Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  1. Thanks, but I already know. I wanted to have a status update on it.
  2. Hello and thank you Heatblur for the amazing work you did on the F-14. I have some questions concerning carriers. I remember early in the development of the Tomcat, you made deck crew character models, and even showed some mocap. Will the Forrestal carriers have any animated crew, or is that plan scrapped since ED is doing that for the Super Carrier? Speaking of which, I noticed in the DCS patch notes a while ago, added features like "salute", "holdback bar" and such. Does that mean that you did your part on making the Tomcat compatible with the SC and that the rest is up to ED to finalize the implementation? Hope you don't mind the questions, thank you.
  3. Theme sounds have been restored to all my modules, except for Normandy map.
  4. Same for me. Error occurs on combat missions. I don't know if it's a coincidence but I started getting this issue after I installed the Flanker on the F-15 vs Su27 free weekend like 2 weeks ago.
  5. I have the same issue. It happened to me quite recently, like 2 weeks ago, for the Flanker free weekend.
  6. Interesting interview with Ian Black. Some quotes: "The Mirage 2000 is probably the ultimate fighter pilot's airplane." ".. you could do anything with it you wanted, you can point it in any direction and it would just keep flying." ".. and it was pretty foolproof really, you couldn't stall it as such, if you span the airplane you flicked the switch and it would come out of the spin. And you could pull 9.5Gs all day long." That sounds exactly like the Mirage 2000 I've read in books, seen on videos, doing all kind of maneuvers at airshows or else. We all know how agile, nimble and very capable the Mirage 2000 is IRL. Unfortunately, this isn't currently reflected in the module. I see that I'm not the only one to think that the Mirage isn't behaving properly. I have to admit that I felt reluctant to post in this thread. Concerns about the FM/performance being off have been raised before, but since no updates have been released for a good while, and obviously some people happy with it, or maybe just wanting to keep things the way they are, I felt that any complaints wouldn't make any difference. But I'm glad this thread came up. Being open and exposing the faults (while avoiding personal attacks) should lead into something positive. And since the issues will be addressed and prioritized for the module, it gives me hopes again. We'll see what happens. I've actually stopped flying it for some time now, as it's just not enjoyable to me. And I guess, as someone mentioned, it is a bit worrying that the Mirage is at this state so far after release, but it is what it is. The good part is that Razbam has good communication with us and that they have acknowledged the problem. CptSmiley gave us direct answers, and is working on it, so all I can say is that I look forward to the upcoming FM updates.
  7. That's correct, it's not solved yet.
  8. Ok I reviewed the code and double checked the switches in-game and it's all fine, but I know why I got a bit confused by the naming, for the first two (Master arm and Gun arm), which you guys pointed out :thumbup:, the naming didn't follow the same logic as for the rest, so definitely better to swap the order in the names for those two. Just to be sure, here is the code with appropriate names :) {down = 3234, up = 3234, cockpit_device_id = 6, value_up = -1, value_down = 1, name = _('Master Arm ARMED, else SAFE'), category = _('3-Pos. Switch Abstractions')}, {down = 3463, up = 3463, cockpit_device_id = 6, value_up = -1, value_down = 1, name = _('Gun Arm ARMED, else SAFE'), category = _('3-Pos. Switch Abstractions')},
  9. Awesome! Thank you very much! :) Yes "SAFE" is definitely a better name. No it's value_down that is the active position. Oh wait you mean the real switch, in-game and on the throttle? Yes that is correct, and the code I provided reflects exactly that, i.e. you pull the switch up -> ARMED, you pull the switch down -> SAFE. So the code should not be altered if you want the correct behavior. On the other hand what you prefer it to say as "default" or "else" ('ON else OFF' or 'OFF else ON') is up to you. It's just the name in the control list. Edit: Actually value_up might be the active position... All I know is that the code works as intended :) -> Switch up = ON, switch down = OFF
  10. Here are some commands I wish would become official: {down = 3234, up = 3234, cockpit_device_id = 6, value_up = -1, value_down = 1, name = _('Master UNARMED, else ARMED'), category = _('3-Pos. Switch Abstractions')}, {down = 3463, up = 3463, cockpit_device_id = 6, value_up = -1, value_down = 1, name = _('Gun UNARMED, else ARMED'), category = _('3-Pos. Switch Abstractions')}, {down = 3486, up = 3486, cockpit_device_id = 11, value_up = 1, value_down = .67, name = _('Radar STANDBY, else ON'), category = _('3-Pos. Switch Abstractions')}, {down = 3486, up = 3486, cockpit_device_id = 11, value_up = .33, value_down = 0, name = _('Radar OFF, else WARM UP'), category = _('3-Pos. Switch Abstractions')}, {down = 3249, up = 3249, cockpit_device_id = 6, value_up = 0, value_down = 1, name = _('Selective Jettison ON, else OFF'), category = _('3-Pos. Switch Abstractions')},
  11. Hi Olivier! I guess you recognized your skins, nice job on the liveries. :) I was just having them as examples to highlight the lack of specularity in the numbering material. So disabling the spec maps doesn't solve the issue, but make it a bit less apparent I guess. What is needed is for the dynamic numbering to have specularity so that it matches the rest of the airframe's material, only then can the area around the numbers be truly transparent. Zeus said he'll let the texturer know, so hopefully it will be fixed. I just read some other parts of the plane didn't have spec maps either. I guess some of the materials need to be looked at.
  12. I have no idea what font is used, but it seems to be different for the letters and numbers. You can check the files: M2KC_N1 and N2 in the liveries folders, you'll see how they look there.
  13. Thank you very much! I find it rather important, so let's hope he can find the time. :)
  14. I haven't received any reply on my previous request, if the devs or anyone involved could please let me know? My question in short: Could you add specularity on the numbering material? Would it be possible for you to look into it? Thank you.
  • Create New...