Lexx_Luthor

I don't have sound on my computer, as I JAM stereo when I play THE SF, so I can't hear the fella. But, this just came out of Ireland a few days ago... Ireland Seizes $7 Billion From Its Pension Fund To Boost Employment ~> http://tickerforum.org/akcs-www?post=188008 But if you click the article, they are talking about a "reserve" fund. Where that reserve comes from, who knows? Maybe it was not taken from wages of men and women, but certainly from "taxpayers". No matter, I'll guess boosting employment (Soviet~esque Central Planning) is probably a cover. The last paragraph about the banks is interesting.

hgbn, yea like those. Thanks!! Aussum stuff.

What control do you use? I use a joystick thumb button -- Forward (0 degrees) for zoom in, Backwards (180 degrees) for zoom out. Have you messed with your Viewlist.ini file?

hgbn:: Nice. Do you have a pic of the horizon from 30,000 feet?

Wrench:: That's normal. I've done thousands of hexing around and you get to peek inside the 3d modders souls, what makes them tock. All sorts of mis~spellings and stuph. It becomes so normal, it actually makes sense in some way, and you can almost predict the mis~spellings, to a slight degree. I guess you get to see the humoid brain at work, over a large population of modders. It don't work logically, but that's the way it is. If the brain worked logically, it would not work at all. Or...if there is a scloops, its left and right scoops but called scroops and scloops. It does make sense after a while, or is it me going nuts....never mind move along there's nothing to discuss. I am NOT Perky.

Spinners:: This is how you make Peace my friend... Specular=1 Glossiness=0.1 Reflection=1 Try it, or something similar.

malibu:: Horizon: Check the Fog settings in Enviro.... StartClear= EndClear= Ramping the EndClear towards the maximum 1.0 lets more horizon show....okay...The Fog covers up the distant terrain so you can't see it, even if its there. Raising the EndClear to 1.0 lets you see clearly all the way to HorizonDistance=. If this is Correct Thinking, then no, you don't see a greater HorizonDistance but you do see closer to the maximum allowed HorizonDistance. ie...Stary is using an EndClear closer to 1.0 :dntknw: However, on the other hand, this may NOT be Correct Thinking. Stary?

Cliff:: Have you seen this? ~> http://www.designation-systems.net/dusrm/index.html Also, there's a site called Astronautix that covers some Russian stupf too. but its buried deep. Look around for it. I can't easily get to my bank (ugh) my vault of links now. ah...here... http://www.astronautix.com/

Yep, I put it in the "mods" folder. Most modified Flightengine.ini variables do work, but some don't. The game ignores a few of these variables now. The Yak-23 is nice. The Lightning with silver glossy shine is very nice. TKMD, well its okay. One thing I have to try is save game, edit, and restart to see if we can swap airplanes during a mission. This SF2 seems to be very computation intensive, with far fewer aircraft in the air than in earlier games. Stary:: AAAGGHA I vowed never to let SF look like IL-2/FB -- the earth pancake horizon seen from high altitude. The 20km, and much later, 30km horizon distance in Oleg's game worked great for the IL-2 treetop flying. Tellingly, when Oleg releaced the P-51 in the -- forgot -- I called it Oleg's CFS3 Addon for IL-2 -- there appeared lots of complaints about the tiny horizon distance. Players flew the P-51 to high altitude, as was done historically, and so they noticed the horizon distance, or lack of it. If TK does Korea, or Formosa, hopeflly he'll learn the same lesson. I think, and I may be wrong, that although TK's height field does simplify with distance, and this softening of terrain elevation detail can be seen visually under the right conditions in very mountainous terrain, the terrain tiles do not simplify with distance. I don't know how one would "simplify" tiles: maybe merge the tiles somehow into larger tiles for viewing at more than 50km away. That's why I gain no performance improvement by using larger height field blocks in Terrain Editor, but I can directly trade tile size for horizon distance at any given acceptable performance. The SF game has long been programmed to automatically adjust height field (HFD) detail for performance. Not so with tiles (TFD). Performance goes up with the square of the tile sizes. Performance goes down with the square of the horizon distance. Thus, say, 3x tile size gives you, ideally, 9x more framerate, or it gives you 3x more horizon distance, or some combination of trading those three commodities around. At a given acceptable performance, tile size and horizon distance can be traded for equal value. In other words, if you fly 40,000 feet, and you like your framerate, you can use tiles 4x larger than a player that spends most time at 10,000 feet, yet see the same "detail" density since you are so much farther away, but have a horizon distance 4x farther away. I normally used 5km tiles in SF1 to get 250km to 300km horizon distance at 50fps with mirrors, but also made some other tweaks as well.

Just re-installed Win-7 and my SF2E-11May is running great. And the world didn't end... ...until about two hours ago. Unless I'm wrong, HorizonDistance= is locked down as well. If some of you fellas/fellattes want to confirm this, I'd be thankful. ~~> (total SF2 Newb here) (1) I've place the extracted Flightengine.ini in a new folder I called Flight in the "mods" folder. Other modded extracted files work, Enviro, Viewlist, etc... (2) Modified Flightengine.ini also works, kinda, but not entirely. Apparently, the game reserves some variables to be read only from the CAT files, not the extracted files. Horizon distance seems to be one of them. I've tried placing Flightengine.ini in all sorts of places, in both "mods" and the game folders, including Flight folder and a folder I created called FlightData. Even tried extracting ALL FlightData.cat files and deleting the CAT file. Game dumps. I can't get the game to read modified horizon distance.

Some disassembly required

Yeap. Get your Teller tan Megabars open 24 hours Bathe in a heated bubbly lagoon Surf the best super critical shock waves Enjoy your radiation relaxation period Fun for the whole Fermily Gammascreen lotion SPF 3.0x10^11 now in stock!

Beware the colour or contrast intensity. Notice the sky and ocean are black.

Oh this is interesting. Western AIM-7: If your Red side is close to USSR, then maybe they can use the K-25 missile, which was to be a copy of the Sparrow, but the R-23 was made instead. Then use a re-skinned Shrike. The K-25 was never produced, but maybe could be produced as ARM by the Soviet and exported to your Red side. If your Red side is not close to USSR, then they might could do it themselves with exported R-13s. Assume your Red side (or Soviets) could not pack electronics that small, but that already happened with R-13 originally which was larger than Sidewinder, so this might cancel out. Another idea -- follow this -- make use of Lindr's K-9 missile which was a radar homing AAM for use by some prototype MiG interceptors like Ye-152A in the early 1960s. Have it enter USSR service converted to ARM by the early 1970s, and if exported as ARM could still be used by Red side in the late 1980s. I'm always of the opinion that we should use things that otherwise would not be used in "real life". K-9 looks "kewl" and that's half the idea right there. Download Lindr's missiles if you have not yet, and czech it out. --- I'm looking for an ARM. My scenario is B-47s and B-36s flying over USSR, finding S-25 SAMs about 1956, but these will be installed in much smaller sites scattered across USSR to defend dispersed areas trying to hide from SAC and RAF Bomber Command. This is different than the historical giant S-25 complex at Moscow which Kruschev(sp?) accused of being the Moscow Palisades. It turned out to be a great missile with development, but never moved beyond the ring around Moscow. Anyways, SAC and RAF will encounter this thing, and in a rush will have to field a supersonic ARM. At the time there was jet powered cruise missiles being developed to home in on surveillance and GCI radars, to be carried by B-50s and B-47s, but this ARM was subsonic (but had like, 300 mile range). I figure that US and UK work together, kinda like in WW2, to rush an ARM and on the same platform generally. RAF uses Canberra and SAC uses B-57. The missile I selected is to take the Navy's early Bullpup off the design table and make it ARM. I call it GAM-79. BP is very big and bulky but this is a few years before Shrike started development so that fits. Being used from high altitude, I'm hoping that allows more range than the real thing, or trade warhead for fuel.

10km is believable. It looks like a wide angle lens. I'm guessing that's 40kt yield, give or take 2x. Apply the old Boy Scout method to the cloud top, guessing at this time maybe 25kft, or 8km high. If the cloud top is 45 degrees high -- assuming wide angle lens, and you can easily see the gills under the mushroom cap, there's 8km from camera tower to the base of the mushroom stem. That's a lot of rough assumptions: yield, cloud age, height, and angle, as well as lens. 10km just to be safe. Apparently, you can vacation there. Mururoa, where the sun shines brighter. Holiday 4 U ~> http://vacationorholiday.blogspot.com/2009/05/mururoa.html

That's one reason I never watch them, or Tbirds. I don't believe low altitude formation flying is needed to "impress" folks on the ground, maybe because it doesn't impress me, in fact, just the opposite. Man, the very *best* flying impression I ever saw was one of, if not the, last flying demo of the F-106A -- because I that was always my favorite, and it was amazing in more ways than one. They couldn't get it started, the thing was so old, so the mech rolled out the aux starter cart. Anyways, after pilot landed me and friend talked to the pilot and mech -- they were two bodies and one soul. The entire crowd ran over to wait for the Thunderbirds and F-16s I guess -- don't know don't care, so we had the F-106A crew all to ourselves, pilot-mech. We left after that, and told them the end of the 106 performance was the end of the airshow for us. They ~loved~ that. Cool as hell guys. They both loved that plane.

Not a very interesting way to get others to think more about motorcycles on the roads. That's always an up~slope battle.

Sorry to hear that. Yea that's a raw feeling there. How'd they get in?

French, 1960s if I recall.

Just a very few things that TK put into SF 2008... High altitude Oxcart Blue sky (we asked for that and he did it). Each airplane having its own [AI Data] stuff. BVR engagement with any weapon, engagement range depending on radar range (needs to be targeted against another flight, even friendly or player flight will do, but be sure that flight is not destroyed -- could be set at map border in the rear. As well, BVR depends on radar azimuth and altitude limits. I tested that a few days back. Missile loft (and things we might mod with that, like Skybolt maybe...dunno). Floating balloons (and the things we can hack with that) etc...I'll think of more after I click POAST REPLY I haven't looked into my SF2 yet. I just got it, and the world didn't end, yet. I'm almost afraid to peek since I might pass out from overdose of even newer AI stuff, not to mention TKMD. TK's been busy.

I guess TK's game is pretty scale~able. I like to think that some guy in Iraq with a laptop in the sand can run The SF, and TK *knows* this, so he plans and shoots for that at least, but gives other options for those having higher spec desktops. Overall a pretty good game design. I have a moderate rig I suppose, desktop. I won't spend much money on a first line system, but buy good parts and slap them together. And I do mean good. I never have hardware problems, although I do have learning experiences that never repeat, as figure out the better products, and am willing to pay more for them, but a year or two old (brand new, older design), and so pay 1/2 price for only maybe 1/4 less performance.

Nice. MBA from Harvard eh? Something is missing from this... Harvard MBA:: You should start by taking out a loan from me. Your competition will also borrow from me. You all will face rising input prices due to the increase in borrowing everywhere, and face less increasing or relatively falling prices for your output product. You all will be forced to default on your loans to me. I get yours and your competition's fishing boats, and spend the rest of my days relaxing. You and your competition then spend the rest of your days competing for jobs in my fishing fleet. Fisherman:: Where do I sign?

Terrain detail is Good. But this should come before "terrain detail"... The air refueling, even if only "abstract" of simplified for mission simulation, not actually flying a refueling procedure, would be nice too. In air games, the player should see things 150 miles away, and can cover that distance, in game, in a few minutes. The ground shooter player can cover that distance in maybe 3 days if carrying a rifle and humping like the Romans, or perhaps 1 day given a reliable tank and smooth ground I suppose. That's why 150 mile distant grafix is not useful for ground shooter games, but is essential for (overall) customer immersion in air games. We've not seen it yet. Perhaps, someday.

OddCast:: Yes! But, I've always said, if done *right* a game with B-70 or Draken on the box cover will outsell all those F-22 Rapper or Su-27 Flaker games. Somebody mentioned that air combat flight TheSims don't compete with the ground shooter games. They do. As Metallica would sing, its a fight they can-not win. Ever since SF2, the stock HorizonDistance='s have been getting shorter and shorter every Patch or so, and now, TK said its going to get even shorter in F-14 game, to allow more "terrain detail" or something like that. Going for "terrain detail" is entering into direct competition with the ground shooter games. The air warfare terrain or battlefield is the sky and atmosphere -- where airplanes fly. We may read our air combat accounts to see this. Sky/Atmosphere has always been superficially modeled, if at all, in air combat TheSims, yet sky and atmosphere are among the best visually appealing images, as well as defining the air combat arena, with some exception in the all weather mission role. When the Devs wake up to this, customers will love it. Perhaps someday.

I've always read about this. Joe Baugher (F-94A/B):: The pilot and radar operator found that the cockpit was too narrow for them to be able to get in and out of the aircraft quickly during alerts and scrambles. Here something interesting. At 0:07, the pilot seems fine, the radar fella, not so good. However, that's the canopy getting in the way, and if Joe is right, the pilot may have had to shoehorn himself into the "narrow" cockpit as well. If the radar operator can get past the canopy, his struggle may have only just begun. How do you get in that thing?