Hawkeye_UK

Yep aware of that - i'm referencing the MFD push button that use to cycle between on the TAD.

Track files to follow from MP test. Ok so spawned in separate group, changed group ID to match on net so usual blue circle on TAD for wingman, also now showing in HMCS which is great. We were 01 and 02 within the group. However, oddly enough SPI broadcast isn't working on TAD, just say's off on the MFD Also SPI from wingman and vice versa stopped working after first designation? Anyone else seeing this? Not on TAD or HMCS

Track files to follow from a MP test - however early feedback in VR after the first mark point there is issues with them not being placed at the point you are looking at. Always offset to the previous mark point by some distance.

Why would you want to remove trees ?

If only it only pulled 12g .....exceeds that.

Ps sorry i had already hit reply, went to make a drink, came back and finished then posted. 2 other replies in between that i hadn't read as in the message posting screen, but to note not only me that has picked up on the 15.

Hey Snappy, both. As in super easy to operate, no challenge, easy flight models, easy to meta play. As i say on our server you mainly see new players going up in them, or people seeking to exploit the attributes. It's all to point and shoot, questionably over accurate rapid radar pictures, god like datalink etc. Perhaps i'm being harsh given been playing with the flanker on and off for over 20 years. Also easy to kill the flankers out in the open since the 120 improved guidance/range combined with TWS coming into the game on the 16/18 in the last year. Hence i would suggest given the numerous contributions on the russian forums complaining of countermeasure resistance i would hypothesize that's what has brought the change, reading between the lines. The FC3 players wanted to reduce the probability of them being shot down. As for PFM, they do not compare to the fidelity of the FF modules so i'd take that with a large grain of salt. Systems wise obviously they are massively simplified, take IFF or lack of it for example. Also being honest let's take the F15 as you mention it, its highly credible because of its ridiculously high G ability which can out turn any missile, its super easy to close on targets if exploited correctly its almost a cheat mode. its radar well that's another discussion, as i said we look on it as meta play to be honest. As for snap hotas dogfight modes, yep but you have to know more than 3 keybinds to get their in the first place. I really do not want to get embroiled in a FF/FC3 debate, i have no interest in the subject, but its sufficient to say that at least the FF modules require some minimal study and practice. Whilst we don't really use the FC3 aircraft the 120 getting toned down with chaff resistance affects the gameplay on 18vs16/JF17's, 16v's JF17's, 14's vs18's etc. Not really bothered about FC3 its the knock on effect for those wanting to employ BVR tactics correctly (and i don't mean airquake) combined with Strike and SEAD/DEAD packages. At the end of the day i say have fun, that's what matters, whilst its sold as a simulation many elements of it are purely what it is, a game. That said we shouldn't be looking at balancing gameplay all because certain sectors of the community are unhappy, that is a slippery slope, the one thing that draw's many is that it is an approximation. I see many comments on here, some from avid flanker fans, everyone is entitled to their own opinion. I just hope one day we get a full fidelity Flanker as for the more serious servers the FC3 aircraft will then no doubt be completely removed from redfor.

Yea rarely fly against FC3 aircraft in our pvp server re point and shoot. way to easy and my request to make them harder is born out of a desire not to have it easy. Rare to see the FC3 aircraft going up unless we have a new player etc, most migrate onto the JF17 re redfor

+1 first thing i also disable in VR however happy for those that like it. I find the same as the last post it hides the switches and clutters the view so dont understand why people go mad for the model to be there. I'm clearly missing something lol

Thanks Uboats please see attached track file. So have selected the Bradley and Abrams. You can see that you can put infinite 25MM and Abrams AP rounds through the vehicle body without it taking any damage. It is completely immune. As soon as you catch a small portion just in the neck of the turret the unit will die, even with the Bradley. The problem here is that when the unit is being moved around rapidly, that's easier said than done at range with an AP round. In reality the whole unit (and sadly for the crew) would be toast. Hope this helps? HQ7 TRACK FOR UBOATS.trk

The OP quite rightly highlights the major issue re the reverse ground effect. IRL the effect happens to be the opposite and a rule of thumb in any aircraft is that the ground effect is approximately half the wingspan. Anyway, in game, yes i've been sucked in by the hornet flight model a few times (terrible pun). I'm confident ED will get there and it's been acknowledged.

Yea i knew it had been reported but for some reason i couldn't find the post again so started a new one, apologies. Now you have linked i have bumped your original post in the hope that one of us gets some resolution. Yes that's exactly what i meant re moving vehicle on the road, seems particularly bad in PG also, cannot get any IR mav's to lock. Been driving me nuts for years lol and have to really on the Mav E which is not ideal in many situations plus required multiple passes over the AO. Needs resolving urgently.

Bump

Each page is adjusted separately however what i would say is that in VR they all appear to start to dim.

oh dear, ok so just to clarify you said my comments where conspiracy in nature, aka that there had been no complaints. You implied very strongly that my reference had no substitute in truth, that is not a lie that is something that has happened. That is not debatable but a matter of fact. As for your other comments re delusional i'd like to refer you to 1.2 of the forum rules "Forum members must treat each other with respect and tolerance". One thing i would say is that perhaps you should have respect for people on here, as you never quite know that person's background or their real world experience. It's a shame how the internet encourages some elements of society to say things that they would not dare say to someone's face and thus when posting anything that is a good rule to have. Wish you all the best and remember the forum rules.

Ok Lets see, so if you think there have been no complaints on the forums direct to one of the main devs from FC3 players then have a review of the following; https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4473481&postcount=9430 https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4472634&postcount=9400 https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4472825&postcount=9405 https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4472854&postcount=9406 https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4473158&postcount=9421 https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4473863&postcount=9432 So no conspiracy, maybe don't just read the English forums lol ;-) Reality is the 120's are super easy to evade now, it wasn't exactly hard before to be honest as with the sam's but now, yea its super easy.

Await next response from me - however yes people using FC3 aircraft complaining, mainly from the Russian forum's and understandably their favourite aircraft and how they cannot compete with 120s. I don't like the change as it makes it easier for me to notch missiles.

Bump @uboats is there an update for this and the Chinese Bmp3?

Ok so just wondering if any feedback on this issue / fix? It's a pretty major flaw in what is a quality map.

yep, the 120 despite having work completed to make it "more realistic", ED's own words, on the last patch it has been nerfed because it seems that on the Russian forums there has been an outcry that FC3 planes are having trouble with them and it seems if you speak Russian they are talking straight to the dev's, which have given in. So we are back to balancing their game systems rather than realism. Not good, utterly disappointing. ED need to stop doing this if they are to be credible.

Ok so this is on old problem but its getting more painful. Why on the F16, Harrier etc will a AGM 65D/G etc attempt to constantly lock a lampost over a main battle tank that is right in front of it, nightmare when the tank's are moving also. Time this issue was resolved, the lampost as an object needs looking at, it should have zero presence in game and not be targetable, but that fact that a slim 30cm wide pole creates a large visual lock than a tank, something somewhere is wrong with the code. Please sort.

Therefore if your keen to save £10 dollars then buy it now at $59.99 with the upgrade hopefully next week of $10 making it £69.99 as opposed to the full module price of $79.99 when it enters the shop.

lol i think ED will have thought about that. However do not expect this to be in the September sale the only thing in the shop, short of no further bugs being found in closed testing will be the A10Cv2 at $79.99 and it will definitely not be on sale. The A10C we have in the shop will not be there anymore.

Its never been TMS, that is for managing the target, aka Target Management Switch. Use the coolie switch to get your SOI selected. Suggest a review of the manual and how the hotas functions work to avoid confusion re comments above. Good luck, its a brilliant module and all these years later is still being polished.

Ok so super easy, hit the UFC button on the harm WPN page, on the DED chose a table and enter; 201 - Roland ADS 205 - Roland SR Also for other Western AD. 124 - Rapier FSA Blindfire Radar 125 - Rapier FSA Launcher 202 - Patriot 203 - Hawk SR 204 - Hawk TR 206 - Gepard 207 - Vulcan Works the same as the others back in the wpn page for selection etc.