Jump to content

Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 04/18/24 in Posts

  1. I thought the beta patch period is over, and we will get more stable versions? With each new patch we get a new "behavior" of one of the F16 systems, but no instructions on how to use them properly. We are supposed to submit a "bug report" without knowing if it is a bug or a new "feature". How are we supposed to do that if we have to guess whether the current behavior of the F16 is the right one? I don't know right now, is this the right way I'm learning to get the F16 to work, or is this the next new of "1000" workarounds. The last few weeks I have the feeling that with every patch a lot of things become new, and hardly anything works like before. With each patch we have to wait longer for the next fix, and with the fix we get a new "feature" that doesn't always work right, and we have to wait again until the next patch "fixes" it (or adds a new problem/new behavior). I feel like the F16 has a lot of new issues right now (INS, scope, laser code, weapon systems, datalink, etc), and with each patch there are coming more. Actually, I just want to have fun, but ED, you make it really difficult for me to have any fun at all. Fun is currently being replaced by frustration and that really sucks. It's ok if the F16 systems finally work as they should, but do they? I don't know. How so without any actual manual? When will we get the newly revised F16 manual? This manual is the basis for learning things and knowing what is right or wrong. Since the last 4 updates, I have the feeling that changes and how they affect the game are decided by a dice roll (I hope I am wrong). I no longer recognize any system behind all the changes. I'm also beginning to lack the imagination to think that there is still a plan for why things happen the way they do. So what's going on, ED? What is the right doing, to have fun with the F16 again? How long do I have to wait, the F16 is in a good state again? And please, don't ask me what's wrong with the F16 right now. If you want to tell me, there is no big problem with the F16 right now, I will give up in believing in you. Yes, I am frustrated, really frustrated.
    11 points
  2. I’m just getting bored of people trying to stir up drama where none exists, the whole idea that there’s some ulterior motive to the release delay or that “they” are lying to us is ridiculous.
    11 points
  3. No you’re right there, they’re totally lying and making stuff up just to mess with you, it’s personal and you should ask for a refund and stop playing DCS entirely
    10 points
  4. I think what is clear from this thread is simply that ED should wait longer with pushing new features. You can still output the same amount of content at the same pace, just do it a month or two later and give both your QAs and developers more time to find and fix any bugs. That feels like it should be enough to stop all these bugs, because it feels like every DCS F-16C patch is two steps forward, one step back (at best). I also think ED needs to be more receptive to bug reports. It is very difficult to get bugs reported, and so many threads which are clearly describing incorrect behaviour gets marked as "correct-as-is" and locked to prevent any further discussion or context to be added to the matter. I know both myself, and a lot of my DCS friends, have simply stopped reporting bugs on the forums because it feels like a futile endeavour, when you've spent hours sometimes researching an issue and providing all kinds of information, and still it gets marked as "correct-as-is" and locked. The community is more than willing to help ED make the DCS F-16C the best it can be, we just need to be given the opportunity.
    9 points
  5. Hello Bignewy, thank you for your very detailed reply. I am well aware that you all (the ED team) are working hard to make sure everything runs as smoothly as possible. Unfortunately, lately I have the feeling that some things are going wrong with the planning. For me, the F16 module has never been in such a bad state without major features being added. And in my opinion, there have never been so many different problems at the same time. I can't remember for a long time that the F16 was ever in such a bad state. It's frustrating when what's added or improved isn't even noticeable as an improvement, but makes the F16 much more unplayable. Waypoints drift as soon as I set markpoints and turn them into STPTs. Boresighting no longer works at all. HARMs suddenly fly around wildly. GBUs no longer find their target. Confusing altitude information for cluster munitions. TGP need and "rearm" to work after a rearm, and many more. And what's worse, I don't even know whether this is a bug or whether I'm simply operating the system incorrectly now (because I learned it wrong, since it wasn't implemented correctly before). I just don't know anymore, is it me or is it the game. Please, if at all possible, stop putting in half-finished things into the game that break more than it adds in functionality. That's all I wish.
    9 points
  6. Seriously? What do you think would happen if we all just kept quiet or stopped participating in the early access program altogether? Do you even remotely believe ED could continue to fund itself? But apart from that. You should realize yourself that, if anything, you've made the worst argument ever. Even if it is the early access program, it should be possible to make justified criticism. Trying to shut us, the customers, up or even portraying us as stupid children is more than cheeky. We know very well what early access entails, and yet it must be possible to point out that something is going exceptionally wrong without you making us out to be possible idiots. What's wrong with you?
    8 points
  7. While i welcome the improvements going into the Q&A part (hope to see more of it), as a customer, the current quality of the module is not acceptable. Yes it is early access, however the decline in quality, the constant issues with systems being broken is not okay. While i dont know the very process after which testing is done prior to releasing a patch, it is questionable how, after 2 minutes of installing the patch and starting the jet in an effort to do an integrated systems test (cold start, align, takeoff, employment of systems and weapons) some major bugs like the boresight and the laser code can be immediately found. „Just enjoy it as it is“ is reeeeally difficult that way and the frustration is noticeable throughout the viper community by the looks of it. This is what i want to see changed and it would be appreciated to hear something about the efforts ED intends to take in this direction
    7 points
  8. Grinelly and Red Star make testing about F-100D and Mig-17F
    6 points
  9. I will be frank, sometimes it feels like we can not win, so we do our best. Some say wait longer to release stuff, others say hurry up and release, you get the point. Regarding bug reports, we deal with many reports, and requests, not all can be fixed or granted how a reporter wants, we have to be careful what information we use in DCS, as many of you know we can only use public unrestricted information, sometimes people share information that just isn't correct for our version, or we may have better information. We are always happy to look into issues, I deal with them every day. If you don't feel like reporting issues I understand. thank you
    5 points
  10. IMO, it all boils down to ED having too much on their plate (and that plate keeps piling on with new EA modules every year) and the fact that we are in a perpetual beta sim environment. That's just the way it is with this sim. If every module could have the attention and focus we saw in Deka's JF-17 development (except for the lack of an English manual to date!) that would be awesome.
    5 points
  11. Sadly have to agree with OP, The viper is imho the most FUN module to fly in dcs but since last patch ive stopped using my fave all time airframe due to it not being fun anymore, Cmon devs, You guys had the F16 in a very stable and almost finished state before the unified patches came out? For the love of god please stop adding and changing whats not broke... Very frustrating as half of her systems are not fun to use anymore.
    5 points
  12. last link was the op's pc problem, and stop throwing a tantrum, you arent heatblur or a dev, stop making this a huge deal chromium isnt gonna fry ur cpu or kill you. and whats wrong with a 404, you can enter the wrong url anywhere and get a 404 doesnt mean anything associated with it is evil and dog<profanity> and again youre literally using chrome, or even any browser to use this forum...
    4 points
  13. I find that I dont need to oversample my crystal. Can I make it look sharper by oversampling? Sure, but for me, rendering at native resolution is way sharper than the G2 ever was, performs better, more FOV than the G2, and in most cases I can run with no AA. The only places I see shimmering in DCS are things like fences on the ground, I can tolerate that while I taxi and then its a non issue after take off. These things give me more overhead to turn on more eye candy:)
    4 points
  14. Hi, da trifft es sich doch ganz gut, das mein OH-58 Rig "fast" fertig ist. Overhead Panel 1 und meine neue Collective Base (Ruckfrei und Feder unterstützt) 50° max Winkel, beliebige Endlagen einstellbar (5° -85°), ca. 3000 Schritte Auflösung auf die 50° (das macht ca. 0,15 mm am Griff)
    4 points
  15. That's almost funny, a reveal of an upcoming reveal. Why not just wait until you have something to actually to show? DCS has really become a "Product Preview Simulator". Things that are coming but not yet, things that were supposed to be released but are now delayed, things that MAYBE have been cancelled or maybe not. Sorry to sound so cynical but the last month haven't been kind to DCS or my patience with it.
    4 points
  16. They’ve done it again. It’s laughable. I’ve flown the Mustang every day since the update and while you can still take off and land in it you can’t taxi and use the brakes sensibly any more. Who’s signing this off? It’s unserviceable as it is. I’ve adjusted curves a few times in an attempt at softening the brakes but it’s futile. They’ve buggered it. The Jug’s busted too but I almost like it. Maybe the weight of the Jug helps? It’s not as silly as it is in the Pony. I’m not happy. Not a bit. Not as it stands. They’ve completely wrecked the Mossie on the ground for me, forget about immersion or realism, I may as well be flying a dodgy arcade game. Better once we’re in the air but still. Now it’s the Pony too so I’m two down on my already meagre diet of props. Bring back Beta? Bring back testing? Whoever’s responsible for this mess needs having a word with. They’re going through my collection of lovelies ‘improving’ them and it’s downright destructive. I’ve never seen anything behave like it IRL (nor has anyone) and if I did it’d be grounded, it’s bloody ridiculous. Test it ffs. Who’s signing off this tosh? It’s like someone’s been authorised to hack into my warbird hangar and screw them all up. Are we expected to put up with months of rolling out some fools brainwave while we post bug reports? Sod that. Look how long it’s taking for someone to wake up and undo the damage done to the Mossie, and they’re still snoozing. Worse, the lunatic ‘mechanic’ is left working his way through the hangar. Somebody take the spanners away. The mind boggles, Biggles.
    4 points
  17. That would be me. They succinctly phrased more or less what I was thinking, therefore I was grateful.
    4 points
  18. A night bomber is no use if you cant use it at night! We have looked into the H2S system and the radar dome is modelled but we don't plan on having it on release, we want to get a Lancaster out at some point and the earlier varients of the Lancaster didn't include the H2S, generally the later war equipment will be coming after an initial release Im not sure what I have and haven't posted in terms of screenshots so apologies if you have already seen this one
    3 points
  19. I have passed the feedback on, we are working on a fix for the boresight issues, a video is being produced to show the INS/GPS changes in more detail, laser code issues have already been fixed.
    3 points
  20. We post in many places, forums, reddit, facebook, instagram, X, discord, tiktok, steam forums, youtube, private messages, email, support tickets. It is impossible to get around to everyone, but we do try. If you think you need something important to be seen that we may have missed you can always PM us. 37395 posts here on the forum for me, and counting thank you
    3 points
  21. I agree, it would be better if ED had a better beta test system in place which would prevent breaking things more than adding new things. But I do not agree that a manual would be the solution, I also feel the changelog isn't too bad What ED critically need is better Q&A and at least checking not only the new features but also the old features to ensure nothing was broken by inducing new feature. (i.e: betat test) That's a Q&A dept and that Q&A dept could issue instruction to devs and issues small mini procedures for the community to overcome the broken things until they are fixed in the next release. I know a bit about writing F-16 sim manuals and I can tell you that this is already very hard to do when all is more or less stable. And it takes quite a while (usually during which dev cycles continue) Doing this for FCS F-16 in it's current cycle of updates is a big no no. The writer would turn crazy in less than 6 months. He would basically suffer the same issues you guys are reporting. My past experience taught me it is almost impossible, frustrating and a source of conflict to write a manual when the software is being contantly updated and when 1 step forward induces 2 steps backwards most of the release cycles. I did start writing DCS F-16 manual but it is pointless as long as the above points are not addressed unfortunately. So here's a vote for better Q&A ED
    3 points
  22. @BIGNEWY sorry to be direct, but the request was to update the manual, not to copy/past the news letter into the forum. And with every release.
    3 points
  23. I think the general advice on this is that you want a combined 64GB from physical RAM and pagefile as a minimum. I agree with SilverDevil that more physical RAM is better. I have no actual evidence, more a feeling, but it seems like a min 64GB physical RAM is best, and more isn't a bad thing.
    3 points
  24. Just hope ORBX doesn't get into the "coming soon" thing where it means sometime between two-weeks and when your grandchildren retire.
    3 points
  25. My understanding is that VSN is a team and each aircraft is created by different individuals, so the A-6 has one main developer, the F-4B another, and so on. Seems to me that the vsn developer behind the Mirage has real life commitments that have delayed this project … I don’t believe that the progress reports were meant to be a joke, or to be cruel with the users. These Mods are provided for free, so I’m happy to use whichever one is released and don’t get frustrated with those that are not released yet.
    3 points
  26. First of all, thank you for taking the time for a detailed reply. The thing is not that we do not appreciate the work going into the F-16. It is... It happened in a lot of the recent patches that saw relevant changes for the F-16 that you take the F-16 for a spin after a bigger patch, and something big is broken. You literally do one single ramp start, and something is off. We went for a quick training like we always do, just a short trip to the range, checking if everything works or if things have changed. I usually take LGB, but this time we went with mavs, LGB and JDAM and out of these, only the JDAM worked. After getting the TGP to work, which took quite some time. And that is getting really frustrating, especially since it is no longer called Open Beta. I am not raging and ranting, but in some of the patches, it makes me wondering about how such problems can pass the internal beta test. And I would really appreciate it if we could get a more reliable platform, and things that already work don't get broken two updates later. That being said, I know that the 16 is still early access. But I would appreciate it if there would be more bugfixing (like fixing post- designate CCIP) and less new bugs, especially on features that didn't even see a change. It's not some new feature, or that something behaves different. It is that things completely stop working. And that's just sad.
    3 points
  27. My first foray into the DCS World has been fairly successful. A few wobbly circuits flown, Tacan navigation is working, and I've got most of my keybinds set (although I have to now remember where they all are!). I haven't yet even used VR, until all is ironed out. VoiceAttack is set to give all required commands to Ground Crew, plus "live pause" (which I've needed a lot!). This is not a "game" for me. Contrary to many assesments of DCS on Yootoobs that seem to think the devs should churn out low fidelity models to fill the gaps for pure "gamers," I'm trying to properly learn to fly in this sim, not just fling rockets down range. Weapons systems will come later, but I'm loving the realism. I hopeit doesn't become what many seem to want it to be. There are other games out there that cater for casual gamers. I haven't even switched the Master Arm on yet, and I'm loving DCS! I'm not a total notice in terms of aviation, but there is a lot to learn in a jet. I have no plans to upgrade from the F-5E for a good while yet!
    2 points
  28. Has anyone else been experiencing the issue of playing on a multiplayer like on contention, BlueFlag, The COOP, and ECW servers and you get into a cool fight and you want to go into the track files to watch it with external views. when launching the file in replays it crashes straight to desktop during the load process. I've heard this has been going on for awhile. I am a content creator and love to make YT videos for this Sim and not being able to utilize the track files for my content has really hindered my ability to create fun content. Hopefully there will be a fix soon https://drive.google.com/file/d/1G5iJ_wMHbaQY5v1P_gePFprv4O_8Drwn/view?usp=sharing <link of the track file it was too big to attach
    2 points
  29. Anything between 1-4 years. Best to forget about it for now and just wait until date of release will be announced in the future. It is way too early to get hyped about it. F-4 appeared in 4 Above and beyond videos and Chinook in 2 already...and probably will appear in further 1- 2 before we can fly it. I am not criticizing. That`s just the way it is.
    2 points
  30. I try to do the same, opening a Forum thread everytime I post a new Mission file, but somehow it seems many users dont bother to actually read the file description Please ED, enable e-mail notifications for the User File section (Forum messages won't work because many of us have different accounts for the User File section than for the Forum).
    2 points
  31. Almost mixed up with Heatblur in the first glance...
    2 points
  32. This is very much needed. I try to steer comments away from the user files section and on to the forum where I would actually see it, but most people comment in the User Files anyway. It can take me years to respond to something posted there as I have no way of knowing without checking everything I've uploaded.
    2 points
  33. I hope it's coming soon. Been nothing new since June of 2023. Longest dry spell I've seen with DCS. I hope Kola or the Phantom coming out doesn't push the other back by months just for the sake of separating product releases.
    2 points
  34. If you bring up the Controls Indicator on screen [RCTRL+ENTER], you can see what each axis is doing in real-time. Sounds like maybe you are bringing up the collective with the throttle at the same time?
    2 points
  35. Появление INS/GPS у вайпера видится как еще один шаг в сторону отвержения ТОО как надежного метода целеуказания JDAM. Если это и в самом деле так - то это очень хорошо и всячески приветствуется. Чем больше в этой игре в применении модулей принимается решений, похожих на решения в реальном применении - тем лучше.
    2 points
  36. Хотелось бы услышать новости в принципе о том, что действительно волнует пользователей. На примере последнего патча, где нам дали новый INS\GPS для вайпера. Сильно ли изменился геймплей у большинства пользователей? Не спорю что он как-то наверно изменился. Система с новыми перегрузками, ну хорошо, а на других ла её нет и мне не надо "разминать" пилота. А ведь это прям фишка патча! Я не пытаюсь преуменьшить работу разработчиков, они точно что-то делают, следуют планам внутренним и т.д. Вот только есть подозрение что эти фишки нужны не столько игрокам проекта ДКС (нам), сколько кому-то, кто использует модули как тренажеры... а мы просто принимаем по факту. А новости (и не только, все таки и реализацию) хочется про доработку модулей не "еще через год", динамическую кампанию, добавлению юнитов, в первую очередь ПВО и вообще работы этого ПВО в мире ДКС. Мы даже согласны покупать паки с юнитами, так ведь и этого нет. Прошу не принимать близко посыл, я люблю ДКС, я в нем со времен локона, я был в команде тестеров проекта А-10, мне просто хочется чтоб насыщенность мира и его возможности развивались вместе с модулями.
    2 points
  37. I can't say much about third party aircraft, as you may realise. Regarding the Viper and Hornet, multiple bomb release logic may be inconsistent at this point. We are looking into that already. But thanks for bringing that up.
    2 points
  38. there is a lot of things wrong with the HARM POS modes, might be related:
    2 points
  39. Everyone is focused on the aircraft and tanks of a 80s WWIII scenario and In over here crying because the SA-4, early variants of the SA-2, SA-3, and SA-7 are all missing on the REDFOR side and Nike (All variants), Pershing MRBM, and a bunch of BLUFOR SAM systems are missing... as are a HUGE number of their associated EW and IFF radars... Fulda excites me greatly because of the potential history we didn't get... but SAM technology would need to improve DRASTICALLY to make it even close to realistic... or enough to suspend disbelief.
    2 points
  40. hello. MP missions especially need a lot of memory. Ram is definitely the best way. it is literally the easiest thing to upgrade. you just have to make sure you purchase the correct type for your system. i got my computer 3 years ago with 128 GB. it was well worth it. i am glad you are working again, and i am glad to help. if you want to pursue RAM for your computer, let me know.
    2 points
  41. Hello, Time with my kitty ... Finest and very best engineering of Heatblur - just Brilliant! Cheers TOM
    2 points
  42. The best option would be a checkbox in the special settings menu to require bore sighting or simple automagic boresight like we have for the cursor on the hornet or ins alignment on the harrier.
    2 points
  43. I gotta chime in as a new guy to DCS. These problems have a financial reality for ED. I've been simming for 30 years, and I was real close to walking away from DCS. As it is, it's hard to consider another "serious" module. The F-16 is a flagship for DCS, as it's one of the things that ED does well that no one else really does at all. As folks have mentioned, it's really hard to tell if a change is a bug or a feature. This is pretty easy to solve: Better communication with the community. For a software developer, ED is pretty dreadful when it comes to communication with its user base. The changelog is pretty weak when it comes to explaining the affects of a change. In my first weeks of DCS, I learned more about workarounds on YouTube, than I have features from the user manual. A number of training missions don't even work. I still think the F-16 here is a fantastic effort, and I'm having a blast with it. -Ryan
    2 points
  44. Just a thought experiment: What would drive you to do your work? The money you earn, the fun you get from your job, your sense of duty or rather the fact that your customers are impatient? I personally don't like it, when customers start do get impatient. When they are understanding and friendly, I usually work with more energy and passion.
    2 points
  45. I agree, too. As i write in my own "CBU 97 Burst Altitude" thread.... The whole CBU 97/105 system is bugged now. Somebody has marked my thread as "solved" but it is not. It was working perfectly before. And now best part of it, they move my problem to "wish list" ...... it was not a wish it worked before, i want it back working.
    2 points
  46. For those curious on the Morse code heard in that video, it says “coming soon” Characters as I heard them (backslash as character separator) - . - . / - - - / - - / . . / - . / - - . / <pause> / . . . / - - - / - - - / - .
    2 points
  47. For a Battle of Britain scenario Hornchurch is a must. Even up till late 1943 it’s an important fighter airfield. However by the time we hit the DCS WW2 fighter meta which is firmly 1944, Hornchurch along with other such luminary airfields like Biggin Hill and Kenley, becomes second line, being primarily Ballon Command support fields as Allied intelligence see the V-1 threat coming. As such there are a number of other airfields I would suggest should take priority; currently there are no prototypical Mustang airfields in the UK for the 2x 9th air force FGs that flew them and only one P-47 base. In an ideal world all the appropriate bases would be present but would it not make sense to prioritise the introduction of airfields that are chronologically appropriate to the planeset we have?
    2 points
  48. @Lord Vader "Yes, this has been added some time ago to our "to do" list. Hopefully it will be addressed soon. " June 12 2023 Any news on this given the Viper has recently received a lot of love?
    2 points
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...