Zaphod

In VR I can see every 'Long' contact as a clear / white dot and I believe some well beyond that. (ie. St. Laurent to Caen seems no problem). Once they are within about 3 km I can barely see them at all until they're at about 500m. This is in open beta.

The Syria map and the instant action missions got me back into flying the F-14. It's basically my favorite module now, except for a few problems with Jester. He seems to be a bit late calling out target position much of the time, and never differentiates between multiple targets. Plus, he's very... excitable. I can deal with the late callouts and the lack of target differentiation in BFM, but it would be nice if he didn't yell so much. I'd love to have a more sedate version of Jester to fly with. Is there any word as to when "boring Jester" will become available?

Downgrading drivers is just not acceptable. But who uses radar on the MiG-21 anyway? That thing was designed to get you killed. ;)

As a tactic for AI, mostly vertical loops is kind of understandable. It's their behavior at the extremes that kills my immersion. It usually looks like they retain too much control at low speed, and have no torque effects to deal with (there's probably a much better way of putting this, but I only fly on the PC). You sometimes catch them in the act, but Tacview really makes it obvious. They're still beatable, but it's frustrating. I find that for WWII, I'm best with the 109. I'll fly the F86F SoH - Dogfight mission borrowed from the F86 quick missions and change the aircraft to suit my mood. This places you head to head over Tunb Kochak. Since the P-47 came out, I've been in a WWII mood. So I switch between these modules, setting the AI to excellent. If I'm flying a 109, I only have trouble with the Spitfire. Even keeping up the energy state and knowing where it's going to be after my turn, that thing is a murder machine with excellent level AI. It's still dumber than a box of rocks... but it can turn so fast . The I16 is surprisingly good against AI opponents too. On the other end is the A8. I die to everything in that. The Korean War era jets are probably the most frustrating though. Going against an excellent MiG15 in a F86 is just ugly. A MiG21 vs F5 fight is a close second. The "modern" modules are a bit different imo. The AI there is just plain dumb, and it's easy to exploit. Radar gun sights and predictable behavior make almost every conceivable matchup too easy. But I'm straying off topic there.

Bravo, B@ron. I have purchased all of the WWII modules and all but two of the rest. It would be very nice to have better AI behavior at high skill levels. Particularly with WWII era craft. There are rarely active WWII servers with a low enough ping for me to participate in PvP. Having sunk well over $1k into DCS, I find the situation somewhat depressing. The AI is either very stupid or slightly less stupid with the ability to bend physics. I hope the AI sees some improvement soon.

Interesting. We were both playing on his dedicated server at the time. I stuck a YT video up so he could see it, and it ended up getting something like 170 views. It's a nothing channel with all of 9 subscribers. It seems I was not alone in my confusion.

The thing I'm most curious about is why it triggered for me but not the guy I was flying with. We're both GMT -5. I had initially thought my hardware clock was set to GMT, but this was not the case. I found it kind of annoying rather than funny, but it didn't cause me to crash or anything. I'm ok at focusing on detailed tasks, and the left MFD is not one of the things I focus on during landings. In testing after the mission, I couldn't get it to land on 3 eject icons or 3 ED icons. The air brake triggered a lot, and I rolled engine failure a couple times. But it seemed to mostly roll gear down or gear failure. Might try some more later, or maybe not. I have plenty of other modules to fly. The eject icon is self-explanatory, but what does rolling 3 ED icons do?

It probably activated on my hardware clock. I have mine set to GMT, my friend probably does not. We're both GMT -5. Not quite so jarring as the SFM only AI. But still... it's annoying.

This has been messing with me all night. It wasn't happening to the guy I fly with. Didn't occur to me that tomorrow was 4/1. My sense of humor is on opt out. I'd rather not, thanks.

Glad it's not just me. I hate to fly against anything on less than excellent difficulty, but things like WW2 and Korean War era aircraft are ridiculous. The Mig15 on excellent was out climbing me in a M-2000C the other day. They AI is still just as stupid as ever, but they never seem to lose much energy while maneuvering. The one notable exception has been the AI in a F-86. They're particularly stupid for some reason. I don't want easy, and I don't want to follow an overpowered loop bot that ignores physics. I would love to fly against "top gun" level AI. I don't care if it melts my CPU. I'll buy a new one. It would be great if BFM against the AI was adequate training for going up against a competent human pilot.

Can I get a link to your Discord server? Thanks.

I see it now. It was late here when I posted and it was all looking like nonsense to me. Thanks.:thumbup:

So... I bought Vaicom pro and its extensions months ago. Finally decided to get it working today, and it's pretty great so far. But I mostly bought it for the F-14, and I have no idea what to say to Jester to make him do stuff. Is there a guide anywhere specific to the F-14 and controlling the RIO with Vaicom pro? Without the menu, I'm a bit lost. Thanks

Given the recent reduction in power of the 7.62 rounds to closer match reality, I feel the UH-1 needs additional historical armaments added to the DCS version. My (completely reasonable) UH-1 wishlist in order of what I want first: XM30 An experimental system, the XM30 provided fully flexible mounts using the XM156/M156 universal mounts for two XM140 30mm cannon, with 600 rounds of ammunition per gun. XM31 Another attempt to up the firepower from existing systems, the XM31 provided two M24A1 20mm cannon in pods fitted to XM156/M156 universal mounts each with 600 rounds of ammunition, and flexible in elevation only. XM59/M59 A variation on the M23, the XM59/M59 was modified to accept either an XM213/M213 .50 caliber machine gun or an XM175 40mm grenade launcher in addition to being able to mount the M60. M22 Armament Subsystem technical schematic XM11, XM22/M22, and the Maxwell System Both of these armament systems were designed to allow the UH-1 to fire the AGM-22 missile. Sources claim that the XM11 provided an XM70 sight and support racks for 6 missiles, three on each side of the aircraft. However, US Army FM 1-40 says that the XM11 designation was unassigned. XM5/M5 The XM5/M5 system consists of a nose turret for a single M75 40mm grenade launcher. The mount was fully flexible and controlled by the pilot via a hand controlled sight electronically linked to the turret. The system either provided 150 or 302 rounds of ammunition. XM9 A variant of the XM6/M6 system, the XM9 substitutes the four M60C 7.62×51mm machine guns with two M75 grenade launchers, one on either side of the aircraft. The M22 was an improvement providing a more specific sight, the XM58, and using the XM156 universal mount. The M22 also provided for a total of 6 missiles, three on each side of the aircraft. It is important to note as well that the XM11 is associated with the standard SS.11 missiles (AGM-22A), while the XM22/M22 system was designed around the US upgraded AGM-22B missiles. XM26 With the development of the BGM-71 TOW missile Hughes had been given the contract to develop a launching system for the UH-1. By 1968 development had shifted over to development of a system for the AH-56 helicopter which was eventually canceled. The XM26 provided two 3-Tube launchers on either side of the aircraft, as well as the necessary sighting equipment. While the XM26 was more of a test platform, the two prototypes were deployed operationally as an emergency measure in South Vietnam to counter the Easter Invasion in 1972. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._h...#UH-1_Iroquois

Despite running a 55" monitor and trackir pro, I can barely fly without VR. It's just not the same experience. VR in DCS is the best.

I'm OK with this, but I want the same consideration for the UH-1 (I have both modules, but the UH-1 is the only one I fly). Given the recent reduction in power of the 7.62 rounds to closer match reality, I feel the UH-1 needs additional historical armaments added to the DCS version. My (completely reasonable) UH-1 wishlist in order of what I want first: XM30 An experimental system, the XM30 provided fully flexible mounts using the XM156/M156 universal mounts for two XM140 30mm cannon, with 600 rounds of ammunition per gun. XM31 Another attempt to up the firepower from existing systems, the XM31 provided two M24A1 20mm cannon in pods fitted to XM156/M156 universal mounts each with 600 rounds of ammunition, and flexible in elevation only. XM59/M59 A variation on the M23, the XM59/M59 was modified to accept either an XM213/M213 .50 caliber machine gun or an XM175 40mm grenade launcher in addition to being able to mount the M60. M22 Armament Subsystem technical schematic XM11, XM22/M22, and the Maxwell System Both of these armament systems were designed to allow the UH-1 to fire the AGM-22 missile. Sources claim that the XM11 provided an XM70 sight and support racks for 6 missiles, three on each side of the aircraft. However, US Army FM 1-40 says that the XM11 designation was unassigned. XM5/M5 The XM5/M5 system consists of a nose turret for a single M75 40mm grenade launcher. The mount was fully flexible and controlled by the pilot via a hand controlled sight electronically linked to the turret. The system either provided 150 or 302 rounds of ammunition. XM9 A variant of the XM6/M6 system, the XM9 substitutes the four M60C 7.62×51mm machine guns with two M75 grenade launchers, one on either side of the aircraft. The M22 was an improvement providing a more specific sight, the XM58, and using the XM156 universal mount. The M22 also provided for a total of 6 missiles, three on each side of the aircraft. It is important to note as well that the XM11 is associated with the standard SS.11 missiles (AGM-22A), while the XM22/M22 system was designed around the US upgraded AGM-22B missiles. XM26 With the development of the BGM-71 TOW missile Hughes had been given the contract to develop a launching system for the UH-1. By 1968 development had shifted over to development of a system for the AH-56 helicopter which was eventually canceled. The XM26 provided two 3-Tube launchers on either side of the aircraft, as well as the necessary sighting equipment. While the XM26 was more of a test platform, the two prototypes were deployed operationally as an emergency measure in South Vietnam to counter the Easter Invasion in 1972. M56 A mine dispenser system for the UH-1H helicopter, the M56 is composed of two SUU-13D/A dispensers on the M156 Universal Mount, which is reinforced to handle the additional weight. XM94 A variant of the XM93, the XM94 substitutes the M129 40mm grenade launcher for one or both of the door mounted M134 7.62×51mm Miniguns. A/A49E-11 Referred to as the Defensive Armament System or DAS, this system is composed of two mounts for GAU-15/A and GAU-16/A .50 caliber machine guns or GAU-17/A 7.62×51mm Miniguns, as well as, two BRU-20/A or BRU-21/A bomb racks for current 2.75" rocket launchers. This system was also designed primarily for use with the UH-1N helicopter (and is in use with the US Marine Corps as well in this capacity), but is likely suitable for other long-fuselage UH-1 types. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/U.S._helicopter_armament_subsystems#UH-1_Iroquois :thumbup:

It really depends on the game. The perspective matters a lot. If it's even off by an imperceptible amount, it can cause motion sickness. I've had a few games that no matter how you tried to center yourself, they'd cause motion sickness (Ground Runner Trials was perhaps the worst offender in my experience). But DCS world does not seem to suffer from this issue at all. I know next to nothing about your headset, but I'm currently using a Rift S for DCS. It's great.

I found the option you mentioned, and I couldn't be happier. It makes SO much difference in the short 1v1 dogfights. THANK YOU!

Thanks. I'll look a bit deeper for it. I didn't even consider it before buying. Had to have it. But I'm generally a short dogfight kinda guy. Jester repeatedly telling me the target is on our 12 when it's taking up most of the HUD gets annoying. One of my resolutions this year is to give the F-14 a serious attempt, so I should probably get used to it. My one hope for a human RIO got sucked into the A-10C. :pilotfly:

Is there an option to just make him shut the hell up? Silent Unless absolutely necessary Jester would be great. Boring Jester can't come soon enough.

No, you understood. That's what the gunner did. The BMP exploded and everything. The thing is, they don't shoot at soft targets much either. I don't have an issue with the gunners not making everything explode, but you shouldn't need to ignite the ammo store or even kill the crew to render a BRDM or BMP ineffective. They should be lighting those boys up when in range, even if they can't get a nice explosion out of it. I'm sure it's probably something to do with the damage modeling in the game, but I don't know enough about that to really have an informed opinion. I would like to see the gunners actually do something other than sit there and die though. Thanks for responding. :thumbup:

I've only been flying the UH-1 for a month or so, but it seems like my AI gunners/co-pilot/wingmen have become very complacent. They can have a clear and easy shot, have free fire capability turned on, and be under fire, and still do nothing. It went so far as to have a gunner begin to open fire on a BMP after we had been shot down and were upside down on the ground. Is there anything I can do locally to mitigate this behavior? It's my favorite module, or would be if the friendly AI hadn't gone braindead.