Minhal

Since not every terrain dev team seems to be able or willed to add a kneeboard folder to their product: ED, please provide us the ability to create terrain specific folders in the savedgames/kneeboard folder as it is already possible with aircraft modules. The kneeboard is a core feature and should be usable with every module without workarounds. Core features are EDs domain. Only option right now to have terrain specific kneeboard pages (like approach charts, radio frequency lists and the like) for these terrains is to put them in each and every aircrafts kneeboard folder. This results in a cluttered kneeboard when flying on other terrains. And it is quite some work to maintain when pages need to get updated. This issue is years old, the dev team has been asked for a fix dozens of times in several threads and, without meaning to be rude, with their recent released terrain also missing said folder, this is getting beyond ridiculous now. Hence i am asking ED to finally step in. Thank you very much!

+1 Please add asap. Trying to cage/uncage with mouse (in left hand) is really inconvenient. Would be nice to have as: cage uncage cage/uncage (toggle) Cheers!

True. But it is yet the first thing everybody tells me to use when i complaint about no choks. Hence i checked that mark right off the bat Fun fact that makes it even funnier: vanilla autostop sequence pulls the emergency brake as if it was a handbrake.

Gorgeous map indeed. Bought the P-47 and Normandy two years ago or so but never really flew. This might get me into warbirds finally.

Yeah, just edited my first part while you replied - i misread. I too have "Normandy 2.0" in my modules manager in game while other still have the 1944.

I was really confused by this too. Was wondering why my beta update was 47GB (got Normandy 1944) before 2.0 even was available on the shop. When i went to the store, it said i own a license fo 2.0. First thought was they messed up and i got it for free. Checked my licenses on the DCS page and at the date back when i bought Normandy 1944, it said "Normandy 2.0". When i checked ingame, the Normandy map i had had Paris and London. Already wrote a PN to BN about the "issue" when i realized they gave extra (low detail) stuff to the 1944 owners for free (and deleted the PN). Looks all good and legit after all. Think all this could have been better communicated in the changelog, especially how you get that "you already own this" on the checkout since they used this probably as a workaround for the discount. I checked (old) Normandy before i bought the new one and it had Paris and London. When i bought it, the cities went full detail.

Was wondering about that too and if folks got the map for free... but Normandy 1944 got a big update too. Hence the big update i guess.

Hey mate, just gave it a quick try and i get a this message: Did i miss something or is something broken in the recent release?

In multiplayer i see some servers having mods mandatory (can not join without having it activated) and some with optional mods (can join without but recommended). How is this managed from the mission maker perspective?

Hey @NineLine and @BIGNEWY, just stopping by to ask if you had opportunity to internally look at this. Not seeking to push but, as it is offtopic to the thread title, to not have it drown. If possible, maybe drag the relevant posts to a separate thread. Lots of folks in here agreeing. If you need me to open a new thread myself, please let me know. Thanks! To clarify again: this request is not about the FM. It is about a difference between the real life stick and our regular consumer sticks. A matter of translating real life to consumer hardware. Like we have the "central position" trimming mode in helicopters, because everyone has a self centering stick without a clutch. For the same reason (difference real life vs. consumer hardware), we think we would need an optional stick behaviour (special options), that takes away the center deadzone for us non-force-sensing-stick owners (which is probably 98% of the DCS population).

Ready to go.

That's the one, thanks a lot! It was missing for me despite i just did a fresh install a week ago. I installed the Su-25A as the standalone and the mission was missing but i got an "ISIS strike" mission instead. Thought the Palmyra mission got replaced recently, hence my request if anyone still has it. Your quick reply made me wonder. So i installed the whole FC3 package, which i own too. The mission is present there, but the ISIS one is missing. @BIGNEWY could we have this as a bug report please? Or is it intentional that standalone and FC3 Su-25A come with different missions? For Syria: Su-25A in FC3 has * Su-25 Cold Start * Su-25 Take Off * Su-25 Free Flight * Su-25 Air To Ground (the mission i was asking for in OP) Standalone Su-25A has * ISIS strike Thanks a lot!

Recently realized the old IA mission is gone and got replaced. Think it was over Palmyra. You first had to destroy a stronghold on the hilltop, then attack the convoy on the road. Between the stronghold and the convoy, there was an artillery battery in the valley. Any way to get that mission back? Someone still got it? It was quite fun!

Hm, then something seems to be wrong on my end. Strange thing is: i installed Reshade in the bin-mt folder and it worked flawless with MT. Now it works with ST only despite the Reshade files all still sit in the bin-mt folder. I might just uninstall and reinstall again and see if it helps. Cheers for letting me know!

Does anyone else have issues runnig Reshade in MT? ST works fine. Had no issues before the update.

Just wanted to chime in and say "thanks"! You guys got an impressive list of fixes for the F1 in todays update. Yet you found time to fix the critical TACAN bug in MT shortly. Great to see you keep caring for the C-101. Practicing SID stuff now

That's a nice list Cheers guys!

Wow, i was not aware you did this for Syria too! Somehow went under my radar Will give it a go. Cheers for doing this, i assume it is a heck load of work but definitely a game changer. Speaking "heck load of work": did you ever consider doing this for NTTR? It really is most in need for some make up i am afraid.

Yep, wondering about this too. There is a lot of marketing for Sinai as well as Normandy lately and the maps seem to be quite "ready to drop". At least in a sense it seems not to be several month to go. Did ED ever announce a change in policy and maps just release without a pre-order phase? I would not care but i assume this would be know publicly.

I think it is in position. Check again my F-16 video from first page. At the end i circle my stick within that deadzone and there is zero reaction of the control surfaces. Tried moving fast and slow, there is no difference. As soon as you hit a certain treshold, response kicks in. Once beyond that point, i never had the feeling of sluggishness. This is e.g. when holding a certain amount of G and then pulling some more. This felt well to me with immediate response. Try holding a 5G level turn, then pull 5.1G slowly. If it was filtering small changes, there should be some kind of sluggishness or delay too? I also just tried a level turn and very slowly pulling back up to 5G, then relaxed. Marked the position of the stick before relaxing with my other hand and then went there in one quick motion. About 5G again. Not a scientifically accurate method but an indicator. If it was filtering slow/small inputs, a quick motion should result in higher G pull i think? Just my observations and thoughts, in the end you seem to be the master of chart magic

Interesting to know. I would have thought it makes sense with a FSS at home because you probably unintenionally make little movements. Yet i think it would be cool to let that in the game for everyone who accustomed to this. No need to force onto people who are just fine with how it is right now.

Yep, i have no doubt @NineLine is correct when he says they modeled everything in that aspect to the charts. It is just that it does not translate well to the regular consumer stick. When you own a force sensing stick with a small range of movement, a small deadzone absolutely makes sense. But when you do not own one, this deadzone should be absent since you have that wide range of movement already. You won't go whoop with 6g by just touching the stick. The situation imho is similar to the microswitches on the Mi-24s pedals. You can model it to the real thing in all aspects. But when you do not own the right hardware (here pedals with a microswitch), the aircraft does not behave like it should on the consumer end. This then needs a workaround. For the Hind it were different options to have the microswitch activate automatically. Hence my request to review the stick behavior with its apparent deadzone. From my point of view regarding my request: no changes to the FM needed, just an additional option in the special options for regular consumer sticks that removes the deadzone.

Sounds like a quite solid "go" for tomorrow Subject to change as always!

Something delaying the patch? Must be a hot potato. Now i am even more curious!

In the end it should be up to the server owners to decide which rules are to be followed on their turf. They are usually the ones paying the bills, they are doing all the admin work, keep missions up to date, promote their servers, do community building, and all that jazz. Their house, their rules. (Agreed, if a server is funded by donations, the donators should probably have a say too). This rule setting is already done by asking for a certain behaviour in the briefing and restricting what can be restricted currently via mission design. Minimum graphics settings would just be another layer of options. The great thing about DCS is, that everyone can run a server themselves and set the rules.