streakeagle

So, if you go to Hyperlobby, you will see my WOV server is up and running in up to 16 players (counting the server) with a clean install of 083006 except: You will need to change the file extension to from "txt" to "INI" put the attached file in your VietnamSEA terrain folder or you will get an error for not having the same terrain files as my installation. This only has one small edit, setting the use water shader to FALSE, which eliminates the CTD when exiting the mission. VIETNAMSEA_DATA.txt

I was wrong, I have seen this type of behavior before: if UPnP is enabled on a linksys router, WoV multiplayer no worky! I have now joined the server via internet/Hyperlobby and locally on my home LAN. It is cool to see it working again after so long!

I have considered the alternatives on the game/version. If I can get 083006 to work in multiplayer with the water shader set to false, it is the way to go. It runs much faster. Pegged at 60 fps with max display settings on my gpu and in-game settings on my current PC and 40 fps on my old single-core Athlon 64 PC. Now if I can just successfully link two pcs over the internet despite my failure to do so over the LAN.

Another update: Hamachi no longer exists. The company that superceded it, LogMeIn wasn't making money providing such excellent service for free and when it went payware, it failed and went away. It appears that the replacement is a dedicated gaming overlay called Evolve. I will look into how it works and test it after I try some Hyperlobby experiments to see if I am still unable to see servers from clients using Win 7 64-bit.

I have encountered my first stumbling block: I have two PCs at home physically connected to the same switch yet they cannot see each other using either the local network or TCP/IP modes of hosting. Both PCs can ping each other, but DirectPlay does not find the local host, so the client cannot join. I have done this before with Win 7. The firewalls on both PCs are disabled (verified by the fact that they can ping each other). I am stumped. So far, I cannot find answers for this symptom on the internet.

For those not familiar with the quirks of SFP1/WoX multiplayer, it performs an anti-cheating file check prior when someone tries to join. Some files are not even monitored, so there is some leeway for local clients to have mods without causing problems. However, the safest way to get started is for everyone to have clean installs all patched to the same version. For the purposes of everyone getting started, we need to agree on a game and install version (apparently WoV? but it could be WoI, WoE). WoE merged with WoV is the most flexible with two terrains and a wide array of aircraft to choose. What is WoV patch 84? The only two versions I would consider hosting are 083006 or Sep 2008. 083006 runs smoother, but Sep 2008 looks better.

Hyperlobby is just a tool for meeting players and sharing the IP. If I get a server up and running correctly, I can post the IP or send it by email and people can try to join directly. However the DirectPlay multiplayer code used by SFP1/WoX is very finicky. It wasn't designed with routing/network address translation in mind, so a much more reliable way to play is on virtual LANs that trick the game into thinking everyone is hardwired to the same switch with the same IP subnet and mask. Hamachi was the old free tool used in the past for SFP1/WoX. Hamachi has changed a lot. I don't think the free version is as useful as it once was. I am in the process of trying to set up an old PC to be a server and see if a laptop from and outside network can properly join/fly on this server. I have to make sure my router is set up correctly, too. Clients don't usually have too many issues as long as they can form a good two-way connection with the host. The host server is the one that has to make sure nothing is firewalled preventing clients from joining/playing.

The money is better spent on two things: DCS, which I use almost daily and a 1981 Corvette that needs a lot of cash after years of neglect.

Wishing you the best... may stubborn determination and a little luck see you through this horrible situation with the least possible pain and best possible recovery. <S>

There is another side to that statistic. Consider Desert Storm. The threat from the enemy was so minimized that US forces lost more people to friendly fire than enemy fire. It is not that the friendly fired incidents were dramatically higher than any other war. It is the marked decrease in losses to the enemy. So, if modern aircraft and their associated maintenance standards dramatically decrease losses due to aircraft failures while the number of problems caused by pilot errors stays the same... you get statistics like this. Now having read about the pilots that stalled a twin turboprop and killed everyone on board because they didn't understand the physics of a stall and overrode the automatic stall limiter to pull the nose up even more... I can't believe pilots with that level of misunderstanding were certified to fly any airplane much less a passenger liner. How has this happened?

FSX/P3D with TacPack keeps getting better for combat aircraft. Milviz is doing a great job providing Vietnam/SFP1 era aircraft with TacPack support. But my experience with Simworks Studios' F-4B, TacPack, and available Vietnam mods for FSX convinced me that even with TacPack, FSX is far from a complete combat flight simulator. SF2 Vietnam is far superior for replicating the mission from ingress to egress. However, FSX is better for the takeoff/comms/landing aspects. I am tempted to buy the Milviz TacPack jets like the F-100D, F-4E, and F-4J, but I know they would just mostly remain unused and take up space on my hard drive as the Simworks F-4B already does.

05 punished anyone who disagreed with him in any way. He also ripped off some of the modders who provided material to him. As I prefer to research and create my own historical missions to suite my preferences, my main use for YAP was the models, especially the aircraft carriers. No one else ever released a comparable Vietnam era CVAN-65 Enterprise.

Had to come to and end sooner or later.

I have always loved SAAB aircraft since the first time I saw a Draken. At this point, I am not sure which I love the most, the Draken or the Viggen. The Gripen comes in third, but all three are among the best looking and best performing fighters of their time. What more could you ask except maybe an engine and avionics/weapons upgrade for the Draken and Viggen?

DCS progress on integrating the old with the new into what will be Version 2.5 has been incredibly slow. I don't do "betas", which means I haven't even experienced the new Nevada map. My refusal to install the 2.x beta is somewhat ironic because even the current official release version 1.5.4. xxx is really a beta with all the bugs that get released despite beta testing. The aircraft that brought me to DCS World, the MiG-21bis actually seems to get worse over time. Leatherneck doesn't take kindly to criticism, yet can't ever live up to even one announcement on fixes and/or dates. Don't even talk to me about VEAO, their Hawk, or the P-40F. But that is all I have to say that is negative. Despite old and new bugs, the Leatherneck MiG-21bis is still one of the most amazing aircraft I have ever flown in any sim. The F-86F and MiG-15bis almost bring tears to my eyes with the level of immersion they bring to flying those aircraft. The DCS P-51D, Bf109K4, and Fw190D9 are the only WW2 aircraft I will fly for any length of time after years of Aces High being my favorite WW2 air combat sim. And when it comes to helos, NOTHING else even comes close to touching the DCS UH-1H and Mi-8. Even the Flaming Cliffs F-15C and Su-27 appear to be modeled better than in any other sim with those aircraft. While I prefer air-to-air combat, the level of immersion in DCS World is such that I am perfectly happy enjoying cold starts, talking to the ground crew and control tower on the radio, taxiing, taking off, following real-world approach procedures, and landing. If DCS World had a global map, like FSX, especially with the option to populate that map with objects based on the current date, it would be THE mother of all flight sims. I am eagerly awaiting the F-5E, F/A-18C, Viggen, and P-40F. The F-5E in Nevada will be especially cool. I would like to be an F-5E/MiG-21bis pilot that takes down online players flying F-15Cs, but I can settle with taking down much easier to kill AI F-15Cs since I will probably never have the skill/luck to kill human players in F-15Cs. DCS World's glaring limitation is that the world is restricted to the Black Sea and or Nevada. With the completion of the WW2 Normandy map and decent Korea, Vietnam, and Israel/Middle East maps with period correct objects, DCS World could be the absolute best combat flight sim ever produced. One can only hope that they reach their goals before going bankrupt.

I have been out of country for two weeks and just now got the chance to try the latest patch. LCOS gunsight works much better now. It didn't move before.

I don't understand the argument at this point. The MiG-21's combat record is far from good. It only performed reasonably well when given very specific environments where the enemy had ROE and/or leadership issues that crippled the opfor's aircraft. Whenever it fought in environments where the enemy had no such restrictions, it was decimated... even by large, smokey F-4s and/or F-15s. Even in the best case, using radar and speed to ambush loaded F-4s with inexperienced pilots, it never did better than 1:2 overall. That fact that it couldn't be spotted head-on at ranges longer than 2nm was extremely annoying, but it was only when it performed precision ground controlled hit and run attacks from the blind 6 at Mach+ speeds where its size wasn't a factor that it excelled. What cannot be denied is that the MiG-21 was the most produced supersonic fighter jet and still serves after all of these years. But despite costing far more, F-4 Phantoms were produced in quite substantial numbers and are still serving, too. If I had to fly one against the other in combat tomorrow, I would easily take the latest Turkish or Greek F-4s over any variant of MiG-21 still serving. Despite its size and smoke, the F-4 had the advantage then and still does.

Like previous Belsimtek releases, their the F-5 beta is better than many other sims' final releases. But look in the last round of patches and look at the bug list on the ED forums. It is still listed as a beta because it still has the rough spots to be expected of a beta.

Try not to go to the doctor so much! Spend more time shopping for Godzilla and playing flight simulator games!

<S> One of the many that gave all. But one of the few whose name will be celebrated for many years to come.

The F-5E is absolutely a treat to fly. The main problem I have with the beta after dogfighting MiG-21s and F-14s is the dysfunctional LCOS sight. I can fight just fine without it, but I love a well-modeled LCOS. Nothing more satisfying than putting the pipper on a specific aiming point like the wing tip, tail, or cockpit canopy and then squeezing off a very small burst and having nearly every round hit with a catastrophic result.

If the MiG-21 is so hard to beat, why did F-4s average 2:1 or better kill ratios against them while being heavy smokers with crappy missiles? In 1972, with better training and missiles, the Navy was getting 6:1 or better kill records with hard wing F-4Js against MiG-17s that turned better and were just as hard to spot as MiG-21s. Why would the Su-27 be built at all if small size were the key to air superiority? I love the MiG-21. In some ways, it was the forerunner of the F-16, at least for WVR dogfight performance. But pilots could not see out of the cockpit. They were very short range and meant to be pure interceptors. When used for dog fighting, they ran out of fuel. The guys at groom lake liked beating teen fighters, but could only win if: 1) they were allowed to fly in a way that allowed them to get WVR undetected. 2) they flew in a way to have enough fuel to fight. 3) the opposition didn't have experience against the type, which affected their ability to spot the MiG-21 and exploit its weaknesses.

I just tried out the new F-5E. It is a little rough as an early beta... but extremely impressive. I can't wait to see how the F-14A, AJS-37, and F/A-18C turn out. I can remember when I used to host SFP1 multiplayer 24/7 and there was a mod that added the F-5 and F-14. I loved the F-5 a lot.

I assure you, I want you to succeed in any and all endeavors to improve SF2. Discovering how to use the SF2NA terrain engine and implement a terrain better than TK did would add a lot to the existing maps... especially if they could be scaled 1:1. TK was such a genius in so many ways. DCS World still hasn't caught up to his level of making the aircraft and decals so modder friendly. But he made some odd compromises. less than 1:1 terrain and a refusal to even provide an arcade/automated in-flight refueling system were big ones. Abandoning ramp starts and drag chutes that were clearly planned in the original SFP1 release were odd choices too. The avionics were right at a sweet spot between fun/playable and realistic. If the terrain engine had been up to the level of the aircraft in shape and texture... it would have beaten the crap out of LOMAC/FC with good marketing. It was always the better game AND sim but lacked some eye candy and multiplayer that many gamers need to see before even considering buying a game. Until the DCS World quality cockpits arrived, TK's were inherently better... and when pro modders like you took over, the engine really shined. It is a shame TK couldn't make the business model work well enough to continue. The tablet games are ok for tablets, but a pale shadow of the fun to be had in the SF2 series. As far as mesh resolutions go: I have the FSX/TacPack F-4B and installed some upgrades to model Vietnam better, both mesh and textures. The Hanoi/Thud Ridge area in this modded FSX is directly equal to Google Earth meshes. It is pretty impressive to see detailed mountains, valleys, etc. But, as low a resolution as the stock SF2 Vietnam mesh is, your textures smoke anything I can find for FSX... much closer to photo real... and seasonal, too. Nice Korea meshes. Reminds me of how much better SF2I terrain looked compared to the original SFP1 map.