Sonoda Umi

See the picture below. Please note "blurred" effects in mirrors like “Pixel Art” . My question is what I should do to fix this? Or it's a new bug in 2.7.0?

So, those files "inputs, inputuserprofiles, snapviews and options.lua" can be saved but ohters should be deleted?

Plus, Aircraft Carrier as the centre of the strike group, when she changes course or speed, the AI Escort ships should keep up the formation. Escort ships have to manoeuvre simultaneously.

I have seen that notice. Thanks again.

Acknowledge. I will check it.

I have completed all the 8 stages. I quited the final stage mission(see picture below), and entered the next mission: "ending scenario" then quited automatically. After this, I saw the campaign status still saying "active" not "win". Can I see this issue as a bug?

Similar problem here. In Ground Radar and SA page, sometimes I encountered an extreme frame drop, which would lasts minutes. During this frame drop, I saw the GPU usage nearly 0% via Session Manager.

Thanks for answering.

Equip NVG via mission planner?

How it's going? I remembered the NVG was the default equipment in pervious version(s).

When I press Rshift + H to trun on NVG, but no response. I have found this issue on F/A-18C, but on other Aircraft like F-14B not.

I have the same issue here. Even through I ran a repair, it is still "half-blacked"

I have a similar knowledge of this. I found that seeing speed indicator reading as INM is correct through a calculating, but ohter DCS aircraft is faster than what they should be by that method.

At previous time, it said multiple times: "ED has no F/A-18E Super Hornet/Superbug plan currently." Well, it makes me very sad. Honestly, as I repeat mostly, I Tomcat dirver have not a good reason to take F/A-18E, but F/A-18F is very nice for me.

This is the patch on Dec. 23. It not mentions about F-14B turning performance fix. Has it already implemented into hotfix or not? @IronMike @Hummingbird

I agree.

Above all, it is only useful manner that attack DCS AI fighters to get close within 18nm and then fire and forget.

That is to say, the effective way to against a maneuvering fighter is closer range attack such as go close within appx. 18nm and make a "missile directly go active attack" On the other word, if it wants hit a fighter under TWS mode, it should make sure that the target is not aware of the AIM-54 launched at a long distance. However, it seems not handful to attack DCS AI fighters - they can detect the missile once it lanunched and go defence maneuver immediately.

Similar problem: AIM-7M and MH are too easy to lost target then going straight on mid and terminal phase.(Jester not saying lost lock)

Watched the 2021 and beyond video, it's AH-64D.

I agree. I have abnormal BVR/long-range A2A Attack experience almost a year. Saddly, in this year, I nearly withdraw the radar-guided missiles from my birds, just conducting Carrier Qualifications, Aerial Refueling and BFM gun only training...

Eagerly awaited aircraft should be AH-64, probably A.

It not just needs to rework ship models, but urge to add more operational functions and then make ships controlable(full-fidelity RTS-like is well). I don't mind pay for it.

I agree.

IMO I know the Glove Vanes are looking cool, but "models of vanes" are not necessary to add more than they are just visual effects. As your guys pervious saying, the Glove Vanes have only littile effect for Aerodynamics, it's right that not add those models. To add Aerodynamic models for vanes will adjust the whole flight model of aicraft and it will cost years to have done - it's not worthful.