Ff you could have one thing in the next update it would be…
-
Is the current IP owner ok with those copies “living” around
BMS team has no control on that anyway. So …
I assume you guys changed a ton of stuff in 20 years.
Yep … but since we are talking about the sound code, AFAIK, not that much has changed since then. so if somebody is able to demonstrate his ability, we will probably consider what he has done.
Only thing is sure, we won’t give somebody the cave’s keys without knowing him and without any clues on what he can do with it.That’s the deal.
-
Personally i’d love to see falcon 3.0 leaked so a svga version of it could be done
frankly 90th models are best in low-poly with upscaler….in hi-res magic is lost,… I see u are perhaps talking rather about gameply, butt still…its all mastterrrpiece as it is
-
and how’s familiarizing with 20 years old code going to help your team ? I assume you guys changed a ton of stuff in 20 years.
Hi,
Correct but:
1. It’s not really 20 years code - The floating RV (known as FF, well not really FF :)) source code is much younger than 20 years and even the data is there so one can implement technically anything on top of that.
2. A coder that REALLY wants to prove himself for possible later inclusion in the team, will find creative ways to impress us, I’m sure of that.Cheers!
-
This post is deleted! -
I took a screenshot… this is memorable!!!
-
Hi Mortesil!
Does this mean the DX11 update is on hold? Because that kind of matters when discussing the sound engine…
So if the sound code is not the best example … let mention the “Recalculate” feature of the Editor which is supposed to update automatically (I don’t know how exactly) the 2D characteristics for each units in the database.
AFAIK, it was working on F4Browse, but we don’t know what is the algorithm and we are unable to extract if tome F4B. So anyone who would be able to rewrite such algorithm which could be integrated into the Editor would draw our attention. Of course, it’s not everything, being a team member is based on cooptation. But belonging to the community is not limited to belonging to the BMS team.
That would be useful. VERY useful.
-
This post is deleted! -
What specific 2D characteristics? I never really played with F4Browse beyond a few specific features I needed for certain things.
Stats (hit chance, strength, detection range, range) and Damage values
-
This post is deleted! -
@Bad:
Stats (hit chance, strength, detection range, range) and Damage values
yep …
-
This post is deleted! -
? … Sorry.
-
After dealing with their shenanigans the last few missions, I’ll add a vote for better ATC as well. Mainly with two issues; the first is the constant, large speed changes while being vectored. The second is its inability to properly sequence aircraft which ends up in lots of go arounds, especially for the player.
-
Still searching
https://pmc.editing.wiki/doku.php?id=falcon4:database:filesSent from my SAMSUNG-SM-T818A using Tapatalk
-
After dealing with their shenanigans the last few missions, I’ll add a vote for better ATC as well. Mainly with two issues; the first is the constant, large speed changes while being vectored. The second is its inability to properly sequence aircraft which ends up in lots of go arounds, especially for the player.
Question is … would you be able to follow enough precisely ATC instructions to not put the mess in the queue and not be kicked from it … ?
How many Vpilots here always flies a heading +/2° altitude +/-100ft and speed +/-10kts … ?
ATC is not perfect in 4.33 … but is it mainly because of AI and ATC brain, or because of human Vpilot’s skills? -
Question is … would you be able to follow enough precisely ATC instructions to not put the mess in the queue and not be kicked from it … ?
How many Vpilots here always flies a heading +/2° altitude +/-100ft and speed +/-10kts … ?
ATC is not perfect in 4.33 … but is it mainly because of AI and ATC brain, or because of human Vpilot’s skills?I don’t know about other people, but I definitely stay within those limits quite easily… so to answer your question… it’s the ATC, at least for me.
Personally, I find it really frustrating when I follow the terrible ATC vectors perfectly, then get asked to go around anyway because it messed up - frequently because it clears someone for takeoff at the same time it’s putting me on final.
It’d be really nice if it’d give a few vectors to just get you downwind, base, final without all the left, right, left, right nonsense. Or a single vector to intercept the final approach course if you’re approaching downwind from the runway. Even if you’re right on speed, it’ll often give really excessive speed changes - like asking you accelerate from 230 to 300!
It would also be cool if it would specify a visual or ILS - probably based on whether the base is in VMC or IMC conditions.
-
Question is … would you be able to follow enough precisely ATC instructions to not put the mess in the queue and not be kicked from it … ?
How many Vpilots here always flies a heading +/2° altitude +/-100ft and speed +/-10kts … ?
ATC is not perfect in 4.33 … but is it mainly because of AI and ATC brain, or because of human Vpilot’s skills?thats pretty strict. Granted Ive never flown under RAPCON so I dont know if the military do things differently - its quite possible I suppose. But that heading set there is very strict for civvie atc.
altitudes and speed though, sure. Isnt a Q for BAQ +/- 50ft altitude? You should always be able to manage within 100 ft of assigned altitude. Speed likewise, +/- 10 knots is a lot.
I can manage +/- 2° of heading, but it seems rather strict compared to the other limits you cited…
On that note above, it would be pretty great to see custom ATC practices at certain airbases. Flying the VFR approaches into Kunsan for example.
-
After dealing with their shenanigans the last few missions, I’ll add a vote for better ATC as well. Mainly with two issues; the first is the constant, large speed changes while being vectored. The second is its inability to properly sequence aircraft which ends up in lots of go arounds, especially for the player.
Well, to my understanding the ATC works at least satisfactorily as long as you follow the vectors at least roughly. For example, in the following video the ATC (at Vidsel in Nordic Theater Polar Vortex by luke777) instructs 13 aircraft including the players into the landing pattern. Video by Zantza.
https://drive.google.com/open?id=19h-bXq_kgfw_mJT0ycv6GH06Hl-Wx-96
-
I have a simple request……Better font and better color to make it easier to read the object labels on the 2d map. I often find that in the briefing under the threat analysis that threats will be noted to be in a vicinity of a location on the 2d map. ( ex: SA2 launchers located 5nm SE Pyongyang). Often the location referenced is the name of a location on the map i cant even begin to pronounce let alone reflexively find on the 2d map. In turn i have to turn on the object labels to find the location referenced in the threat analysis. Often times i find the white font almost impossible to read, especially if the location is in a “city”. The cities in Korea are marked yellow on the map and the white font is impossible to read with the yellow background.
-
I have a simple request……Better font and better color to make it easier to read the object labels on the 2d map. I often find that in the briefing under the threat analysis that threats will be noted to be in a vicinity of a location on the 2d map. ( ex: SA2 launchers located 5nm SE Pyongyang). Often the location referenced is the name of a location on the map i cant even begin to pronounce let alone reflexively find on the 2d map. In turn i have to turn on the object labels to find the location referenced in the threat analysis. Often times i find the white font almost impossible to read, especially if the location is in a “city”. The cities in Korea are marked yellow on the map and the white font is impossible to read with the yellow background.
Not much we can do.
But to find easily a city on the map … I personally use the OOB, search for the city name on the list, the hit find/locate button.