streakeagle

I am going to guess that was the Falcon BMS forum? I didn't realize that was their policy after years of having to re-register every time I wanted to download the lates BMS release.

Two installs was too excessive for me. Now enjoying 1.5 and the Mirage 2000C.

Downloading 1.5 to update 1.2 as I type. I hope all the major bugs are fixed.

No rules that I know of... welcome aboard!

Outstanding!

Great news :) When the DCS 1.5 branch goes hot (by the end of December?), I will have the L-39 and Mirage 2000 to enjoy for the first time. Guess which one will get the most time? I hope all the problems with the MiG-21bis are sorted out by then. Will all the bug fixes and newly added features, the F-86 should be a step up from 1.2 as well.

My changes don't work well with copying over directly, particularly if the module's controls were changed in any way. I am doing scripting in the module's files to get the behavior I want/need with toggle switches. So, I have all my changes grouped at the beginning of the file. After a patch, I have to go to the previous version backup folders for each aircraft and copy out my changes, then paste them into the new version. Simple, but tedious when I have custom mods for the: UH-1H, F-86, MiG-21, Bf109, and Fw190. So, I am pretty happy when there is a functional, stable version. I love flying the Bf109. Cold start, taxi, takeoff, oval back for a landing... whether it correctly models a Bf109 or not, I cannot say. But, based on my real world flying experience, the DCS Bf109 "feels" like I am flying a real airplane instead of the "riding on rails" effect typical of sims. I don't care for the guns as I am spoiled by high velocity/high rate of fire US guns, but with a bit of patience and precision, the Bf109 can use its power advantage to get in close and blow the enemy out of the sky with very few hits. The Fw190 is fun to fly, too, but I like the Bf109 a lot more... far more agile but at the same time a wild beast in need of taming.

For me, there is a need to wait. Stability. Every time there is a patch, I have to re-do my custom control mappings. AFAIK, the MiG-21bis completely broke its control mappings to appease complaints of people using conventional HOTAS, which will leave me unable to fly the MiG-21bis as I have since its initial release. The F-86 has been going through some changes as well, which is the aircraft I fly as much or more than the MiG-21. I read the bug reports. I will wait and hope that most if not all of my concerns are addressed by the time DCS 2.0 is released publicly rather than as a 1.5 beta or 2.0 alpha. I have very few complaints about the current 1.2.x release. So I will continue to enjoy the MiG-21, F-86, MiG-15, P-51D, Fw190, Bf109, UH-1, and Mi-8 as they are while everyone else suffers the teething problems of 1.5 and 2.0. But I am closely watching all the videos and screenshots.. can't wait for better looking graphics AND higher frame rates as well as the new NTTR map. But my main obsession is with the aircraft modules: when will the Hawk and C-101 get proper EFMs? When will the P-40F and Mirage 2000 be released? Spitfire? P-47? F-4F? Leatherneck announcements and F-14 release? etc... Of course, I will have to have 1.5/2.0 to enjoy any of the new releases, so get that 1.5 beta/2.0 alpha up to an integrated 2.0 beta and a final public release!

Done right, superman, batman, wonder woman, and the whole justice league could be as successful as the Marvel Universe movies. But somehow, DC movies usually get it wrong. Yet, they have done well on TV many times over the years. I usually like both Marvel and DC stuff regardless of how badly the critics pan it, so I will certainly see this movie, too. Though I missed the last Fantastic 4 based on my brother's assessment... wait for Netflix.

File Name: SF2.fcf for Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS File Submitter: streakeagle File Submitted: 19 October 2014 File Category: Joystick Config Files With this profile running, you will have to configure the SF2 in-game snap views (or other functions according to your preference) to the gray primary POV hat (trim switch) on the Warthog joystick to function as intended. Otherwise it will serve no purpose. This is a fairly complex profile that uses almost every switch available and some switches have "shifted" modes according to the gray rocker switch just above the red thumb switch on the throttle. Click here to download this file

Glad to hear you solved your problem. I hope this profile serves you well.

It looks so good! But I will keep waiting patiently for a final release :P If only someone, ED or a 3rd party, would put a fully modeled F-4 in the game. I would gladly take any non-recon variant ever built: F-4B/C/D/E/F/G/J//K/M/S. The Simworks Studios F-4B for FSX would be great adapted to DCS World!

Despite the delays involved and the fun I am missing out on, I have even less interest in maintaining an alpha and a beta install in parallel with a main install :P I am looking forward to both the improved Georgia and NTTR terrains in 2.0. But I am equally or perhaps more interested in bug fixes to various aircraft modules. I am also curious about improved frame rates.

$60 with free TacPack upgrade sounds more realistic to me. A comparable DCS aircraft is typically $50 and frequently goes on sail for $40 or less. Of course, I would also have to buy TacPack. I would also have to decide whether to use FSX, FSX:SE, or buy Prepar3d. Prepar3d looks appealing, but keeps changing and addons don't necessarily maintain compatibility. I am not sure if FSX:SE is a better choice, because it already is a bit different from vanilla FSX and keeps changing. But the alternative is to stay with the bugs and performance issues of the now very old FSX.

As tempting as the Milviz F-4E and F-4S are... $60 and adding TacPack later will cost more? Not even an expected release date for TacPack despite F-4E having been out for quite some time. And people think DCS charges too much for individual aircraft? The Simworks Studios F-4B looks more promising than the Milviz offerings. But whichever of them is released in a fully functioning state including properly operating weapons and radar will get my money. At the present rate, 6 months to a year before one of the two even claims to have reached that state?

Not sure if I am going to buy it. The graphics look amazing, but my son and I still enjoy Battlefront 2 (which I have 4 copies - one disc and 3 on steam). If I do buy it, I am not sure if I will get 1 or 2 copies. Right now, I have only 1 origin account which I got for my son. But he wants me to get a 2nd account so we can play Plants vs Zombies Garden Warfare together, which would also make sense for the new Battlefront.

Yes, this is a target profile. Technically, you can put it into any folder you want and then open the file using Target. I don't recall where the default folder is. I synchronized all of my computers via a common public documents folder system, so I filed all of my profiles in the same folder I store the target software I use whenever I am building a new PC. I think the default path for the profiles that come with the Target is: C://Users/<User Name>/AppData/Roaming/Thrustmaster/TARGET/Scripts

When you can get the right people into the right situation, there is nothing better than multiplayer. But it is hard to find more than two people that like playing the same way and can fly at the same time. The issues with SFP1 multiplayer connectivity made things even worse, though Hamachi solved most of the networking issues.

You can get the entire Falcon series, including Falcon 4 for $10 at gog.com: http://www.gog.com/game/falcon_collection

My situation is somewhat complicated by the fact that I use an SSD for Windows, but have a conventional mirrored raid 1 array that hosts all my other files including windows user folders and steam applications. So, I might be better off staying with Windows 7 or fully migrating... though I could image the RAID array to a new pair of drives as well... maybe even make those SSD, too.

Well, it can't hurt if I use a new hard drive for Win 10, and then roll back by swapping hard drives? Ultimately some games will require later DirectX than Win 7 supports, so I have to go to Win 10 sooner or later. But DCS isn't going that route any time soon and I don't think I presently have any games that will require a later DirectX. But if I ever get Prepar3d FSX flavor, I guess I could use more advanced DirectX?

Great story and loved the posts that went with it, too. Go back for more and tell us how it goes!

Is this is trick question? I thought the answer was to format the drive and install Win 7 ;) My Win 10 upgrade icon still reports, "We're validating Windows 10 for your PC". If it ever allows me to download Win 10, I plan on installing it on a new hard drive. Win 7 has worked better for me both at home and at work than anything before it. I am fearful of destroying such a stable and fast installation.

Two PCs on the same network have no problem with multiplayer. You don't need Hyperlobby at all to find other PCs on the same network. But the available dogfight and coop modes are the same. As long as both PCs are configured exactly the same in terms of mod files, they should theoretically be able to go online together. There is a less than perfect file checker anti-cheating program. Sometimes it has false alarms that keep pure stock installs of the same exact version from playing, yet it doesn't detect complete aircraft swap-outs if certain files have the same names as the aircraft that has been replaced. The only way to accomplish base take-off is to fly the dogfight mode and have players agree to fly to their respective bases, then take off on command. For such a situation, I suggest unlimited fuel and unlimited ammo. There is no refueling or reloading of ammo in SFP1, using unlimited fuel and ammo will help flights last longer without having to respawn.

Historically, any virtual squadron that flew SFP1 online co-operatively as described above (dogfight mode, landing at base, taking off together, flying formations etc.) would get bored very quickly and move back to whatever sim they came from that supported multiplayer much better. The only people that stayed over the long haul were those that were happy to just randomly dogfight whoever showed up with whatever planes they happened to like flying. Most of the time, I was willing to fly aircraft that would balance the fights better. The draw to SFP1 multiplayer was the plane set, but the limitations were just too great for most people. Third Wire missed an opportunity by never providing useful multiplayer, but ultimately the SF PC series couldn't even afford to keep up in single player, so TK was wise to not waste time and money on multiplayer.