Jump to content

Esac_mirmidon

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    6987

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Esac_mirmidon

  1. Esac_mirmidon
    Useless report ever. What desync? Sound, position while flying, guns, aimpoints with bombs? The wheels not sync between clients is known. What else?
  2. Esac_mirmidon
    If you say so.
  3. Esac_mirmidon
    Thats why im talking about 3D final model. We can discuss if UV maps are "3D model" in strict sense or not. Obviously the instructions, the map to fit a 3D model are needed, but you need to build the 3D model itself
  4. Esac_mirmidon
    And more things planned lost, like the JHMCS helmet.
  5. Esac_mirmidon
    The final 3D model is 100% made by Metal2mesh. Nothing used from the former AI model.
  6. Esac_mirmidon
    Thats a proper bug report mate, hats off.
  7. Esac_mirmidon
    Thanks ¡¡¡¡ No hurry, take your time. I will send you a link to download a custom Spanish Navy AV-8B II+ our virtual squad flies. Thanks a lot for your kind reply
  8. Esac_mirmidon
    So nice !!!! Thanks for this. Would you consider doing another one in grey for the Spanish Armada Harrier II+? If not, would you mind sharing the Photoshop template to change colours?
  9. Esac_mirmidon
    Only on the DCS core side, because, as has been told numerous times, ED doesnt have any code from any RB module. Resuming, as the dispute is not resolved, ED can only make DCS compatible with RB modules as they are now. No updates, no changes to RB modules can be made by ED. Supporting only means try to make DCS compatible with the modules. Until the dispute is resolved. Or ED offers RB to buy the code. Or the worst scenario, no solution, RB is out of DCS and one day an update for DCS will advertise... "RB modules are no longer supported in DCS version 3.xxx. Please use previous versions of DCS to fly RB modules"
  10. Esac_mirmidon
    Any news about when other helicopters will have access to the new cargo system? It was advertised in a previous update but was not included in the end.
  11. Esac_mirmidon
    Because there is a fictional war in the Germany Map The Goverment will understand it
  12. Esac_mirmidon
    Thats a wise choice
  13. Esac_mirmidon
    Sometimes ED takes license to add things like 4 Harms on the F-16. Technical it is possible, but never fielded on operational use. For the Mig-29A as some has told us, is also possible as an upgrade for the Mig-29A. Not fielded but think about a war in Germany, that retrofit could be hurried up for the Fulcrum A fleet. I feel confortable sticking to reality on modules, not fancy scifi things, no impossible weapon combos. But certainly an ER or ET on a Fulcrum A is not scifi. Is just and opportunity on a What If scenario that is credible because it was possible at that time. Just think about Ukraine Mig-29A upgraded to use Harms, GBUs, etc. Now is realistic, not in 1989. But what if we want to fly a UKR Mig-29A attacking Caucasus Novorossysk Harbour with GBU? Those are opportunities that play a role inside what is realistic for a Mig-29A capabilites. But i understand your point also, purism on modules is a good thing but at the end DCS is only a sandbox for fun so ET/ER on an upgraded Mig-29A fielded on Damgarten against a NATO invasion? Why not?
  14. Esac_mirmidon
    Just imagine we have very kind mechanics on the base that are willing to update your Mig-29A and enjoy the E familty. If not, just dont use those missiles in your missions. Is just imagination. Like a war on the Cold War Germany Map, when in reality there were no conflicts at all on that terrain ever NATOvsWarPac. If we stick to pure reality we cant make any other mission on the Germany map except Recon and QRA, or training over friendly terrain.
  15. Esac_mirmidon
    So we need to relief on Chucks shoulders EDs work on complete module manuals? Dont get me wrong, Chucks manuals are excelent. But if ED is not going to provide one after so many years just offer him a job as an official partner for manuals. ED can dedicate resources and time in other things and we can have manuals from a dedicated and profesional fellow, quicker. Like CurrentHill, or Massun92, i think an official partner with Chuck is a win win
  16. Esac_mirmidon
    In my experience, moving maps, not a single perfomance problem. Dont know about the whole DCS, but i dont think so.
  17. Esac_mirmidon
    Im just giving answers. I know i cant change a thing. Thanks for enlighting me.
  18. Esac_mirmidon
    That means someone is lucky enough to have you working for free. When you finish please call me. I will be delighted to hire you for free
  19. Esac_mirmidon
    UGRA ¡¡¡ Hire that man please ......
  20. Esac_mirmidon
    Nobody keeps working for free for 2 years
  21. Esac_mirmidon
    Hornet EXP3 SA is way more limited and again, im talking about FIRST introduction of a SAR Ground Mapping Radar, not a submode on a Doppler base radar
  22. Esac_mirmidon
    Welcomed , mate
  23. Esac_mirmidon
    First SAR Ground Mapping Radar, it was the FIRST Synthetic Aperture Ground Mapping Radar in DCS. Thats what im writing Hornets and Vipers are Doppler Ground Maping Radars in DCS, not SAR. The difference is huge not only on resolution.
  24. Esac_mirmidon
    Just compare the Ground Mapping Radar of the Strike Eagle on release and the Hornet or Viper at the same time the Eagle was released. Thats why im talking about FIRST in the category. If you know well the Strike Eagle you can tell the difference
  25. Esac_mirmidon
    We are close to two years now, 2 years of possible development halted. Imagine what things could came in two years
×
×
  • Create New...