Do335

Actually! I like where the game engine is at. It is very very stable and mostly bug free. If 3rd party exe mods roll in they come with better stuff for sure but also CTDs and bugs... I'm haunted by bugs....

Interesting project Gepard! More updates later plz if you have them! (If the sidewinders are Bravos, I say dump them dead weights)

^Oh, do the space combat have sounds? As sound waves don't travel in vacuum you're not supposed to hear anything. I've only seen Firefly/Serenity gets it. ...Only a personal pet peeve I guess. For cinematic effect probably the more fireworks the better!:D

The "no spoilers but it hangs on the edge" thing is killing me. Can someone plz just out w/ it?o.O

damn... Never hopped on the star wars wagon myself, much prefer anything Philip k. Dick or the matrix. But a good movie is hard to miss... will see..

Always thought IMDB rating is quite representative and can tune out a movie's marketing hype (i.e. 50 shades of grey). Usually anything above 7 is decent, above 8 is.. master piece level. This one is currently at 8.8! It will go down as is usually the case when more people vote for the rating for a new movie, currently number of votes is at about 10%. I'd guess it will settle on around 8.0~8.3 if the star wars hype cool down a bit, which is still very good!

Hi WBS, I'm trying to use the low rez CV-21lo1.LOD for Wings over Korea and there appears to be meshes hanging above the flight deck for both CV-21lo1 and CV-21lo2. Also some parts like the bridge doesn't seem to have texmap. Absolutely stunning ship (wow)! Is there any chance for a small fix?..

TK's most definitive answer: http://bbs.thirdwire.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=3963 Player squadron will always get the upgrade on time (i'm sure). AI squadrons depend on supply (my guess) and combat lull (i'm sure).

Thank you very much Mue. The new cat extractor works a treat. And thanks for uploading to the downloads section.

Stratos: you can still defend against AI in the horizontal and turn the table around with straight wing jets. The way the FMs are set up the Mig-15 has very high energy bleed while engaged in sustained turning fight against the F-86, even more so vs straight wings. But of course dedicated offensive AA is still difficult... Historically I believe it is true that Korea is the only jet conflict where the USAF doesn't have a clear tech advantage. (Or perhaps the progression of technology has yet to make it a dominant factor in air power... Like the important factors in ww2 air power are resources, doctrine and numbers alongside technology, but the 1991 gulf war showcased clear dominance of air power on the side that had tech advantage. But I digress!......) For "what if" I think the TW stock Mig-9 can be used for a start. In reality the reds did get Mig-9 but they just didn't get sent to fight in Korea. PS the banshee FM's aero are quite simplified. The F9F and F-80s are way better with baffmeister's FM. placeholder ss

If the AA radar cursor can be moved it wouldn't be a problem with hardware or key settings so first make sure of that. Then the problem would be sensor of interest. You can toggle cursor enable to go BORE/Vis mode, or if in Slave mode lock something up with the FCR first, the SOI would then transfer to the MFD WPN page. Also the maverick avionics code is a bit fubar iirc, if sometimes it's wonkey just toggle cursor enable to cycle back to the mode you want.

I really liked the Real Time Tactics campaign style in that the player controls a group of (customizable) units but there're no resource gathering involved. S.W.I.N.E., Codename panzers 1 & 2 by an eastern european gaming studio was also RTT and massively fun:D (forgot the name... their follow on corporate offspring Rush To Berlin not so good imo..), there was Nexus the jupiter incident, even Homeworld is somewhat RTT because there's a unit cap(?). Did someone say the new battlemech game KS campaign got funded in one day?.. I checked their KS page on day 4 and they surely had already reached stage 1. That promo video was awesome!

Usually AI uses "StallSpeed=" for short final speed and "LandingSpeed=" for final, but some 3rd party FM simplies it without LandingSpeed, it's mostly fine but sometimes depending on the FM and/or battle damage AI might crash to ground so, best is to separate the two values I reckon. ...but eh, nice that it works:)

It's mostly due to landing speed set too high in the FM, you can reduce it by 0.5 increments in the data ini and do trial and error runs in game. TK probably had an algorithm for the stock planes' landing speed values, but trial and error is what can be done by layman and it's certainly error proof. Also in campaign mode the AI uses a different landing approach vs single missions (it adds a flare before touchdown) so if you wanna use it in campaign, gotta test it in campaign mode. ^What I found out by own experience is all.

Hi WBS, Thank you for this masterpiece!!! Awesome!

Thanks a lot for the source doc MigBuster! edit: I thought it was a shut-up-or-be-disciplined warning but it's just a PR event so normal I guess. As an organization it should fight for itself. Where I come from something like this would be done completely opaque in secrecy and then years later, it would be on active duty and displayed at parades or air shows as the latest weapon system in service for the public to see. Nobody would question anything until it is done. Here on the JSF program it appears to be the complete opposite, it gets so much press that the AF is forced to do PR campaigns.

http://dailycaller.com/2015/09/23/air-force-instructs-airmen-to-say-positive-things-about-troubled-f-35/ Saw it yesterday, if legitimate, news from the US service might need to be taken with a (heavier) grain of salt now. I quite like the jet itself and the revolutions it brings to air combat, but the open press coverage sometimes makes things... complicated. Or does being in the service mean you automatically waiver rights such as these and 'play for the team'? But then how about the F-35 pilot that told the reporter that the EODAS does not replace the Mk 1 eyeball? While the general public could completely misinterpret it, it was straight-up truth.

Yes (without joking) that although the original idea on a wider scale would not work I'm still staying true to my words. The revised patron idea is what I believe to be a good one, and will always stand up to it and more importantly the general spirit it represents long as I'm around. placeholder screenie

Hello guys. Idea mode. edit: idea changed. See follow up posts. If a final idea forms that is agreeable I'll update it to here.

Yes the original plan is flawed as have pointed out to me. In my previous (long) post the reply addressed to Stratos I've given a general layout of the new idea. Perhaps there needs to be another thread.... It is not about what I want but for CA and the community to stay alive. I'm hoping this is what everybody wants. The traditional way to do this is of course as you said, properly sell a creation. But like you said it is not what's it's cracked up to be. Staying with what we know MSFS is the one that's been doing this all along but, that community is different. Nowadays if we take a look around, commercial sims aren't what they crack up to be as well. In the traditional sense, once a sim stops getting its core programming updated it is going for a death path yes. However perhaps we're living in a different day and age now. Perhaps there's a way for individual content creators to give an old sim new life. I don't think I'm alone in this for various grassroot methods have popped up since the economic downturn. Maybe something similar is worth encouraging here? Imagine that John is a good 3d modeller. He creates quality mods, upload them to CA and for everybody to download. In his signature he provides a link and says, If you like what I do, be my patron. If I see this I'd give it a proper thought, and generally I'd have a decent feeling about this right? Or is this something that is considered to be destructive to the community spirit? (Nah man... really?) And imagine the positive effects that something like this could ripple through?.....

Stratos, Yep the original idea was flawed as pointed out to me and we've moved on to the patron system. How it works is rather simple. If you like someone's work, support him with a monthly fee i.e. becoming a patron. In return you get certain privileges, such as early preview of projects, future goals, getting to see WIP pics a week early, stuff like this. If you're willing to support with more, you get your name on a decal like Capt. __ "Stratos" __ (insert name) on the side of the canopy. If you support even more, you get private 3DSmax tutoring sessions with... something simple, like... how to create a pilot helmet. The details are purely outta my head ofc. The creator provides the tiered pricing and privilege options so you can choose something that's comfortable and good at doing (say if making videos are very cool but talking to a bunch of strangers is weird then there's no need to do that. something like that); You can setup something basic so as to make it not very disruptive time wise, or something more engaging so as to grow the patron base. This is a very grassroot thing so, a basic patron is like 1$ per month, but it can be tiered up to like 20 30.. 50$ if so choose. Link to an example. This is a guy who plays Arma3 and takes patrons. What he does is playing video games for ppl to see so I'm not sure if it's even comparable to 3d modelling. However the basic layout is absolutely the same. https://www.patreon.com/Jester814?ty=h Interesting to note that each tiered patrons are limited to 10 in numbers, so it won't end up with say 100 1$ patrons and impossible to attend to. For the patrons it's even more simple, you support someone mostly because you like what they do. (completely hypothetical here) So if you like Ravenclaw_007's hi-def weapons and jets, or if you like WBS's quality ships or if you dig Stary's cockpits.... everytime they release pics you're like this is looking nice! Well be a patron and support them in their work. There is, in no way or form, can someone else dictate what the creator works on. This is a simple explanation and I'm apparently no expert, so if Gunrunner or someone else has a better description I'm all ears, but hopefully this is the drift. Gunrunner, For once I'd like this to be not a forum pissing contest like these things are usually perceived to be, but something constructive. So hopefully you can find more problems again! Erik, Hopefully your reply is in a tone of sarcasm because if you're really giving up then I've got nothing to say. You and Dave have rang the warning in 2013 and since then it surely has been something of a concern for us outsiders as well (? if not I'm sorry for thinking too much?..). Now we know that apparently you've since then been doing it out of altruism. Should the word be "deficit" or have I gotten the whole thing opposite?? Anyway hopefully you can overlook who I am and listen to what I'm saying and maybe think of a solution together. Yes it is not my problem but whose is it then other than Erik's and combatace's? What we got here is an issue in and of the system itself. Unless someone steps up, either you, me or John Doe, it's not going to solve itself from what I see at least.

not bad at all http://devblog.sim155.com/2015/09/dynamic-campaign.html

So... nothing? So if it ain't 20 pages of forum negativity and vetocracy nobody would even think about it? Right, ready for round 2 Gunrunner?? I promise to be a better sport this time! It is disappointing. I put it another way. How do you suppose to keep combatace.com active? Take me for example, I've paid for subs. But haven't felt the need to do so these days. If we don't have more quality mods I don't think my need or lack thereof is going to change. It could be possible that what I feel is within the range of common sense.

Guys thanks for the replies. It was tbh better than I expected. The whole topic could be considered taboo in certain circles, but I'm glad we can openly talk about it. The posts are very long/bit hard to read, and with the latest we've come to the patron system. Maybe a thing like this would have some actual help in bringing new talent? Intention is still the same. Someone said iirc that once TK stopped the work, SF would be a "stable 3rd party modding platform". I'm simply saying maybe the platform can be more... alive.

OK. I don't appreciate the tone, maybe that is your way but I see your point. Perhaps by executing this idea the message could be perceived as condescending. Fwiw if I were a modder I don't think I'll be swayed by the sum that could be gathered even in a best case scenario say with a popular aircraft, unless my interest already lies in the area. What's hoped to achieve is only a light nudge to go from most likely to yes, that sort of thing. Guessing by the number of forum members man how many do you think would end up requesting the same subtype of a type of aircraft that spans from 1910 or 2015.... Mostly 1 or 2, my guess. But judging from the responses ppl tend to blow it into all seriousness over this. So maybe patroning is the preferred method here? It is a lot more proper a "business model" approach, but basic ideas like combatace free for all rule still apply. How it works is pretty straightforward/precedented. I stand by my original goal to keep SF community going, but this might take some website tech to set up. Erik, any chance that you are still willing to consider at this stage? And to the CA modders, if you've perceived the original idea as ill toned, I sincerely apologize, with no excuse. But if you're willing to look it over, and bear in mind that I am not the matter here, maybe you'd give this thought (or any variation of it) a fair assessment. The basic idea is some form of compensation. Without violating CA's ways and optional individually on both sides to take it or not. Heck if you have something in mind talk to Erik, I bet he listens better to you.