Mav-jp

Mav-jp

Just to be a bit more specific some of the bug fixes Seifer is talking about (rwr issue , AI - missiles avoidance in MP) were already fixed in the dev versions for a long time.

We decided to backport some of them in order to improve user experience .

It’s good you like this communication , therefore that is very positive.

However I read here and there that this sort of communiction shows for the first time that BMS dev team is taking care of users feedbacks

I would like therefore to make a statement here

After all those years I am a bit surprised to read that some people believe we didn’t take into account users feedback before. As a matter of fact we spend countless hours to read your feedback guys, on bms forum , on several discord channel , on Reddit . We even visit squadrons forums regularly to read feedback. We even watch countless hours of videos to track bugs. We support in the background TvT.

Two reasons we didn’t communicate much in the past :

don’t forget some day in the past we were forced to work underground because of legal actions : so that leaves red marks
we are very careful to not provoke hype as we don’t want to disappoint you later on

So whatever the communication we make or made , even if we don’t communicate , just be sure of one thing : we care about you guys , your feedbacks and bug reports are very much valued as we can’t stand bugs or bad gameplay either !!!

Thanks for your support

Mav-jp

Why losing time on such things, that will never work I could bring hundreds of reasons on the table Just think about some simple ones : : <ul><li> Ground intersection : in order to have accurate CCP pipper or CCRP designation (and many many other places in the code as well) radar ray intersection with the terrain must be asbolutly very precisely calculated in BMS code so that the FCC is fed with accurate values. So explain me how to do that with a terrain that is rendered outside the BMS code ? we would need a wrapper to go back and front between bMS code and MSF terrain code ? ouch.Or you will tell me, do it on BMS terrain, then display in MFSF , but i’m taling PRECISION here, so your pipper displayed will be totally wacko compared with what you will see…</li></ul> <ul><li>LOS : All sensors , AA Radar , RWR , SAMS radars , IR sensors have complex calculation about Line of Sight (LOS) , This is in order to compute terrain masking, but also CLoud masking , Signatures / ground cluttering , IR sensors interactions with cloud , rain, sun, ground heat… all those sensors are dependant from terrain , Sun position, Weather …explain me how to feed correctly BMS code from MSFS terrain / weather rendering ? …</li></ul> Such Idea of using MSFS for rendering i just a fantasy of people who still dont understand that BMS is NOT just a simulator like MFSF or DCS where the environment is not interacting deeply with the core sim . BMS has DEEEP and HUGE interactions with environment , terrain , Weather , Season, Atmosphere as far as Sensors , AI , FM , Campaign engine are concerned. SO you want a pretty sim => fly MFSF or DCS , or wait for a few more years

Mav-jp

Those videos are devs video , they contain bugs, end result may differ

FALCON BMS 4.36 EXTERNAL LIGHTS – 14:14
— MultiJp51

FALCON BMS 4.36 EXTERNAL LIGHT PART 2 – 01:28
— MultiJp51

Mav-jp

Those videos are devs video , they contain bugs, end result may differ

From Start to the end

Hose physics 1 – 02:24
— MultiJp51

Hose physics 2 – 00:55
— MultiJp51

Hose animated – 00:15
— MultiJp51

deploying – 00:31
— MultiJp51

black&white – 00:33
— MultiJp51

I HATE YOU GUYS – 00:35
— MultiJp51

Lords of the rings 2 – 02:05
— MultiJp51

POD&MARKINGS – 02:18
— MultiJp51

fluttering – 00:30
— MultiJp51

bam dans ton gland – 01:34
— MultiJp51

CLOSE UP – 01:27
— MultiJp51

BASKET 3 LOW – 00:26
— MultiJp51

BASKET 2 HIGH – 00:19
— MultiJp51

TEST WACKO 2 – 00:22
— MultiJp51

INTEGRATION – 03:28
— MultiJp51

FIRST MP TEST – 05:59
— MultiJp51

EXTERNAL CONTACT – 00:35
— MultiJp51

Basket3 – 00:20
— MultiJp51

Disconnect – 07:47
— MultiJp51

Mirage 2000 D – 01:56
— MultiJp51

lights – 01:30
— MultiJp51

Mav-jp

Yes most of your bug reports are valid, thank you for that but

all of them are very low priority . Some of them are not even bugs but implementation to be polished . For instance I already looked at the HAD symbology , but fixing AHR HPRF to DL or RWR bugs are more imporyant for now and I worked literally several nights on them already with the help of nice community members (not BMS members), and I think they can testify how intense , tricky and time consuming BMS dev is.
that does not mean we won’t fix it , it will just take time and patience
the more agressive you are in your posts , the less we will consider even reading you

Typical from a guy that sees only HIS priorities , you remember me some other people that left because couldn’t stand they « their » top priority bugs were not a priority for us

On a side note , saying that each release brings more bugs than before is a huge joke and clearly demonstrate you totally lost the notion of what is an important bug and what is not

Please leave this shitty bms community if you are not happy with us , and good luck in your combat sim adventure with your next community

Bye

Mav-jp

Those videos are devs video , they contain bugs, end result may differ

JTAC FINAL – 04:03
— MultiJp51

Mav-jp

https://streamable.com/yeczlz

Mav-jp

If you expect BMS to become a Simulator based on GFX up to modern standard then you will be disappointed

Things will improve , yes

But when I read that « the sims that will die will be the sims that don’t have a photorealistic global terrain » my only answer would be: yes sir , but only if those other sims have a high level of fidelity for a COMBAT sim in a global war .

And the only simulator for now that matches this definition is BMS.

Îm not saying it is bad or not I’m just stating facts