Leaderboard

Yes, our sources match those posted on the forum, thanks again for the help. We were guided by these sources. Several types of SAM sites were made - they differ in size. In addition to them, some airbases have unique elevations for installing radars - these objects are merged with the terrain and were placed according to photos or airfield schemes. Yes, they are empty and will allow you to install your equipment. Look at the screenshots: SAMs, radars are installed in the mission editor - you can install your in these places.

VERSION 7.4.0 You can now download version 7.4.0 in the Original Post! Spring update time! It's spring, and it's time for a new update. I can't believe it has been 6 years since I first released this mission. It has been downloaded 33,025 times across the different versions. I wonder how many traps you guys have done by now. Fixing the auto-cockpit-setup A while back, there was a Hornet update in which they revisited the INS. This gave us a special state for the HSI page when you start airborne with the INS knob set to IFA, that you see for around 8 seconds before the HSI shows the old familiar set of button functions. Unfortunately, this change caused the timing of the auto-setup to fail, and instead of setting up the time in the HUD (TIMEUFC/ZTOD) engaged the RALT A/P. Not ideal. But this is now fixed! Discord and Patreon When I first headed out on this journey, I had no thoughts on such a thing. But enough people have told me"You have supported this thing for 6 years(!), and it has helped so many people... maybe you should let people give something back if they want to?". So, here goes! Please join the Discord to talk about DCS and carrier stuff. Maybe we can get some flying going on as well? Also, join the Patreon for some exclusive extras. Check it out! I wonder who's going to be my first patron, probably my mom... Discord: https://discord.gg/bYB4jXQWQW Patreon: https://www.patreon.com/banklerdcs CHANGE LOG 7.4.0 * Fixed a problem with the auto-cockpit setup for F/A-18C, where the RALT A/P was engaged. This started happening after a recent INS update to the module. * Tweaked the limit to what counts as a downwind extension during SHBs. It now gives you a little more room. * Updated Moose. * Started a Discord server. * Started a Patreon page. Enjoy!

Thank you for your support. We are glad to see that you like the map and this gives us even more desire to improve it. It is very nice when you remember the places where you served or walked as a child. The map is very large and we want to recreate everything, but we have to think about resources and your SSD/HDD. And like any of our maps, it does not stand still and is constantly evolving: it will be improved and refined, including according to user requests. Today we will answer some questions and tell you a little about what we added: @Swiso Yes, most of the buildings are destructible. Many with detailed damage models. The rule with original objects is the same - we don't bomb them @KarlRadek thanks for the information about the quarries. I want to say that this place is already under reconstruction: water is pumped out of the lakes and instead of them there will be quarries, like at that time. There were many requests from you about air defense locations. We had them, but at your requests we increased the number of these places and now they will not only be near large bases. Thanks to everyone who sent in SAM info @Rick Mave Ersatzpisten - they are located mostly south of phase 1, in phase 3 territory, but we can already say - don't worry, you'll be able to land on the road. @C525 today the shelters in Büchel look like this:

"We do not and we will not infringe on the IP of others" Interesting choice of words - only present and future tense

Small bugs brought upon patch releases caused by an updated engine isnt a game breaking issue that ED cant fix themselves. Those problems in and of themselves arent relevant to whether or not the module is completed. The Huey has issues; its been finished for a decade now and its on life support at the moment because its quality of life is passed. Should we bring Belsimtek back out and get them to redo the Huey because its not finished?

We introduced a hall of fail for the most unpolite users on our discord now. This is the first entry. Have fun

We have been able to maintain fairly well now, we will continue to do so. Well into the future? I mean it's hard to see how far this could last, the goal for all parties involved should be to get everyone back to work. That continues to be our goal, until then we will continue to make sure the modules stay as they are for those that own them.

Welcome to my life the last year

I have to agree. It's been made clear who is the bad faith actor in this individual situation. I started to get that notion when this first broke and I asked around. I didn't spam developers with the typical social media/imageboard brained stupidity, I asked like a human being. And I got direct answers to the best of their ability to answer. If this, indeed, were ED withholding payment for no good reason, this would've been over and done with a lot sooner. I understand that they made a lot of people's favorite toy and these individuals act as if DCS exists just for the Mudhen, but the fact of the matter is that both Razbam's leadership is very much at fault, they know that they are, they've been poisoning the well to try and win it in the court of public opinion because internet dorks sure do love a moral crusade, and this is not the first time we have seen these kinds of antics from Zambrano.

Same, one of my favorite jets in DCS.

ED isn't the one making posts. They ARE handling it with "grace" by keeping it private. RAZBAM asked to have the modules removed, so thank them.

No matter what happens with the mess with Rambam, I think we should the MIG-23 and 27. I don't care what version but if possible I'd love to see them as a twofer pack if that's not possible that would be fine as well. Either way it would be awesome for Afghanistan

I'm flying it all the time.

More texture fun. Fictious Loach of the Aero Scouts "Low Life II" You know tobi, you could have the perfect mod and there will still be people whining and complaining. Thats just human nature lol. One of the things I love about this mod is how you have to use the pedals, cyclitic, and collective all at the same time in the right "sweet spot" to take off and land. People being rude and complaining, and the mod is free! OMG then don't use it delete it problem solved. I like it!!

As stated over and over and over again, this issue does not affect the SA Map. They are a different team. Only the F-15E can be refunded for store credit!

Basically in your saved games folder there's a DCS_OH-58D folder (or something like that, I'm writing from work) and in there you should have 3 .json files, mission1.json, mission2.json and mission3.json. They are your "DTC"s which you can upload and download data from whenever you wish. To do that, you need to do in the (again, writing from faulty memory) Init -> Data Loader. There you will have option to either Store data or Load data. When storing/loading data for Mission 1/2/3 that data gets stored/loaded in/from the respective json file. If the folder in the saved games is empty, just go to any instant action mission, go to the Data Loader and store missions to the Mission1, Mission2 and Mission3. Now you will have those 3 json files that you can edit. It stores Waypoints, Radio frequencies, Battlefield graphics, Laser codes and maybe something else. Now, if you prepare data from the mission editor, you'll already have it preloaded in the bird so it defeats the purpose of the "DTC". However, you can edit those "DTC" files anytime, anywhere and just place them in your saved games folder on the go and load it in the cockpit. --- One example usecase is the following: I'm mission commander and I'm building our flightplan for the mission on some MP server. As I can't pre-set everything in the mission editor this is what I would do. Go to mission editor, drop one KW and start building Add main flight route Draw any battlefield graphics I might need (Ensure that the BindingLayer is set to the same coallition as your aircraft) Set all radio frequencies Start the mission with the hotstarted birt Set laser codes for all presets Go to Data Loader -> Mission 3 -> Store ALL Now I just send the "mission3.json" to my friends, they save it in the SavedGames folder I mentioned earlier and then we can join the MP server, after startup just load the "Mission 3" and we all have the correct flight plan, graphics, radios and laser codes...

The positive take that I think we have is NL stating that support will continue. Sure, the unit's probably won't be enhanced, but at least they'll continue to work. If you exclude the F15E, the other 3 seem to be in a pretty good condition (I fly all of them and don't have any issues with them). That to me seems to guarantee ongoing usability, which is cool. Yes, it would be nice for the F15E to finished, but that's something for further down the line. Pretty much anything else seems to be purely speculation, so I'm staying out of that.

As always a lot of conjecture and assumptions from people that know nothing about a case. Apparently you won't know the whole truth and you shouldn't make any conclusions from that. Both parties fight for their rights and want to play it their way. Nothing is over. Nothing has really changed. We're still waiting for the resolution.

Sadly, Ron won't even do that. To quote their Discord announcement: "Only RAZBAM Simulations is able to properly support, update, and develop our products. Our development pipeline, including all source code, has never been — and will never be — released to any distributor or third party. This is by design, and it ensures we can protect the integrity of what we build and deliver the best experience possible to you." Personally, this is another case of his ego being through the freaking roof. I know what I'm saying can come across as being a bit toxic... but in this case I think I'm justified as he's basically screwing the player base over, rather than taking steps to make sure these things work in the future. FFS, if he did decide to wash his hands of ED, and just sell them the soruce code for the modules in question, he'd actually be in a better position as he can tout being the 'bigger man' in the argument from then on. It'd also be a win for everyone as well: ED gets the modules, and can both keep them going, and update them as needed. This is also a good job opportunity for some, since ED will need a few more people to keep these aircraft functioning, and to develop the features RB promised... but never delivered on. The players now know the modules will work Future endeavors can be taken to add additional versions of the aircraft in question. For example the AV-8B+ that has the Hornet Radar and Fox-3 capability, or the Mirage 2000D with the second seat. Razbam has some good will, and a "path back to the platform" But, it requires RZ to drop his ego, and sell the source code to ED. Might be time to go Godfather on them and make them an offer they can't refuse

In addition to a Mirage III I 100% back a AV-8S Matador!

And you base that on FPS who's right or wrong?? "Your honor, my client is innocent!" "How so?' "My client had Frosted Flakes for breakfast" "Case dismissed"

Well said. I don't think the lost money is going to break anyone here. On the other hand, losing these unique modules which really are works of art is a huge bummer. I'm still hanging on to my Strike Eagle and hoping for the best.

With these, will they be in their real-life positions & configurations? Are there sites appropriate to HAWK, S-75/SA-2, S-125/SA-3 and S-200/SA-5? Will it also include EWR sites and, if so, where there are radomes can the radome be removed, leaving a structure (be it a tower, pedestal, building etc) with a flat top, so we can place functional radars? And finally, can we see an example? See the spoiler for one from the Sinai map, showing an almost 1:1 recreation of a real Egyptian SA-2 site. If we can have something akin to this (obviously appropriate to the sites in Germany), then that would be perfect (and Ugra already have a perfectly adequate SA-2 launcher revetment on Syria, it only needs a retexture and it would be good to go as-is on Germany): For me, the presence of real-life air defence sites, in their real-life positions (even if we have generic HAWK, SA-2 and SA-3 etc sites, placed where they really are/historically were) is very important to me - the closer I can get to recreating the real-life air defence order of battle, the better. If Ugra does this, then I'll be absolutely sold.

My 2 cents: this is just another attempt form RB to put pressure on ED and, at the same time, do some captatio benevolentiae (capturing goodwill) among the customers.

"Stop selling RB modules!" ED can't make that decision on their own because of legal obligations But, when RB makes that request and ED complies (as they probably have to) and the suddenly great crimes have been committed. It must be fun to be partisan.

@Bignewy this is an example of the messaging that hasn't sat well with me. Of course the public were brought in to this - as they should have been a product that was in EA was/is in jeopardy of being discontinued due to, allegedly, nonpayment by company it was being developed for. This is alarming, full stop. Now that you have removed the products from the product page, I really feel as if a some sort of message is necessary from your legal team. I am really beginning to wonder if the 56 licenses I hold in your store are sound. Since 2018 - ED or it's partners posts something for early release, I am generally there on day one- that is not the case anymore... this is absolutely going to effect your business short of some sort of clear understanding for your customers. I am really not one of those bitter keyboard warriors - looking through my post history hopefully says that... I am just very, very, very concerned.

Within this thread/post, I'm hoping that we can collate a set of thoughts/guidance/advise for DCS users to assist with their system optimisation. Such that instead of having to repeatedly state the same things to people with questions who were unable to find guidance using the search, that we can direct them to a single thread. In particular, the opening post will collate things, and I'm hoping that others will add useful recommendations that I can merge into the opening post, so please do assist. DCS Systems requirements, when compared to other apps and managing your expectations: Most of the flight sims out there work best with well above average resources, when compared to say your average games. This is very much true of DCS, which is at the bleeding edge of what is currently possible DCS does seem to attract users who are highly engaged, both with the amount of time to invest in playing and also their focus for how to spend their hard earned spondoolies Players want the best eye candy possible, and that's what ED are trying to provide. Taking into account that DCS probably has some of the highest investment in PC equipment capabilities, that's a lot of eye candy. When scaling into VR, that same PC has to work MUCH harder than with a monitor. So as part of managing your own expectations, be aware that you're never going to be able to run DCS in VR with the same levels of eye candy as someone using a monitor If you want the "best" kit for DCS, as of April 2025, look here: Fastest CPU for DCS = AMD9800x3d Fastest GPU for DCS = Nvidia 5090 GPU recommended VRAM = 16GB. DCS can now show the level of VRAM usage, as well as the amount reserved (which is what is shown in Windows Task Manager). I've yet to see above 13GB of VRAM Recommended RAM for DCS = 64GB. In single player I've seen usage of up to 50GB in total. I've yet to see a requirement above 64GB. Having said that, we now have 96GB becoming an option. If I were looking to help with future proofing, I'd personally now buy 96GB Nvidia vs AMD. Right now, IMO, advantage sits with Nvidia, primarily because DCS supports the updated DLSS super-sampling and DLAA capabilities, as introduced within DLSS4. It's a big help. AMD may catch up with their recently introduced hardware capability that provides something similar to DLSS, but it's not yet supported by DCS we don't know how it will compare to the Nvidia solution Storage. A full install of DCS (i.e. all terrains and modules) requires just over 1TB of space. In addition there is space needed for the Saved Games folder, which can be pretty big if you have a lot of liveries and mods. The Saved Games folder does not need to be on the same drive as the DCS install. My current recommendation is a good NVME2 SSD of at least 2TB Motherboard. You may wish to ensure that any new motherboard supports at least PCIE4 and possibility PCIE5. This influences the data transfer between the CPU, GPU and storage External power for USB. If you have or intend to use a number of USB controllers, be aware that they'll all suck power. Individually, might not be much, but it WILL add up. My recommendation is to buy an external USB powered hub. It's quite easy to find ones that support upto 60w each System Configuration: Windows Try to minimise bloatware. There's plenty of guides around, but a good starting point is to look in Start Up and disable anything that you don't need in DCS Familiarise yourself with the use of Taskmanager. Be aware that you can for example drill into CPU usage by core. By default that simply shows a summary of all cores and their usage. DCS is multi-threaded and sometimes uses some cores more than others. If one of your cores is maxed out, you have a CPU bottleneck. It's also a reasonable way to identify if your GPU is maxed out Mouse polling rates. High mouse polling rates can seemingly influence micro-judder (i.e. little stop/starts, regardless of a good frame rate). The impression I was given being that a high mouse polling rate loads the PC, and especially so if there's a lot of USB devices connected. For my Logitech G502, the default polling rate was 1000/second. Reducing that to 125 made a significant improvement to smoothness As per normal with Windows, using it, or leaving it running for a number of hours can result a build up of peripheral tasks that suck up resources without being obvious. If you're intending to go for a long flight after a hard days work at the same PC, it's prudent to conduct a system restart Anti-virus. This is clearly going to be dependant upon which AV you use. A number of DCS users (me included) have at points experienced issues with our AV either: Calling out certain files as trojans. I've yet to see an issue with a file distributed by ED Insisting on checking files before using them. This can turn into a big issue if the files in question are say textures which need to be loaded from your NVME SSD. If your AV decides that it's going to run a check on said texture file, that can result in massive cuts to FPS. My solution for both of the above was to deliberately exclude my AV from sanity checking the folder that has DCS installed into. GPU drivers. Keep an eye on driver releases, but also check in the forums. New drivers can sometimes improve visuals/frame rates, but not always for DCS. Check in the forums for feedback is my recommendation USB Hubs. By default, Window's have these configured for "power saving". In practice, that means that some USB hubs on your motherboard will go sleep if not used for a while. This can include the USB hub that you might have a VR headset linked to. If you have issues, open Device Manager, navigate to the USB Hubs and disable power saving mode Nvidia DLSS4. DCS does NOT as yet support frame or multi-frame generation. DCS does support DLSS upsampling and DLAA (anti-aliasing), which were both introduced on RTX20 series cards. If you have an RTX20 series or newer, your GPU supports the current DCS enabled functionality. Be aware that by default, the Nvidia GPU drivers currently use a fairly old "preset" for DLSS. Newer versions are being introduced and presets from "K" onwards had some serious Nvidia magic sprinkled on them. To action, there are guides around on how to use NVPI (Nvidia Profile Inspector) to take advantage of this Related Applications: You may be using MSI Afterburner, or Tacview. Both make calls to retrieve data within Windows, or DCS respectively. It has been identified that both of these can result in stutter as a side-effect of the calls. Disabling of these and re-testing is a way of checking if they are causing impact DCS install: Do download the Skatezilla DCS App. Above all, it facilitates very easy updates to DCS, along with Repairs (both simple and full) Ensure you have enough storage space (see earlier) DCS updates. I consider it good practice to empty both the FXO and Metashaders folders (both in the Saved Games folder) after EVERY DCS, or GPU driver update. Apparently, post a DCS update, the files in those folders are recreated and simply added to the existing files. The result can be a folder with a LOT of files that are not being used. This can slow DCS down. Be aware that when you first next jump into a map/aircraft, that DCS will need to create them again, so will chug a little for a few mins. Post that, it'll run much better DCS Settings. Key settings that standout for me as being most important in VR: Textures - These are for the aircraft. Set them high if you have VRAM available. If you're struggling on VRAM, set to medium or low Terrain Textures - Set them high if you have VRAM available. If you're struggling on VRAM, set to low Civ Traffic - Off (these use a lot of CPU) Heat Blur - Off Shadows - Flat Res of Cockpit displays - 1024 (lower looks awful) Upsampling - If your card supports DLSS Quality, give it a try Anti-Aliasing - My opinion is that DLAA is awesome. Sorry can't comment on the AMD equivalent Lens Effect - Off Clouds - Ultra. Lower seems to result in weird artefacts in VR Scenery Details Factor - This influences the detail that you see on say a building. Personally I've maxed it out Pre-load radius - I tend to run it at around 45%. I used to have issues with performance on cranking that up. Turning this setting from 45% to 100% can add circa 1GB of VRAM usage Vsync - Off Full Screen - Ticked VR - General: OpenXR is now the preferred format. I'm unaware of any use cases that would now support the use of OpenComposite Some users prefer using Virtual Desktop, which supports connection to the headset via Wifi. Personally I use link cable, which eliminates the potential for wi-fi interference Virtual Desktop does seem to have advantages in reducing "smear" of moving objects within VR, and has "similar" visual quality overall to a link cable. Do ensure that if you're going to use Virtual Desktop that you have a fast Wifi router somewhere nearby. There's plenty of guides on using VD, so I won't repeat detail here The initial view you get on loading into DCS in VR is of the inside of a hangar. That's very nice, but also takes up circa 2GB of VRAM that is not released. If you're a bit short of VRAM (and for those of us without a 5090, that's not many of us), there is a solution in a mod called Empty VR Hangar, which is available via the DCS user files. Install that, and the hangar is replaced with ...nothing, just blackness. Very easy way to recover some VRAM. I'm hoping that at some point, there will be a tick-box within DCS to select the option of nothing Quad views. A chap clearly a lot smarter than I (Mbucchia) created an App called Quad Views, which I believe works with a number of VR headsets. It's a VERY clever piece of software that retains full resolution of the centre of your display in VR, whilst deliberately lowering the visuals outside of that central area. This can make a SIGNIFICANT saving in PC resource usage and therefore enhancement to frame rate. There's plenty of guides around on where to find it, how to install it etc. If your VR headset has Eye Tracking, that's even better as it facilitates reducing the area at full resolution even more Oculus: By default, Oculus show a "home" on powering up their headset in PCVR mode. This also happens to use circa 2GB of VRAM. Within the menu options of your Oculus software there is a option to disable it. It's worth doing Oculus Tray Tool (OTT). This is tool created several years ago, that for a while I thought was defunct. It's not. It allows the easy setting of: Supersampling in VR. I've seen all sorts of recommendations. I'm currently using x1.25, but play to your hearts content Bandwidth usage via Linkcable. The max = 960bps and is what I use Setting resolution. This is the upscaling used. In rough terms, the recommendation I've read that seems to work is to set the horizontal to double the resolution of each eye screen for your VR headset. For example, my Quest Pro has a resolution of 1800 pixels per eye, so my resolution is set at 3600 (it'll auto-calculate the vertical resolution) Pimax/HP: Please see Marky's thread, which has some good recommendations. Please do add recommendations/updates as you find them and I'll try to maintain this opening post. Troubleshooting: There's a reason why this troubleshooting section is at the bottom of this post, i.e. that it's prudent to have investigated the above BEFORE digging around further, as some of these may well rectify your performance issues. VRAM. All GPUs have a finite level of VRAM. Right now, 16GB is a good minimum figure to aim for if you're buying a new GPU VRAM is used by several applications within Windows. Note the points earlier that the Oculus home uses up some, as goes the VR hangar in DCS. Neither of these are really needed and disabling them will give you more headroom Some of the key variables within DCS that seem to eat VRAM are: Textures (the aircraft) Terrain textures (i.e. the ground) The F10 map. Opening that seems to use up around 1GB of VRAM. If you're already short on VRAM, quite unsurprisingly, that will create issues Newer maps and aircraft will tend to use more VRAM, that's just the nature of progress. We all want "better everything" in DCS, and ED have to assume that we'll keep improving our PCs, as that's the nature of us as consumers There's an option in DCS to see how much VRAM it's using. Open the Show FPS, and it'll do that. Hit the Show FPS again and it brings up a box of info. Near the bottom of that box of info, DCS now shows the VRAM reserved and used Note that if you now open Windows Task Manager, that it will also show VRAM used, however, it's measuring everything, rather than just DCS. If there's a big difference between the amount that DCS has reserved and Task Manager is showing as being used, then you probably have an "area of opportunity" for optimising your PC, that sits outside of the remit and control of ED/DCS RAM (both VRAM and normal). When you're getting to the point where your RAM is saturated (i.e. fully used), your PC will starting paging (saving) some of the less used data from RAM into storage. On a PC, that will be on your SSD/HDD. Read/write speeds to and from storage is basically rubbish, when compared to access speeds from RAM, so be aware of how much RAM and VRAM are being used CPU. The multi-core update to DCS did (in my opinion) make a big improvement to performance. On my PC, it seems to primarily spread it's load across 4 cores, though I do get some load on the other 4 CPU cores, but it's much lower. If any of those cores are fully loaded, yep, you've guessed, it'll result in frame rate issues and stutter The reason I've specifically called out the above is that once you've done the basic optimisation, if you're still having issues, it's important to understand where the bottleneck is. DCS heavily loads everything, the GPU, VRAM, RAM and CPU. It doesn't really matter which of those is maxed out, but if any truly are, that on it's own can cause issues. Identifying the culprit then means that you have 2 options: Throw money at the problem Back of on some of the settings You may think that the easy solution is to simply complain about the performance of DCS. It is, but IMO it's wrong. I own most of the big flight sims, i.e. the alternative combat sim and the 2 biggest Civ Sims. For me, I do genuinely believe that DCS is a better solution and have confidence that their work will continue to lead the rest. The unfortunate point is that we have some big spenders within our community with bleeding edge PCs, who are always looking to keep improving. ED by their nature are always going to be looking to see how they can take advantage of that capability. As such, hoping that a 4 year old PC will run DCS on "max" settings is simply not realistic.

No. Prepare to get prank calls and pizzas.

It's probably best to not discuss anything between RB and other companies here. Also as a reminder, everyone be nice to each other, and be nice to RB and if you don't mind even us.

I just want a better AI model for the mig23, 27 and su17/22

ww2.dk has good information on locations of batteries for the 157th and 163rd ZRBR, locations are fairly easy to confirm with satellite imagery.

"At the moment" is 18 months unpaid for any sale. Enlight me, Who can survive as a company or a person for 18 months being unpaid. Whos willing to keep working unpaid for 18 months? I have a nice business where i live for who wants to work for free

Its mostly wording, no need to get focussed on nitpicking other answers while not contributing to the original question. What @draconus was aiming at was kinetic energy, what @Dragon1-1 is talking about managing is potential energy. Think about it a couple of ways, before the fight you have all the time in the world to set yourself up for a good engagement, build up a solid bank of both types of energy (get high, get fast). Then think of it as making trades, you don't want to tank all your potential energy on the first turn, if you just spiral downwards pulling all the Gs you will trade away everything for 1 good turn and 1 chance. Once the fight begins as draconus said, you need to start trying to hold onto speed or altitude wherever possible, and depending on what you're trying to do like lead or pure pursuit you are trading PE or KE to do it. Generally the PE you started with is pretty much what you've got to work with as if you try and level the wings and go up you risk giving the bandit an easy angles problem. Going downhill during a sharp turn will help maintain the circle so long as it's worth it. If you find yourself fast for some reason then instead of using the brakes or throttle, then as Dragon says, you could bank that energy by doing a yo-yo or something rather than just throwing it away like your opponent just did. There's no simple answer to winning dogfights, but if you understand your best rate / radius turns and can do those, and you know your basic aerobatic manoeuvres, then start combining them depending on what you and the bandit are doing. It's fairly normal for new pilots to start thinking very horizontally and to master the vertical later, but there is always something to learn and its a very very currency driven skill.

As mentioned over and over. SA map is NOT made by Razbam. Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

Err... that's very, very wrong. You're probably thinking about airspeed. Going up is the best way to save energy while still being able to make a tight turn. In fact, going in fast and pulling up lets you bank that extra energy and maintain your best turning speed, while being able to pull a bit higher G than 6.5, since when you're coming down, you're gaining airspeed, so anything above about 310kts can be turned into Gs at your leisure. Very few things can defend against an F-14 that can use the vertical right.

@Tank50us Note, there are two holes in your suggested scenario: a) Why would Ron want to sell code, 3D model and whatever IP assets related to F-15E to ED if he can still re-use them partially for planned MSFS / "new" Microprose projects. They're still worth money even when/if his relationship with ED ends for good; b) Without Galinette and M2M aboard nobody will develop these modules further anyway, no matter who owns the code in the end. And judging from their responses on other communication channels, they do not seem to be in hurry to become subcontractors directly for ED (nor do we know if ED would like to hire them at all).

guys, I'm little shocked by number of videos of map, in diferent areas, at LOW altitud, and also with car rides!!! i'll buy map on pre-order. u showed HOW to advertis new map, and we, buyers, see how map looks in REALITI. yes, not everything is shown, but - bravo!!!!

No it is not. We have to wait for the dispute to be resolved. We all hope for a positive outcome. Hopefully RAZBAM will support their modules again, if not we have to see what the dispute resolution is and we will let you know when that happens.

You're licenses are fine and will work on any computer. New users are not able to purchase licenses. Cheers! Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

I like that idea

I wonder, if Razbam performed so well why didn't ED pay them? There are two scenarios: 1. the ED is in financial crisis and cannot afford to pay third parties! - But then it should happen to ALL third parties not just Razbam 2. ED is ugly and mean and wants to hurt Razbam - I would say not very credible.... A there is a third possibility Razbam is not telling the whole truth!!! Let's remember that a Razbam programmer put a time trap in the code, and that seems to me to be an important indicator of the situation that was going on INSIDE Razbam!!!!

Uh bro this is not ED's fault. It is sad because I got paid just now I was goint to buy the AV-8B, F-15E and M2000C (Since we have Iraq) all at once. I will never buy a RAZBAM product because of this. He is the one who hurt himself and his reputation. @Wags @BIGNEWY - Guys I am so sorrt this is happening to your company. I am behind you.

Do you have any references for that? A quick search for "vulture turn" didn't reveal anything of note.

And updated training missions and fixed campaigns... [emoji849] (Not only for the Harrier obviously). Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

I can't speak to the meaning of their statements over the past few days, but we remain focused on a solution and are hopeful to resolve it. Even in their statements, they state they are working towards this goal as well. So I appreciate the confusion in messaging, but as far as I am concerned, we are still marching on the same path towards the same goal.

May I object that a) They could have done it a long time ago and b) the fact that the official request to remove their modules from the store came only a few days after another "help us, we don't get paid!" post from Ron is definitely suspicious... ?

Allegedly (though my comes from an ED Tester), RB tried to sell a simulator to an Air Force. I can't remember which one off hand, but I know it was for the Super Tucano, which they were also developing for us (the player base). This sale would've cut ED out, and RB would've gotten 100% of the proceeds not going to the Super Tucano's OEM. The sales of the module to us would've proceeded as normal, but ED would've effectively lost millions of dollars rightfully theirs for the use of the IP. When ED found out, and this is my speculation, they demanded a renegotiation of the contract and froze funds transfers until that renegotiation took place. Clearly RB refused this, and hasn't been paid as a result due to the breach of contract. And instead of quietly agreeing to new terms or negotiating, RZ went public in order to steer public opinion in their favor. And as you can see, many are on their side, mostly because ED doesn't want to talk about what's going on behind closed doors (and likely legally advised not to to the degree needed to get the public on their side). Ergo, since the only 'side' of the story most have heard is RBs.... many buy what RB's been selling, and have also spun up some ludicrous allegations. The main piece of evidence to follow though: Notice how none of the other devs are backing RB here. The few who've said anything have come out on EDs side as well. So it's quiet telling that RB did something wrong.

Indeed it's coming along great. This is gonna be one of the best maps in DCS, no doubt about it. There is just one thing which kind of bothers me, is the texture... I would only work on that brown ground texture (which mostly appears around man-made structures), which really doesn't go well in combination with the green. Example: It seems way to off with one being summer/dry soil while the other is spring/wet grass. I would replace brown with something less green, like summer green grass. Now the difference is way too big, looks odd, and really doesn't coincide with reality (at least not in 90%). Besides it even doesn't present the dry grass, but rather a dry soil, which is even worse, right? Also the ground normal-map textures could be better as well, they seem way low poly, way too edgy, not in normal shapes. But that wouldn't be that noticeable if there would be less difference between green and brown texture. Try replacing brown texture with something more gray-ish, more like summer grass texture, that it would look something like: Dry base grass textures should be something like this:

Thank you so much, "Ghost 1-1." It's a wonderful tribute you've just paid to the crews who flew this Chinook during this period. https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3344132/