Jump to content

Nate--IRL--

Members
  • Posts

    11148
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    13

Everything posted by Nate--IRL--

  1. The Closer you are to the ground, the more ground reflections interfere with the radars operation, giving false alerts. It is really only useful at higher altitudes. I forget the min alt, IIRC it is some thing like 1000ft maybe. Nate
  2. Kinda, you must jump out of the aircraft with RAlt-J, set the new waypoints with Combined Arms and then RAlt-J back in. It was never intended as a feature but it does work. Nate
  3. You can set waypoints as you like, but to activate dormant aircraft at an airbase would require the use of Radio Command Triggers I would imagine. Nate
  4. Pg 12 of the manual. Nate
  5. Good question - I'll check........... EDIT:- For FC3 aircraft at least, the new waypoints are shown after R-Alt-Jing back into the cockpit. I haven't checked any DCS aircraft. You must R-ALTJ out in order to set waypoints. Then Jump back in. Nate
  6. Hold Shift when placing waypoints on the road. Don't use the set path Button. Nate
  7. It is on the list with a million other known bugs. Nate
  8. He didn't turn on the lights, they are present in the game. Nate
  9. I can route many ground units through cities using roads. You must be doing some thing wrong. Nate
  10. Currently there is only CA. CA2 doesn't exist, but there are already Ideas for it if it ever gets green-lit. Nate
  11. My point still stands - Player Radar was never intended to be a feature of CA. In fact originally the Radar Sams were omitted from player control. Nate
  12. The AI can ford smaller rivers - this behaviour is intentional. Nate
  13. OMG? Has this ever been mentioned as a feature for CA1? Nate
  14. Crazing =/= scratches. Nate
  15. You'd be surprised at the amount of people here who don't. :) Nate
  16. It is a known issue IIRC, Pilot and Battle Commander behaviour for Allies only is not the same IIRC. Nate
  17. Nothing to do with performance IIRC, It just Borks various unrelated aspects of the AI IIRC, As well as causing a few other issues that seemingly have nothing to do with trees or AI. In other words it can be done, it just breaks too many things for it to be a priority. Nate
  18. But that is my point. It is far far better that the criticisms are about the product, and not that some promised item will not be delivered. That lesson has been learned the hard way over the years. The First is constructive, the other Destructive. Nate
  19. Absolutely no. If said feature gets delayed, people scream fraud among other ignorant vitriolic bile. It has happened in the past, repeatedly. Now very very little is announced until it is confirmed to make it in to a release. Blame the asshats screaming blue murder in years past for the current reticence to give details. Nate
  20. I think perhaps it has been in production well before FC3 got anywhere near Beta. It was always going to be done. Nate
  21. I want DCS Flanker so much :( All ED AFAIK. Nate
  22. I don't have to prove it. ED and/or the 3rd party devs have to conduct their own research and make a business decision themselves. Basically the market research done by these companies dictates what gets built. I would be of the opinion that there is a market for something like the Su-27, but is it bigger than say an F-16? That is a simple choice for a Dev. However the problem with this approach is the situation of 2xF-15Es being developed, which in my opinion is absurd. Nate
  23. Sounds like overheating. But need a track to be sure. Nate
  24. Of course it is ok to ask, in fact I think you've answered the question yourself. Less potential sales and difficulty in obtaining information. Nate
  25. What kind of answer do you expect from the developers? Nate
×
×
  • Create New...