Creampie

I also do not think its a Syria specific issue (now) I heard it happening on PG as well. I will try to gather up a track when I get home, Zero mods.

No win!

???

It's not up to ED for unofficial mods to work. It is up to the mod creator for them to work on new builds & keep them updated. It is up to the server owner to decide what mods are best for their server & which are most likely to break when a new build is released. I am not sure what point you are trying to make here, but the point seems pretty misunderstood. All I am trying to say is mod support that could be extremely beneficial to not only ED, but its community, it's non-existent here. Again... Obviously every mod can't be accepted for use by ED as it could have implications on people actually buying modules.

Full GC alignment & turn on HNS.

Again... A perfect example is the currenthill stuff.... something people want to use and would add a lot of options for SP & MP with no real hassle. Most games who allow mod support in fact make their games better, Because like ED they need that help. Modding communities for the above games have not only excelled those games & kept their head above water they when an update to the build comes, they adjust accordingly. You join a server, it shows you the list of mods the server uses, If you don't want them to install, you don't join the server. But instead, we live in the stone age, Each individual player has to manually find and install the mods themselves rather than giving the option for it to be automatic, under user discretion. Say for example if one of the bigger MP servers wanted to use 1 asset from currenthill or any mod creator for that matter, each player has to install them, hope they did it correctly, Closing the door for it even being an option for servers trying to have a MP base. It's really not some miracle work for fixing the game but it will certainly open a lot of doors for it & it's really not even asking a lot or putting people at any sort of risk. Very few servers use unofficial mods, because it in its current state is extremely bad.

To join any multiplayer server with mods you 100% download them when you go to join the server, in every other game. This is not an abnormal thing for most games with mod support.

No, you understood it correctly. Just like every other sandbox out there, DayZ, Arma etc

SP & MP both are just like many other comments stated seemingly left without polishing. I think one of the biggest drawbacks to both are server sided mod support. Just like every other game in the world, you join a server that has mods, the mods install. With the absolute lack of eastern aircraft in a FF manner some of these mods help fill a gap that seems to never talked about.. Now I know that if every server could add every single mod it would essentially hurt cash flow. But the light for future red aircraft is extremely dim. I know there are incredible complications and a rigorous checklists in order for a module to be made or considered, there has to be something other than the JF-17 (that ED seems to want to neuter) that can be implemented. Not to mention being able to implement things that the legendary @currenthill has made for this community without being a massive struggle for a MP server made for more than just a group of friends. The seemingly never going to happen aside; I think there are a ton of QOL updates the community is just itching for with no actual road map ahead.

It's only occasionally & I have only noticed it at airfields. Most of the major ones, Hatay, Bassel, Rene, Tiyas etc

nullnullnullSyria causing these graphical errors... These photos are from 3 separate people including myself. Have saw multiple complaints of it, Initially thought it was a metashader/FX delete... Did so, Problem persists. Doesn't seem to be an issue outside of Syria.

It's almost like you thought for a second that you did something useful. While I can understand that if everyone had the same monitor or played on the same res this would in fact be relevant The fact that the difference in 4K, 1440 & 1080 have a very significant difference is a pretty big and widely accepted & acknowledged by community & devs issue Until that is somehow made consistent across the board of resolutions (scaling) this topic unfortunately does not change for the better.

It's had years of supporting data in the form of videos and screenshots. WT had/has this issue for as long as I can remember as well, Play low res/graphics for some sort of tactical advantage, low res incentivized with low graphics blah blah. There is an incredibly unrealistic expectation of being able to see a 10x10 (exaggerating ofc) 20nm away. But having flown like many many others within DCS. There is no comparison to RL like the ignorant statement above claims.

No need for a detailed report. It's bad the company knows its bad, the community knows its bad and continues to try and make support for it yet you can't seem to understand that. You want detailed reports like you're relevant to the matter or while having no real constructive thing to say

The spotting is incredibly bad in this game. i think its more so bad in the sense of a competitive state, You have to be playing in 1080p. If not, you get weird rendering of "dots" both in VR & flat, disappearing/appearing while zooming in/out. I've been in the sky many many times & they most certainly do not provide a better visual than RL, Unless you have poor vision. Scaling is incredibly important for anyone wanting to play above 1080p only because there doesn't seem to be any other viable solution.

I think there is a configs file in saved games... idk When I did a fresh install I just saved them all individually and properly labeled them. Made for a no confusion rebind.

The variant of the frankly put Frankenstein F/A-18C in DCS is roughly 2004-06... There is no "parity" The variant of the flanker that would most likely be allowed to be in DCS as a FF module is the MKK, It is not classified. At this point the community of red enjoyers would be happy with a FF27, But for some reason yet another plane that isn't classified doesn't get put into DCS as a FF module. While grateful for the FF29 coming, The worst possible solution of doing something other than blue was picked.

Launching the AK in the sense of using it for an ASM finds & tracks the ships fine. Its using it the same as a an AKG, Without the TV guidance. Just using coordinates, Sea or air. It should be able to be used as such as they are a AKG supplement. No guidance, No ship no IR seeker, just aiming it at coordinates, they should land perfectly with them & not go passed them like they do. None of the modes work to achieve this as they should. GB6 Only sometimes has issues, LS6 I've never had an issue with. Just AK & AKG. Both should be able to be used as the just cruise missiles, for any target.

That's an absolute fair point. But you're talking about a missile with the confirmed kill of a balloon. Where as for example, The AIM7, depending on the variant have a confirmed hit rate of anywhere between 9%-66?% depending on the variant. Something that is long documented confirmed and public information. I bring this up only as reference to a missile that is being replaced and isn't exactly a contender is must keep secrets. Another example of this exact issue is the SD-10/120C fiasco. We just do not know and can only speculate and the same goes for ED. I get the point you are trying to make, At times the 9X seems a little underperforming. But that's just the RNG roll we get, Is this missile going to hit this after burning & countermeasure dispensing flanker or not? It's just dice rolling on every heater in the game. I've personally had perfect parameters of a 9X & R73 miss jets in burner.

Not to be confused with the CM802-AKG I remember some time ago, Where an “issue” had been patched with the AK making it not be able to lock onto ground targets. While this is in fact a ASM, It also is a provided supplement of the CM802-AKG. – The TV Aspect. The 802AK is meant to be able to be guided to GPS coordinates as well using its seeker to find a ship & currently does not. If it doesn’t find a target near the entered coordinates, it just shoots passed. I have replicated using the 802AK for specific coordinates before & cannot remember how I achieved it (post patch of the previously mentioned “issue”) Its bad enough the AKG/GB6 have enough issues, Now to just add the AK to this list is a little disappointing No issues with the LS6s, GBUs, SD10s, LD10s they all work as intended. Is this going to also be left in the GB6/AKG bucket & just not fixed? Or am I missing something?

No matter which way you want to put it, No one actually knows the capabilities of the AIM9x, R-73. Everything related to that in the sim has to be done based on speculation. The information that any developer releases on their missiles needs to be taken with a grain of salt, Some boast about them, other release diluted results for national security reasons. Truth is, we do not & will not know.

As far as the accuracy of any weapon system goes with the JF, A full GC alignment must be done and ensure HNS+GPS is enabled. Otherwise they will never be directly on target.