1. Some long campaign missions have checkpoints, but it's rare.

  2. mission creators have to manually add those checkpoints, it is not really intended from what I understand and adds a lot of additional workload onto the mission maker. Having a native build system would save the mission makers who do this a lot of time that could be spent on making better missions.

  3. Dunno if you have already decided on something, but in mission to mithril I believe there is an EMP device used to fry the grav lifters on the starship thus no ability to jump safely( welld inside 100 diameters) or move. This could be triggered with taking weight off the device or some other method. The players could then disable it if they found it or they could fix the ship after it had been disabled.

  4. Is it possible you have vertical wings? If you do and they are all facing the same direction then you end up with a force off to the side.

  5. Eve is actually closer to realistic. The height of the Empire supposedly only had 25,000 Star Destroyers. The galaxy spanning fascist regime only had 25k enforcement ships. Yeah fucking right. A US super-carrier is 1000 feet long and has a crew of 5,000. The Starfleet constitution class, which is around the same length and volume, supposedly only has a crew of 300.

  6. To be fair in the far future it is likely a significant amount of stuff could be automated. For example no chefs or cleaning crew. Also on an aircraft carrier you need pilots and mechanics for airplanes and similar. 300 is maybe a bit low but I could imagine needing significantly less.

  7. I wish we got internal weapons bays for the ah-94. Two half sized bays per side would have been really neat. It would allow for 1/2 the payload and stealth or normal payload without stealth.

  8. Holding in your left stick allows you to move it around in the rearming screen.

  9. I’d honestly like to see like a F-4E F-4C or F-4J variant in the game

  10. Yeah, about half the stuff for US would have the 48-star flag instead of the 50 we are all used to. It’s too small to notice with USA, so I’m not even sure which one they’re using.

  11. I believe it at least used to be 48 I counted at some point. The game started with ww2 stuff so that makes sense.

  12. Yes two seat support plane with radar jamming capabilities and bombing capabilities (vark)

  13. I guess this post kind of brings to question an important gap in our vehicle coverage.

  14. The real question is why would you build one? Especially if designed for military purpose you would have to get a lot of benefit out of making it pure atmospheric to make it worth your while. I don't really see any use case for a militaristic in atmosphere only ship because that would be so limiting when fighting an opponent. Possibly a cargo or other civilian vehicle could be useful but I can't really see why any company would sacrifice the versatility of spaceflight when that seems so easy to do.

  15. No one’s landed a plane backwards if they did I give them a bj and a medal

  16. What do you mean backwards, cause I'm fairly certain that people have landed planes while going backwards cause wind.

  17. Ah that's a bummer. I do remember them saying on another WAN show that they wouldn't be in time for the school year, but your comment gave me hope.

  18. I believe they said it will likely be able to be there within the first few weeks of school if you get into the first order wave. If you don't do that they said it will be a long wait.

  19. One of the weirdest things is that the USS Gearing has its proper radar, which as far as I can tell should be the same as on the Cowell and Fletcher and similar, but those don't. It seems very inconsistent. Especially since the USS Mitscher has its cold war era radar.

  20. I just wish there was an F111C (Aussie version) for DCS. Getting down low and dirty like a pig would be awesome!

  21. Doesn't the f-5 with the mig 28 skin actually appear as a 28 on the rwr

  22. Yeah confirmed bug they said that it is fixed internally and the solution for now is to turn 180 degrees after firing it.

  23. Good to know and thanks for the work around :)

  24. No problem in the future you can check the jf-17's bugs page on the forums here:

  25. Every tree except sweden has 1 or more of the following: Stuart, Sherman, Patton, M24, M41, M18, M10, M36 and M113 but 1 T series in any tree but russia will destroy diversity beyond repair.

  26. That statement is true off of the sherman alone, you could have listed every vehicle in the american tech tree and it technically would have been correct lol.

  27. I generally will wait unless I am really hyped and the developer has a good track record or I have a moment of weakness. Definitely been burned a few times because of that

  28. JF-17 has the WASP system, which tbh puts it far above any blufor jet.

  29. I am new to the jeff and couldn't find anything on initial google search, what is the wasp system?

  30. In terms of rudder pedal options on the lower end there are 3 real options from what I can tell.

  31. I think something like a Sea Stallion or a Chinook would be an awesome new addition for VTOL VR. Here are some possible gameplay loops I think would be a lot of fun:

  32. I think something more similar to the hind which has cargo and combat capabilities would be more likely even if a pure transport would be cool.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Author: admin