guys have only just recently (lastweek) started the new development reports to which I say thank you for creating a more central place for these things to live. Now with the mention of machine learning AI (in what ever capacity you guys are going to be using it at), I got rather excited about this. In the day (and to be honest usually night and weekends) I'm a technical 3d artist (Houdini, Maya, Vray), mostly working on offline content, but I have a high level of interest in areas of development. My 'wish list' item: Would we be able to (sometimes) get more techical write ups, say for example: Tests of the machine learning - even the failed stuff! High level overviews of how systems are created Testing of new systems/api Even write ups about how certain bugs/issues that have been big in the 'public' eye were resolved Like I said, I very much have an interest in all this, but even people who don't (yet) could learn or have an insight into why certain tasks are hard to resolve/complete. Lastly, sorry to any of the dev team who read this - yes I am trying to get you to do more work :D

It's 'back' because it was never fixed. Just for the hornet, sliding was dramtically reduce but never solved. Hopefully the team will come up with a new way to handle this in time for the new carrier module.

Whilst this is currently true, I would hope that their new cloud system removes this issue. But who the :censored: knows :dunno:

3 - Unfortunately from what I recall, it's current state is final state

@Eagle do you have the afterburner detent enabled on your warthog? If so I found I needed to tweak my throttle curves slightly so that I was actually on mill power at the physical gate. Whilst it only gives you a little extra power it does help. Also in the event of a bolter it actually disengages your speed brake as it should. On axis tune I set it to be a slider and had a +10 on x curve.

They will add it, though I wouldn't be surprised if at first it's only for the future carrier module.

Wooop, mine just arrived today. Manchester, UK. They're awesome!

Only with scripts currently... Checkout Moose - more specifically the Airboss function

Well with the eventual implementation of the Vulkan api this could certainly be an easier possibility, mainly because of the big cpu overhead we currently deal with. BUT, sli is dead now, reborn as NVLink. The way the cards work together with NVLink is different to SLI mainly down to the bridge data transfer rate. Don't quote me on this but I think there's less work in getting the two cards working together now due to them being able to simply split up the tasks. There's a reason Nvidia never really pushed sli, and it's because it's not all it's cracked up to be.

Nineline, Shadow has supplied a mission in their post for you to try out... We all know the track files don't always yield the same results and is essentially broken. May I suggest you load the mission that they have kindly supplied and try what shadow has said to reproduce the issue, then with all due respect 'get back in your box'.

Unfortunately, based on previous efforts. I feel that they cannot fix it currently which is why there's been no acknowledgement of this post or others.... Now I'm not saying that it a way of 'ED is shite weh weh weh', these things are difficult to resolve as I'm sure it'll require a new way of thinking to their current method. But for me thus a core tech issue - it's one of those things that really really has to be resolved and resolved properly. It would be great to at least see a little response, even if it's: "Yes, we currently don't have a solution but we are looking into it." As currently it seems like somethings are just going unnoticed, which makes 'bug reporting' a big waste of my/others time.