Ff you could have one thing in the next update it would be…
-
I’d like to see us be able to cross the streams to get something like this…anyone ever tried porting worlds between BMS and some other sim using a shared memory server? On their own?
Actually yes. Not me, but ASharpe was getting results in making stuff in BMS happen in ArmA 3.
-
…now you understand the problem.
-
Actually yes. Not me, but ASharpe was getting results in making stuff in BMS happen in ArmA 3.
Way cool…more please!
-
Ive done that scenario in CMANO often enough that its not a case of understanding or not.
-
…try it in RL.
-
Procedural ID. If it walks like a valid target, and squawks like a valid target, and (fails to) talk like a valid target, its a valid target.
-
I wish it was that simple…would make life and death a lot easier.
-
With smart ROE drafters, it is that simple.
Command has the benefit that the mission designers also set the ROEs, so you end up with a level of sanity checking.
Anyway, the point I was making is that in a warzone (which is what BMS simulates) you have folks on permissive ROEs, and a lack of maritime shipping. If your NK patrol boat saunters up to a CVG, its going to get sunk. How do you know its a NK patrol boat? So many measures… what does your air surveillance say? What emissions have we got from it? Which way is it motoring, what is its probable point of origin…
-
With smart ROE drafters, it is that simple.
Command has the benefit that the mission designers also set the ROEs, so you end up with a level of sanity checking.
Anyway, the point I was making is that in a warzone (which is what BMS simulates) you have folks on permissive ROEs, and a lack of maritime shipping. If your NK patrol boat saunters up to a CVG, its going to get sunk. How do you know its a NK patrol boat? So many measures… what does your air surveillance say? What emissions have we got from it? Which way is it motoring, what is its probable point of origin…
Once again, you hit the nail on the head with “smart”…
But your point brings us back to my original point about cracking the AI nut for shipping in BMS…right now we don’t really have a “maritime battlefield” like the great one we have ashore…and that’s totally understandable. All of the AI wrt how the shipping behaves and how any war at sea would progress - in conjunction with the land Campaign - would have to also be worked out. And that would be a lot of work.
-
How do you get patrol boats into range of the CV without them being dealt with by the CV escort?
That’s what the US Navy thought too. Until they held the Millennium Challenge 02 exercise, where shockingly almost the entire carrier battle group was sunk by a swarm of small planes and boats armed with anti-ship missiles.
Chinese Silkworm-type cruise missiles fired from some of the small boats sank the US fleet’s only aircraft carrier and two marine helicopter carriers.
(http://www.theguardian.com/world/2002/sep/06/usa.iraq)Red launched a massive salvo of cruise missiles that overwhelmed the Blue forces’ electronic sensors and destroyed sixteen warships. This included one aircraft carrier, ten cruisers and five of six amphibious ships.
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millennium_Challenge_2002) -
Seems like they didnt have enough of a screen there. For a less recent conflict this is quite significant.
-
Any chance of changing the focus distance of the HUD and HMCS so that they are usable with stereoscopic headsets? Is there an easy way for us to fix it without needing the bms source code?
-
Buildings and ground clutter for every ground tile, not just trees.
More ground activity at air bases.
Things like that to liven up the world.
-
More than anything else we could possibly get, I would love to see performance optimizations.
-
Theres a few areas that could use improvement, but Im not sure how likely it is (or even how possible it is, seeing as Im thinking of picture in picture stuff like FLIR).
-
Theres a few areas that could use improvement, but Im not sure how likely it is (or even how possible it is, seeing as Im thinking of picture in picture stuff like FLIR).
My main curiosity is this - what changed with 4.33 that made the TPG/WPN/FLIR so abusive to the FPS? In 4.32, I could have Mavs on one MFD and the TPG on the other, and still get a perfect 60 FPS. Now I can’t do that with just one of those on.
-
FPS drops with FLIR/TFR/MAV/TGP is minimal here, less than 2-3 fps…
-
FPS drops with FLIR/TFR/MAV/TGP is minimal here, less than 2-3 fps…
Really? Damn, mine goes down with 20-30FPS (from 60 capped to 25 average) when TGP goes on :s
-
FPS drops with FLIR/TFR/MAV/TGP is minimal here, less than 2-3 fps…
I think you must be the 1st person I read who doesn’t encounter an fps drop. What kind of system do you have ?
-
Really? Damn, mine goes down with 20-30FPS (from 60 capped to 25 average) when TGP goes on :s
Not only this…
Yesterday I came back from a Tiger Spirit mission and on the ground I had 22 FPS (at ramp start ~36 FPS)… That is shocking.