Gepard

Das verhalten erinnert mich ein klein wenig an die "gute" alte Zeit wo die Partei immer recht hatte. Aber damit kann ich leben. So etwas habe ich in der DDR oft genug erlebt.

In den letzten Tagen habe ich mit 3ds max dieses kleine Biest gezaubert. Doch gibt es noch ein paar Probleme, die ich nicht lösen kann. Deshalb zwei vielleicht dumme Frage von mir an die Gurus. Wieso kommen die Bremsklappen und das Fahrwerk im Spiel nicht raus, obwohl sie in 3ds max animiert sind?

The soviet way of killmark was only to paint small red stars close to the canopy. To use enemy insignia for Kilsigns was the anglo american way. The germans used simply bars on the Vertical tail. The japanese painted the shapes of the shot down planes on their birds.

This morning, when i switched on the radio, i heared the best joke of the day. He came from Mr. Obama, who spoke yesterday in a speech of the "nation that invented the automobile". In the first moment i thought "Why he is speaking about Germany?", then i realized that he means the USA. Now it was time for a great laughter and with me the entire Germany laughted. What for the knowledge gap of the mightiest man of the world! Oh, no Barack! Ford was not the inventor of the automobile! This had done german ingenieurs. Names like Benz, Horch, Maybach, Daimler are connected with this milestone of the mankind. The nation that invented the automobile was ... 3 times you can guess!

I'm working now on the north east of Afghanistan terrain. Mazar i Sharif and Kunduz are now on the map. New target areas as taliban hill positions, captured shot down helicopters etc are made. Also a new transport ground object "Taliban with donkey" Its something for Donkeyhunters.

Put the J-10 in. Would be a nice opponent for SK F-16

Beta testing of Ye-8? Why not!

Sounds like you use the wrong TE version. If you use SFP1 tileset as basic for your terrain, then you must use the old version for autotiling. The new version works with WOE, WOI,FE tilesets. Why? I dont know. Its simply a fact.

Exacly. This bird is a dream.

Da ich immer noch ein blutiger Laie bei der Arbeit mit 3ds max bin habe ich zwei Fragen. 1.) Wie importiert man ein gmax Objekt in 3ds. Braucht man da ein spezielles Plugin? 2.) Ich habe versucht für mein Afghanistan terrain einen Talibantransport mit Eseln zu basteln. Ich habe einen Eseltreiber und einen Esel. Jedes Objekt allein ist okay. Wenn ich diese beiden Objekte zu einem verbinde und im Spiel teste sind sie beide zur Hälfte in der Erde versunken. Was mache ich hier falsch? Vielleicht kann mir einer der Gurus unter die Arme greifen.

I think you should take the Mi-24 FM as basic and modify it as far as neccessary. The Mi-24 flies well and also the AI has no problem with it, with one exaption, the AI pilots have no idea how to land this beast.

If i would get the Ye-8 too i would feel like X-mas and eastern on one day.

Not only the europeans are crazy. I want tell you a story which i have heared from an old fisherman. He sailed, it nearly 25 years ago, with his trawler (Atlantic Supertrawler of the east german fishermens fleet) in the area between Greenland and the canadian coast. Over radio the german crew was able to listen a very impressive talk between americans and canadians. american voice: "Unidentified object change your course!" canadian voice: "Impossible, change your course yourself." american voice: "Unidetified object, i order you to change your course immedetly!" canadian voice: "No way!" american voice: "You stupid canadian a.....hole. The commander of the biggest warship of the world is ordering you to change your course immedetly or we will running you into the bottom!" canadian voice: "Maybe that you fool command the biggest warship of the world, but i command the local lighthouse!" This is a true story. Happend mid 80th close to the canadian coast.

For the beginning you could include the MiG-21F cockpit or the Su-15 pit. Both are excellent.

As far as i know the Su-39 was not in action. Su-25TM were used by the russians and the georgian had their own update programm.

I think, if you use the real world fuse distance you will face the problem, that we have only the blast fragmentation warhead for AAM. The more effectice Continous Rod Warhead is not available. So missiles like the R-60 (Aphid) are undermodelled if warhead efficency. Thatswhy it is better to use smaller fusing distances as in reality.

It is possible. Try it and you will see.

hgbn, the soviet strategy was simply to avoid a new June 22. This was the date of the german attack in 1941 which came completly unexpected for the soviet leadership and became to a trauma comparable to the american Pearl Harbour trauma. So it was planed in worst case (on the first sign of an enemy attack) to strike first and bring the war into enemy territory. And this from the early 50th. The reasons: 1)Soviet armies were panzer armies, what means the were prepered for fast and deep attack operations. The maximum daily attack depht was set up to 150km. More was not possible because of resupply restrictions. (up today 150km/day is the maximum, more is easily possible for combat troops, but ammo and fuel supply forces cant follow as fast. The fast american strike to Bagdad in the last Iraq war came close to a fiasco, because the US boys suddenly faced empty ammo stocks and empty fueltanks) If you look on a map of Germany you will see, that the North of Germany is very good suited for panzer operations, because widly flat or hilly and a good street network available. So maneuvering warfare is possible and favors the attacker. 2)Panzers are not made for combat in mountainious areas. What means that an attack through the mountain areas in middle or south Germany would be more risky. The attack ways were much more canaled and could be defended more easily also by outnumberd forced. 3)If you take a closer look on the WP war exercises then you will see, that the major exercises played in low lands. The last large Scale exercise "Waffenbrüderschaft80" (Brotherhood of Arms 80) for instance trained the strike of the "Jütland Operation". This premisses were the basic for the soviet (WP) war planning up to the early 80th. With Andropow the soviet strategy was changed from offensive style to defensive doctrin. From that time it was planed to lure the enemy into the own territory and follow the successfull strategy of the war against Napoleon and NaziGermany.

Yeah, would be nice to fire some Kh-25 on NATO vessels.

The Fulda Gap scenarios as main direction of attack are wrong. As war game scenarios of the WP, which were found after the political change in 1990, indicated, the planed main attack direction was in northern Germany. The first strike direction was called "Jütlandische Operation" in NVA documents. With a strike from the north of the GDR was planed to conquer the danish penisula of Jutland. The first strategic wave would have to reache the line of the Nord-Ostseekanal (Northsea-Baltic Sea canal) The second wave should take the rest of Danmark. The second strike direction was called "Operationsrichtung Küste". The main idea of this strike was to reach the area of Bremen and to annihilate the american forces in this area in a major panzer battle, then to run to the river Rhine to attack the Netherlands. The third strategic direction "Norddeutsche Strategische Richtung" would strike from the centre of the GDR over Hannover to the Ruhr Gebiet area then cross Belgium to reach the English Canal The forth strike direction was called "Süddeutsche Strategische Richtung" would cover the Fulda Gap scenarios. The idea was to run toward Frankfurt, reach the Rhine and then run over Luxenburg deep into France, main direction Paris. The troops in the western CSSR would stand defensive at the first moment. It was planed to lure the american forces in bavaria into a trap. The left flank of the forth strike direction was open. So it was expected, that the american commanders would attack in northern direction from Bavaria into Thuringia to cut of the supply lines of the "Fulda Gap operation". When the americans would try to cross the Thuringia Wood mountains the 5th strike direction troops would start to begin a attack from the CSSR to the Rhine and enter France south of the Vogesen mountains. The in northern direction advancing US forces should annihilated in a battle north of the Thuringia Wood (Erfurt area) by troops of the second strategic wave. It is interessting, that only against american forces the terminus "annihilate" is used. Against all other NATO nations it was said "to push". That indicates, that it was planned to kill as many US americans as possible, because of the proven "loss vulnerability" of the US american society (55.000 lost soldiers in Vietnam forced a big trauma on that nation). The idea was to give isolationist forces in the USA the argument to leave western europe alone.

The upper limit is the ability of the computer to handle it. But if you place to much targets to close to each other you will face rather slideshow then action in game. Sunken objects into the terrain can mean, that you have placed them onto tiles which have a big value entry in the HeightMapScale. (_data.ini file) You cant solve it. The only way would be to use smaller values or not to place objects on this tiles. This is the reason, why try to avoid to place targets on mountain tiles in my Afghanistan terrain.

Wrench, for tiling with Desert terrain tileset better use the old version of TE. The new TE is good for WOE, WOI, but has problems with SFP1 Desert. Why? I dont know, but it is a fact. If you has the DEM imported, then tile the terrain with new TE. Then save it. Open the terrain with old TE. Tile it again and it should run.

Depends on the plane. In a MiG i prefer the air combat, especially the intercept or CAP missions. MiG's were for me allways the defenders. In american planes i prefer the mud mover role. Blue side as aggressors.

Ich versuch das mal.