Jump to content


Founders [premium]
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2512 Excellent

About AndyJWest

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location
    London, England

Recent Profile Visitors

4948 profile views
  1. I have in the past as a result of sheer lack of dosh had to resort to buying second-hand PC parts, but I'd really not recommend it except as a last resort, or unless you are buying from someone you know and trust. Air-cooled graphics cards are probably amongst the safer purchases, as they don't really wear out (other than possibly the fan motors) and either work, or don't. Anything that is liable to deteriorate over time (an HDD, an AIO CPU cooler etc) is much more risky. People sell them because they show signs of wearing out...
  2. The F-16 is a looker, certainly. And you are probably right about workflow. As far as the Hornet goes, there always seems to be at least one more step to doing anything blowing-stuff-up wise than really ought to be necessary. @ Boo: Agree, the Harrier 'techy systems' seem buggy to the extent that trying to use them gets to be a chore for me. Hence me only using it with dumb bombs and rockets. Or occasionally for chasing unarmed civilian aircraft for a spot of Geneva-convention-busting. 😳
  3. To be honest, the F-16 seems a bit bland to me. And the absence of a canopy frame makes me feel like I'm flying the Fokker Eindecker from RoF.
  4. I tried it briefly in the earlier free-to-play event. Interesting, but not really my sort of aircraft. I think that's the one I described as having a cockpit designed by captured U-Boat builders.
  5. If you buy it from Steam, they consider it DLC for IL-2 Battle of Stalingrad, so you need that too. You can buy FC directly from the developers on this website though, without needing to buy anything else. Note that Flying Circus – Volume II isn't out yet. If you want to fly now, you'll want to buy Volume I. VR works with any of the IL-2 GB content.
  6. Yay! Tomcat! Another plane to almost-half-learn to operate! I'll undoubtedly buy it at some point, but for now I've got too much to be going on with as it is. I think my best tactic may be to just learn the A-G systems in the Hornet, and the A-A systems in the F-16. And the not-crashing-in-flames techniques for the Harrier, along with minimal old-fashioned A-G weapons so I've got an excuse to fly it. The aircraft may be multifunctional, but my brain isn't... 😧 As for the Blackshark, I had a love-hate relationship with it, mostly due to the weird autopilot.
  7. Yeah, I've seen icing in other aircraft, just not the XCub. Though so far I've mostly been flying in conditions where ice isn't going to be an issue. I left England at the end of August, and have been in the tropics or thereabouts most of the time since, and only occasionally venture above 10,000 ft. The XCub has a 14,000 ft rated ceiling, and would go quite a bit higher I suspect, but flying at that height requires an imaginary oxygen cylinder so I don't do it for long.
  8. I bought the Gazelle. Tried it briefly. Didn't like it. Flight model just seemed 'off'. Not that I have any idea what a Gazelle should fly like, but if they fly like that, I'd rather fly a Huey. I should probably give it another go at some point, just for fairness, but meanwhile I've got quite enough DCS study-sim studying to do with the Harrier, Hornet, F-16, and all the other stuff I've shelled out for, and I get the distinct impression that if I try to learn too much, I forget it faster than I learn it. It sometimes seems to me that the sole purpose of modern military avionics is to simplify flying the aircraft just enough so you can then operate unnecessarily complicated weapons systems.
  9. A bit difficult to fly low over South Island, ZachariasX. Or at least, difficult if you want to see the interesting bits. I last landed in Nelson, on the north of the island, and my next leg was going to be to Hokitika, on the west coast, so I supposed I could go the long way round, and follow the coast, avoiding the high ground. Even without the turbulence, conditions are going to be poor though. And the next leg was going to take me over Mt Cook, which is 12,218 ft high. I'll sit it out. As for icing, I've not actually encountered it in the XCub. For some reason, the (modded) Garmin flashes a 'pitot heat' warning briefly sometimes, though there don't seem to be any consequences, and it seems to be doing it at about 7°C OAT, which doesn't make sense anyway. And if there's a pitot heat switch in the cockpit, I've not found it.
  10. Yes, there's no doubt that the more modern multicore CPUs could be utilised more efficiently by IL-2 GB, though it isn't likely to be simple: if it was, the developers would surely have done it already. Any such improvements, if and when they come, are likely to benefit both single-and multiplayer environments, making the suggestion that the developers should prioritise unspecified 'netcode' over other work even less sensible - they know where the work is needed, and where it will benefit most.
  11. The next New Zealand legs of my world tour are on hold for a day or two. ☹️ Crossing the Cook Strait/Te Moana-o-Raukawa (between the North and South islands) in a 50 kt crosswind wasn't really much of an issue beyond adding to the time taken, but flying in that sort of wind over the mountains is likely to be distinctly bumpy. I've seen reports that enough turbulence can actually break an MSFS plane. It looks like it will be raining hard too. I thought it was supposed to be summer there...
  12. What do you want to be when you grow up?
  13. If I want advice for life, I'll look for it elsewhere, thank you.
  14. I don't think there is any question whether there is 'a market for multiplayer' as far as IL-2 GB is concerned. There clearly is one. The question is how to best cater to that market, alongside the larger single-player market. Nothing I've seen in this thread suggests that the participants are in a better position than the developers to answer that question, which makes the poll rather pointless. The developers (and the investors who fund development) aren't going to base decisions on a poll attracting at best a couple of hundred votes. Particularly when the poll is based on a false premise. As RedKestrel says above, the people responsible for new content aren't going to be netcode developers, making any decision regarding further work on multiplayer content contingent on being able to justify it to investors, rather than on reallocating resources currently being used elsewhere. If you want to know what the developers plans are, ask them. And if you want to influence such plans, don't try to second-guess their decisions based on false assumptions. Furthermore, the developers have already decided to go ahead with 'More Planes'. They are accepting advance payment for them. Backtracking on that isn't a remotely rational option, making the poll entirely null and void.
  15. There are lots of things that could be 'improved upon'. The developers have been making improvements for years - the game is in a very different state than it was in 2013. And they have been funding such improvements by selling new content.
  • Create New...