Demiurgo

I am mixing nothing but ok. From my first comment in this thread I mentioned the same but you are deflecting. You are saying that one thing here but before you said "It's up to the 3rd Party if they want to support these features". I hope you see the conflict from this point of view. But generally, my main point is: you are having modules that, for reasons, operate differently with your assets and IT'S NOT INFORMED properly. That's something YOU need to fix instead sending us to talk to third party. Period.

Believe me, I am not being argumentative and is not a gotcha thing. I strongly suggest you modify this because is no good for consumers. For instance.....F15E radar can catch normal traffic but other radars can't. This difference in experience is not good. Do you agree on that? Same with Maverick boresighting in the F16. If you continue this trend (that seems to be accelerating) experience is going to suffer.

HI. Where does it say in https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/products/other/supercarrier/ that features of the SC ONLY ARE CONFIRMED for ED's OWN MODULES? You don´t get that also here https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/products/planes/hornet/ and https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/products/planes/tomcat/ Is not something I should ask your third party devs....it's something you should declare by yourself. I know that DCS has become a really complicated product and it's going to get worse because you just keep adding modules without ever finishing things in most of the cases but you should try to clarify things like this. Things like double burble, datalink that worked for some but not for others, effects that you see in one plane but not in others, different radar implementations, etc are making the experience really uneven and in many cases leading to wrongful purchases that probably happen to people like OP. Thanks

This is weird business practice. You are offering a product (SC) and announcing features that may or may not work with third party modules? We are not talking about an unofficial mod but a thing you earn money for. Also you disrupt the ecosystem and force people to change behavior to use different products BOUGHT from you like configs (happened with the burble). Honestly you should review this.

@BIGNEWY What about the following: 1) windows select? 2) WP SNAP so you can attach WP from different planes to one place? 3) Random weather (or imported weather) and time Thanks

Not so fast.... I am not talking about the fact that after complains (which were 100% correct) you added ACLS to legacy Carrier. I am talking that ED is on record saying that you COULDN´T EASILY migrate that functionality to legacy because the technology was ad-hoc for SC and it was hard. When people complained (and some even threaten legal action for false advertising) you changed in LESS THAN 15 days. That's the bad comms I am talking about. It's hard for me to believe now that all is complex now....... Finally I read what you wrote about complexity; try not to dismiss other opinions witch such infantile rhetoric arguments please. By saying that your product is ALL complex you put updating B1, S3 models in the same place as redoing a radar. You see that's not the same, don´t you? Or VOIP which is something that existed for 2 decades now in the same place as researching a complex plane....So no.... I don´t buy this as an excuse for the way you communicate and change priorities. Don´t know why you resort to the "nobody wants to wait". That´s a fact of life my friend.......you simple handle that smartly or not. You choose as other user put it, not to be transparent so here we are. Since I feel a ban incoming I will shut up now. Thank you for your time.

I don´t like mods either but VOIP is not functional right now to the level that SRS gives you. Thank you anyways for worrying about how I enjoy the game.

1) You say is not true but again you say it´s all hard at the end of the sentence. I think that's settled there so I won´t talk any further on this point. 2) Priority Shifting examples: a) You launch VOIP in an unusable form then left it there for a year, you then go to do something else. Later you add some small functionality but still unusable and don´t know when you will continue or finish it. Before you come back with empty excuses on this let me tell you that is in fact unusable and you can check that by seeing which famous servers have that ON. Also I'd question the need for this while all the people have SRS and stuff and there are clearer priorities. b) You launched the "new weather" 2 years ago and we don´t have 20% of what should be. From outside it seems that you launched "moving clouds" in a whole year and then shift to something else. I have many other examples and can send it to you in private.... 3) Bad comms examples: a) F-18 ACLS only for SC thingy then recanted a week later, b) Module launches dates changes galore, c) Product maps changing constantly, etc.... 4) I think you are avoiding the issue, as always. You seem to think that, for example, when lots of people question you about radar and missiles you just say: "guys we will do a white paper" and then move about other things...... that´s the good news and think you can buy time. The bad news is that you are talking a lot of time to do a paper and you are not saying even why is taking so much time nor you have a plan to share. probably you are going to say: "it is complex", right? Just to clarify: BAD NEWS means that you continue pushing the message of ALL THE GOOD THINGS TO COME and when those things are delayed all the time or simply vanish in the air for years you MUST EXPLAIN what's going on because LOTS OF PEOPLE buy your stuff predicated on those messages. Understand you can´t continue buying time with "it is all complex" and "sorry and thank you for your passion and support" I know this message sounds harsh but you can't possible overlook that many people is saying things like this. I want DCS to succeed but I don't see how you can pull it out in the long run like this, specially if at a certain point a strong competitor shows up. Don't tell me you are in this for years while other failed because that's debatable....

I know moderators are not going to like this but: 1) Lately it seems the "GO TO" blanket answer is: we are slow because all that we do is hard. 2) There are continuous APPARENT and REAL priority shifts which put into question how they plan and allocate resources. Community questions them but since they don´t inform the people the motivation behind those changes, bad mood and pessimism gets into the people 3) Even if the policy seems to be "we will communicate when we are ready" there were several bad miscommunications and many people when crazy. If ED is ok with that then why not communicate MUCH MUCH MORE? They always say people gets mad anyway..... The fact they are not doing it makes many people think they are allocating resources to some other not gaming projects maybe? 4) The track record of the last 3 years shows that situation is CLEARLY worsening on delivery times and communication. So bad that many CC complained and some others left entirely. So bottom line: communicate what are you doing or communicate why you aren´t delivering. You simply can't continue delivering only "good news" that end in nothing.

Yes, that's why I said Spud survey has a bias. Till we don't get info from ED or some other source we won´t know for sure.

again, that's incorrect because: 1) not all time zones have the same amount of players so the math you are doing is incorrect 2) I never said those were 75% of all players; just it SEEMED WEIRD that 1k on a holiday in US playing when you say there is 1M players and most of them are in MP according to your survey Here's another data point: Don´t know how accurate is this but this is the amount of people that start STEAM and then the GAME. I don´t know how much of the people on DCS use STEAM (i my group is much more than 50%) but it seems rather small against 1M players. EDIT: TYPOS

Of course. I mentioned that. It´s clear as well that Spud´s survey has a bias but is one of the few sources of information we have. I wanted to give the OP ideas on how he might approach to a reasonable number.

It could be but it seems to conflict with the survey you posted..... There it says this: I know said 76% can´t be playing all the time...but 76% vs 1% seems weird.

Until you can explain with hard data how many things are bought per ticket and if said tickets have consecutive numbers you are pulling things out of thin air. Just FYI: if you review MP numbers at any given time you'll see around 1000-2000 players at peak time. So...... how 1M users are translated into 1% playing on heavy traffic days??? Take into account all the things you want to include but it seems far fetched that there are 1M regular players. I would agree that probably there are more than 1M that downloaded the game and some others that abandoned the game for whatever reasons.... Right now is Holidays in the US and this is the amount of players in the server: Around 1k......

if you add these numbers it gives you 1.4M aprox tickets....I don´t know how much you can infer from here based on the fact that most people have much more than 1 module based on Spud survey you showed. Also you don´t know if said tickets are only for purchase and how many units typical user buys.

If you search you'll find Wags stating the amount of some modules sold at a given time. If you use the survey that Rudel post it and extrapolate you'll have a better idea. Also check the amount of users playing at any given time in MP and use the same survey to refine said numbers.... You'll have a better estimate than only relying on Steam Personally I think they are note even close to have 1M regular users.

Hi, thank you. I know that. I am talking about copying stuff in the same place. It happened in Marianas. I tried Caucasus and was ok.

In my case the issue (reported in this forum without a comment from ED's so far) is that when you PASTE units all WP are moved, sometimes outside the MAP AREA. This is a new behavior after the patch.

Hello, When you copy a flight using "CTRL+C" and "CTRL+V" the new unit has the waypoints moved all around. In same cases outside the map. Tried this on Marianas. Also please add "CTRL+Z". Thanks.

Cuál es el problema de que un usuario aspire a que DCS mejore y se acerque a las mejores prácticas de otros productos?

New Fuzes. If you put 1 bomb you can modify fuzes. if you put 2 of the same kind in one pylon you can´t. Also please indicate where is the documentation for each one. Thanks

Thanks. That is what I thought!

Hi! If you don't mind me asking, how did you arrive to these figures? Thanks!

solved. Installed and removed once again A4 MOD and fixed. Don't know why

HI, I am seeing the same. I add ships (carriers) but only the icon appears on the map. My installation is fresh (less than a week). only had A4 mod but removed for the tests. Thanks