Jump to content

Citizen

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    171

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Citizen

  1. Citizen
    ED says the agreement hasn't been implemented. There should be no expectation of confidentiality on a agreement that hasn't been implemented.
  2. Citizen
    It's reasonable to doubt the validity of that. If they're legally not able to discuss, why were they able to claim RB violated IP? If they're muzzled, why were they able to say they've signed an agreement? If the agreement hasn't been implemented as they claim on discord, why can't they discuss it? That cherrypicking more than anything else has soured my viewpoint of ED, and they've been doing it since the start.
  3. Citizen
    If there's no escrow, there's no good faith behind the agreement.
  4. Citizen
    This is the first time I've seen verbiage indicating that a settlement has been signed. If you've seen it before, feel free to let me know where to find it. The rest, yeah, heard a lot of that and in this case it may be a misunderstanding of how long it takes to action a settlement. As far as if the settlement is a good thing, that remains to be seen.
  5. Citizen
    re: Link Here you go: https://discord.com/channels/536389125276827660/544231925263630336/1389338291794481184 I suspect it has something to do with the 'staff' being independent contractors with their own DMCA stuff, but don't know for sure.
  6. Citizen
    RB staff indicated that they "all signed a settlement" on their discord. [edit] I guess it's former RB staff, which may explain why multiple signatures would be required. Dunno.
  7. Citizen
    I believe a settlement has been signed.
  8. Citizen
    This is interesting context. If RAZBAM and ED are waiting with each other, that indicates that there is another party they are waiting on.
  9. Citizen
    Out of range for late feb/early march 2016 AM hours
  10. Citizen
    nullNot being able to model Mavericks due to a lack of documentation has been a common theme for over a decade.
  11. Citizen
    The entire platform of DCS live and dies on trust. Trust that EA products will be delivered, Trust that authenticity will be maintained. When a weapon, system, or item is removed as an early access deliverable, we could trust that while it was not great to see a feature we paid for be sidelined, at least it was in service to authenticity. We just spent months being told that the F-5 couldn't possibly have access to the AGM-65 because of a lack of documentation, despite clear indicators that the F-5 refresh would be a much more moving value proposition if ED would make a best guess on how the radar screen can be switched to MAV. But it made sense, DCS is a platform we trust not to make things up. The F-35 violates that trust both ways. I can't trust you will maintain the same authenticity that says the F-5 simply cannot have AGM-65s, which is fine except you'll continue to enforce that same requirement when you do not wish to do the work, even if we've purchased a module that advertised that feature on a store page.
  12. Citizen
    I agree. As I said, the primary driver of EDs decision-making doesn't appear to be classification or documentation, but rather on if the product has been sold already or not. If you already have our money, then the requirements appear much tighter than if early access hasn't been opened yet.
  13. Citizen
    It's been 5 years.
  14. Citizen
    If DCS isn't that accurate, then the documentation requirement of items like towed decoys is moot. Yet we've been told for years that those early access features were held up by the need to be super accurate. It seems like that's not the case and the element that determines which is at play is if ED wants to do the work or not.
  15. Citizen
    Will the ADFX-01 Morgan have the Multi-Purpose Burst Missile and Tactical Laser System at launch or can we expect that later in early access?
  16. Citizen
    This makes a mockery of every time anyone was told a system was impossible to produce in DCS because there wasn't enough documentation.
  17. Citizen
    He's a contractor that has done a bunch of flight models.
  18. Citizen
    Welp.
  19. Citizen
    They served into the 2000s. A lot of our modules work for early 2000s as well. I think they work fine with real world fits.
  20. Citizen
    United States Navy: "We are a professional organization dedicated to completing the mission in an efficient and effective manner." Also USN: "lol lets see what else we can put on the sprues"
  21. Citizen
    It wouldn't surprise me if there's not a whole lot of info since I bet USN wanted to keep the amounts and locations of TLAM-Ns a secret. How reliable is this? I have no idea, but the 1986 load is interesting since that's a lot of throw weight for the USN that is not represented in DCS. https://influenceofhistory.blogspot.com/2019/04/missile-loadouts-spruance-class.html
  22. Citizen
    I wonder if the Spruance carried a bunch of TASM. That'd be a nasty surprise to a Soviet battlegroup.
  23. Citizen
    As far as opinions go, I think Mizzy is right that RB isn't coming back to ED. If NG told me he wanted to destroy my company, I probably wouldn't make big plans for coming back to ED either.
  24. Citizen
    Again, I'm not finding it. I'm no slouch at google-fu, and I'm not finding anything on discord either. To put it bluntly, I think something was misinterpreted or worse.
  25. Citizen
    because he said the messages and emails had been posted elsewhere.
×
×
  • Create New...