Ff you could have one thing in the next update it would be…
-
n/m wrong thread
-
Let BMS team decide whats best, they love this SIM so trust in the result, no complaints here.
-
Maybe something like a server browser or something to make setting up multiplayer flights a little easier?
-
@Red:
Let BMS team decide whats best, they love this SIM so trust in the result, no complaints here.
Best words between 246 pages.
-
its only 62 pages…
-
Chrome says 246 pages……either way enough requests for one lifetime.
-
-
Different amount of posts per page depending on user settings.
I think he knows that. It’s a certain kind of way to point out “page count is meaningless if everyone’s is not the same.”
-
@Red:
Let BMS team decide whats best, they love this SIM so trust in the result, no complaints here.
The best post I this whole thread .
Thank you for your wisdom -
Having FALCAS HUD only - working with Trak - IR
-
It seems that the IVC server behaviour has changed in 4.33 when connecting to a host: previously, if you left the dedi ivc server field blank the connection process would use the same IP address as the BMS host, now it seems that you have to enter the same IP twice when connecting (once for the BMS host, then again for the dedicated IVC server).
Please feel free to correct me if I’m wrong, but that’s the behaviour I’m seeing.
Also it would be great if BMS would pick up a new / changed IVC connection when launching the IVC client manually after BMS has already started up / connected to the BMS server.
A nice plus would be to be able to use proper host names (DNS) as well as IPs in the bms server field, right now this is only possible in the IVC dedicated server field when connecting.
Thanks Uwe
-
-MOVED-
-
Having FALCAS HUD only - working with Trak - IR
you couldn’t call it HUD only anymore then
-
@Red:
you couldn’t call it HUD only anymore then
Yes, you could.
I.e. HUD-only only shows you the HUD when looking forward, and nothing except HMCS (maybe cockpit reflections) when you look around in any direction. No cockpit, no empty shell, no model at all in fact, just air.To avoid cheating in MP WVR, it would definitely require an extra option to disable that, or to limit the view axis ranges, but once it’s in the sim, it could theoretically also be used as a basis to build upon to simulate the “see-through” functionality of the F-35 DAS, AH-64 IHADSS and probably some others. (assuming we ever get those in BMS)
-
Yes, you could.
I.e. HUD-only only shows you the HUD when looking forward, and nothing except HMCS (maybe cockpit reflections) when you look around in any direction. No cockpit, no empty shell, no model at all in fact, just air.To avoid cheating in MP WVR, it would definitely require an extra option to disable that, or to limit the view axis ranges, but once it’s in the sim, it could theoretically also be used as a basis to build upon to simulate the “see-through” functionality of the F-35 DAS, AH-64 IHADSS and probably some others. (assuming we ever get those in BMS)
:rockon:
-
I know it sounds crazy but here goes: features aggregation.
As we have the objective aggregation have it and for massive features.
That way when a city build up on City engine or whatever to be deagregated on the smaller objects - models.
This can be done and on all the models and be used for damage and maybe destroyed models.
So a window is on a building and a blast is capable to brake the window. The window is not attached to the building model but separate. In 3ds max we could assign the hit radius and hitbox as helpers and have blast effect value. So if parameters are met the code sees the subpart of the model must brake and if the model exists it shows it or makes it invisible.
Same can go and on vehicles and other structures.
If no such info use the old way.
That way if the left side of an object must be impacted then only that side will look bad or even destroyed.
This could have like 2-3 levels of deagregation. First to Target the unique object, like a building on a city, the rest would be used for impact and hit box.
hmmm see lots of code lines and models.Second would be to add more areas and the way are created.
Areas like in terrain editor urban , forest, etc.
New could be appartments, skyscraper, highrise, park.
With paths also have many paths, like highway, small road etc.
Bridges the same…
Since with trees we can assign 3d models from the database then we can manipulate and some basic generic stuff.
On the terrain editor side it would need besides circle designation of the area to have polygon designation of the area, and if we could have the ability to curve some polygon points there would be no limits.
Though working tile by tile to designate those areas ain’t efficient this should be done on a larger scale of the terrain, and for sure having the ability to import kml for instance or svg would be just a dream.Στάλθηκε από το MI 5 μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
-
Why not auto gen tree slider, auto gen building slider, cloud slider, everything slider then every one can adjust to their pc specs, lets have everything slider and adjustable so we can all adjust to our personal needs and complaints will vanish……well thats what I think.
-
Why not auto gen tree slider, auto gen building slider, cloud slider, everything slider then every one can adjust to their pc specs, lets have everything slider and adjustable so we can all adjust to our personal needs and complaints will vanish……well thats what I think.
There are sliders already for Object Density, Object Detail, Tree Density and Grass Density. You can also manipulate the clouds and weather!?!!??!!??
C9
-
@Cloud:
There are sliders already for Object Density, Object Detail, Tree Density and Grass Density. You can also manipulate the clouds and weather!?!!??!!??
C9
Not enough, make all adjustable, everything, LOD density, distance, radius, spots, pimples, grass, water, everything.
-
Not enough, make all adjustable, everything, LOD density, distance, radius, spots, pimples, grass, water, everything.
Not going to happen!!
C9