Leaderboard

**Upcoming Patch for DCS: OH-58D Kiowa Warrior - Sound Overhaul & More!** Dear Kiowa Warrior community, We’re excited to share details about our next update for the OH-58D Kiowa Warrior module, addressing key feedback from our dedicated users. Since the module’s release in June, we’ve been hard at work on a comprehensive patch that includes an overhaul of our input system, extensive bug fixes, and a sound update you won’t want to miss! ***Unfortunately, this patch won’t be in the immediate DCS World update due to the timing of our final testing. We’re targeting the next update to ensure a smooth release.*** **Echo 19 Sound Overhaul** We’ve partnered with Echo 19 Audio Production to bring a complete sound overhaul to the Kiowa Warrior. This update introduces meticulously captured audio from Bell 407GXP flights, enhancing rotor, turbine, blade slap, M3P weapon sounds, and even intricate cockpit switch and linkage sounds. Echo 19’s industry expertise ensures a more immersive auditory experience, capturing the authentic atmosphere of this iconic helicopter. Echo 19 supplied a first "look" of the overhaul earlier this month, check out the YouTube video here if you haven't already: https://youtu.be/uum3534IcD0 **Why the Delay?** Our new input system required significant engineering time. The update not only simplifies keybinds for both pilot and co-pilot positions, but it also adds many more keybindings to cater to various hardware setups, including those for pit builders. This reduction in repetitive code allows for more intuitive control mappings. However, given that input updates often affect all current keybinds, we’re taking extra care to test each change. By refining this input system now, we hope to avoid future disruptions. **What’s Included?** - **Feature-level changes:** - Improved damage modeling - Performance improvements - Input fixes and additions - Echo 19 Sound Overhaul - **Bug fixes:** - Fixed IDM not displaying wingmen as recipients - Can no longer store positions from IDM messages when no positions selected to be stored (CTD fix) - Fixed CTD on receiving BDA with Air Mission EOM - Fixed LMC trying to stabilize with 0 range - Vox (used for SRS intercom volume in game) now starts at 75% - Airbag circuit breaker now starts OUT - Fixes for DTC loading waypoints/control points/target points - Fixed L2MUM page bug when using WPN/ASE switch - Fixed SA symbology being visible in HSD - Fixed ODA display to Direct Point - Fixed display conditions for NVGs, Visor and Mask - Collective clickables no longer accessible when collective is hidden - CI state now syncs correctly on join - Various fixes for MMS, LMC, Laser and MFD states on join in progress - Disabled MMS resolution changes until render issue can be resolved by ED - Hellfire VSD page displays manual laser codes correctly - Radios correctly named in ME - Fixed airbags not synced for the rest of clients - Implemented fixed MIL-2525 symbol (thanks ED!) - CPG Sparse VSD L1 laser readout behaviour fixed - RTE SEQ now default on for cold start - AI now has some hover instability - Added editor option for allowing PDU show/hide when installed (defaults to ON) - Adjusted hover attitude and fixed roll reference indicator offset - Fixed armour doors in multicrew - MMS diagonal slewing improvements for both axis and button inputs - Fixed input behaviour for radio frequencies - Fixed incorrect DTC loading behaviour - Fixed heading hold/force trim conflict Thank you for your patience and continued support. We’re thrilled to bring these improvements to the Kiowa Warrior, and we look forward to delivering a refined experience in the coming DCS update. **Polychop Simulations**

null

I want to clarify, this post is not intended for the community managers, NineLine or Bignewy, but rather is targeted at ED Management. This post is not specifically about the bugs in modules or items listed below. But is intended to show a lack of care from Eagle Dynamics Management toward the community that purchases their modules. Eagle Dynamics Management, do you truly care for your customer's who have spent money on your products? If so, PLEASE SHOW IT. There are a number of issues to the CORE of DCS that have not been realized, and even more so have shown no progress in years. There are countless items that could be listed, but some of the larger items that affect DCS in a larger view than just one module are provided. 1. Dynamic Campaign nullAbove is a post from an Eagle Dynamics Team Member on January 17,2019. Stating in regards to the dynamic campaign "This is a very high-priority item for us with good progress. However, this is a highly complex undertaking and it will take time, but certainly not "5 years"." As of today, this post is 5 years, 9 months, and 11 days old. And there has been no progress on the DCS Dynamic Campaign. I'm sorry, newsletters with screenshots and saying "we are working on it" and "its a complex task" do not make up for 5 years and 9 months worth of development. Show some sort of progress. Show a video of a developer troubleshooting it, show a video of the buggy version you are trying to debug, show some sort of actual progress to show it has been actually worked on. Showing screenshots of the F10 map and writing a paragraph about how hard and complex it is, is not progress. Does Eagle Dynamics have anything to show it has actually been worked on other than just words at this point? 2. ATC Above is a post from an Eagle Dynamics Team Member on February 9, 2016 discussing that ATC does not currently work and that it "Will resolved with new ATC system". Again, similar points to the Dynamic Campaign. Where has there been any progress shown on ATC? It has been 8 years, 8 months, and 19 days since this post was made, and what progress does Eagle Dynamics show? Newsletters claiming it is being worked on, and is a complex task, again, do not cut it. Show something that shows some sort of actual progress. If it is buggy and doesn't work flawlessly? At least show us that something has been done in the last 8 years, 8 months, and 19 days. 3. Supercarrier Above is a post from an Eagle Dynamics Team Member on April 1, 2020 discussing what features are to come with the Super Carrier Module. There are a number of these items that have not been worked on since this post in April 1, 2020. Ready Room, Interactive LSO Controls, Plane directors, Rendered hanger deck, Emergency barrier net, Deck crew that move to avoid collisions with aircraft, where is the progress on these items? Plane directors and barrier net have been talked about in forum posts and newsletters, but there is nothing Eagle Dynamics can show for progress on these items. The issue with COMMS with the Supercarrier can also be included, as they do not work, but this ties into the point above about ATC. The ATC issue is a core issue that affects ALL modules. When a user purchases a module in early access the intent is that that money is used to further the development of that module and the core game that it lives in. I do not understand how Eagle Dynamics can state that modules are "Out of Early Access" when they cannot even properly communicate with ATC. That is a core element of flight simulation. As far as the supercarrier module, users that are purchasing this module in specific deserve to have their funds paid for Early Access actually go toward development of this module. And where has any progress on the Supercarrier been? Again, actual progress, not words in a newsletter describing how challenging the process is. Finally, the community managers communicate that they "...listen to lots of feedback constantly and pass it on to the team...". Please show the users that Eagle Dynamics Management actually listens to the community. Eagle Dynamics as a company has a history of continuing to send out new modules to sell without finishing old modules. For instance, releasing FC2024 when numerous bug existing in the FC3 planes. Releasing a pre-order for Iraq while Afghanistan still has not received an update since it's release. In the forum post for Afghanistan it is stated plainly "Regions will be release in approximately three-month intervals". Now, we are only told that these regions will be delayed in the forum of a newly released pre-order for the IRAQ map. And this was only after users complained that Eagle Dynamics is pushing new content without providing any updates on previous modules. Eagle Dynamics Management, you are losing the faith in your customer's. People have paid money for you modules, both early access modules and out of Early Access Modules, that do not work within the game, and yet you continue to push only new content without showing any actual progress on the promises you have made the community. I'm sorry, but Newsletters describing how hard something is doesn't show progress. Show us something, that these items are actually being worked on in some way. Have the developers actually share what they are working on, not just having Community Managers state they have talked to the teams. Again, this is not to hate on the community managers, this is to ask Eagle Dynamics Management to do something to show the community you actually care about following through with your promises. Eagle Dynamics Management, I ask that you actually listen to your customers. And show us that you care.

No doubt, you guys are working on their newest video - 2025 and beyond. Just a request - if at all possible (I know it's a little out of the ordinary for normal 'beyond' video's), but I think it would be really nice to have included at the end of the video (or in a separate video/newsletter) - a short update as to where things are currently at with: Plane Directors on the Super Carrier Air Traffic Control Server Multi-Threading Vulkan Implementation Dynamic Campaign Engine Data Transfer Cartridge Weather System (including Thunderstorms please) Save / Load Game State Spherical Earth Module Modules are fantastic to look forward to - but these are a lot of very much sought after functions that in many cases some users are probably just as eager (if not more) to have some hints, previews of, etc. I'm not asking for release dates or anything - I know that's impractical. It would however be nice to have some newsletter/video/etc talking about these systems, and a rough idea of how far along the development cycle each one currently is, or which ones we could expect to see sooner, and which ones are still years away. Thanks for consideration DZ

If we're sharing our criticisms here, here's mine: you folk at ED don't seem to care about the mission editor. What makes me say that ? It's been what ? 20 years ? And still no left click drag to select multiple objects and even more important than that, no UNDO/REDO button. Unbelievable...

Some interesting points, lots of the main topics there. Brief overview below. Dynamic campaign is a huge task, we have a team working on it and have already invested around 17 man years on the project. We will share more news as soon as we can. ATC is something for the future, again its a huge task. Plane directors are in testing and I hope we can bring it to you all soon. Vulkan is in progress, no ETA to share yet. Whole world, again is a massive task and that will take a long time. Server multithreading is not planned yet. ( Its more important for the client and we have delivered and are tweaking it ) DTC is in progress for the core of DCS, I hope we can share news soon. Weather, hopefully we can share the new dust and fog with you soon, testing is in progress. I'm sure the 2025 and Beyond video will be another great video to get us excited for the future of DCS. thank you

an interesting point of view

BN, I get you're speaking on behalf of your company but be real here, you must admit DCS has issues. You can claim your company works as hard as they can but no amount of effort can offset the bad decisions your company has made and are still making. Of course, I'm sure everyone at ED is working hard to pump out the next EA product but you gotta read the room, look at the comments in the recent Iraq pre-order video, look at the comments in this thread, look at the community posts on various forums. Will you just actually properly finish your early access products before pushing out more? Will you actually make the core DCS experience better ? Suddenly no one at your company is up for these tasks. All your main modules, be it the ah64, the f16, the fa18 and especially the suppercarrier saw their updates come out at an agonizingly slow pace sometime after their initial release, as an example, take the a10cII, I remember how you all took more than a whole year to add the radio. And don't even get me started on your older or more niche modules like combined arms or the mosquito. What about the core dcs experience ? You have been teasing dynamic campaign for a few years, nothing to show for it still. Ground ai is broken. ATC is pretty much non existent. There is little single player content available except for paid campaigns that get broken every patch because of the horrendous ai. Ohh yes, there are also the missions made by the community which carry the single player experience in my opinion. How do you reward these mission makers ? By leaving them with your mission editor from the nineties that hasn't even got drag select or an undo redo button because that would be "wasting thousands of man hours" to implement a undo/redo button or drag select in a 2024 simulator. Don't get me started on the feud with RB because I know you'll want to ban me for even mentioning the name. I am commenting as a customer who has paid more than 500$ on your platform, I do care about your product, really. But please, don't try to make us look like we are whining babies that can't comprehend the work you put in. At the end of the day, we are left with the product you present to us and given some of it's core and module features have remained broken, outdated or unfinished/missing for years while you manage to release new EA modules back to back, well, excuse us for not being very satisfied or having doubts about your product and the direction it is heading towards.

I'm not sure what authority the creator of the video has to represent everybody, by using the word "we". But, that said, I appreciate the patience and will to post the video, to voice some common concerns - thank you for that. I could list a whole group of issues, with the AI, or with new features introduced while others get broken, and with bugs that remain in the modules for indefinite. But the three main issues I have with DCS (which were not really addressed there) have exhisted for years and years on end. They are 1) the performance, 2) the issue that new maps create, and 3) the lack of depth for specific eras where the aircrafts exhist in. Performance. No need to be a scientist to understand that the wrong size and format of textures has been chosen for many years, and it gets worse with every new module/map release. No, it's not a matter of reducing texture settings in game options because those only reduce the texture MIP in use. But the whole texture file size is still loaded regardless, overwhelming the drives, RAM, and barely aleviating the VRAM. Another example (and there are others), and beautiful as it is, the new clouds system (introduced with 2.7.0) was a mistake, as it heavily bogged down the performance benefits we add with 2.5.6. In my experience, VR was never the same again (still isn't). People want better and better detail 3D models (mooaar polygons), larger rendering distances, but forget that all that imediately means a heavy price to pay, in performance hit and (even higher) hardware requirements. A bit of a comical sentiment and desire, when that (performance issues and hardware requirements) is already a problem for so many users (I'd wager the majority?), especially for those playing complex missions and more so if in Multi-Player. Simply put, you can't have your cake and eat it too. What we need now is not prettier graphics, we need drastic optimization. Like yesterday! It's only once that is done effectively, and achieved in the practice, that the next graphical improvements can/should be considered. Issue with new Maps. These can become a really bad investment because the size of the community forces players to gather on one or two main maps (usually Caucasus and Syria), which leaves all those nice new maps unused in Multi-Player. So, basically, buying these new maps ends up in having to focus on Single-Player (not Multi-Player), with their buyers left with the hope that mission/campaign creators expand/add to them. It makes little sense unless you want to help funding (like a donation to) ED. The issue becomes even more prevalent because some of these new maps overlap with each other, but are released separate of each other. When, instead, they should have been expanded (joint together, continuously) onto a larger map. Lack of depth for specific eras. Then there's the issue with assets, maps, and overall content that doesn't focus on specific time periods, which is a must for realistic conflicts recreation (past and present). This has been one of the longest issues with DCS (maybe since the start?). We have aircraft from different periods and generations, all beautifully done, but then the content and context in which they're used does not follow same lines. In the end, it becomes a beautiful mix of disjointed period content (sometimes not making much sense) that turns into something rather generic.

Underrated post. These are actual issues I'd hold more concern for. Although, I'm kind of a coinflip on 3. I'm of the idea of you make the variant that is most accessible and call it good. The maps and how ED handles maps is real silly, in my opinion. Chopping them up into bits to sell is not the answer and, frankly, a terrible idea. It's one of the frequent complaints I heard about FC3 for the longest time. ED's not offering any real value or convenience by ONLY selling the F-15 or Su-27. It just seems likew a newcomers' trap to squeeze a little extra money out of them. Actually, a better idea would be price reductions across the board for maps to encourage people to pick them up. Moving product should be the #1 concern of any digital storefront since you don't have to worry about inventory. Get more maps out into the wild, get more people using them, and get more people actually playing on places like Sinai. At the present, the only maps I can ever recommend newbies get are Persian Gulf and Syria, if at all.

No FREAKING WAY!!! Ok, now this is opening up a World of mission-making opportunities!!! Looks amazing! The 3D model is better than some payware stuff. Hats off! May I ask if we are expecting to see an updated cockpit for the Little Bird? From your external model it does appear like the MFDs are there. Once again, phenomenal work. Can't wait for this!

UPDATE 28.10.2024: Changed default minTexSize to 2048, i hope this will eliminate pixelated reflections at night, not sure why i set it that low (512) earlier. Most of the offending textures are 4096px anyways

Split larger Updates into parts, as in: Part I - Core Game Updates, Part II - Kola Map Update, Part III - Syria Map Update, Part IV - Aircraft Updates, Part V - Campaign Updates. So you can individually select, one or more, and then download, decompress and install, one at a time, or all at once. This can help to manage disk space during for download, decompression and installation, if you don't have enough disk space.

Since you mention the price, Id like to remind you about two things: - You purchased an early access product. Experience can thus be rough for a minority of users. Id wish it wouldnt be like that, but thats how development goes. - We have a no-questions-asked refund policy. So if you cant get the issue resolved, you can just refund, get your money back and perhaps try again in a few years or once the product is out of EA Fingers crossed on getting these nasty issues resolved [emoji106]

No, you are not going to. In fact, rewriting ME would likely save you even more in long run, considering your modules typically include missions, too. Right now, ME is difficult to use, the scripting is brittle and putting together anything but simplest missions is an exercise in frustration. Both campaign creators and users would be well served by an updated editor, and you could probably drop a lot of technical debt as well, helping the coders. Time spent working on a replacement would be well spent indeed.

Polychop-Simulations **Upcoming Patch for DCS: OH-58D Kiowa Warrior - Sound Overhaul & More!** Dear Kiowa Warrior community, We’re excited to share details about our next update for the OH-58D Kiowa Warrior module, addressing key feedback from our dedicated users. Since the module’s release in June, we’ve been hard at work on a comprehensive patch that includes an overhaul of our input system, extensive bug fixes, and a sound update you won’t want to miss! ***Unfortunately, this patch won’t be in the immediate DCS World update due to the timing of our final testing. We’re targeting the next update to ensure a smooth release.*** **Echo 19 Sound Overhaul** We’ve partnered with Echo 19 Audio Production to bring a complete sound overhaul to the Kiowa Warrior. This update introduces meticulously captured audio from Bell 407GXP flights, enhancing rotor, turbine, blade slap, M3P weapon sounds, and even intricate cockpit switch and linkage sounds. Echo 19’s industry expertise ensures a more immersive auditory experience, capturing the authentic atmosphere of this iconic helicopter. Echo 19 supplied a first "look" of the overhaul earlier this month, check out the YouTube video here if you haven't already: https://youtu.be/uum3534IcD0 **Why the Delay?** Our new input system required significant engineering time. The update not only simplifies keybinds for both pilot and co-pilot positions, but it also adds many more keybindings to cater to various hardware setups, including those for pit builders. This reduction in repetitive code allows for more intuitive control mappings. However, given that input updates often affect all current keybinds, we’re taking extra care to test each change. By refining this input system now, we hope to avoid future disruptions. **What’s Included?** - **Feature-level changes:** - Improved damage modeling - Performance improvements - Input fixes and additions - Echo 19 Sound Overhaul - **Bug fixes:** - Fixed IDM not displaying wingmen as recipients - Can no longer store positions from IDM messages when no positions selected to be stored (CTD fix) - Fixed CTD on receiving BDA with Air Mission EOM - Fixed LMC trying to stabilize with 0 range - Vox (used for SRS intercom volume in game) now starts at 75% - Airbag circuit breaker now starts OUT - Fixes for DTC loading waypoints/control points/target points - Fixed L2MUM page bug when using WPN/ASE switch - Fixed SA symbology being visible in HSD - Fixed ODA display to Direct Point - Fixed display conditions for NVGs, Visor and Mask - Collective clickables no longer accessible when collective is hidden - CI state now syncs correctly on join - Various fixes for MMS, LMC, Laser and MFD states on join in progress - Disabled MMS resolution changes until render issue can be resolved by ED - Hellfire VSD page displays manual laser codes correctly - Radios correctly named in ME - Fixed airbags not synced for the rest of clients - Implemented fixed MIL-2525 symbol (thanks ED!) - CPG Sparse VSD L1 laser readout behaviour fixed - RTE SEQ now default on for cold start - AI now has some hover instability - Added editor option for allowing PDU show/hide when installed (defaults to ON) - Adjusted hover attitude and fixed roll reference indicator offset - Fixed armour doors in multicrew - MMS diagonal slewing improvements for both axis and button inputs - Fixed input behaviour for radio frequencies - Fixed incorrect DTC loading behaviour - Fixed heading hold/force trim conflict Thank you for your patience and continued support. We’re thrilled to bring these improvements to the Kiowa Warrior, and we look forward to delivering a refined experience in the coming DCS update. **Polychop Simulations**

I would like info on the new General Flight Model that, was shown 2-3 years ago and then never again. Fragmentation simulation would be nice too. Secondary explosions based on unit type (ammo, fuel, explosives) Mk20/Napalm for the F18, so other modules can get Napalm (F4, F5, upcoming A6, A7, Corsair)

For me the biggest wish for the 2025 and beyond would be to update on all items still in the 'beyond' phase of videos 2021 ... 2022 ... 2023 ... 2024

https://www.cgtrader.com/3d-models/aircraft/military-aircraft/the-douglas-a3-skywarrior-usa-1952 I think this is the model!! I am looking forward to seeing if the Whale flies in DCS later on! I can fully recreate the first Tomcat Deployment in game with a A-7, EA-6B and A-6 and the well made VF-2 and VF-1 skins made by Yaesakura on the workshop! Now we just need the KA-6 AI tanker from heat blur and a AI RA-5C vigilante!

So for you, making your editor more usable and bringing it up to modern standards is "wasting thousands of man hours", thanks for hammering my point in even more.

Trains have been reported for some time, in this case, they are waiting for a free dev. It was originally a project by an individual dev to give us the current train set up, he is simply tied up at the moment to get back to it, but trust me, I remind him alllll the time Yeah its not great right now for sure.

хоть и не по теме, см.вложениеah64_collective.bmp *это наш 3Д-дизайнер для Вас и других игроков изготовил, не я)

I don't get why ED doesn't listen to user feedback, it's really frustrating. Instead they always seem to know it better. Also no guidance as in what to expect in the next months or year, so also nothing to look forward to. I don't count the "and beyond video", because apparently "beyond" can mean anything between now and the next 100 years. Lots of fixes, but still and even more lots of bugs. It seems like DCS is getting lost in details while the important things are being left untouched. New buttons and gimmicks for F-16 or F-18 are cool, but those aircraft are pretty fine as they are (or were before all the bugs and certain changes). It would be better to focus on what annoys most of the community instead of a few enthusiasts. The RAZBAM issue is the tip of the iceberg. The Spotting dots issue is another example (1300 posts in the main thread!). I know ED is working on this stuff, but you can work all day long, in the end it's the results that matter. And when I joined there were a lot of improvements, but for some reason this year was pretty disappointing, also most of last year. Luckily there is no competition for DCS, but that also doesn't mean that people need to play DCS at all. I personally am not gonna wait another year for something to change.

Guys, once again we only remove posts if they break the rules, we do not remove posts because they are negative, frustrated or unhappy with DCS. This can be seen by a simple search in the forums. Programmers do not get removed or leave a module in the middle of their work, rather sometimes their work is long and complex. For example, currently, we have someone working on the Sniper pod for the F-16C. He has not been removed and only stops for vacation. He has literally been working on this pod for months. Now before you say, oh he must be a bad programmer or slow. No this involves all aspects of creating an item in DCS, from researching, designing, and implementing. Sadly it takes a lot of time. Same with radar improvements, we may say we are improving a radar, and then go quiet for some time. That is them work away. We have hired people so we don't have to remove someone mid-project because it would be very tough to drop something in the middle and move to something else. I will also note, from the video. I get that everyone is eager for the Dynamic Campaign. It's a monumental undertaking. For example, way back when Falcon 4's Dynamic Campaign took over 5 years to do. They only had one flyable aircraft to deal with, and 1 era. This DC release has to be whatever one expects, and beyond. Even Falcon 4's campaign while good for its time wouldn't cut it if we just copied and pasted it into DCS (not that that is even possible) And before you say, oh he doesn't know, I have been flying simulations since the early days, I bought a computer for Falcon. It has to meet or more so exceed expectations now, and some of those expectations are immense and well beyond what has been seen. Our internal expectations have to be met as we know you want nothing but an exceptional experience with it. Some good points are made in the video, but some I am not sure I agree with. For example his dismissal of Bomb Fuses. They do do something in DCS and were very much needed. Anyways, I just wanted to answer a couple of points here. If there is something else from the video you want me to expand on, I will do my best. Once again, if you keep your posts within the very VERY simple frame work of the forum rules, your posts do not get removed. Thanks!

Honestly, it worked pretty well for ArmA 2 once upon a time. I imagine it'd be a REAL hard sell to the company, but wow you can't do much worse than the current approach to maps, at least.

MOHO - Make OH-6A Official!

@BIGNEWY Has said "Vulkan is in progress, no ETA to share yet."

Understandable, but quick and cheap isn't always the most dependable way to move product. The DCS ecosystem, I feel, doesn't really allow that to truly succeed. Instead, the push should be for value more than anything. We're all going to be accepting that we're spending a premium on additions, so it's better to make the customer feel very confident in their purchase than it is to make them feel like impulse buying. The reality is that DCS' audience isn't going to grow all that much, if at all, by these piecemeal approaches and ED understands that, no doubt. But, I feel you'd be much farther ahead if you were to cut prices on maps to encourage their sales more than anything. I really enjoy Sinai, but I can rarely find servers running it as much as Syria or PG. South Atlantic and Kola offered much needed greener and Kola's a theatre I'm interested in, but only 1 person I know owns it. I'm not asking for charity, obviously, but cutting the entry fee to these maps would increase their user share could easily prove to be well worth it. After all, these are sales that would have either waited for a price reduction or never have occurred to begin with. It'd be worth it, even if ED has to stomach the lion's share of the price reduction. After all, if I'm looking at Kola (finished, not EA) for $70 US and then I'm also looking at the Hornet at $80 US, what's going to give me more enjoyment? The aircraft. I can fly that on the Caucuses without worrying about having to find a server or good campaign. So, realistically, while trying to make things cheaper for us is appreciated, giving us better value for our purchases is better. Price reductions over all maps that might not be as cheap as selling them piecemeal, but making customers actually feel like they got a lot for their money will go a lot farther than just a lower sticker price. I think this would be a lot more beneficial to the DCS ecosystem than if ED and RB announced that they were best friends forever again. It doesn't get you clicks with outlandish outrage bait titles, sadly. Also, a more detailed roadmap specifically dedicated to back-end developmental goals would be a very good idea. We've been waiting for AI behavior fixes for how long?

How would that work better for you? Still need to download the update, right? So if you download it in one go or in parts... Or if you don't want to update particular terrain then uninstall it since not used right? Then you will install it if ever want to use it and it will install its latest version. No? Get a bigger drive

You probably know that with each of my campaigns comes a custom UI background that you can select from the options/misc menu. I'm happy to announce that as of the next update you'll also get custom menu music when selecting these themes.

Sadly, for me, it seem like my most highly anticipated features: Air Traffic Control Vulkan Implementation Dynamic Campaign Engine Data Transfer Cartridge Save / Load Game State Will be more "Beyond" than 2025...

The problem is we also have to consider many systems and the FPS impact it may have. But I agree the setting needs tweaking as it has been set at the current value for a long time.

I think it's important but it's tough on our end to control effectively as most have seen. If you look at all the variables from computer quality, headsets, your eyeball quality, it's tough to make a one size fits all. I even now test with and without my reading glasses on (no old people jokes ). And look at say pimax as the dot gets close to the edge of the screens it can grow. It remains tough. But it's important to try and find a solution that works for everyone and all it to be turned off if it's not your thing or not wanted. I appreciate the kind words as I assume BN does as well. I love this sim and I get frustrated as well believe it or not, but after so many years flying sims this is still a dream being able to be apart of what I feel is the top combat flight sim ever. It's been a rough year with all that has transpired but I think we are near the end of some of it and we can continue to move forward. Threads, videos etc like this are always good to keep us all in check and make sure we don't get caught up in the wrong things and forget what is truly important. Thanks all

A nice way to bring balance to the force post. It is a hard community to please, and like you, I don't mind things being released as they're being worked on too, but that's not what I got out of the video. For me, it's more about breaking things that were working (introducing new bugs where they didn't exist previously), and then sidelining those bugs for years because they're now focused elsewhere. I mean, if I had a mechanic work on my racing car in-between races to improve performance, but while doing so, he blew a fuse for the power steering, it wouldn't be good. But for him then to continue to focus on performance and ignore the blown fuse so the car doesn't operate as well as it did before - that's a real problem. Not quite a fair comparison, but honestly - sometimes that's what it feels like with DCS - at least from a mission builder and server administrators perspective. How the MOOSE guys keep the passion to keep up with what goes on - honestly, they deserve a medal! I also feel for ED, and those that are the meat shield between ED and the public. (Looking at you Nineline and BN). You've got a real tough job at the moment (especially looking at youtube comments), and I expect it's the toughest you've probably experienced while doing this job at ED. Keep holding in there - we're all hoping for better times ahead! Sometimes it's easy to forget you're limited with your influence - yet you take a lot of the brunt of the dissatisfaction.

Oh I am not saying we shouldnt adjust our settings, I was more making the point that not everyone can afford the latest and greatest, its possible that we were leaning to hard towards older systems than we should be with this one setting, its also possible it just slipped through the cracks, but I am beating that drum now. Its tough, I know a lot of people enjoy DCS, and I have never been a fan of forcing hardware upgrades, that said, you are right and there should be a cut off, but its hard to determine than when you are living inside a world economy not just one or two.

Have a look at the thread for the last newsletter but one. All the relevent points as to why some of us feel thats not the case are there. The "maybe we'll fix it" sentement comes from the protest after Afghanistan was FAQ'd as feature complete, the back and forth as to what this meant, the rewording of the FAQ and the current stance that the Hi-Fi areas will be completed for the whole map before a look is taken at seeing what scope remains to improve the rest. Its not an EA issue. Its the fact that the entire map is based on low rez textures to which there is no certain fix or confirmed roadmap of improvement. If you really wanted to send a clear message about EA mpas, you should perhaps include some of those awful looking areas with an explanation of what improvements, if any, will come. At the moment the EA I once happily took part in to support ED has become more of an unknown that it should be when it comes to maps. Its no longer a case of how long something will take to arrive but rather if.

Yeah, it bugged me for a long time as well, and in fact, has been brought up by me and BIGNEWY as well, the response way back when was performance but I think that is less of an issue now, so I want at least the option to expand this render distance out so that people can choose to render farther, and as you or maybe someone else said, with helicopters, it's more a thing than fixed wing.

@BIGNEWY PM'd you.

Yeah "when" is "soon". Great job on the fill-in map.

Dear God, does this mean we are getting an actual Little Bird mod separate from the Cayuse? Or is this just a skin a minor upgrade (5-Blades) to the Cayuse? Looks fantastic and will be a perfect fit for the Afghanistan and Iraq map. Expect some major videos coming out when this gets released! Also, did some pretty sick CSAR flight in the Cayuse (check time stamps) this weekend. Working on perfecting this mission with Mistermann and then we will push it out on the user forums. Fully expect this type of stuff with the Little Bird above only in the middle east running night ops. Already practiced a little with a 160th livery someone made on the Afghanistan map. Going to be a great time!

I'm not sure what the issue is. But I know one of the Oshkosh MRAPs have a bad collision model, I've fixed it for the next update.

He meant to split the Update into parts, as in: Part I - Core Game Updates, Part II - Kola Map Update, Part III - Syria Map Update, Part IV - Aircraft Updates, Part V - Campaign Updates. That you can individually select, one or more, and then download, decompress and install, one at a time, or all at once, if you have enough disk space. Actually, I think this is a good idea!

Whatever happened to Vulkan, which I vaguely recall was loosely promised Q3 in early 2022?

Please give us the power to adjust those settings ourselves. At least give us a accessable .lua for this kind of stuff. That would be so awesome.

Bush pop in is something we have asked the team to tweak, I know as mostly a helo flyer now it can be disconcerting to see it happen when flying low, I hope we can teak it in the future. thank you

I just checked it ingame. The presence of the R symbol already indicates you are being tracked and under attack. Shortly after you see the R appear, a missile will come your way. If you want to detect its search-radar, hit the SEARCH mode. You will then see the vehicle used for searching targets appear on your screen before you are being locked: Dont forget that you can also click the HANDOFF mode in order to hear the high pitched tone as soon as the R appears, then its hard to miss that you are under attack

New, better graphical options can be nice but not at the cost of performance. If something is going to affect performance (even range of rendering) let it be as a user selectable option so that everyone can continue to enjoy DCS at its current level. I think the MT version has greatly improved performance, plus map streaming. Those were great moves, so it's interesting to see what else the future will bring.

Its harsh but this should have been addressed before ED started chucking the latest round of helos out really. In the grand scheme its perhaps not a huge issue in comparison with stuff on the bugz list but equally Its not like its not been raised many times by the helo and mud plugging community over the years. Its not a new thing brought about by new maps. But, I'll go with with the fact you are banging the drum and thank you for it.

Daily MiG-29 Swifts 9.13

While I do get some of the frustrations, one has to also admit that the DCS community is very hard to please. I mean, since DCS World's existence, everybody is constantly asking for new features, new modules, new eye candy, etc. Some complain about their favorite module being incomplete and they're angry that new modules are released. While they do not realize that others may have been wishing for that new module just as long. For instance; I couldn't care less about any of the ww2 modules, but you won't hear me complain that ED and 3rd parties are working on it, while work on my favorite modules is not complete yet. I totally get that many want to see products finished first, before adding more, but personally I don't mind that ED and it's partners are pumping out content. Even if half finished. As an example; I rather see new content added that I'm interested in in early/crude state (like the new clouds we got a few years ago), than having to wait for some module I'm not interested in to get finished. I just wanted to share my view on things. No offence or disrespect meant to anyone of course. In the end, we all want the same: "that perfect mil flight sim"