Zimmerdylan

This is one issue that really upsets me. I have waited for YEARS for this to be corrected. I get that barrels warp. But having fired many a .50 cal Browning, and even the 7.62 M60. I know that they over heat and that there is a cool down period. In DCS it stays warped for eternity. It's useless once it goes into that warped stage. I know from experience that this is wrong. Plus...It takes a few seconds in DCS for the barrels to become hopelessly inaccurate. Again....Not true. I have fired many .50 cal Brownings and ED has this completely wrong. Yet for reasons I cannot understand they seem to be uninterested in correcting this issue. Granted the .50 cals I have fired were turret mounted on Tanks and trucks but they were accurate for longer and would correct after a cooling period, Not so in DCS. I would think that an aircraft traveling at 300 MPH would cool those .50 cals pretty quick. But no such luck. This is why I get so frustrated with this sim. It's just one of dozens of issues that DCS seems to not be interested in correcting.

What was getting at is that I have modules that are years old. Not one or two but 5 or 6 years that show no signs that initial promises will ever be kept or bugs fixed. If you think that new modules are going to be brought up to snuff, just keep in mind that modules that are over 5 years old are still waiting for promises that were made. I have long given up on purchasing new modules because ED isn't holding up their end of the bargain on many of the modules I have purchased in the long past. It's about time to start holding them accountable. So.....I'm just moving on.

Yeah...Been trying to stay positive and defend ED but looks like it's time to give up and move on. This is getting ridiculous. Nothing important getting fixed. No promises being kept.

Some of you guys aren't getting it and I fail to understand why. If you want a stable DCS with releases that are complete and tested, you stay with the stable DCS version. You get exactly what you want. You say you re willing to wait for the complete version. That's what stable DCS is. If you agree to, and volunteer to use the BETA version, you knew exactly what you signed on for. You are getting an incomplete version that has not been completely tested. It's what you agreed to. It all makes perfect sense to me. I have BETA and I fly it to see what ED is doing with it's updates. It's not always pretty but it tells me what direction DCS is headed in and gives me an idea of upcoming improvements. I have stable for when I want to just chill and enjoy. It seems that some of you are just happy when you aren't happy.

That would be against forum rules but Flarpt is correct. There are several other modern sims with modern AC. Whether they're as good, not as good, better, or worse than DCS is the subject of opinion. And again....Not to be discussed on the forums. All sims have their ups and downs. Many people go back and forth between them depending on whatever issues are going on with any given sim at the time. We're missing the main issue here. The last update for DCS was BETA. It is there to give you the opportunity to test and see what issues prevail. If you have DCS open beta version, all you can do is offer input and constructive ideas based on your rig and how it all works with what you have. Downing ED based on a BETA program that you agreed to the terms of when you downloaded it is just short sighted. This particular thread isn't the place for discussing whether you agree or disagree with ED's perspectives, business model, or past problems that aren't getting addressed. It's the update discussion thread. So it is frustrating for many who are trying to solve issues in a positive environment.

I know that I have become a pretty harsh critic of ED now a days. But I also give credit where it is due. Thanks for fixing the textures in the cockpit. It really makes a difference. I was really avoiding DCS mostly because of this issue. I don't know for sure but it feels like you guys have done some work on the FM also which seems to feel a bit more "natural" (for lack of a better term) to me. :joystick::D I don't really expect miracles from you guys. Only a fair product for a fair price. Honestly, I couldn't tell you much about software engineering, coding, or any of that kind of stuff. What I do know is that all of us have our craft. I'm positive that you guys at ED would find my line of work just as perplexing as I find yours. I to am in a very technical, and complex line of work. I had to go to college and get a degree just like most of you have had to do. I work for hours and hours on even small projects at times. My customers have made it very clear to me over the years (30 years in this business) that they don't know or care how my product gets made. They just want it done and done correctly. They can be very demanding. At times, painfully so. I get it. All I ask of ED or anyone is to stand on their word. If you say you'll deliver, it is not unreasonable for anyone to expect otherwise. In a timely manner. This is why I have become critical of ED at this point. None the less, this update brought me much relief and has given me reason to come back and enjoy virtual flying again. So thanks so much!!!!

B-E-T-A........Use stable release if you have problems with testing. Problems solved.

LOL....I'm a bit befuttled by all of this. Everyone is about rolling back and complaining about the update. I get that it can be frustrating. I myself am not particularly happy about many things in DCS at this time. BUT!!!! This whole beta thing is pretty self explanatory to me. (Simple as my mind is.) It's a test platform designed to give users the opportunity to help. ED has made this pretty plane. Common sense dictated to me that I have the Beta installed for those stellar updates that just blow me away, and I have the stable version installed for when the beta is pretty much sucking wind. Am I crazy or what? I don't have to roll anything back or complain. I have a stable, running version to revert back to. You guys cannot tell me that because this that or the other wasn't implemented to your satisfaction that you can't just go to the stable version and just wait. That's like the little kid that want's the shiny balloon in the window because the shiny balloon in his hand isn't in the window. You guys praise everything DCS does until you see that shiny balloon that's out of your reach and you won't be happy with what you have until you get that other balloon. Download the perfectly fine balloon that you already have and play with it for a while longer.

Exactly...........But don't hold your breath.

Guys: There are almost always non documented fixes and changes in every patch. Many times there is a lot more in the patch than is listed so just wait till you get it on your computer and check it out before you panic. It will save you a lot of anxiety to remember that this isn't at all uncommon. Even I, as a disenfranchised DCS user understand this.

And it's still wreaking havoc on the NTTR map. Much as I hate to say it, I have pretty much lost faith that much of this will ever get fixed. I've gone from flying DCS 2 or 3 times a week to maybe once a month. I usually get so frustrated with all of the issues that I just give up and get off. My faith in ED is at an all time low. Creating missions is a nightmare because of all of the issues with M.E. Assets pack seems to have been a bad purchase as there is little to nothing to it at this point. And yes I see all of the pretty images of all of the great "stuff to come" in the news letters. It really sucks that the only time I can comment on this simulator that I use to love so much it to report issues or agree with other's complaints. I use to praise E.D. :cry:

I'm creating this thread to kind of elaborate on another thread that was closed. It was the thread about the Mavs locking on to light posts and such. I have the same issue but when they lock on to these things, I can't break the lock. They stay stuck on whatever they lock on to first. I can't break the lock. I have been using the mavs in DCS for years and never had this issue. Not sure if the fatal locking issue is related or not. But it's an issue that I am having.

For me, it was incredibly easy to switch to the right handed stick and HOTAS setup. I do everything left handed so I thought there would be issues. I know that I cannot adapt to the right handed Xbox remote settings. Boy have I tried! But I have the X55 and there was no way I was ever going to pull off using it left handed. The conversion from left to right hand took all of one flight in the P-51 and I was use to it.

Can we please please please please please get this fixed ASAP. It's been a problem for months now and when it occurs, I am certain that there are other issues that accompany it. So please.................

:megalol:

Can't say that I do.............

My problem has never been early access. I have never complained about anything released in early access unless some disaster befell it. My problem (as is I am sure will reverberate with many users here) is that after years of waiting on fixes, and promised never kept on several modules, I just gave up on caring. Many people here have been supporting ED for over a decade and have watched module after module come out partially incomplete with promises of greatness. So we sat and waited. We watched other modules get released that were much more complex than previous modules while simple fixes and promises are forgotten on many of the "completed" modules. It is possible that many of these people are on some level reflecting their previous experiences with ED when they panic or complain. I just stopped bothering. Mind you I stopped buying also. I completely understand the angst of the people complaining. And while I gave up on trying to get the fixes and promises, it is no less frustrating watching the trend continue. I have not purchased a module since before the Yak. I'm not angry. Frustrated maybe but not angry. Nor am I trying to punish ED. The bottom line is that if you aren't happy with a product, you just don't buy it any more. I think that many here have reached that threshold. People complaining is bothersome and comes off as whining, but many here have been all through this time and time again with module after module. I get it. :thumbup:

It's the countless little details like this that prevent me from purchasing anything new from DCS. If they would just fix these simple problems, I'd be a spending fool. It baffles and aggravates me no end. I love the F86 but the gun issues really kill it for me. Between the terrible warpage after only a few rounds and the slow speed of the rounds, it's just not really very fun. I remember saying something about the guns very early in the F86's release, and it's still an issue. I don't fly the F86 because of this. There are several modules that I just keep grounded for these kinds of reasons.

I have to absolutely second this statement. I have personally seen what a 30mm round from an A10 does to a T55. And while I remember that the penetration (make no mistake, it was complete and devastating penetration) was mostly in the turret I did see where rounds penetrated through other areas of the tank. I remember distinctly thinking to myself how insanely powerful those rounds must be. And that I would never want to be in that tank while an A10 was attacking. My experiences are from the early 1980's but I know what I saw. Plus, I had the great pleasure to get to know one of the A10 flight instructors from Davis Monthan AFB some years ago. He told me that an A10 could absolutely disable many of the cold war era soviet tanks with the cannon. And that it was not uncommon. He told me that you had to get in pretty close to do any real effective damage but it was not that uncommon. He told me a story of some Iraqi tankers that surrendered immediately following an attack from an A10 using it's cannon. They said that they though that a demon of hell fire was coming after them (paraphrasing) when the rounds were hitting the tank. The only reason that they survived the attack was that the pilot of the A10 was shooting from over 2 miles away because he was unable to get any closer due to other threats, and the cannon was all he had left at the time. So I can look at all of the statistics from people who have never seen an A10 in action, or never seen the aftermath of what it can do. I am not saying that the 30mm in an A10 is the end all of weapons. I'm saying that I know what I have seen with my own 2 eyes. And I know that my source for my information is very real and dependable. My experience doesn't seem to match up with what many here are claiming. I do believe that the DM in DCS is fundementally flawed. It always has been. At times, I can't kill a gaggle of ground troops with the cannon while my pipper is right on them. But That's an issue in all computer based games and sims. I do believe that it's a very low priority in DCS so it's something that we all have to live with.

++++++++1,000,000

Wow....If this thread does not become the most responded to thread in ED history, I'll go into shock. I will post my response later when I have had time to write what will probably be a 30 page opinion. The big word here though is "opinion". I do not run E.D. so my opinion really means nothing.

You did not understand the answer. There are many different servers for DCS that are owned by many different people. Get it? I wrote that it was a general answer and that you would have to talk to a server owner about what they specifically use. DCS in and of itself doesn't run most of the servers so they have their own command sets. You will be hard pressed to get what you are looking for unless you personally know someone who owns or runs a server.

I have adminned several gaming servers so I'll try and answer in a general sense. An admin has a list of key commands that they must use, plus the the action (ban) and name of the person they are banning.When an admin bans you, they have the option of typing in a reason for the ban, or they can select a reason from a pre typed list set by the person running the server or whatever. Each admin signs into the server with admin privileges to do this. You cannot just type in the command and voila, someone is banned. You have to have admin privileges that are given (usually) through the owner of the server. The commands are different from server to server, game to game. So what would the command for any given DCS server be? You would have to ask a DCS server admin. It wouldn't do you any good without admin privileges so it's not relevant really. The ban list is recorded according to what the admin typed in. You can ban for just a few minutes or permaban someone. The server records your ID and when you try to log on, it obeys the parameters set by the admin for your ID. It's all stored in the server so far as I know. Not on anyone's computer as a file. And the only people who have access to the information are admin with the privileges. You cannot un-ban yourself. Only an admin may un-ban you. Usually you have to go to the forum section of the web site of the clan or group that banned you, explain why you were an ass, and ask nicely for a second chance. DCS servers are much like all other gaming servers and they work pretty much the same. It's a simple generic system.

Actually, you have a point there. The tank isn't even moving under what would be a tremendous impact stress. And the supposed impact points show no damage whatsoever after impact. That's actually pretty funny. But.....I have seen an A10 attack a T-55 (on a range mind you). I have seen the aftermath. It was 30 plus years ago but I remember what it looks like. It's pretty intense and the tanks were certainly completely ripped apart where they were hit. I'm not saying it's fact, but I know what I saw. That being said......... Read the following. It kind of validates ED and what I saw at the same time. What I conclude from this report is that there is no way ED would or should accommodate this level of damage detail. So I'm probably not going to worry about it. The report is a great demonstration of both the power and the limitations of the GAU 8. My apologies to ED for my remark earlier. :smilewink: https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a522446.pdf