Iff you could have one thing in the next update it would be. (Archive)
-
Talent …. more talent.
-
-
IFF, please, please, please. It would greatly reduce comm. chatter and fratricide in busy engagements.
-
ooops … 3 - 4 weeks is becoming 3 - 4 years!
BTW … sorry to inform you (one more time) that IFF is not planned. If you want some information about IFF, make a search in the forum. You will (maybe) understand why it is a very low priority. (ATM)
-
Some more 3d pits, would be nice…
-
active trees autogen
-
Because weather and terrain engine were alreaty mentioned, i’d go for robust scripting language for ai and aircraft systems/avionics modelling (ability imrprove those without access to the core sourcecode).
Then all the other flyable aircrafts would start to make sense. Too bad that ain’t gonna happen in forseeable future. -
Ground forces use to be controllable. It made winning campaign objectives possible. I remember early BMS in 2011 had unstoppable Engineer Battalions that would march right in and take over the city, though not realistic.
Is it fixable? Can BMS improve on ground troop AI and controlability, as it was somewhat working in earlier versions of Falcon.
-
i’d go for robust scripting language for ai and aircraft systems/avionics modelling (ability imrprove those without access to the core sourcecode).
Always wondered what does “scripting avionics” actually mean? I mean, what do you expect such a “scripting” system to be able to do? let you decide where some labels will be positioned on the MFD? or what built-in functionality some buttons on the MFD can do? because if that’s the thing, then this isn’t avionics, it just playing around. For real “upgrades” of avionics, only code will help.
As for other ACs systems, I can tell you that even if we had the time to code some (which we don’t, the F-16 itself still require a lot of work), I can hardly think of maybe the F-18 and probably the A-10 as the only other ACs that worth investing some time on, for other jets, its mostly bits and pieces of knowledge here and there, hardly to even start thinking of the basic systems.
-
Stick to F-16 with even more detail. Better AI and comms.
-
This thread should be named - letter to Santa.
-
Flickerfree cockpit with 1920*1200 and FOV 70 without supersampling
TIA :))
Earlybite -
Only one HUD colour available, Green, and buddy lasing would be nice along with a more dynamic weather engine…
Greetings
-
@NIL:
Only one HUD colour available, Green,
LOL
Yep … but with a glow effect making it more readable (we tried … but unfortunately, not successful ATM :()
-
Ground forces use to be controllable. It made winning campaign objectives possible. I remember early BMS in 2011 had unstoppable Engineer Battalions that would march right in and take over the city, though not realistic.
Is it fixable? Can BMS improve on ground troop AI and controlability, as it was somewhat working in earlier versions of Falcon.
Only AF had real ground control
Others you got the impression but that wasn’t working
Next version to support ground troops control will be available in 3-4 weeks
-
BTW … sorry to inform you (one more time) that IFF is not planned. If you want some information about IFF, make a search in the forum. You will (maybe) understand why it is a very low priority. (ATM)
He needs to edit the thread title then. I thought the spelling mistake was a subtle hint
-
Next version to support ground troops control will be available in 3-4 weeks
Need to talk to you about this to make it more user friendly … (you know, about white border like in AF)
-
My number one wish is a day/night switch. Think about the possibilities: external lights (more visible at night), cockpit lighting, afterburner (brighter at night), JHMCS / NVG…
-
Link-16, even if i know you pretty much have to recode everything avionics and sensor wise.
-
external lights (more visible at night),
Same wishes. (Would be much better for night formation rejoin … and of course, more realistic)
(And would like to win 1.000.000 € ;))