Exorcet

The F-16 is a bit faster when the E has CFT's, but they're pretty close. It looks like the gap opens up as altitude increases.

I've noticed this too. When I want to put a somewhat difficult SAM on the field, I often end up using the SA-2. I know ED was going through missiles and adjusting parameters, but I've lost track of what is considered done or not. The SA-2 is very low drag which gives it great range and agility, where as missiles like the Patriot and SA-11 fly like bricks.

Groups of planes fly in formation by default. You don't have to do anything, unless you want a specific formation. Can you provide more info?

Strange screenshot. The Eagle can't rail launch Sparrows.

That the topic seems to come up so much may hint that it's more of a concern than it appears. Only a portion of a portion of a portion of players are going to even find the poll. How many people respond to the average wish list poll anyway?

This is airframe dependent. Modern radars have lookdown capability and aren't bothered much by ground clutter. The ED radars are an exception, but ED has said they will revise these radar, so I expect them to improve. Even with current ED radars, you can still attack from above, you just need to maintain a shallow angle. As soon as you've launched a missile, you no longer need to stay high (although sometimes it's good to retain height) and can dive, removing concerns about lookdown and ground clutter. If you happen to be in a plane that has look down issues, then you will need to descend. Starting high can still be an advantage though, as you can trade altitude for speed. Flying higher also generally helps range and endurance. If you're looking for a perfect situation to start off every engagement, you're not going to find it. If the other plane you're trying to fight is good, it will try to make problems for you. Your job is to find advantages to use for your own gain and to create problems for your adversary. You listed a few common tactics in your first post, instead of trying to blindly apply them, determine if they are feasible in your current situation and which would provide the largest advantage to you. BVR is complex and dynamic, you can't boil it down to a simple 3 step process and learn it in a day.

Here is one way to combine them: Start high and fast, then shoot After shooting dive and turn away Maintain missile lock as long as needed, then turn 90 degrees or more to avoid incoming missiles.

On the one hand it's a lot of work, on the other it means DCS isn't going to run out of modules any time soon. It's a tradeoff in a way.

A models would be great, from the original to ADF's to MLU's. In my ideal world DCS modules would include entire aircraft families.

Using this as a g meter of sorts might be a reasonable way to include it even if it's not strictly realistic. In real life, you can feel g build up. I was recently on a flight and you can feel very minute motions of the aircraft unlike in a simulation. Subbing sounds in for the experience of motion can be a workaround. If you want more immersion while keeping with realistic sounds though, perhaps an overhaul of AI comms is due. More varied voices, lines, and more focus on creating and communicating information.

While this does exist for this purpose, it's much easier to have the delay built into the trigger. This is the case with message/sound to coalition/group/whatever. In a complex mission with tons of triggers an integrated delay saves so much time and potentially makes bug checking a thousand times easier. I think it would easily be worth the effort to add delays into triggers even if a method for doing this already exists.

The user files are harder to integrate and less important though. They're optional in the first place, so they don't really have an impact on space. It would be nice to include user skins in the manager, but it's more of reach feature than a primary one. Also by having the manager, we might open up room for module developers to make more skins without worrying about bloating DCS install size (this is part of the inspiration behind the Extra category I mentioned in my example image).

I've never had a problem with this, but some fade in/out for visuals and sounds seems like an easy fix.

Yes, the detection trigger is heavily requested, but some added functionality like time detected and such could make it even more useful. Like you've said there are cases where something may only appear on the radar for a second. Not enough time to really gain any meaningful info. The mission designer might not want this to count as detection. However, there is some functionality to do this as is, such as by timing the detection with a flag counter. But if these things could be built into detection triggers themselves, that would be very useful.

That is the consensus reached yes. I have not seen a single post against images. Incorrect. This will change on a case by case basis. This is unrelated to the livery manager idea and has solutions have been provided already multiple times over. Which doesn't make a livery manager any less useful.

Since you're just repeating yourself, you can probably find an answer by rereading the thread. What point are you even trying to make? Anyway I'm posting because I thought of another option to add, which would be "remove liveries for aircraft not installed", it seems like something most people concerned about space would want based on their comments. Maybe we could list the suggestions in the first post @Hardcard?

And no one is arguing that. What I said is: If you're the only person on the planet that thinks images are needed in a livery manager, that might indicate that images aren't needed in a livery manager for it to be useful to people in general.

Given that we don't know what MAC was even supposed to be exactly, I wouldn't agree here. If anything there is still plenty of room for something like a modern Jane's USNF. I'd even argue that MAC being separate from DCS might be a mistake. MAC, as a DCS module, could possibly facilitate FC3 level aircraft that wouldn't make it into DCS otherwise, maybe including modern Russian assets.

Out of curiosity was damage to leading and trailing edges looked at as well? Or only holes in the center of the wing?

No, the problem is that you don't realize that your opinions are your own and no one else's. You're describing unrelated problems that exist regardless and have already had solution proposed.

You get the missing texture skin, which is orange or something. As far as I know you can force this to show up on planes currently by deleting skins, so having a livery manager doesn't enable this anymore than is already case. It's not hard to solve in any case. The missing skin can be replaced by one that isn't missing. If you really want to be paranoid about it then you could have a bunch of low res skins to cover different camos as replacements. Which disucssion? Certainly not the one in this thread, official livery management is totally feasible. Export liveries, if they are real, would be historical no? In any case though, if desired we could rearrange the categories. Missing liveries can be replaced by the default. Or we could have low res versions of liveries for MP.

This thread arose out of a concern for disc space. If your drive is full, then it's pretty easy to make a decision. You don't use WWII planes? Disable all those liveries. It doesn't matter what any of them look like. You yourself seem to be under the impression that all anyone wants is an all button anyway, which would also make images pretty pointless. If there is a particular livery that you want to add or remove, then you probably know its name. I can recognize a few livery names that I'm familiar with, and I can probably ID whether I'd use quite a few more by name (North Korea for example isn't a country I use a lot because of the current map list so I might remove their liveries if I were trying to make space). You can't seem to find a reason to go through the checklist, but others can. So I don't see the problem here. And before it comes up, I'm not against images either. It's just that they are completely unnecessary to make a livery manager worthwhile or user friendly.

Having commands to set options for multiple planes is fine, but there is an obvious need for them on a per module basis. The categories are meant to serve as examples, not the only possible list of options. They are pretty self explanatory though and could have descriptions added to them. I specifically explained what basic and extra are, they serve to facilitate module developers in creating livery lists for users with different space needs. Modules might classify the first 10 liveries as basic for users with little disc space. Any additional liveries could be considered extra and targeted at players with unlimited space. There is no need for images. Players who don't want liveries for a given plane pick default only. Users who want all the liveries pick all. Anyone looking for something inbetween has options. I'm not sure if every module has liveries for famous pilots, but if so that could be its own category. Yep

No amount of CM's will guarantee spoofing a missile. More should be better, but it also depends on what weapon you're up against. If you dropped them all and still got hit, you might have had AB on, limiting flare effectiveness and also just had a stroke of bad luck.

I went ahead and made an image to represent what the livery manager might look like based on the module manager: The quick options are additive: Default Livery is the first livery on the list when the aircraft is set as a member of its home nation Home Country Liveries are the above along with any other livery from the home nation Historical Liveries are the above along with export liveries or liveries representing similar but not identical foreign planes (F-2 vs F-16) Basic Liveries - I included an option for devs to have a small list of varied livers for those players with limited disc space Extra Liveries - Basically the opposite of Basic, an extended list for those users with no concerns about disc space All Liveries - Check all boxes, download everything. To the right is the full list of liveries for manual selection There is a confirm choices button below to tell DCS to go ahead of add/remove liveries as requested. I just wanted to put something together to start the discussion on what exactly should be included so that we don't end up with a vague request.