Jump to content

danielprates

Members
  • Content Count

    1004
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

502 Excellent

About danielprates

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

1203 profile views
  1. Those screenshots lead me to beleive there is a Wellington campaign!
  2. I am so glad to reas this. I always wondered why the auto coexisted with a manual, less effective system.
  3. Since we're at it: does the new damage model include the canopy jamming shut? And btw was that really a thing or just a movie thing?
  4. Now we're talking! Ok thanks, I'll check it out!
  5. Ugh. Look its simple, I am only asking if it is possible to configure keys or buttons to two actions, viz: a) gradual pan instead of only 45 degrees at a time (excluding using the mouse for that); b) head movement or tilting, as oposed to turning view direction. Simple queation. So, nothing fancy and common in other games (BoS) for instance. If they do not exist in the game, can someone just confirm me that? There are no options to that effect in the bindings menu but some games allow more options in, say, config file. Can't anybody give me a straight answer? @ATAG_Pattle, @Buzzsaw?
  6. I am gearing up for the upcoming Desert Wings DLC, after some time away, and I am confused with some of the view settings. Ok. So I can Snap and Pan my head from inside the cockpit. Snap will turn it slightly and immediatelly come back to the original position, where pan will turn there and stay there. However, BOTH only seem to work in increments of 45 degrees. Can't I have a fee pan mode, where I use the hatswitch to turn my head how much I want in any direction? Also: is here no way to configure a key to MOVE your head, only turn it? Can't I raise my head to see lower below the nose, move it to the sides to reach more towards the tail etc.?
  7. What a beast. 2.200hp on such a lean airframe.
  8. Oh yeah. That is a great sidestory of ww2 that not so many people know. I have Alambrooke's memoirs and boy, do they shed new light over Churchill!
  9. Hehe. @Avimimus, the Germans did eventually take Tobruk. At the time it was felt as a shameful defeat by the English. Churchill was at the time at the White House in Washignton, where he was handed by Roosevelt himself the telegram communicating the fall of Tobruk. I don't remember the exact words but he said it was the most somber time of the war for him, and that defeat was one thing but shame was another and that was it. Anyways, as time proved, that didn't help the Germans too much. At the time though, they made much fuss of it. The African campaign, which wasn't too much of Hitler's liking anyway, for a while got some decent attention, as german high command started speculating of feats worth of Alexander (of Macedonia, not the british general) - such as Rommel advancing towards India and assaulting Russia from the south. However as @DD_Arthur said, supplies and logistics and an overall lack of means meant that Rommel couldn't reach Suez, the real meaningful goal. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Axis_capture_of_Tobruk
  10. Only thing missing is a transport or passenger plane on the Allied side. Hmm.... what a weird type of reflector sight the Dewoitine had.... looks like a lamp or something like that.
  11. So 4 months stock career, plus 32 months of another good PW career, right? I would be cool with it if they find a way to model a heavy land/sea presence, but only in the very spot where the mission happens. I wouldnt mind if it was merely a couple of kms wide. One has to be crazy to really expect an entire front of hundreds of kms fully packed with troops, ships, fortifications etc.
  12. I would guess not those two. They make more sense as a part of a hands-on engine start/stop procedure, which iirc has been totally ruled out.
×
×
  • Create New...