DoctorQuest

Well, I predate the ORIGINAL G.I. Joe and I regret every day not keeping some of that stuff.

April's Fools is one thing but this is just MEAN!!!!!! Examples of good April's Fools jokes: 1. Your wife/girlfriend/husband/boyfriend is having an affair. 2. You boss called. You've been fired. 3. Your hometown has been wiped out by a nuclear device. Examples of BAD April's Fools jokes: 1. The Mirage Factory just released the Mirage 2000. 2. The Mirage Factory just released the F-117. 3. Capun is getting out of the mod business. 4. Your joystick is broken. Let's keep things in perspective folks.

Good. Now I don't feel so stupid.

Agreed it's more than reflections but it looks for all the world like one of the following: 1. Drivers. 2. Heat corruption. 3. Video card not getting enough power. 4. Bad vid card to mobo connection. 5. Bad vid card. 6. Bad mobo. Drivers are the easiest to check. Can you go back even further than the previous version? Have you contacted the video card folks?

You have the latest graphics drivers? If so, have you tried rolling back to an older version of the drivers? Is it heat related? Does it happen immediately after a power up? Do you shut down services to improve performance? Some graphics cards required certain services to be available to operate correctly.

Really good point. Sims tend to be much more open ended than most shooters. Even campaigns usually have enough variables that you can play through them again and it's not the feeling you get playing through an FPS again.

And, yes, to answer the original question: Both sims and wargames have fairly steep learning curves. You have to devote a good amount of time before you're even qualified to try to write a review.

I think most of us are more than just casual gamers. We are either pilots or those wishing we were. That reduces the potential audience by a huge chunk. Wargaming has the same problem. It is a fiercely loyal community but a very small one.

My two cents. A dynamic campaign is usually defined as having some way to "remember" the state of the conflict so that the effects of any missions you fly apply to the conflict as a whole. There is also usually some sort of "campaign AI" written that reacts to the effects of your and other missions. For instance: You fly a mission against an airfield and destroy a number of aircraft. If you fly a new mission over this same airfield these same aircraft would still be destroyed. That being said, if there is an effective campaign AI the "enemy" may resupply the airfield with replacement aircraft. The other element of a dynamic campaign is that the missions you fly depend on the results of previous missions. If you succeed in a given mission you may get a different NEXT mission than if you fail a given mission. This is all opposed to a static campaign where the campaign is made up of a series of missions that have no relationship to each other. No attempt is made to communicate the state of the conflict between missions.

Sounds good. Let me know if you need someone to help test it. Thanks!!

It is so fun to watch a kid with new toys!! Welcome, Basher. The adventure is only beginning.

Does the mission specify startonground=true? (sorry. can't remember the exact parameter. But I know you sure blowed up good if you don't have it.)

Hate to beat a dead horse here, but has anyone looked at the forum search function. I went to the top level of the KB forum and did a search on "cockpits". It returned no results. I can't believe that is true. Again, the KB is a great idea and we should all be willing to work with it, but it really needs a working search function.

http://alt.coxnewsweb.com/ajc/swf/blueangels/blueangels.swf Having done acrobatics once I can relate to this. I maxed at about 3 g and did OK. Can't imagine 7. Enjoy!

I was going to swear off LOMAC for a while but after rebuilding my system I put LOMAC 1.02 back on. I like it as far as it goes, but please do not ask me to comment on vendor support. Both are good sims, but I find myself playing the TW sims much more than LOMAC. A lot of it is the ability to fly over terrains that mean something. The LOMAC terrains are good but obviously limited in scope. The ability to mod the TW sims is huge. This has raised all the of sims to a new level and as far as I can see it has not hurt TK's business one bit. Minor kudo to TW over LOMAC. The airfields have decent taxiways, signs and runways. The LOMAC airfields look like they are just slapped together pieces of runway. Bottom line is, in restrospect, if I did not have LOMAC I probably would not miss it that much. I consider the TW sims must haves. Good post. Nice to see it has stayed civil.

I am not sure it's a usability thing as much as an attitude thing. But the search function needs to be looked at. I did a search on "adding aircraft" in the KB forum and got nothing. I think most of us realize how much work it is to maintain a site like this. The KB is a great idea. But I'm not sure everyone does a full browse of the website first time to realize it is there and POLITELY pointing them in the right direction does not cost you much.

I have had the same issue with "why didn't you do a search, you idiot." Folks have plenty of time to post a scathing reply to a request for information, but, God forbid, they take the same time to help out. In any event, there are good ways to communicate and there are bad ways to communicate. Helping someone and then pointing them to the KB is good. Bashing them over the head with the KB is not.

And a special shout out to those who have to work this day. Troops, Police, Firemen and the poor IT guys like me and my team who have to work around the rest of the world's schedule. Alleluia!

Well, I figured out the issue with the Korea Air War F-86's anyway. FastCargo gave me the hint. The dark tint for those planes is part of the F86_reflection TGAs. Delete the TGAs from the texture folders and it removes the reflections AND the dark tint. I realize this is somewhat a matter of taste but I just prefer my canopys without tint or reflections. Not sure if anyone else has this issue..... Now the A-6A is another issue...... Probably something similar but still have not figure it out yet. What I AM pretty sure of is that the CanopyGlass.TGA does NOT control the tint you see on the inside of the cockpit. It does control the color of the canopy from the external view.

Update on the A-6A canopy.... It is definitely in the cockpit LOD where this is being done. The stock WOV A-6 has a perfectly clear, beautiful canopy view but once you apply the patches it goes dark. Extracting and copying the stock cockpit LOD to the cockpit folder of a patched WOV/WOE install removes the darkness but I don't know what it might screw up. (I was expecting a CTD or something but it works just fine.) I guess I should go poke around the TW forums......

Happy Birthday, indeed! When I was 27 I was playing Microprose Strike Eagle on my C64. Those WERE the days!

I take it these are not endorsed by the United State Air Force?

Very nice work! Just keeps getting better and better...

Ok. I realize this is somewhat of a dead horse but I still can't figure out how to reduce the "darkness" of some of the canopy glass renderings. I saw the bit about the trick of "moving" the glass out of the way but I was looking for a simpler alternative. The REAL gist of my question is: "Can the color of the canopy be controlled in the 3D definition of the cockpit (I.E. the cockpit LOD file)?" Which, in effect, makes in difficult to change. I have a couple of planes where I have mucked and mucked with the canopy TGA files to no avail. I have disabled the "reflection" TGAs. (Which DOES remove the reflections but does not affect the "tinting" of the glass. Anyway, if I just knew that the "tint" can be controlled by the LOD file I will at least know what the basic issue is. Thanks!!

Ok. I'm new at this....... I'll see what I can do. What I don't quite understand yet..... Is there a separate canopyglass.tga for each aircraft?