gekoiq

This needs to be seen and responded to by ED. What Wags said, and what this page on the steam partners page says are in direct contradiction. By Steam's own definition, a game is still in "Early Access" while it is not "feature complete". The roadmap laid out by Wags in the Hornet mini-update thread shows ED plans to remove the "Early Access" notation before the Hornet is actually "feature complete".

And just like that, ED has ensured I never spend another cent on a product of theirs.

As it turns out he *is* a Hornet pilot...

USMC legacy Hornets DO use the LITENING when shore based. The documentation ED is basing their hornet on indicates that the legacy hornet of our vintage does not have a LOS indicator on the HUD for the LITENING.

Think of it as "Pointed straight ahead" If you bore sight a Maverick for example, it will return the seeker gimble to be pointed straight ahead.

No it can't, just because a weapon will bolt up does not mean the plane knows what to do with it, how to launch it, and how to compute a solution for it, or even know what to call it in the systems. Each weapon, even different variants of the same weapons, require a software update to allow the plane to know the parameters of the individual weapons.

I think he's referring to the IR laser marker, not markpoints. The IR Laser marker has been in since pod release.

Yeah the 10x slammer loadout is dumb and certainly never used operationally, but 6x is perfectly reasonable if the expected threat is high. 4x would probably be the more sensible/common loadout IRL as the air-threat is rarely as high as it is in most DCS servers/missions.

With wing bags, the Hornet can carry 6+2. (2 on the fuselage stations 4 and 6, 2each on the outer wing pylons)

No mistake with readings, what you're missing is that Indicated airspeed (in the hud) is different than Ground speed (shown on the HSI next to your aircraft symbol and on F10) Indicated airspeed is going to be lower than your ground speed, based on your altitude (at sea level they would match, not including any winds) as you get higher, indicated airspeed is going to be dramatically lower than ground speed.

I have no problem hitting Mach 1.8 at altitude while clean and light. Seems accurate enough to me. Make sure you're at 40k+, no ordnance, and 50% fuel or less, in full reheat to get to max speed. Weather (air density) will also effect speed.

Throttle should be constantly moving, if your throttle is sitting still for any length of time you're doing it wrong. Constant small adjustments, put some on, take it off immediately. Take a little off, put it back on immediately. Don't wait for the jet to respond, if you wait for the jet to respond it's too late and you'll now be low/high. The concept of "take a little off, put a little back on" is really important for fine throttle control. you have to think a few steps ahead of what the jet's going to do, if you keep the throttle moving in small steps back and forth you can make fine adjustments without any extreme swings either way. It's a tough concept to get used to. If you watch any videos of IRL Case1, you'll see them constantly moving their throttles back and forth. So it's not just a DCS thing.

Throwing my name in the hat of people who feel slighted by ED's business practices regarding EA and their commitment to finish older modules. Making the Viper a higher priority than the Hornet is a blatant slap in the face to all the people who bought the Hornet. 2 Months after the Viper release and we still aren't seeing anything done on the Hornet. Giving the Viper new, long awaited and promised, features before the Hornet gets them is absolutely ridiculous. Developing new tech and sharing across modules? Great, lets start with the modules that have been out the longest, fix and add features to THEM first, since you know, you've had our money for years at this point. This was a good thing in a way for me, as someone who has spent many hundreds of dollars on modules, It solidified my decision to not spend another penny on ED products, EA or otherwise, until some positive change is realized.

I also bought the Hornet Day1, Hour0. I did not and will not buy the Viper until I see positive progress on the Hornet again, once I do I will purchase the viper even though I have zero interest in flying it, just to support ED, if/when they regain my faith.

I'd happily pay a monthly/yearly subscription if it meant more regular updates to the core game and finishing modules faster before starting the next EA project. Ed would have a more steady stream of income and would no longer need to rely on the mass income from the *next* EA project. They'd be able to make a more polished game without having to push EA projects long before they're really ready. The Hornet being in EA for over a year and the Viper coming out with little, but highly sought after features we need (pod indication in HUD and slave to wp, proper CM numbers, proper gun ammo selection) is pretty painful for us Hornet pilots. I can only hope that the Hornet gets these updates in the next OB patch, you know since the Viper has them and they are supposed to help each other right? Edit, if a straight subscription based model wouldn't work, how about a premium subscription on top of the base free2play model? Premium subscribers get access to Open Beta, F2P people can still play the release branch.