Leaderboard

Update, So I jumped into the stock F/A-18C, set a runway start and to my surprise I did not fall through the ship I actually took off. Landing worked also, well sort of. When playing back the track in external view is seems the nose wheel dipped into the deck a bit. Also the catapult launch was not what you would call smooth so a few issues to work out. But considering I expected the player aircraft to fall into the ocean I'm presently surprised it worked at all .

I purchased F-5E on release day. Good old times Everyday since 2016, new copies has been sold of the F-5E. Maybe I'm naive, but a portion of those sales should have gone into more fixes and maintenance over the years. After all, it's not reasonable to keep selling 8 year old products at top prices. From my perspective. The F-5E got left hanging in the wind when Belsimtek merged into ED and started focus on new product. Even if many players expected a free update, I don't think $10 or even $20 pricing would have been an issue if ED truly had delivered a full Remaster. Many players feel the F-5E always needed more fixes and a finishing touch, and to them this DLC does not live up to it's name or the "7000hrs+ invested" hype. Bottom line is that the product needs to deliver and meet expectations and it seems like the F-5E Remastered fell short. Anyways, it is what it is. If players find value in the F-5E Remastered version they will buy, otherwise they won't. Simple as that.

From the first F-5 newsletter about the f-5e remastered: Key Features of the Remastered DCS: F-5E: Remastered external model based on the latest graphics technologies to create a highly accurate and realistic model. New external animations have also been added. Remastered cockpit with greatly improved resolution, glass surfaces, and attention to detail. Addition of a 1st person view pilot in the cockpit view. New afterburner effects. (coming soon) New vortices effect based on the aircraft’s angle of attack. (coming soon) Numerous bug fixes and tunings such as damage modelling, sensors, and avionics. To be honest: I think 9,99 after 8+ years is a fair price even just for a graphical and 3d model overhaul, and I've already bought the upgrade; nevertheless, the first newsletter was a bit misleading as for the last point: "tunings in the avionics": it's not just the bug fixing (which, moreover, one deserves even without upgrading to the remastered); the newsletter alludes to something more: that's why people expected at least a remake of the radar textures or some adjustment of the radar values to make it more realistic: it was written in the newsletter! As a proof of a certain intellectual dishonesty, in the final description of the remastered in the store page, the last line is removed: DCS: F-5E Remaster If you already own the DCS: F-5E, the remaster allows you to update the external model and cockpit. Recently remastered external model is based on the latest graphics technologies to create a highly accurate and realistic model. New external animations have also been added. Recently remastered cockpit with greatly improved resolution, glass surfaces, and attention to detail. Please note that installing the remaster updates your existing DCS: F-5E and does not create a new aircraft entry in DCS. All F-5E mission content is carried over to the remaster update. I hope that at least the afterburner and vortices effects are kept and do not end up like the promises on the avionics. I repeat: I'm glad I've bought the upgrade and the price is fair, but as we say in Italy "cca nisciuno è fesso" (search it on google if you like).

A short video on the development of the Vietnam War Vessels RA-5C Vigilante AI:

The point is that the paid upgrade should have more features. The F5E is an aircraft that has a wide list of features that could be included. Look at the A10C v2 and the Ka-50 v3 that for 10 dollars delivered much more. I would have paid even more than 10 dollars for the F5E to have more love in the cockpit and its expanded features.

As a customer I would also try to get my return on investment. Seeking feedback from others, understanding current state and future potential of the product, what is the vision of the company for this and other modules and their plan for an healthy environment. And yes I would do this even if "it is only 9.99". My opinion is that I would have been willing to pay more —it is not a cheap hobby after all— if it meant a stronger commitment to elevate this module to be on par with the others. Offering a cosmetic upgrade for a bargain price gives me the impression that all the community's wishes and hopes will be frozen for another decade if not for good. All the feedback in these days sounds like the community loves the F-5 more than ED do, a missed opportunity. Perhaps with a higher quality product, enthusiasm could have been greater, trust could have been renewed, and sales might even have been stronger —but that's speculation on my part. Removing the product from the trial program is concerning, preventing potential customers from "see for themselves" and leaving the marketing keys in the hands of the community which, understandably, has mixed feelings right now. I hope that continuing this conversation politely and constructively can spark some interest and lead to a reevaluation of this project.

I’ve been away for almost 2 years and it’s strange to see that this is still an issues. I’ve flown for a couple days and it’s to the point that I’m contemplating stopping again as it’s just as bad as it’s always been, if not worse since it seems more people know about the exploit and are using it on public multiplayer servers. When we did SATAL issues such as this were a huge problem and something that I constantly had to police when running that event. The roll that was an issue was more of a spaz roll where people would input and induce tons of rapid instant AoA that should break or deteriorate an aircraft in real life that would cause a missile to desync and miss. We banned anyone found to be doing this. Traditional barrel rolling, as in flying your plane like you’re flying around a barrel, was fully allowed, and if the missile was slow enough, would cause it to bleed all of its energy and miss. Valid tactic! I think ED is misconstruing the 2 here in 2 different scenarios. You should be able to run a missile out of energy if it’s already slower, losing the ability to pull the needed AoA to kill the player. This primarily is an option at lower altitudes with thicker air where missiles slow rapidly. The issue most people here are talking about is what can happen at high altitude at huge speeds where the missile still has plenty of AoA to hit its target. No maneuver by a plane should be fast enough for a missile track to lose you. If it has the energy, and therefore ability to pull the needed AoA, it should kill you, especially at higher altitudes. Players abuse this head on exploit mechanic to cause missiles to miss when they have no reason to and I assume it’s still due to desync. Chaff should have almost ZERO effect on a C, especially if the aircraft is not in a notch, and even then should have virtually nil cause on the missiles tracking, but for some reason still works. Continuing to bring up the barrel rolling maneuver because it’s real world is just evidence, to me at least, that there is still a misunderstanding of what the issue is. While that maneuver does work in a certain situation, it’s not supposed to work where people are using and abusing it.

I'm sick of fanboys that think that they are going to inherit the company. This update sucks. I would pay for it if it would include a new variant of the plane with better avionics, new weapons or better radar. But it's just cosmetics. A facelift for an outdated product. Yeah, it should be free. Since the development of ED's products take literally decades, they at least should maintain the products updated according to the visual standards of the sim.

Don't start this again. That had nothing to do with what you're talking about, just because we don't agree with the presented calculations and their point of view doesn't mean we don't welcome feedback and new information when available. But that fact doesn't mean we always have to agree with the presented feedback which was the case in this instance. So you couldn't, in fact, be more wrong about us not wanting discussion and new facts brought to light. What we don't want however is a derailed, fruitless discussion, about something that we've already answered and decided upon. The last couple of pages (or more) of that thread was basically the same people bringing up the same points and sources over and over again disregarding the fact that we've acknowledged and decided we don't agree with their sources. And then people piling on with just basically <profanity>-talk and bashing because they didn't agree with us. It would be best if this thread didn't end up the same.

threads merged. I am sorry but we have no plans for a subscription model. thank you

Speaking strictly about this aspect, I'd say there's option 3 -company should set the price of product according to its actual value. If 2nd "incarnation" of A-10C and 3rd of Ka-50 didn't exist, I guess the whole drama about F-5E remaster cost would not exist either (maybe with exception of these couple of, shall we say, "special" people, who indeed expect eternal software upgrades for free). These two remasters were released however, and we can see that for that 10$ each, they simply brought many times more features than F-5 one. Compared to them, this remaster, with the same 3D mesh of cockpit and only external model redone ("7000" hours? Yeah.... rrrrright), just offers poor value for the same upgrade price. There's no denying that. I know inflation is a thing, but it hasn't increased THAT much in recent years. On the other hand though, one cannot ignore that when A-10CII and Ka-50 v3 came out, they got their base prices jacked up quite a bit compared to their legacy versions. Remastered F-5E still stays a 60$. So some of existing owners of all these modules might feel taken advantage of, but for new DCS customers, it all kind of balances out.

My guy, a consumer purchase is not an investment. There is no return, you spend the money, it's gone and ED only owes you the key to unlock the 1s and 0s you just purchased. I understand your thought, I consider my hardware an investment because I can upgrade at my leisure and re-sell if I need to, you can't do that with DCS modules. I hope everyone can agree on the fact that the hostility towards ED staffers and the abundant back and forth happening on every video. It is starting to make this community look toxic which is going to further drive away people discovering the things that we all clearly do enjoy that keeps us launching and flying in DCS.

that should be news to people that believe all it takes is a search on wikipedia for rare cold war assets to ask for. I'm just grateful for all you've done so far, and simply enjoy the assets you've already created, I have lots of fun devising ways to employ them on my missions, so thanks a lot for all you've contributed to the DCS users community

Haha! Well, I wouldn't mind creating cold war assets. But besides my time and effort, it would require a reasonable list of assets, available 3d models and funds to purchase them.

Agreed. I'm looking forward to you building and sharing such a mission with us.

Well, there are many directions to go , and I think we all know that no matter which direction ED take, there will be detractors. To me it is becoming increasingly apparent that a lack of sustained, steady income is eroding the base product - which happens to be the free product. Coincidence? I don't think so, others do. To add my own 2 cents to the heap of unrequested advice: I'd suggest a split approach to start the migration: offer a free DCS for anyone interested to get them hooked. And a 'pro' version, with subscription that enables additional features like Multiplay with more than 4 people, has "save and resume" for missions, and other amenities that slowly trickle down to the free version over time, but are available to 'pro' first. Will that make everyone happy? Hell no. But given the choice of keeping a great game in the future (and pay a subscription fee), or see DCS become more and more obsolete, I will choose the to me more expensive route. One thing is certain: I will continue to play great flight sims in the future. I'm hoping it will be DCS. It's current trajectory sadly is (to me) discouraging.

Vote with your wallets. I'm enjoying the new cockpit in VR, I bought the original F5 in 2021 on 50% off for USD $29.99 I paid $9.99 for the upgrade. to buy this module new (even before the update as of 2021) was 59.99. For me that's a win as I still have not paid full price for the F5 having only forked out ~$39.99 USD total. I hope some bugs are addressed and maybe some unplanned improvements, to encourage that I am reporting bugs to help the devs find the issues and correct them. **I also noticed if I listen to the plane under G I can hear it overstress and crack, a good clue the wings are about to go their own ways. Very cool.

There are a ton of assets that we need for Cold War (Air, Land, Sea) Its the aspect that DCS fails at the most, nothing fits together in time frame. However, if CH started down that road, he would have to change his name to Retrohill.

This is what ED doesn't get: the modding community has been hundreds and hundreds of hours creating work to make DCS better -- in this case liveries for the F-5E. These all wiped out in one fell swoop. ED's attitude is "We have provided a template, no go out and spend hundreds more hours creating supplemental work (which of course we will wipe out in one fell swoop later again). No working with the community to create a sustainable, playable product. Just slight of hand marketing. The effort that went into this upgrade could have been so much better directed toward other aspects of game play. I am already sorry I purchased this update. That was my foolishness.

Was thinking this could be an interesting scenario: 1) cover rebels as they take the capital city 2) chase Assad's private jet as he flees to Russia all sorts of ideas.

"Getting the most out of my purchases" is a better way to put it. I'm not here to defend toxicity nor suggest that a product should come with lifetime free support and upgrades. At the same time I will not criticize fellow customers providing productive feedback on how awesome this module could be. If i only vote with my wallet and leave the explanations to toxic voices, I can't hope for any meaningful change.

I think I have working Sea Darts. I'll take a look and send you my latest files

I've not forgotten about this, just been a tad occupied with real life and a recent vacation back to Thailand, I have it uploaded to Megasync, there's not much more that I will do to be honest, the original script for the Sea darts had them detonating 5km away from the target, but if I use script for the SM'2..she's deadly!

Well thank you for noticing my 'smart' code As for your issue, it's actually already fixed internally. You're correct that 'pressed' was causing problems, it's been updated and waiting for the next patch. Regarding the general state - we're going through all of the issues as they arise and fixing them. I can't promise there won't continue to be some bugs in the next patch but we've definitely smashed the most important/most reported input issues this cycle. Once you get the next update, please keep reporting issues

Видимо имеется ввиду то, что назначил район БД например город - кинул с обоих сторон юнитов и, они сплоченно совершают рывок-прорыв навстречу друг другу и, в этом городе месятся там сами по себе, а игорёк летает над ними и по мере своих возможностей вносит свой героический вклад в развитие событий. ИИ штаб какой то имеется вероятно ввиду, который бы сам выдвигал юниты, например берется шахматная партия, как шаблон забивается в ИИ - юниты = фигуры и эта партия разыгрывается на карте, рандомно уничтоженные игорьком юниты заменяются ИИ штабом на новые - либо рандомные фигуры, либо равноценные, кол-во фигур ограничено, алгоритм играемой партии может меняться - например игорьком выбито 3 пешки и слон, ИИ анализирует ходы и выставляет меры - либо спавнит фигуры или, меняет тактику. Ну условно говоря, ни надо кидать камни, если не поняли. Или, как стратегии игры делают на подобии такого, даются группы войск, направляешь и они месятся, а это разве не реализовано в модуле наземной техники, который продается, разве этого всего нет, зачем это в редакторе или, при покупке того модуля наземки будет игра типа стратегии? Ни панятна.

I was going to answer the question about my Pantsir being able to fire on the move, but couldn't find the post. Anyway, here's my source.

There are 2 major issues that plagues the 120 in multiplayer right now and one of these issues affects all dcs missiles. First issue is, if you do a loaded roll, barrel roll, the 120 will not be able to keep up with you and will miss. Check the video in the thread below. It was performed in single player, current DCS version. The 2nd issue that affects the 120 and all the other missiles in MP is teleporting. When a player starts doing a loaded roll, if he rolls the jet too fast, like in the video in the thread below, it will cause the player to teleport (desync), thus making the missile miss, this is a problem for all missiles and is an issue that is being neglected for a very long time now. Please ignore the notching part of the video, lets just focus on the barrel roll problem for this thread.

чем меньше слов в постановке задачи, тем дольше и сложней видится реализация. Ваша формулировка примерно такова: "Сделайте, чтобы было хорошо")) При создании миссии всё равно (так или иначе) придется соблюсти какие-то ограничения. Миссияделу определить - а какая же цель действий этой (той) группы. Иначе юниты будут вести себя как "двое из ларца" в известном старинном мультфильме)). В будущем многие вещи будут автоматизированы, но явно не в такой постановке задачи, как Вы предложили.

Cold War assets: 75 models, £10000 for paid geometry and 3 years of work

Wow, great to hear cold war assets by @currenthill might be possible. Since I mostly do air to air stuff, to my mind come fighters with really ugly 3D models, like the MiG-23 Flogger or the MiG-25 Foxbat, the british Lightning but also assets like IL-38 - I'm a Tomcat person and love to intercept and escorts big birds like this. Yak-38 would be really cool too. I know Cubanace has been working on one for a long time, though. Working Tanker assets like a Victor of a VC-10 would be awesome, too. [There already is a nice Cold War Assets Mod by Tripod, this one contains an older version of the Tu-95 and a Tu-16, we also have a simple mod for an okay-looking An-12. So I'll leave those ones out of my wishlist. ] Regarding ground units, I think the M48 and M60 Tanks could really have a better model. Also (not an expert) the T-72 we have in game looks quite modern? A stripped-down version would be cool. T-55 and T-62 Tanks would be great for a lot of scenarios - and I'm not sure if we have a good british Chieftain Tank in-game right now.

I purchased my F-5 on the christmas sale of 2016, for us$ 42. How long do you think that amount can support this Module’s fixes and maintenance? 8 years is not enough? I don’t need passion in order to be fair.

Personally I am willing to pay the upgrade fee, such as the production quality of aerges. If I buy F1CE and then spend 10 US dollars to upgrade to F1EE or 20 US dollars to upgrade to F1M, I will be willing to do so! But aerges directly developed four models of the Spanish Mirage F1 and I am very satisfied,and have been looking forward to the F1M under development; or to give an example that will not happen, for example, if Heatblur produces the F-16A, I will be willing to pay for various F-16 blockXX upgrades at US$10~15 or even US$20~25. The F-5E remastered appearance is beautiful, but unfortunately it does not include the Swiss version of UHF and VHF.maybe ED can provide everyone with the upgrade plan for the cockpit?!

I bought all my planes and modules and now I should keep paying monthly to use them. Great idea my dude.

not a fanboy, just a normal person that wouldn’t work for free and so I don't expect others to do so either, but I really don’t want to argue with you so will add you to the ignore list and be done with this subject.

I didn’t write the jokes, but I still understood them as such.

I dont like subscriptions, I much rather prefer to purchase when I do have spare money. Also, I would hate not being able to play if I let the subscription lapse.

I revamped the older structure you made, just going with a single lua, and multiple liveries.. I will send you the updated link to have a fool around shortly

Subscription or not, you don't decide where the money goes.

Yeah, good point. I didn't see it on the screenshot (all that text over the image). BTW, while you're here, I really enjoy your campaign playthrough videos! They are a treasure trove for learning this module! My MO is to fly the mission, then watch your video of that mission (and take notes for the inevitable second play through of this campaign). For example, using GM to create a markpoint from bullseye coordinates; I never even thought about that. One question: for those of us who like to role-play this thing, what is the external light policy in the Air Force? When do I set to flash vs steady, for example?

That was your take away? Seriously?!? Lucky for us we have your razor sharp perspicacity *rolleyes* The fact that you conflate ED and Heatblur tells me you need more time to process and understand what is being said to you.

A lot of people will love to see such a Cold War pack, as many players like to join Cold War servers.

That sounds amazing! Thanks for this information! I was wondering what 'Handoff Mode' was. I was just trying to imagine what that would be like and it sounds epic! It would serve to immerse us even more into our cockpit sounds. No listening to music in the F-16 anymore when they model that!

Multiple reports. Server down for maintenance. From ED News: Master Server Infrastructure Maintenance We will have infrastructure maintenance on Tuesday, December 10th, 2024 from 04:00 to 05:00 UTC. All users will not be able to connect to the DCS Master server and all account sessions will be reset. We appreciate your patience and understanding during this short downtime. Thank you Eagle Dynamics

Damn keybinds! (Keybind was set to VOIP and not Radio Menu) Thank you so much for your help and again, what a fantastic Campaign!

Oh my... another business advisor, no thanks.

Sometimes I wonder if the devs even play DCS themselves Don’t get me wrong, details on the landing gear is awesome. The external model looks very impressive sitting on the ramp or in the air - for videos and screenshots. But as a regular player flying and fighting in the F-5E, my eyes are INSIDE the cockpit. And in prominent view is the radar. Again, I don’t think most of us expected a radar rework. But some tweaks to the clutter and indication-files could have been done in photoshop without much time spent. Anyways, lets hope that ED can find some time to improve. Or to allow indication textures to be properly modded (and IC allowed) by the users themselves.

We need models to be opened in Model Viewer. IMHO, It's not really a debateable thing. Work flow isn't going to be 3x longer it's going be like 10x longer. DCS takes like real time 7-10 mins to load these days. only to have to shut it down and reload every time you want to see an alignment change? This isn't FS 2004. It's DCS in 2024, and it's the tool that has been used for like almost a decade. These models aren't a joke. And neither is the artwork that so many talented people are putting into them. Respectfully request that whatever version of model viewer the MISSION EDITOR is obviously using; get put into the stand alone version.

Sums up perfectly why I think a subscription model makes a lot of sense. I actually think it's awesome to have Hornet and Viper in Early Access and it's cool that they're available on MP servers. But if it was up to me, I'd rather see some of the ancient Hog and Black Shark bugs fixed, as well as a bunch of core game problems. Plus, stuff like a more detailed weather simulation would be more valuable to me than another multi-role jet, no matter how iconic it may be. A subscription model would be much more likely to give the devs an incentive to develop the core game, fix bugs, deliver a more polished product and keep it polished throughout the entire product lifetime. Just to be clear, I think it's absolutely amazing how ED keep pushing the boundaries of what can be done in flight sims, and how they manage to keep adding new and awesome features. I'd just prefer to see such features added at a higher pace, while my fascination with the modules degrades with each one that comes out.