plott1964

Nice apocalypse therapy session. You’ve invented a new genre: meta-simulated ennui—DCS isn’t a sim, it’s a bug-hunt simulator. Cute. Reality check: some people indeed love the fiddly joy of installing mods and fixing LUA scripts; others actually enjoy flying and shooting stuff. Both camps exist. Want a polished “DCS 3.x” miracle boxed up with 2025 graphics, flawless AI, perfect carriers, and a worship-free forum? Great wishlist — drop it in Santa’s mailbox next to “unlimited development resources” and “instant QA for all third-party modules.” If you want change that isn’t a rant-shaped prayer: Pick three realistic, measurable improvements and push them with reproducible bug reports and community proposals. Stop asking for “everything” in one release; prioritize. Engage unpaid modders with concrete incentives (docs, tool access, communication channel), not broad insults. And while you’re at it, fix “its” vs “it's”—syntax matters when you want devs to take you seriously. We’re not doomed. We’re just dramatic, and drama doesn’t compile into features.

Yes. of course I'm unaware. Thanks for the input. So, 50% work on DCS core and 50% are split between terrains and modules? ...or am I getting even more confused?

Even a mark on the windscreen would suffice.

My issue with this whole thing is that we in community that support ED really have no way of knowing that our requests are even being considered or implemented until ... they are. ED never says. "We hear you. We will be implementing these features by this date." We only here the dreaded "maybe" and "in the future". This community provides a lot of insight and experience not only to ourselves, but to ED as well and we all do it in support of making DCS better. I would just like to see definitive timelines and a better interaction with us in the community.

Okay. ED may do this already, but I would suggest having sub-teams for R&M (Revision and Maintenance) and others for New Development.

I would pause the new dev and update what you have to adequacy, then turn new dev back on. ED may have over committed with f-35, Iraq, Fulcrum and others.

Yes. That's why I propose a modest fee. For instance, ED could still provide the free (unedited) Caucasus map for entry level users, but then offer an "upgrade" (modernized map) for like $19.99. The other maps could be handled like they did with the F-5E (granted, ED got a little heat for that). Anyway, all of this would be feasible and (mostly) welcomed by the community.

I would say all three could use a serious update: NTTR - could more like Afghanistan Caucasus - could be more like CWG Persian Gulf - could be more like Syria Also, I'm sure most players would also pay a modest fee for such upgrades if they were actually agreed to by ED.

? ... Sorry, I don't understand.

...very brief - LOL. But okay. Do we have any idea of what is being updated and when we will see them?

Has the Razbam situation (which is gone into the ether) affected the South Atlantic map updates?

I am having trouble with Pitch. It doesn't seem to work on my keyboard or stick. I can adjust the pitch with trim, but not with the controller. Did I miss something?

I guess the short answer is: "We are most likely not ever going to see a moving map for the AMPCD for all the terrains in the Hornet."

Great idea! What hawkeye mods are required for this server?

I'm curious (and nosey)... When a bug is reported, how does ED handle them? I would assume the standard process is: Bug Reporting and Documentation Prioritization and Triage Root Cause Analysis Testing and Validation Continuous Improvement and Feedback Loop But, my question is more specifically in reference to processes 2 and 3. How are these processes done? How are bugs prioritized? How much RCA is performed and to what detail?

there is a script out there and helps out a lot: https://github.com/Chromium18/AIEN

Feature F-4U Corsair P-47 Thunderbolt Role Carrier-based fighter Fighter and fighter-bomber Wingspan 40 ft 0 in (12.19 m) 40 ft 0 in (12.19 m) Length 33 ft 4 in (10.16 m) 36 ft 1 in (10.99 m) Top Speed Approximately 446 mph (718 km/h) Approximately 433 mph (697 km/h) Service Ceiling About 40,000 ft (12,192 m) About 40,000 ft (12,192 m) Armament 6 x .50 caliber M2 Browning MGs, bombs, and rockets 8 x .50 caliber M2 Browning MGs, bombs, and rockets Flight Characteristics Excellent speed and maneuverability, especially at low altitudes Ruggedness and ability to absorb damage, effective at high altitudes My thoughts: ED should communicate to Magnitude 3 that the P-47 seems to work just fine and share some code for Pete's sake.

I don't call them "problems". I call them "features".

...share the mission when you do?

Look for "load_immediately = true," in this thread - read, follow, learn.

I believe I fixed it based on the info you provided and by limiting the max FPS to 60. So far so good. Thanks!

It doesn't matter. That just means it's post pre-release LOL ....bugs and all.

@BIGNEWY.... Can you respond to this? Many of us have had to hang up the VR headset. I have read all the forums (very time consuming) very little has improved after utilizing all the advise. Has anyone done anything regarding this specific issue?

Awesome Mr_sukebe! Thanks.