Jump to content

JuiceIsLoose

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    119

  • Joined

  • Last visited

 Content Type 

Everything posted by JuiceIsLoose

  1. JuiceIsLoose
    Clock sync was not solved prior to the Situation. Your only hope for this to get fixed is for ED to pay Razbam.
  2. JuiceIsLoose
    I have done Durandal drops many many times. You have to drop them low, like 200ft AGL and be level and non maneuvering as you release. If you drop them any higher they won't hit because of the chute and wind drifting them off course, then once that rocket fires it will exaggerate any drift (either from wind or from how you approached the runway). The chute makes them retarded, so you want to drop them low, just like you would any other retarded dumb bomb. I would try dropping them at 200-300ft AGL and report back. If you are trying to drop them from anywhere other than low level, then I would say that is not how the ordinance is intended to be used and would not expect them to function as intended. In your different drops what altitudes were you releasing at? Have you tried any at 200ft AGL and level flight? Durandals were designed to be dropped very low level. And the AAA you are discussing is a prime reason they are not used anymore, because in order to use them you must get VERY close to the ground (and AAA) and you basically fly along the runway heading +/- 10 degrees, so you are a big open target. The runway of an airbase is not even the best target for realism. Ideally you would take out hangers, housing, fuel stores, ammo stores. Runways can be repaired relatively easily, even with the concept for the durandal. But if there is nothing to fuel the planes, load on the planes, or even fly the planes, an operating runway is all but useless. Look into the RAF Tornados shot down in the Gulf War, this is a prime example of why trying to go low level over an actively defended airfield isn't the best. I often thought of using Durandals for runway destruction to shut out an airfield. But after discussions with others I have found there are much better tactics. Such as destroying the surronding infrastructure, which can be done with a Low Altitude Pop to Dive Toss delivery with slick MK-82/84s. Or if you really want to destroy the runway, come in with a 4 ship dropping LGB and lase precise intersections of runways/taxi ways.
  3. JuiceIsLoose
    How are you trying to release them? You are using them in Auto? Normally the best way to use them is to use them in CDIP and change the BOT (BOMB ON TARGET) on the PACS program to 1 (it defaults to center). When BOT is 1 this means that the pipper (when using CDIP) will cause the bombs to release in a string such that the 1st bomb will hit the pipper. Thus you should fly to have the pipper be at the front of the runway and pickle (hold pickle) until all bombs come off the jet. The same could be done in AUTO with having a designation at the front of the runway. If you have a designation at the front of the runway and don't change your BOT in your pacs and it is left to the default CENTER then half of your bombs will go short of that designation point and the other half of your bombs will go long of it. Also another tip is to "cut" the runway at an angle and to not go directly straight down the runway. The bombs have shoot that dispenses as you mention and the wind can affect the trajectory due to the wind causing them to blow off to side and miss. So cutting the runway at an angle will help to ensure bombs will hit the runway regardless of the direction of the wind. Edit: Durandals are dumb bombs with a chute and a rocket, and because you release them so low and want to release them right at the runway typically doing this 200-300ft AGL and in CDIP is the best way I have found to get good hits. You can also leave the PACS in auto and transition to CDIP by taking control of the HUD and then pressing Auto Acq Aft, this will toggle you into CDIP mode from Auto. Pressing Auto Acq Aft again (with the HUD in command) will then bring you back to AUTO mode.
  4. JuiceIsLoose
    The M-2000C is on sale on steam. Does this mean there was some sort of agreement between ED and RB?
  5. JuiceIsLoose
    So honest question, and maybe it’s just the way the sentence is formatted, but that sentence makes it sound like ED is very health aside from this dispute currently. Does that mean, if we include this dispute of money that ED is not healthy financially? Or Is it just a weird formatting or phrasing thing?
  6. JuiceIsLoose
    So then if being out of Early Access is Feature Complete, then we can expect not further updates to the F/A-18? If what you are stating is that a module being out of Early Access means it is "feature complete". Then that means there are no new features planned for the F/A-18 which has been moved out from Early Access. I think we both know that is false. And that there are future features planned for the F/A-18. And thus, this would then be true for the other Razbam modules that are our of Early Access. So claiming that they "it's finished and no further feature updates will be forthcoming only fixes, agree with it or not, that's the situation." would not be correct would it? If we are going to discipline users for spreading "misinformation" then lets keep it fair.
  7. JuiceIsLoose
    Again, I am asking where does it say anywhere that is feature complete? Please point to me where this statement is true, that there are no planned missing features to the RB modules (excluding the F-15E).
  8. JuiceIsLoose
    MIzzy has brought this up numerous times. I do not see any comments from you about not discussing this because it is off topic? There are comments from Mizzy in this thread: "The other guy comes up with rumour exclusively and tries to pass it on as factual evidence (lol) and his arguments are worth as much as a piece of paper thrown down the toilet." I bring up statements from other sources, and have never claimed them as facts or evidence. Yet, when MIzzy makes comment there is no backlash about this being offtopic? However, when I ask simple for the source of her statement it is off topic?
  9. JuiceIsLoose
    Can you please share your source, or evidence as you like to call it, that these other modules (excluding the F-15E) are feature complete by Razbam? Because you are not allowing anything but official announcements, please provide an official source (not discord, and not reddit, because you refuse to allow those sources) where it has been stated where they are finished and no further updates were planned. You have stated this numerous times and I would like your source for this.
  10. JuiceIsLoose
    Well ED has had plenty of time to talk with lawyers or Nick about how to explain this complex topic to community. About why they feel a third party doesn’t deserve payment for a product they created. Or what plan ED had after legal resolution. You say you want things to return to normal. While not paying a developer and taking legal action. And you just expect the situation to return to normal after all this? Theres no way ED expects anything to return to normal after taking legal action. At the very least ED could be honest about their intentions for how they want this resolved.
  11. JuiceIsLoose
    I too would hope we would be on the same side. And I too want it to be over. And to be clear, the side I am on is that developers get paid for their work. I wish we could agree on this.
  12. JuiceIsLoose
    Well then looking facts from the official statements: RB wasn’t paid by ED for the sale of the F-15E. ED, yourself actually, has confirmed that ED withheld and is withholding payment. ED claims they aren’t paying because of an IP issue. So then ED knew about the IP issue while releasing the F-15E and knew they weren’t going to pay RB? How did ED not think this was gonna blow up? ED seriously thought that RB would just roll over? Or did the IP issue happen after the release of the F-15E? If so, then why was RB not paid before the IP issue? Not using any outside information, just what’s in official announcements. How do either of those situations seem fair? I don’t want ED to fail or anything like that. I just think developers of modules should be rewarded for the tireless hours they put into creating a wonderful sim. Third party developers included.
  13. JuiceIsLoose
    This comes across as if ED is trying to mend things and users are bringing up issues to further divide. Not sure, if that is your intent. But if ED really was trying to mend things, a good place to start would be by paying the developers for the module that ED sold and continues to sell. When people ask why modules cost so much you and Bignewy state it’s because the developers should be compensated for all of their efforts, a sentiment I think we all share. Where is that concern and support now for third party companies? If there was harm to ED please show us where. Because all the users can see is a third party not receive revenue from a product they created through years of development. Years of development and now they watch their module sold and receive nothing from it. How does that seem right? Seriously, people are upset about the way ED management is treating a third party, and yet we are censored and told to just be quiet and wait. How does that come across as mending things?
  14. JuiceIsLoose
    Just because something comes from Reddit doesn't mean it is 100% false and untrue.... The reason the stuff posted on Reddit gets referenced is because it would be censored and deleted off of here immediately.
  15. JuiceIsLoose
    Then how would it not then be plausible for ED to do this, not saying they are, if what they owed RB was greater than what they anticipated the legal costs to be? You say you are a lawyer, so I can understand you may have an idea on what supposed legal costs may be, but you have no way of knowing what ED owes RB, correct? So then you have no way of knowing which cost would be higher.
  16. JuiceIsLoose
    So then you are saying that never in history, has a company with deeper pockets pushed another company into legal proceedings because they knew the smaller company couldn't afford it?
  17. JuiceIsLoose
    I get the hesitation in not just blatantly believing everything that is being posted out there in non "official statements". But simply just ignoring everything doesn't seem open minded either. ED management has had to have seen this stuff, most of it gets linked here anyways. And ED hasn't refuted any of this stuff. Yea, they don't have to. But wouldn't you think they would refute this stuff if they were on the moral high ground? I don't think these leaks necessarily are "evidence" that RB did no wrong and that ED management is pure evil. But I do think it paints the picture that maybe ED management isn't and wasn't acting in good faith. This all depends on how much the ED owes RB... ED cut off a good portion of RB's revenue by not paying them, and not paying them for months. If ED has enough to cover the legal costs of stonewalling a broke RB, and that cost is less than ED owes RB then its not totally upsurd.
  18. JuiceIsLoose
    Do we know for a fact that ED had no idea that RB was going to go public? Sure, RB may have not made a joint statement with ED. But we don't know for sure that ED was unaware there was going to be a public statement at all. Again, going to say reference other materials that are not official statements (queue everyones eye rolls), but it has been brought up that ED reached out to other Third Parties to not make an additional statement with RB. So that would mean ED knew something was coming. So IF that is true (note the IF) then its not like ED was caught completely off guard. Just saying, we don't know for a fact that ED was completely blindsided by a possible public statement.
  19. JuiceIsLoose
    So then you think the better solution would have been for RB to be silent and just stop? We would be at no updates for like 6-7 months with zero communication as to why? That’s what would have happened if RB said nothing. How does that make this situation better? Better for ED sure, because no bad publicity. And do you think RB would blow the whistle on the whole thing if it wasn’t their last resort? It wasn’t like there check was a week late in the mail. They didn’t get the sales for the jet that had been selling for months at that time. They had to know this would be a huge blow up, but if ED wasn’t working with them what are they supposed to do? I imagine the only other option was to just silent sue ED. But if that happened, that’s the more nuclear option. It seemed they wanted a resolution without involving courts (which is also what ED said they wanted in their first statement).
  20. JuiceIsLoose
    Deleted comment to avoid addition disagreements
  21. JuiceIsLoose
    You ask me to provide additional information to support what I am saying. I say that I can. Then I simply ask you for the same, and that makes me childish?
  22. JuiceIsLoose
    What we don't have is an official announcement that ED is making legal claims of IP infringement. What we do have is an official announcement from ED claiming that RB violated IP and that they "are seeking a reasonable and forward-looking commercial outcome rather than entertaining legal claims". If you are only going by official announcements, there is nothing in ED's official announcement stating they are taking legal action against RB for IP infringement. If you are so set on only using official announcements, please show me where ED has stated they are making a legal claim of IP infringement. So how do we even know ED is pursuing legal claims specifically for IP infringement. Also, you are stating that a reasonable lawyer would advise them to withdraw their claim if it was baseless. But there are plenty of frivolous lawsuits that happen, how do we know this isn't one of them?
  23. JuiceIsLoose
    There is lots of stuff out there in other discord and subreddits. Won't go into much more because the CM's don't like it. I can DM you if you would like. Also I could ask you the same question. There is nothing supporting their claim of IP infringement, unless you know something else no one else does? Do you have inside information?
  24. JuiceIsLoose
    That depends on whether their IP claim has any validity....
  25. JuiceIsLoose
    Because you have stated many times that people are spewing half truths and conspiracy theories here, let’s be clear here. ED CAN choose to say more. They are CHOOSING to not say anything, as you say, to win the case. Hope the court outcome ED is looking for far outweighs the damage done to your own public opinion. No one has seen any evidence of how this claimed IP infringement has damaged DCS. The only thing I see damaging DCS is their own CHOICE to not pay third party developers (and we both know this isn’t the first time) and now it’s finally become public.
×
×
  • Create New...