CommandT

+1 here for the wider and more realistic road bases. MAESTR0, would it be possible to replace or remove all the NATO equipment from East German bases? There's lots of NATO GPUs, tow bars, loaders and various equipment scattered all around the East German airbases which is slightly immersion-breaking. But otherwise, also big thanks for working on the map, and despite some of the above shortcomings, it continuous to be the best map in DCS for me atm!

Let's hope they up their game for the Balkans. It would be a great shame for all of us otherwise. Such a beautiful part of the World and would offer such a wide veriety for both NATO and Redfor ops. I also sincerely hope they don't do a copy and paste job like they did in a lot of locations on the Sinai map.

Are you planning on releasing any of these textures? They look fantastic!

It's super great to get highway landing strips finally but I do agree - the realism of them is somewhat hampered by the rather narrow obtacle clearence and the width of the highways use for these strips. At the very least the trees need to be offset by some safety margin on the sides to make them feel a bit more realistic. Hope this can be rectified. Otherwise looking great and thanks for working hard on expanding the map

Interesting. I guess like you say the main issue at the end is still cost. Though I would be curious what sort of budgets we are talking here... multiple millions $? I do still feel strongly that there's a proper sim that is totally missing on the market. DCS is fantastic with aircraft fidelity and flight phyisics but sucks in gameplay and obviously offers little to no non-military missions and flying. MSFS is somwhat better in gameplay (still far off what it could be) but sucks with aircraft fidelity / physics and just isn't that well-optimised and offers zero military stuff. Would be great to have a sim that could have excellent physics and great gameplay whether it was civilian or military all in one. Hypothetically-speaking, how difficult and expensive would it be to create a small realistic map (lets say 50x50km) with say a city plus some countryside/ surrounding area, and have one or two helicopters such as the OH-6 as a starting point? Lets pretend that integrating a driving sim as part of the game is something to be done further down the line. The weather engine can also wait along with all the other assets as well. Let's just say a map plus a helicopter with great physics and that's it as a starting point. Using some sort of modern graphics engine (Unreal engine maybe)?

Interesting. Just thinking out loud here so feel free to shoot me down but couldn't you technically load a slightly different version of the world depending on whether you are flying or driving? I mean both players could be in the same game world but the driver will have all the additional ground textures, perhaps some additional roadside objects, signs etc, with simplified textures for the weather/ sky, whilst the person flying will have a simplified version of the same terrain whilst retaining the basic shape of the road the car is driving on without additional ground features and obviously have the complicated weather/ clouds ect? The draw distance could also be loaded totally differently for ground vehicles since there is no need for buildings to be rendered 10km away. The only things that would remain identical between both are the physics and the general shape of the terrain (obviously only around the areas where drivers could drive - otherwise simplified ground mesh could be used in all other locations where only flying can take place). Would this technically not be possible? The only real issue with this idea is that if the driver has more additional ground objects, how does the pilot interact with said objects - can he fly through them ect. But maybe there could be a solution here too? For example still having all the additional big items sticking out of the ground like light poles and signs with reduced LODs and textures whilst ignoring anything extra like branches on the side of the road ect?

Yeah but unfortunately firing at max range, they will still a) descend to low level even if you tell them to fly at 55,000ft, and b) still continue to drive forward and engage in BFM. I mean the max range launch doesn't really solve the fundamental probelm of how they fly or fight in DCS

Thanks Wags!! For anyone who is still struggling the view.lua file is in Eagle Dynamics - DCS World - Config - View Line 49 says: ExternalKeyboardAccelerationSlow = 0.1 But you can also edit the next line to save time and just reduce the rate to whatever you need.

That's super cool. What we need is is a driiving sim and a flight sim all in the same "game" (sort of like war thunder but a sim)... make a rally/ racing/ driving sim game and a flight sim using the same platform. That could open up the door for a huge veriety of flying missions - rally/ race car chasing, police chases ect. If I could get the right people and money together I'd be pretty keen on building a sim like that! Though I suspect the resources involved to make it happen would be fairly astronomical

Oh it appears I may have been almost a little bit too tame with my chasing! Need to get those close ups on the next one!

Thanks! Unfortunately there's no camera view to track moving objects. I really really wish there was! It was just some video editing I did using the F4 view that I positioned in the rough location where the lens of the camera would be and then used trackir to look at the moving car - it's a highly flawed method due to trackir limitations and doesn't really "gyro-stabilize" the image like I would have wanted But it's the only way I can think of doing it. There is a way of tracking vehicles but that camera view uses the external view with the entire aircraft which doesn't allow for the camera location to be adjusted unfortunately.

Filmed a rally stage with the OH-6. Thinking of doing a couple more - maybe a night stage and one in crappy weather. Way too much fun! Now, if there was ever a chance that MH-6 could get restarted...

I'm definitely using the correct buttons to open the radio menu... but still same issue. Even when on the correct channel with the correct frequency set for that channel in the ME, that station doesn't appear when opening up the radio menu. Still can't figure it out. I'll play around with it a bit more. Maybe it was just on the CWG map that the issue arises. Haven't tested any other maps yet.

I am using an extension but due to my set up and the physical size of FFBeast base I can't have the same length lever arm as the real aircraft. My extension is about 10cm. Need to make do with compromises for now. It works well though. I have no complaints overall.

Ah yes, sorry i understand what you mean now. I though this was fairly obvious. Creating curves on an FFB system is highly compromised in many ways and yes, the trim envelope can be reduced for this reason. However what I was trying to say in my first post is that there is still no issue or conflict with using DCS control curves and using a force feedback system. You just have to deal with the compromises. And having a slightly reduced trim envelope in many aircraft is a non-issue. Hence I used curves in the MiG-29 since my stick extension is about 1/3 of the control stick in the real aircraft. And yes, the reason the AFCS failed is as a result of the stick trimming but running out of available trim deflection on the real stick during the bit test, hence not meeting the requirements of the module's AFCS stick trim deflection in the game. I'm just telling everyone who is using a FFB stick, in layman's terms - having too much curve on the control axis may be the reason for the AFCs bit test fail, like it was in my case.