Jayhawk1971

Suggestion for mission 13: Could you give us more time to set up the jet properly when starting behind the tanker? Both Reflected and Ground Pounder have the player start in some form of active pause, and only after pressing a key (space, IIRC) does the mission start (and the assets then spawn in). Having first to trim, then to set up all my preference, at night - while trying to fly formation - threw me off, and I felt I was "behind the jet" during the mission (= couldn't get my head in the game as I felt I had to play catch-up). Other than that: What a great campaign! Incredibly immersive, and I did learn a lot about the Viper, even though I'm not at all new to that jet (had my first "run in" with the Viper with Falcon during my Amiga days). I can't believe I'm already at the final mission!

I have experienced some weird trigger issues in mission 10. !Spoiler alert for those who haven't played this mission yet! I destroyed the building, did a show of force, destroyed both technicals. did a second show of force, then was bingo and got the option to RTB. On my way to the tanker (after having switched back to 6 on prime), wingman calls out tracers, followed by two triggers simultaneously: one we discuss how to take out the AAA, and discussing the trap they set. I went back, we took out both AAA pieces. I went back towards the tanker, when wingman calls out more AAA. At this point I quit the mission. I'll do it again tomorrow, trying to stay out of burner more. Second attempt, everything worked fine

Of note: M4 worked flawlessly for me yesterday, so apparently my CBU killed the whole mortar position immediately.

Maybe only certain installed modules trigger a restart after updating? [not doubting your experience, just wanted to mention that it did not happen for my side]

Did not happen for me (Windows 10). Installed like every other patch.

Sent you a PM.

Discord, Facebook, X. BD wrote he was going to send the campaign in April on his Discord, there was a post about a release in May on his Facebook, and again an update that the campaign release had been postponed again for a June release. Latest news was July 3rd. I can only go from what I read. Don't want to get BD in hot water, either. So, what is the status then. I'd be happy for some information from you regarding what is correct. Believe it or not, my mission is not to spread "misinformation", but simply would like to enjoy the product you provide. Thanks.

I don't understand. How can a working version that has been sitting on one of ED's servers for 2.5 months - and should have been released in May - introduce bugs?

If they need to work on the patch for another week, won't they have to re-compile the whole thing anyway before sending it? The campaigns should be working with the current version, shouldn't they? Baltic did send the finished campaign by the end of April for a release in May. Apparently it got postponed because of the Phantom release (so as not to be "drowned out"). So I assume this campaign has been thoroughly tested for the current version.

I don't even think it's the frequency of the major patches. It's the infrequency of smaller hotfixes in-between that contribute to the high frustration levels. Waiting weeks for an comparatively easy fix for a bug that prevents you from using a module or playing a campaign for no apparent reasons (=reasons not transparently communicated to the customer) is irritating.

You could reduce the patch size, earn some revenue, dampen the blow of the patch delay and provide me with hours of joy and entertainment - not to mention earning eternal gratitude - literally over night, if you guys would consider doing an independent release of the 3rd party campaigns that have been submitted to you, say, tomorrow afternoon UTC.

Aren't they introducing a completely new launcher? I can very well imagine this to be the culprit for the delay.

No, you have your ice cream. Many others may not. Your playstyle might be unaffected by the lack of an update at the moment, others might be at a point where they are temporarily "grounded" in DCS. For example: I myself am not playing DCS at the moment, due to a lack of content that I haven't already played to death, and when I tried to re-play a campaign (that I played a dozen times already), I get game crashes (the issue has been fixed "internally" for over a month now. The F-4 ATM is back in the virtual hangar due to performance issues. Thankfully, I have a lot more things in life that keep me busy and entertained, so I'm not angry or even overly disappointed. But I can muster enough empathy for those who may be more "dependent" on DCS for their escapism. In other words: I am slightly annoyed at the posters who are annoyed that people are annoyed about the delay, while being annoyed at those posters who are overly dramatic in their expression of their annoyance.

I've made that point in the past, before the introduction of the "6-week-cylce". IMO augmenting "big patches" with more frequent hot fixes, and divorcing content releases from patches and "core" enhancements would be much more customer friendly. It would certainly dampen frustration, and might even somewhat help appease the pitchfork brigade.

But why have new modules and content such as campaigns to be bundled with core updates and bug fixes? Edit: especially campaigns made with the mission editor should have absolutely no impact on DCS's core.

ED should maybe look into re-evaluating their patch policy. Instead of packing everything into one large mega-patch, where one broken item can hold back the whole package, maybe consider splitting patches into smaller, but more frequent, updates, like splitting core updates and fixes from content releases and updates? Easier to manage, quicker to release, and customers won't have to wait for months for a small fix for a highly annoying bug (like the game crashing every time a missile hits a target in the Zone 5 campaign, due to an internally already fixed glitch). At least get me going again now with smaller fixes, and wow me later with the big kahuna patch. For example, I can't see why content such as the "Gamblers" and "MiG Killers" campaigns can not be released now, while the team focuses on those items that need fixing with the core update. Just my 2c.

We might be closer than a couple of years from what I've seen from other gaming genres. I believe there was a mod for Skyrim (already one year ago) where you could have a freeform conversation with an NPC (based on last year's iteration of ChatGPT). From what I recall from the videos I've seen, it worked ok-ish, the downside being that it took a while for the "AI" to parse its database to cobble together a sensible reply. Someone in the HB Phantom subforum posted this link to a Chatbot-based interaction addon. I have not tested this myself yet, but it does sound promising: https://www.wingman-ai.com/

Don't get me wrong, I'm generally in the "teamplayer", err, team myself. I suppose that, with anything that requires cooperation, if a team does gel well and get's coordination right, having additional eyes, ears, and brains (!) with you can and will be a huge force-multiplier. And if crews do not cooperate well, you'd end up ineffective, or worse. It always baffles me when humanity develops technology that is supposed to lighten the workload and save resources but always seem to end up piling on. From task saturation in the Viper to trippling the amount of printed out pages in the "paperless office". From an outsider's perspective, the amount of red tape and ways of decision making in procurement are equally baffling.

So, Mover does have a point when he says he'd rather take the extra gas than a WSO... But seriously, I really would like to have some form of "Jester", for any "multicrew" aircraft at some point, for immersion's sake. Even now, with VAICOM Pro's AIRIO plugin, interacting with Jester 1.0 in the Tomcat is pretty straightforward, as long as the task isn't too exotic. And it can only get better from here. With the rapid development of Chatbot "AI" (which, I agree, it is not), player-to-module interaction has the potential to become much more organic. Which would be nice WRT an upcoming dynamic campaign (something that - at the current DCS development pace - my yet unborn grandchildren might have a blast enjoying, if future generations have the benefit of vastly extended lifespans ) Also, as I'm strictly SP, I'm ok with a more scripted environment, if it helps to suspend disbelief. For example, Reflected's campaigns for the Tomcat - especially "Speed & Angels" - make the RIO much more helpful and fluid (as it's a controlled, highly scripted environment) where the player can get a glimpse how beneficial good crew coordination can be. Hardly any micromanaging at all on the player's part. Not very flexible, but that's moot in a story-driven SP campaign.

I would like that too, but doesn't the Navy use mostly hand signals?

I'd say your "comprehansion" is not "fime". And I am not "salty", I am angry that you deliberately misrepresented what I wrote! I don't care about any "mentions" in this thread, claiming whatever. Those were not written by me. And no, I also have not been following all 92 pages of this. I want the radar of the Strike Eagle to work again, as it clearly has been working before. Who you think is responsible or not is something I really, really don't care about. I want solutions, not speculation. So kindly leave me out of that.

Who "pointed" at anyone?! Are you having trouble with reading comprehension? Who said anything about something being malicious (except you)?! It is a fact that the radar was working fine until June 13th, and stopped working on June 14th. The last patch was from June 5. Whatever happened needs to be fixed. Stop putting words into my mouth, and leave me out of your speculative crusade. I don't care.

The G940 also has such a sensor, and I have it taped over.

At the very least, fix the Radar! It used to work, and it suddenly stopped working, one week after the last patch.