Bump just to let people know Falcon Online Round 2 has started and on going for 2 weeks.
Posts made by shisabandit
-
RE: Falcon Online
-
RE: The present future of Falcon.
Whatever the OP said I agree with… 100%.
-
RE: Falcon Online
Thanks for the feedback guys.
See you gents for Round 2 starting this Saturday!!
-
RE: Link 16 things you want in the next update
Focus functions in BMS aren’t implemented. Every TGP AFAIK has focus functions (because eventually TGP has a camera and camera must have focus changing mechanism). There are IIRC manual and auto focus modes.
Main reason why it wasn’t implemented was that back at the time when I worked on Sniper for 4.33, I had almost 0 GFX knowledge, and since focus relates directly to blur GFX algorithms, I simply left it alone.
I think that today I can implement blur effect in order to simulate out of focus state, but honestly this is low priority and will have to wait until there is time. We have WAY bigger things in the pipeline to finish first.Cheers!
Well no disrespect cuz the TGP is pretty good in BMS but you also didnt understand about alpha transparency or perhaps you forgot to turn on backface culling because the TGP in A-A mode doesnt render objects properly.
Not disrespecting your work I am very grateful for what you have done but if you want some help in the GFX dept you can always look me up.
Anyways I am sure its a simple fix it does confuse sometimes tho. -
RE: Falcon Online
Argh! Lose the “music”!! Far prefer to listen to the comm only please. C’mon, inspire me!
Well my first week vid had something like that… this vid was going for more broad appeal.
I will be doing some vids with a break down of some of the more interesting engagements we had with commentary and acmi.
Here was the first week highlights/lowlights vid with minimal music in only the first 3 mins and comms at the forefront (also my preference).
Consider yourself inspired
-
Falcon Online
Lets get some more flyers for the next event in two weeks.
Here is some inspiration…
-
RE: Clusterbombs are broken
Well, what else could be expected out of a bunch of flyboys? From up there, the worst part of war is just a pretty light show. TGPs don’t zoom as much as to give you a good view at all the disembodied corpses and bloody carnage doesn’t show up well on thermal (or B/W video for that matter). We’re the guys who see the big red-guarded “NUCLEAR CONSENT” switch in the 'pit and wish it’ll get implemented someday (sadly, it’s probably too classified for that to happen)…
We dont give a shit dude.
WE ARE HERE TO KILL ALL NON COOPERATIVE PARTIES and they will pay the ****ing price! -
RE: Add aircraft crew on ground
:D:thumb:
:rofl:
unfortunately there’s some problem with “script” ( or i do not know how to use it right )
Cheers
YES! This is awesome great idea just make them 2d billboards and have them use the real signals. Than we will need a marshal button key file so we can start doing more realistic engine starts involving the ground crew. Have our pilots dudes give hand signals……
BTW please let us map somekeys for our pilot dudes to give hand signals now been needing that for a while!!My head gets tired nodding head up ad down with trackIR for radio silent calls with wingman.
-
RE: Add aircraft crew on ground
This is cool also… make it so that we accidentally run them over you get a court martial and demoted back down to 2nd lt actually should just auto delete their log book cuz your in jail.
-
RE: 20th Anniversary Movie 47th VFS "Dragonfighters"
Yo!! Whoever made this video should def create a 4.34 trailer very good work.
-
RE: Mantis at Dawn campaign.
?
Sorry, no.
Purpose of “IFF” is to get some positive friendly IDs (most over friendly area).
Yes thats what I said dj khalid
-
RE: Mantis at Dawn campaign.
Well, desepit our name Benchmarksims, we try to keep in mind that currently we don’t have the possibility to adapt specific RWR library to the theatre/mission (which would be out of simulation scope and can’t be done for many reasons) and by default, is including ALL a/c present in database. This is also to allow 3rd party theaters to work by using stock database.
Whoever you are, you have to understand that, if we make it exactly like IRL (which is technically not possible), many a/c will have to be removed from RWR library to avoid possible ambiguities … and … accept the fact that some a/c will share the same symbols. Such as (for example) M2000 displayed as an F-16 and or MIG29, … simply because IRL, those radar are sharing roughly the same characteristics (in most of they modes) making them quite ambiguous and sometimes impossible to discriminate. Considering the amount of different a/c (but equiped with similar radar) in database, it would makes your RWR “almost” unusable or at least, mostly unreliable.
Considering the part of your post about “aggressor a/c in your package”, I think that you don’t know how real RWR is working because if we do as you are suggesting, in many cases, your team mates in BLUE fighters could be confused with RED fighters because of RF signals vs libraries ambiguities.
In order you help you to understand, here is a ficticious graph illustrating why an F-16’s APG68 radar can be confused with a MiG-29’s SlotBack radar or any other airborn fighter’s radar sharing the same caracteristic depending on actual active modes.
…
Last but not least, it seems also that you are missing what an IFF is (?) => In no way IFF can help for enemy positive identification.
So while I am thanking you for your comment about the relevance of our internal decisions, let me kindly inform you that sometimes, we have to make some compromises to keep our simulator unusable and balanced.
I understand IFF is not to be used for enemy positive identification its just one small tool of many to get an idea with what type of contact you may have.
My point is if thats how it is in RL than thats how it should be in BMS. If its ambiguous in real life thats why we have AWACS TGP IFF and an ATO to see what aircraft are operating in the area at the time we are on station.
I understand you literally can not simulate every radar emission etc… what I do expect is that the sim will attempt to make it appear as it is doing so so a similar effect.
To be clear I am very happy with BMS as it is but if your going to be a SIM than something that is ambiguous in RL should be at least a bit more ambiguous in BMS.
If I can no longer reliably guarantee that an F-16 in my RWR is not a mig than that makes having AWACS in range more important and increases the need for pilot skill.
I am always going to be the one to push for a more realistic EW as thats the most lacking in BMS.
Besides making request of pilots outside of your package more AWACS /ELINT/CAS detail I think EW should be the major focus behind doing whatever it takes to remove the restriction of SAM targeting.Either way thanks and keep up the good work I know you guys sometimes put in that midnight oil.
-
RE: Mantis at Dawn campaign.
It is not my entire decision. I would personally rather keep it as is. But it is also a matter of “game play”. …
On the other hands, it is not necessarily impossible … depending if Aggressors a/c have a different radar version than “regular”.
Well your name is benchmark simulation right not benchmark gameplay.
Whoever is making those decisions needs to reevaluate what they are trying to do in BMS.You should keep it as SIM as possible in this case I think its quite silly.
So your saying if I use Aggressor squadron in BMS other flights in my package could pick me up as 27? Whoever thought of that should def be fired!No need for that especially since you went out of your way to add in IFF.
-
RE: Mantis at Dawn campaign.
“Aggressors” (US aircraft with Russian style paint schemes) in database are (fictitiously) equipped with Russian radars.
This is “not really realistic” (but not wrong either depending on assumptions), but a choice to easier simulating Russian a/c vs NATO a/c.
IRL, aggressors (RedFor) a/c are using the “same” radar than “BluFor” one (I mean, they are not modified per say). There is not way to make difference in RWR libraries unless, for example, and AGP66 of a old F-16 and AGP68 of a more recent F-16 are different enough to be discriminated n RWR libraries. Otherwise, and F-16 is an F-16 whatever the color of the airframe.
By memory, in BMS (stock DB), aggressors sqn we have are A-4 ; F-5 ; F-14 ; F-15 ; F-16 ; F-18
Personally you should keep it a lil more realistic and not make the aggressor squadrons show up as “russian” radars. Kind of silly.
Use IFF settings or other means as in the real world. -
RE: BMS: graphic improvements are possible?
@BenDean87:
Calm down, your bias is showing
I am an IRL pilot, and yes of course VR lacks clarity in regards to real life. But so does a screen. Whats your point? That’s why these sims have functions like zoom.
I don’t believe putting my face near a 10W OLED screen for a few hours a week is any more life threatening than lots of other hobbies that people engage in. OLEDs produce very low EM radiation and not a lot of heat either so I’m not exactly sure what you’re so worried about. Its not like i’m strapping an CRT to my face.As you see above in the DCS strawpoll out of aprox 1300 people, 28% fly using VR. This is a decent chunk of the playerbase now, and this number is only going to grow as VR tech gets better and the sims get more optimised to use it.
You can argue how shit VR is all you like, but the fact is that more and more people are using it for sims and the numbers reflect that.
I would not fly with VR till they compensated for the poor visual accuity and even than I would not because I need to see my keyboard and again dont want screens attached to my face due to…
1. EM magnetic radiation.
2. Unknown long term effect on eyesight.
3. I dont fly only a couple of hours a week if I fly 3 to 4 times a week at 3 hours per… that 12 hours per week with that heavy ass sweaty thing attached to my face.
Thats 40 hrs a month or more sometimes if I get some days off could be more…There is no BIAS I have used and tried VR It is nice but it is not worth the risks and sacrificing comfortability possible health.
Sometimes I need to interact with family during a flight I cant be completely shielded off so … till then waiting for them to bring back 3d TV’s with 8k monitors …
I WISH VR was useful Flight Simulators are a great application but you dont want to be using that long term.The is reason VR has been Niche since the 80’s. Its always going to be a niche product flight simming and similar type games will be its main commercial application.
But those are itself niche.So now we are in a niche of a niche.
BMS should focus on first improving the graphics than VR.
I like the idea of VR is just not good enough the whole concept. 3D projector would be the best . -
RE: BMS: graphic improvements are possible?
In the VR headsets there are lenses between the screen and your eyes. These lenses make it so that your eye is not focused on a distance of 5 cm, and instead focuses on “to infinity” (like when you look in outside your window on a distant mountain, or the horizon), to the point that a near-sighted person needs to keep their glasses on to see well in VR.
So all the people joking about going blind or nearsighted from looking for too long at a screen stuck in their face are wrong, or at least exaggerating greatly.About the problem of looking at the keyboard with the headset on: I don’t think the situation is so catastrophic… Certainly being able too directly see the keyboard (with trackIR) makes it easier to push the right key, but I believe that after a bit of getting used to touch-typing with the VR headset on people wouldn’t have great difficulties.
This is clearly different in the case of pit-builders, for which I guess sight is quite more important.On the other hand, the other concerns about VR like low resolution, powerful GPU needed, motion sickness, new models needed, cost of the headsets, and developer effort needed for the implementation are absolutely relevant, in my opinion.
I am not talking about losing your eyesight I am talking about having a device that is emitting electromagnetic radiation attached to your HEAD.
No one knows the long term effects of having your eyes fooled like that but if you want to be a test pig be my guest.