Ff you could have one thing in the next update it would be…
-
Which is pretty much what I tried to achieve.
EDIT: mmh not sure. What I did is prevent the missile from guiding in the first seconds, so it can’t lock on a close, closing fast target. This is supposed to simulate lack of time to prepare the missile launcher and the operator not firing at all finally.
If you have a better way to simulate that, I’m a taker. I can provide my own files in private message if that helps. This may be a very bad abstraction, but it’s the best I found.
If you disable the guidance the missile flies off course from the intercept trajectory. This is very bad. If you wish delay, make a delay with thrust but do not force off course the missile.
-
If you disable the guidance the missile flies off course from the intercept trajectory. This is very bad. If you wish delay, make a delay with thrust but do not force off course the missile.
I tried that, I invite you to try as well. Results are horrible.
-
So I would like in the next update an actual in game kneeboard. I know there is the Kneeboard mod with the pilot legs but it is not simple to implement and if your new to BMS its even more difficult to understand what needs to be done.
So there it is…my request
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
-
One thing i’d like in the next update….I’d like it to be released
-
-
LoL keep on
Mission impossible
-
Is the Heatblur effect the same as in BMS? or from BMS?
seems like it, though it has a gap bug…
wonder the reason of it…:lol:
-
Skinner’s request :
More skins for most of the F-16 models so we could easily use the “Change Skin” function (already implemented) like in previous versions.please
-
add ROCAF and PAF F-16 skin
-
In first step day/night diff would be a huge step forward.
+1
This could enforce a new tactical element, making flying at night more meaningful.In the late nineties I had the opportunity to test the SNS (stinger night sight), basically a thermal vision equipped sight for the MANPAD stinger.
Maybe better than nothing, but I dont think the standard operation procedures could be applied to it and I am not even sure if it ever entered large-scale service.
Resolution was verly low and field of view was very narrow. Target acquisition very difficult.And of course it was not available to the north koreans of 80/90s.
Thus, MANPADs in general should have no night-fight abilities. They are not even on duty at night.
-
One thing that I would like to see is a higher density of buildings and trees
-
One thing that i would like to add is to generate silence sectors for SAM sites (depending of their location / environment).
IRL SAM Site radar does not emmit on 360 degres on all azimuths and elevations -
One thing that i would like to add is to generate silence sectors for SAM sites (depending of their location / environment).
IRL SAM Site radar does not emmit on 360 degres on all azimuths and elevationsThis is what I called lobe modelling.
-
One thing i’d like in the next update….I’d like it to be released
I already did that joke … so go back and think of another more funny joke…
-
I already did that joke … so go back and think of another more funny joke…
I’ll just leave it here…
-
https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/51KUcI%2B%2BU5L.jpg
https://thumbs.gfycat.com/DeafeningImpartialAruanas-size_restricted.gif
https://i1.wp.com/youthleaderworkshop.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/wait-1.png
I’ll just leave it here…
First, sorry for OT.
Well, wrong section, but I got hyped for DCS/HB F14. I promissed myself no to preorder anything DCS. I promissed myself no to buy any alpha. I promissed myself not to buy another complex airplane with steep learning curve. I skipped the Hornet entirely. I know I will be back here soon. All in vain, now I will have tro try that Tomcat. So BMS team, do not hurry, take your time with release and polish it perfectly as usual. I do not demand anything as I assume you know the best what should be in the next release. -
This is unfair lol. But I completely understand your satisfaction.
-
After some talk about IDM on Discord, I thought about this and asked there, but it’s probably better suited here:
Though the back-end logic isn’t necessarily realistic, would it be hard to code some kind of intra-package basic LINK16 simulation by enhancing IDM?Say,
11 has 11, 12, 21, 31
21 has 21, 22, 23, 24, 11, 31
31 has 31, 32, 33, 34, 11, 21
…The logic behind it would be that each lead collects his wingman data (primarily position, but maybe also FCR tracking/engagement information) and sends that to the rest of the package flight leaders, who then distribute that information among their own wingmen. That way, you could have up to 20 aircraft (5 fourships) shown on IDM, instead of the 8 we have now. Even without IFF or a full LINK16 functionality, this would add tremendously to SA and picture building, especially in crowded airspaces like we can see in campaigns.
There are other front-end ways to get the job done, e.g. 1 adds all x1, 2 adds x2, …, but the outcome should be the same, i.e. seeing every single package member through your IDM. As the back-end logic is the same (received information is forwarded to own IDM contacts), I believe the code should be pretty similar?
-
IDM has IRL much more limitations than what we have now. No point in creating a fantasy datalink to emulate L16 - not much less effort than simulating L16 to begin with
-
So BMS team, do not hurry, take your time with release and polish it perfectly as usual. I do not demand anything as I assume you know the best what should be in the next release.
Very well said, mate.
And if my advise counts a dim, that’s the point and the main objective: BMS can succeed, because it has still plenty of room in improvement.
Besides, with some up-to-date graphics, it can be kick ass time again!With best regards,