winz

3)You end the mission by exiting the sim. You can use the ' key (between ; and enter) to see your current mission score. Above 50 is victory. Below 50 is defeat.

Noob == Idiot. Newbs are the ones, that are mostly welcome, new players willing to listen and learn. Best explained here: http://www.cad-comic.com/cad/20060823 :)

If you downloaded in the past 2 days, then you already have 1.1.0.9, If you downloaded before that, then you have 1.1.0.8, and you only need the 1.1.0.9 patch.

Same behaviour here for the RWR

It's actually a great feeling to be able to handle changes like these without seeing the patch notes, just by knowing your aircraft and finding what's different :)

Some workaround for non fullscreen users available? (as alt-tab doesn't flush the vram in windowed mode) I'm using windowed mode, because alt+tab switching to other apps doesn't work for me in fullscreen + softth configuration. And I like to have the ability to switch out of the sim i.e in case of a skype message.

My question is, why it shouldn't be able to detect aircraft with 0 closure rate flying up in the sky, where there is no background? The radar wave does reflect of the aircraft and does return to the radar. And the signal is good as any other. It is a pulse-doppler radar after all. The doppler shift is only used for filtering when it is required. It is a feature, not a mandatory property. There doesn't have to be a doppler shift in the signal for the radar to process it if a frequency pass-through set on the expected fq is not enabled. sure, it will show 0 closure rate, but is that a problem?

I love the little details.. fingerprints on displays, dust, reflection of glass infront of gauges, details on windows...looking forward for it

Well, there is no need to filter for immobile objects, when you are looking up in the sky, is it? So any strong radar return can be a valid target, no matter what the doppler shift on the returned waves is.

It might seem overhelming at first, but it is really not that hard if you grasp the concept. If you've done it for BS, then it is the same for A-10. I was setting the same setup as you will a week ago (left monitor for mfds, right for the rest, different resolutions, right monitor as win main monitor). It was my first experience with dualmonitor and I had it all in running condition in less then two hours. If you havent, check out helios (http://www.scsimulations.com/content.php?204) it's really, really worth the time you spent setting it up.

As a SW developer I assure that the opposite is in fact the true. Every engine change would have to been tested on other modules as well. What worse, every module would have to be compatibile with the engine change at the time the change is made. Every small bugfix for A-10C would have to be tested on Ka50. An example - during the development process of A-10C the radio system has changed to allow different aircrafts/atcs/.... to use different frequencies. In that time some resources would have to been shifted from A-10C to Ka-50 to implement support for such feature. The same hold true for every new feature. And keep in mind, that the core engine is evolving rapidly and we have no idea how many new features were implemented for A-10C, because we can only directly see a small portion of them. It's much more simplier to freeze the Ka-50 branch for the time A-10C is developed. And you can dedicate all your resources on that what matters most - getting a new modul out as soon as possible.

Try to run the sim as admin

that's almost the same setup I have (the same CPU & GK & Ram amount), and I can only recommend it. A10C is running smoothly on high settings at 1680x1050.

No, the poly count inrease would be even larger, because you're not drawing a line, but a cone. At 180 degree FOV it would be around 10 000* more polygons without lods.

That's just silly wordplay. By increasing draw distance, you have to increase poly count, if you want to preserve the level of detail. Thus increasing draw distance is directly increasing poly count, which in turn has direct impact on performance.

It has almost everything to do km, because that's the area you want to display. If you have average terrain complexity x polys per square km, then trying to display 2 square km will give you double the polies. The average terrain complexity is limiting how big area you can display with still reasonable poly count. If you want larger are you have to reduce the terrain complexity somehow => reduce the terrain detail. That's why Arma 2 looks so great from infantry perspective, but is absolutely unusable for flying. The poly count with increased visibility would be insane. And there is no way (except for LODs) to reduce the poly count. Most games in other genres artifically obscur player visible area with buildings/high mountains. Then they use precompiled visibility maps (created during map compilation) to only draw what the player can really see from the place he is standing. If you use a no-clip cheat in any FPS since Quake 1 to fly a little up, you'll see that only a very limited portion of the map is rendered. This trick is unusable in open world games, because you have no way to limit players visibility. That's why CoD will allways look better then Arma. The other trick used mostly on consoles, is to reduce the FOV, so only a narrower portion of the map has to be rendered. But once again, having narrower FOV in a flight sim is a no go. One thing that might help is DX11 tesselation, because it can be reduced lineary with distance (unlike LODs, which will be allways jumpy) edit: and we haven't touched other subjects that are affected by terrain complexity.. i.e. ground forces AI

Yes, it mostly comes down to poly count. The problem with draw distance is that the poly count does not rise lineary. What's worse, you cannot use tricks appliciable in most other genres, to get the poly count down (Arma has this problem too). You cannot have a rich detailed world with high visibility range and low poly count...

Try to set 140km draw distance in Arma2 ;) And then try to render it 3x, because that's what the engine has to do when you have TGP + Mav camera... not to mention the cases when you export MFDS to another monitor. Have you ever tried to fly in a fast mover in Arma 2? You cannot fly high, because you won't be able to see the ground.

The same here, I'm flying Su-25 in FC 2.0 atm and the difference is huge. Cannot wait to see what Nevada will show us.

ADF is equipment on the aircraft itselft. It can point to the direction the radio signal is comming from. Using similiar principle human brain uses our ears to poinpoint sound origin direction (comparing signal from directional antenna pointing at different directions). The signal doesn't have to have any specific 'ADF' properties. Too bad its not modelled... that could be a fun mission :)

cool, thanks for the answer :)

I've never played any of the X games, but they sure do look interesting. If I would jump into the franchise, which sequel should I choose? Will I miss anything important if I skip the first two parts, and move just to X3? :)

it's in a now way a memory problem. It's trying to read a virtual memory adress 0x00000000 and that's more common known as null pointer exception. Try to reinstall dx9 and the Microsoft Visual C++ 2010 Redistributable Package. edit: you can also try to launch the game as admin.

Yes, you can. I've seen this to be used as some kind of edit protection - I've seen the lag/long edited, so when you open the mission in the editor, all the units will be on the other side of the globe. The mission ran fine in the sim, because it uses the x/y coordinates.

AFAIK you can also allign shkval to target points (not waypoints) stored in the PVI. Will try it when I get out of work.