Ff you could have one thing in the next update it would be…
-
yep …
Sadly the recalculate function does not solve the problem of 2D world. During creation of my MOD I set the same 2D modelling values for A-10 and for testing I put the same AG mission on it and the result in 2D world was totally different…
I also tried change values of red AG missile result was the same.So far I was not able to find anybody who surely could say and confirm how works the 2D world + DB and which is determined by which.
In FF5.x as I can remember I overrided the eng. range of SAMs to provide more chance to down airplanes because their fire rate was low with very low CTH. -
The best update falcon lovers could wish for is BMS work together with DCS and produce F-16/Campaign engine.:blowpar:
-
… ok … time for me to quite again that forum. It is hopelessly depressing.
Cheers guys.
-
The best update falcon lovers could wish for is BMS work together with DCS and produce F-16/Campaign engine.:blowpar:
The best update would be you stop posting such non sense and you quit this forum and give advice to DCS to create the f16/campaign
-
The best update falcon lovers could wish for is BMS work together with DCS and produce F-16/Campaign engine.:blowpar:
Then many of us will not afford it and quit from this sim. Is hard times lol:wfish:
From marketing perspective Ed focuses in young ppl mainly In the new generation that will pay any cost for having what has been said by other ppl in this forum
-
@vfp:
Then many of us will not afford it and quit from this sim. Is hard times lol:wfish:
From marketing perspective Ed focuses in young ppl mainly In the new generation that will pay any cost for having what has been said by other ppl in this forum
stats says other wise… not that young actually. u must have money for this sport… serious money that most youngsters don’t have. Also youngsters , most of them, are for quickies and not the learning curve of a flligt sim…
-
The best update would be you stop posting such non sense and you quit this forum and give advice to DCS to create the f16/campaign
I think it was a joke…
-
The best update falcon lovers could wish for is BMS work together with DCS and produce F-16/Campaign engine.:blowpar:
You are foolish. DCS will always be a fragmented mess of a game/sim.
Even if they get a campaign engine … do you think there will be something the likes of a Falcon Online? Nope because there is no canonical version of an aircraft. Just different modules
that other players may or may not have. -
The best update falcon lovers could wish for is BMS work together with DCS and produce F-16/Campaign engine.:blowpar:
-
Not again guys please…
I wish AI vehicles could just follow alternative routes if a bridge is destroyed and Eng. Battalions could repair them in few hours.
Everytime I started a campaign I had to block all strikes on brigdes because they literally brake the campaign from the start.
This is the only major flaw I found in the campaigns.Maybe is even possible to create this unit:
-
I wish AI vehicles could just follow alternative routes if a bridge is destroyed and Eng. Battalions could repair them in few hours.
Everytime I started a campaign I had to block all strikes on brigdes because they literally brake the campaign from the start.
This is the only major flaw I found in the campaigns.Maybe is even possible to create this unit:
It was a few years ago that I flew a SP campaign with 4.33, but I do remember finishing campaigns without touching anything related to bridges.
Also, I don’t know for sure but this rings a bell as something that was fixed already (But this isn’t really my area so I have no idea if indeed it was).
Are you SURE that this behavior still exists with 4.33 ? -
This post is deleted! -
It was a few years ago that I flew a SP campaign with 4.33, but I do remember finishing campaigns without touching anything related to bridges.
Also, I don’t know for sure but this rings a bell as something that was fixed already (But this isn’t really my area so I have no idea if indeed it was).
Are you SURE that this behavior still exists with 4.33 ?I’ve played all campaigns months ago with the last 4.33 update Korea Thearter only , I’m 100% sure of that.
-
I’ve played all campaigns months ago with the last 4.33 update Korea Thearter only , I’m 100% sure of that.
What if you manually task an engineer battalion to go there ?
Don’t forget to desactivate bataillions auto control -
What if you manually task an engineer battalion to go there ?
Don’t forget to desactivate bataillions auto controlI’m pretty sure I’ve moved them near a destroyed bridge… no joy after 2 days.
Few months have passed since my last try … I guess I’ll wait 4.34 for another test -
This post is deleted! -
I’m pretty sure I’ve moved them near a destroyed bridge… no joy after 2 days.
Few months have passed since my last try … I guess I’ll wait 4.34 for another testyou need to activate player control else the campaign engine will retask it somewhere else a few minutes later
-
Speaking of the campaign:
I would really like the option to disable the effect of the “mission rating” on the 2D engagement outcomes.
I find it quite “gamey”… Why would the performance of a single plane impact the combat capability of the whole army?
But most importantly, it annoys my perfectionist side, often pushing me to reload if I didn’t get an high enough rating, as I worry that I’m crippling my side.I’m not saying to remove it in the name of realism, as maybe others like it, it’s just that I would like the choice.
Cheers!
-
Speaking of the campaign:
I would really like the option to disable the effect of the “mission rating” on the 2D engagement outcomes.
I find it quite “gamey”… Why would the performance of a single plane impact the combat capability of the whole army?
But most importantly, it annoys my perfectionist side, often pushing me to reload if I didn’t get an high enough rating, as I worry that I’m crippling my side.I’m not saying to remove it in the name of realism, as maybe others like it, it’s just that I would like the choice.
Cheers!
Without this you would play the same campaign over and over. In fact to me is one of the biggest problem that you literally cannot loose a campaign…
-
Without this you would play the same campaign over and over. […]
Well, why would the campaign always be the same? There is some randomness in all AI choices and combat outcomes, different force ratios to choose, one could manage differently the ground forces, or give different priorities and tasks to the air forces… I think there is plenty of variability, even if we don’t take into account the player’s mission outcomes.
Incidentally, maybe you never lose a campaign because you often get high mission ratings?
In any case, one could design a difficult campaign that is hard to win even with perfect scores and mission tasking. Maybe it would be even more easy to balance, if one didn’t have to care about mission scores influencing the outcome.