Ducksen

If you use speech recognition to interact with the F1-F10 coms menu, it is a bit strange to say the command and hear it repeated before the answer. For example, say you want to request rejoin with a refueling tanker. You have a command set up, and you vocalize "Texaco, request rejoin" And a simular request is made due to the selection in the menu, the samer order is then repeated, before the tanker responds. If we could disable outgoing voice coms from the menu, than that would be a nice enhancements to immersion.

Respectfully, this thread made my day! I am still laughing. It is an unfair fight for sure... :pilotfly::doh:

It seems as if the ROE setting of Return Fire does limit down to using fox 2 missiles. However, they do still fire first. They fire at just below 10KM range. If that is the correct way the Return Fire should work, please correct me. I would think that in ROE setting of Return Fire they do a star-wars of "fly casual" until fired upon. Not just locked, but fired upon. If weapons free is used they fire fox 1 and 3 missiles as one would expect. I know you can fiddle around with restrict air to air on and off with moving zones etc. I have a tedious workaround.

The Raindropps on the cockpit glass is missing on SU25, SU25T, A10A, perhaps more... It works fine on many aircrafts is FC3 and full fidelity modules, but not in the mentioned ones. Dit not test all FC3....

The Persian gulf map is huge, and a large part of the map is Iran. We shougld have Iranian voice like Russia has for ATC etc for their coalition. Makes sense in Caucasus map. Russia is a big part of that map. And please more Iranian ground and naval assets. Bring in effective attackboats etc. Looking forward to playing both sides of conflics in the Persian gulf region.

I want to set up a ground attack mission where some forces will move away after a show of force has been made. Like dropping countermeasure flares below a certain altitude in a zone. Showing that if you do not move, more than just flares will come off the aircraft. Any specific help on this matter is welcome, thanks.

THANKS! Nice picture. I consider my request solved. Btw, not all vr users have vr zoom. ;) Again, thanks for the picture. Looking forward to the release of your upgrade, looks nice.

The lighting from a city seems faded and darker than it is flying over cities and populated areas. Take Nevada map, clear weather, as clear as you can make it. Fly over at 20.000 feet. The strip at Las Vagas and Las Vagas in general, should be an amber wounder to view. Now, well now it is as if the cities around in DCS knows we are flying. Turned ''off'' the street and house lights, gone to ''duck and cover'', as in a bomb raid. Little do they know how accurate that is. Joke aside, the lighting in the ambient surroundings is dim. I also want a standard for aircraft nav lights, collition lights, taxi lights, landing lights etc etc. Take the A10C nice collition flashes, mig 21 nice strong taxi and landing lights. Many other aircrafts lack in lighting. Doubt they would be fit to regulation being so dim. Line up all DCS plane modules on the ramp. Have lights on all of them and see. Huge variations. Don't count the F-16 yet. Not finished.

Second that! Personally, I think ED should define a standard. And check it when a third party developer wants to publish a new module. Be it key bindings like this post or dare I say lighting intensity standards.... Don't follow up on lighting in this post, its off topic. It was another example of where a ED standard would come in handy.

One thing I notice in the game, in or out of vr is that the terrain is waaaay to vibrant in colour. It is, well, a bit lego. Caucasus is a good example. Great map, nature in woodlands is more dark green from the air. The sim would look more like a sim and less like a game if the terrain was less vibrant.

Yes please. I understand the dilemmas with module copyrights. Like many have said in many ways here. Allow only to spectate internal cockpit if you your self own the module in question. Great way to help build a community around DCS. We need more pilots!

How about a module that lets you man the tanker. Easy commands to fly, like set altitude, orbit here or track between these two points, land here etc. And you as a player man the probe and use the radio with virtual pilots. You can then say sadistically; return pre-contact all you want... And fiddle with the nozzle like an overeager virgin looking to nut. I would do that if mission parameters are set up for refuling.

+1

+1 Making intercept missions more interesting, and the world a bit more lively. Well there is a performance issue I guess. Agree and hope to see.

This is not a bug, had no place else that was logical to put this request. I want to be able to keymap the manual frequency selectors, where you enter the frequency. Meaning where you enter a frequency that is not pre-programed in the radio. Those rollers are REALLY hard to see and operate in VR. So a fix for that would be to keybind them. No more need to see them, just operate the manually mapped keys and bob's your uncle. The cockpit is not easy to read and see in general in VR. A whole lot of just knowing what that blur blob does and clicking it. For the record, I LOVE the Mirrage 2000C, and enjoy the airframe in DCS. Hope the frequency number selectors can be key mapable. Cheers

In DCS currently an air superiority fighter is nothing more than another aircraft as the AI is concerned. I miss the feeling of being able to fly an F15C or Su27 and lock up a L39 or an F5E etc and have them turn back. It is how the real world works in principal. Forget the details here, I am talking about a single F5E engaging a 4 ship SU33 like it owns the sky. It would open up to some interesting gameplay if one could set criteria for threat or disengage when locked up, disengage when fired upon or disengage when within x distance of threat equal to or higher. etc etc etc. That would put the air superiority fighter back where it belongs. Flying CAP or TARCAP suddenly becomes more realistic and, well political in a complex conflict environment. Imagine locking up a bogie, waiting for it to disengage, for shooting down a plane is going to kick things off, and want to avoid that. The plane comes closer, hoping you will fire so its nation can start war and justify it. Or imagine starting a mission out with intercepting a bomber. You fly up to it, next to it. Not responding on guard? Pop flares in front to the left or right, see if it responds. Fire warning shots across the front end of the aircraft. At last moment, it turns back. Escort it to the "border" and air intercept complete, return to base. Open up a little, towards things not only being red vs blue, but all the inbetweens, if that is even a word. That would be awesome gameplay. Have pilots not wanting to shoot down an aircraft, for there may be consequences to that kind of action. Today it is a bit "If it flies it dies, quake style play" Fly, die, respawn" (Yes I know that is up to every player to work out, and new players need some slack.) I agree on that, just a suggestion for the betterment of the gameplay.

I want a module or tools to be a better human AWACS. Like an enhanced F10 map. You click an aircraft and it instantly draws lines to the closest bogies/bandits. So you can read out the BRA calls. Click on an aircraft and then on a tanker and you have a live feed of BRA for tanker. Yes, yes, I know we have the ruler tool, but this would be easier. And it would then be natural to have contacts that are boogies, not yet confirmed bandits. Create some tension that way. Have the possibility to use it as an AWACS og a factual Ground Controll Intercept, sending flights to inspect and possibly interact with aircrafts.

Yes please.

I want am infantry group that you can select in the editor that can act as a JTAC. Adding JTAC today is a bit offputting. Yes you can script it, yes you can use the Humvee TOW vehicle. Having an infantry crew will be nice. And while you are at it, add lasing function for the drones aswell. Yes they are scriptable, but make it selectable in the editor please.

Well, since the S25T is the very first aircraft a new player meets in DCS it should be a bit more looked after. We need more pilots :) Pew pew!

The smudge that is in the HUD is way to visible. It is all fine and all that we are simming, but this is way to annoying. Please remove the graphic layer that is this smudge or give us a cloth in the sim so we can wipe it as part of a startup. I would not take off with the HUD glass like this. Picture uploaded.

Ok :) One choice :) give me F15C if you can. Thanks for your quick reply.

Ether SU25T or F15C please. Red or blue does not matter. Hope to join, thanks.

The F5E shows as unknown (U) in the RWR. Is this fault or feature? And regardless if it is candid or not, can the F5E be added to the RWR library?

Thanks. The issue is still there. The light comes on. But a candle would do the same job. The way it is now. The whole Tomcat needs a lighting fix. Make it bright, make it bling and shine ;)