OmasRachE

Thank you guys. Good to see that something is in the making. All I know is that when we have a human ATC which knows what he is doing even the most boring practice sessions feel so much better and also more challenging due to the fact that you have to spend more attention on the communication while following your task and flying the plane. So if there would be an affordable fee to pay for our MP Servers, I´m pretty sure we would spend some money for this.

Cool I did not notice that. Do you have any sources for me? Would be really interested in how they plan to implement this. A little update from NineLine or BIGNEWIE would be appreceated too.

In my opinion there is one thing, that would really enhance the whole DCS experience by far. An AI ATC that replaces the Voices of ATC Controllers like AWACS, Tanker, Tower etc with AI generated random human like voices. This combined with a responsive system that captures the players voice and interpretes his calls in commands like "request bogey dope", "request landing" or "ready precontact" would just change the immersion dramaticly. Imagine you could actually speak to the ATC controllers and get a seemingly human reaction. There are programms like voice attack or even things like beyond ATC which show, that it is possible. I would be willing to buy it as a module or even consider paying for some kind of season pass to get this feature if neccesary. So ED, are you planning to do something like this or have even discussed it? Is there anybody else who would love such an ATC improvement?

Hey Baltic, first I have to tell you how much I injoy your campaign. I came as a fan of Reflecteds stunning campaigns and am playing both Arctic Thunders as suggested in the timeline sheet. I will defenetly try your other campaigns. It´s just an awsome and immersive experience and I am realy thankfull to you guys for giving me a good time. One thing I´d like to ask is, if there is anything I´m missing with the parking spots at the end of each mission. In some missions, the music with the Arctic Thunder banner appeared on the spot when I enterend the parking area at the end of the "taxiway" road. But in other missions I had to drive around and search for the right spot to get the mission complete. yesterday evening when I finished mission 7, which is awesome by the way, my lead turned around at the end of the runway and taxied the whole way back to the parking area at the southern end of the runway, so I followed him. But no matter how I tried, there was no trigger zone for mission success. I then drove back the whole way to the other parking area and even had to look it up there until finally I found it. Is there any way to identify the trigger zone which I am missing? Or could you expand the trigger zones, so that the mission success appears without taxiing arround like sniffing dog? Thanks.

I tried immortality mode but was not satisfyed after the end of the mission. I tried it without later and when I finally survived it felt much more satisfying. I think it was M04 or so. Its allways dissapointing when you get shot 1 hour or even more in the mission. Especially the Debten Eagles missions were you fly to france for hours just to hit you with the blast of your own bomb were quite challanging for my mind, but its still the only way I can enjoy it.

Yeah, thats kind of the point. Honestly its rediculous that you need tons of additional software to make DCS run smoothly. SRS, openkneeboard, viacom, tacview, voice attack, you name it. I feel like it should be EDs interest to implement such thinks in their core system. We will see if they take it on the wishlist.

Yes, it ist not necessary but it would be nice. Openkneeboard is a quite annoying tool. You have to bind several new keys as long as you want to be able to use the ingame version as well. You must adjust the position in VR what can be quite a challange for some time and in the end, it is another programm you have to install. I don´t know how hard it is for ED to improve this little thing to their own kneebord, so I can´t tell if it is worth it. But I wanted to try.

I´m very aware of the fact, that there are some external tools to work around that. And in multiplayer settings, this works great. But my attempt is aiming at single player campaigns. In the Arctic Thunder campaign of Baltic Dragon for example there are severel occasions where you get coordinates from an Awacs or Jtac but the message is displayed only for a very short period, so its nearly impossible to get them into your UFC. Relfected did solve this with a picture of a hand written notice which lasts longer, but that somehow breaks the immersion too and according to Baltics post in his campaign subforum he yould well appreciate the ability to display those information in another form. And I personally think that a kneebord is the right place to do. So in a single player campaign, where the information is static I see no need for the player to whrite down it by himself at the cost of immersion by using the mouse or something like that. Instead the campaign creator could place a trigger based kneeboard card with the information just recieved from the give controller.

I could imagine to by an AC 130 as well as a B52 Bomber. But I also would consider to by a tanker. Playing the Boom Operator would be cool, I think.

Since in VR it is hard to make kneeboard notes for yourself, like writing down coordinates, or ninelines it would be great if campaign creators had the ability to ad kneeboard pages within a mission, or manipulate the content of a kneeboard page in flight. So they could simulate the player noting coordinates or something like that. This would solve issues with the duration of the displayed subtitles of radio calls and prevent the player from breaking immersion by looking it up in the message history of the menue.

Even with max resolution of my Quest 3 I can´t see all weapons. It woul´d be great if there was a slidebar.

I think you are missunderstanding this. Razbam did not leave DCS yet. And even if they will cut all lines in the future they can claim a reason for this, namely not beeing payd for their sales. So the question if Razbam is forced to give out the code by contract could well be part of the litigation and therefore ED should better not claim that they will have access to it in the future.

In that regard, I would have actually expected something like this to be contractually regulated from the outset. Something along the lines of a clause obligating the developer to hand over the source code to ED in the event that the developer ceases operations or discontinues support for future versions.

So yesterday evening I played baltics version of this one. And I have two questions. First I noticed that in Your version I fly as element lead and get ordered to go to trail formation before we reach the ao and split up. Know sitting in the hornet i had a nice view on the weasel 7 flight but noticed W73 and W74 leading the pack by severel miles. I´m wondering if this is due to the DCS AI mechanics and maybe happens randomly or is it a lack of coordination between you and baltic? Even if it is, no blame for that, this is totally unimportant at all, but still I noticed it. Second I don´t know if I only was to busy and missed something, but I had the feeling there were quite a few radio calls between Weasel 7 and Awacs in your Mission, which I didn´t hear in the hornet? Could that be or did I just not notice. I missed at least the whole SA8 announcement. And I could be wrong but the message in which awacs tells all players that the SA 10 had come alive two times in the last hour or so sounded like it was another speaker. Or is my brain trolling me? And the mission felt shorter, even considering that is is shorter couse you don´t need to plug the tanker.

I don’t see the point in demanding information about the future of the modules, it’s something ED simply can’t predict with any certainty. There are just too many variables. The only possible outcomes from such demands are either false promises or unnecessary panic over hypothetical worst-case scenarios that likely won’t happen. ED will respond once they have legal clarity regarding Razbam. Until then, there are countless possible outcomes, ranging from a happy resolution to a total collapse of the modules, or anything in between. Personally, I will demand a solution the moment I can’t use my Strike Eagle anymore. And who knows, maybe the first step will simply be a hotfix. I think everyone involved understands that the community wants this dispute resolved and is eager for long awaited updates. But I don’t see how harassing either ED or Razbam helps bring about a solution. The rest is up to you. You can stop buying modules, stop playing DCS altogether, or simply enjoy what we currently have. In my opinion, DCS remains the most visually stunning and immersive combat flight simulator available. I’m still having a great time flying it, despite the flaws with AI, ATC, and the lack of a true dynamic campaign. And just to put things in perspective, the total amount I’ve invested in DCS far exceeds the cost of all Razbam modules combined.

In my campaign run I got struck by those smokey sams several times and normal evasive maneuvers didn´t work for me too. The solution I found was to fly level with high speed and then suddenly pull the stick as hard as I can while flaring, just half a second or so before impact. This worked only if I flew low, were tally on the missile and it came either from the side or front. Many ifs but then it worked every time and the missiles flew through under my jet.

I share the frustration and I am still wondering how 2 companies can smash their heads and burn money like this. But I think we have to leave the church in the town, as we say in germany. A legal dispute has rules and ED is sticking to this. I'd rather hear nothing than those insufferable, meaningless pseudo-emotional statements that RAZBAM regularly puts out. And going after NineLine over a sarcastic remark is seriously over the top. At the moment, the Strike Eagle is no different from many other unfinished modules, and it works at the moment. If that stops being the case and there's no solution, then we'll see how ED deals with us — or whether they want to face a series of further legal actions. Until then, I’ll just keep hoping for a solution and focus on the other construction sites DCS still has.

Hey Reflected, what an amazing campaign and what a perfect mission. I needed to play it twice due to pilot error but I think I will play it severel times more in the future. It was so immersive and challenging, just pure fun. The voice-overs and the intense thrill when <profanity> got hot, and the relieve after the eagles have done their job. I´m realy looking forward to mission 6 but first I will play the F18 part of this mission. I like baltics campaign also but his missions sometimes leave me without an idea of what I have to do next. I think the pacing in your missions is a little better. It realy felt like being part of a package and I think my experience in Redflag 81-2 did serve me well, allthough it is another aircraft. I realy injoyed these realistic procedures from crew chief startup to plugging the tanker after takeoff and that stunning low level approach to the IP. Simply the best!

As far as I know, the rudders are not designed to change course of the aircraft. As I understand there are only two usecases for the rudders. First to adjust the noseheading on final approach in the case of crosswinds to hold the glidepath and second you can use the rudders on high angles of attac and low speed to roll the aircraft, because aileron inputs cause the opposite reaction than intended under these conditions. And of course you can use the rudders to make smoother turns while banking like you would do on a light prop plane but honestly I didn´t noticed any positiv effect on my turns, so I just keep my feet off the pedals during the normal flight.

Understood. Thank you for your answers. So I just have to deal with it, but its not a bing thing at all. The last two days, I didn´t find time to have another try. Maybe today. Can´t wait to progress. Just another awesome campaign from you.

Hey, yeah I just did that but kind of ended up flying like a snake. Not dramatically but I was wondering if there is a way to get his reference heading to avoid constantly increasing and decreasing the distance.

Hello everyone, yesterday I had my first try on Mission 3 (Cap). Besides the fakt that I got shot out of the sky by a frogfoot (shame on me), I found it difficult to perform a proper CAP line abreast formation. Is there any way to get the reference heading from the lead? He doens´t seem to fly staight to any waypoint. Or did I miss the call? I want to try again this evening.

Hi everyone, I just experienced a new wingman behavior at the mission start. When we taxi to the runway, my wing stays at the runway crossing and refuses to follow me to the armoring zone. He only continues taxi, after I took off. First time that happend was in mission 2 last week, where it was not a dramatic problem, I just had to wait for him at WP1 a minute or so. I think its an general dcs bug and may have been served with the latest update. In mission 3 it then was quite a problem at first glance, because the lead hi-ho doesn´t start the take off unless everyone is aligned behind him. Thankfully you can work around by just overtaking the lead and take off. This will make your wingman crossing the runway and after that your lead and his wingman finally start. One slow turnaround at WP1 and you can get in formation behind 2. Your wingman will follow up shortly after. So if anyone else is facing this problem, I hope that helps you.

I also noticed the strange reflections on the gauges. Seemes like the reflectiones are heavyly overacting. Should be a easy fix. Magnitude 3, please take it on your list for the first patch. Besides this, I realy like the module. No performace issues so far and flightmodel feels quite good. I am realy looking forward to test it in every aspect.

I experienced quite the same, instead I didn´t purchased it, so it want´s me to by it for my own. For me it seams that the button where you can choose between VR and 2D ist in deed much smaller programmed than it looks. If I push it right in the middle this annoying advertise doesn´t open. If you are just a millimeter of, the ad opens. I realy thought about bying it, to ged rid of this, but luckily I didn´t because that woul´d obviously not solve the issue. Is it a faulty programmed button or pure calculation? Who knows...