sirrah

Hehe agree The constant "acceleration, running, insta-stop" was a bit extreme, but right now is really really casual. Something in between would be good I suppose. Anyways, this is just me, nitpicking about a very small detail. Poor ED

But wouldn't a larger "nipple surface" provide more fingertip grip and with that make it a bit more easy to make small inputs. (Oh my, it so difficult to keep this topic within forum regulations, with terms like "nipple surface" ) I understand this won't increase axis resolution, but I can imagine the better finger grip could slightly increase fingertip control.

You're not alone in that opinion about the F-14. I pre-purchased the Tomcat and although Heatblur did a mind-blowingly good job on this iconic jet, the micromanagement of Jester AI is one of the main reasons that module never truly got me hooked. I don't regret buying it, but it did make me more alert that new multicrew modules might not be for me. I'm confident that Razbam will come up with a smart WSO AI communication interface. As far as we even need one

Sorry if asked/posted before. Today I strapped myself into a Hornet again, after months of Apache addiction, and I noticed the deck crew was a lot more relaxed. Last time I launched from the deck, they were running with every move. Now, they were calmly walking to and away from my jet. (I was doing a few sorties in the Liberation campaign) Is this something new? Can the deck crew "relaxed mode" or "run mode" be set somehow in the mission editor? I suppose the running crew were a little too intense, so in that respect I think it's a bit more realistic now. On the other hand, they're walking really at ease now, would that also be the case during a scramble irl?

Scores are used for campaigns iirc: >55 score = mission succes and campaign progress <55 score = mission failure (EDIT: See @Grimes' post for correct values) I don't think scoring has any added value for single missions, but please anyone, correct me if I'm wrong

First of all, I know there are slew upgrades available for the Warthog throttle, but one has to choose where to spend money on. I still have so many upgrades in my mind (new GPU, fssb stick, Winwing F-16 throttle, new F-15E module, just to mame a few...) and unfortunately I can only spend my money only once Anyways, did anyone ever try to drill a tiny hole in the top of the oem Warthog nipple. I was thinking of doing this and then screw on a small "thumb" stick using a tiny screw. I can imagine a larger surface would already improve the slew stick (as the main issue is the lack of "grip" on the small nipple) (Don't look at all the dust please, the close up photo makes it worse than it actually is ) Any ideas/advice/reasons why I shouldn't try this? Anyone know how long/deep the oem nipple is? (How deep would I be able to drill without damaging any wiring?)

This would indeed add a lot to a more lifelike environment on airfields. Also an external bleed air cart (with those typical big bore air hoses) would be cool to see. And icing on the cake would be two versions: one with rolled out air hose and one stowed version.

Good wish! This would indeed add just that bit of extra! Should have posted this on the general wish list subforum, as this feature would be great for all multicrew modules. On the other hand, on the general wishlist subforum it'll probably be swallowed by all the (sorry to say) junk wishes.

All fair points indeed You made me doubt the subject @Exorcet On one hand I agree with the OP though, that currently it's a bit of a hassle trying to find proper (written) reviews on this forum. On the other hand, YT is full of (some very good) DCS module reviews, and also, a bit of searching is not too much to ask from newcomers.

I wouldn't really need it for myself (active long enough in DCS and its predecessors, that by now I pretty much always know up front if a module is something for me or not), but I can imagine that a centralized place on the forum specifically for user reviews, would help newcomers. Or maybe a subforum under each module dedicated for user reviews. I think though, that there should be a few rules to keep those reviews organized. I'm thinking of: No discussions! (A user review is a personal view on something which shouldn't be contested) Mandatory for the user review to clearly contain date, especially when edited (modules evolve and a bad user review could change once the module evolves). Clear categories, such as: Module difficulty/learning curve, graphics/3D model, performance Anyway, a properly setup review section isn't a bad idea imho

Exactly, we're talking about 6dof suddenly changing to 3dof. Imho one of the most awful things you can experience in VR (it also sometimes happens when your headset's tracking is failing). @kablamoman; don't get me wrong, I'm all for adding more user side options. No problem there. It's just when MP servers are able to enforce this, it will result (for me) in even less available servers to join/enjoy. The amount of properly populated servers with an acceptable ping, is already scarce as it is. So, if just an option on the user side, I'm all for it (why wouldn't I be). If you want it as an option to be enforced on MP servers, I'll keep objecting it, as it will (literally) limit my experience Oh and about "why there's a discussion". Well, this is a forum

I see you do use VR yourself. Not judging in any way, but purely out of interest; Do you like the VR "head limiter" in Il-2? (the feature I think is being referred to as a "hard limiter" in this thread. So, the moment your head protrudes the canopy class, the entire cockpit starts moving along with your head). Do I understand correctly that's what you wish for in DCS? Personally, I hate that feature and I find it much more immersion killing than accidentally briefly sticking my head through the glass. I suppose the nauseating effect is not the case for everyone and would indeed wear off after a while, but if I had to choose, I would prefer the "black out" option. Anyway, I'm glad to see you write that you don't want this feature because you think VR users are cheating, but only for personal preference .

Hi mate, this has been discussed (and wished for) a lot of times. You'll find several threads about it on this forum. Brief summary: No, it's not (just ) your eye's; The tanker lights are actually quite dim irl. Especially during daytime they are difficult to see, but on the other hand, they are less important then, as the pilot will just use his/her visual reference to the tanker. So, the tanker lights aren't "wrong" per se in DCS. Though, given how often this is requested, I suppose ED could give those who want/need it the option for brighter lights.

Campaign updated to version 1.1 Change log: Mission 2 - F10 radio menu not disappearing - FIXED Mission 2 - Possibility of mission getting stuck at some point - FIXED Mission 4 - Time-out scoring problem - FIXED

Thanks for the feedback. I'll double check it as soon as I get the chance (any chance you have a track file?). Don't doubt your own skills. Perfectly possible I messed up on the mission scoring. EDIT: It wasn't you. I made a mistake in the "time-out mission failure" condition Hmm that's weird, I'm sure it worked when I tested it, but I'll check again. Thank you for reporting! EDIT: You were right!

I'm pretty sure, but please anyone correct me if I'm wrong, the "propeller effect" thus far has only been implemented for the WWII modules (like a year ago orso). Maybe at the moment ED still considers it a test case before also implementing this effect for their helo modules (something that has been requested by the community ever since the effect was introduced for the WWII modules). So, again, I could be mistaking, but I don't think this is a bug, yet more a matter of ED not having implemented this yet for helo modules.

Well, I'm not against more options. To each their own . But, as @Baldrick33 also mentioned, this will have an effect on the DCS MP scene. And imho, a negative effect. (Casual) MP servers, with a proper amount of active players are already very scarce (only ones that come to mind, but I'm no hardcore MP player, are the Buddyspike and 4YA servers). A nauseating VR head limiter (which is what it is, no matter how it's implemented), will cause even more strain on the already exhausted MP servers. Personally; I don't play MP often (and never pvp) I couldn't be bothered too much, but what does bother me is the apparent feeling of injustice non-VR users seem to have over VR users. Sure, being able to stick your head through the canopy might help you in combat, but there are also many advantages pancake users have over VR users, that you don't hear anyone complaining about. Personally 2 ; In my opinion, people should stop trying to make DCS MP into some sort of 100% "fair" experience. There's so much of influence preventing just that. Some have build an entire pit with replica HOTAS, some use a mouse/keyboard, some use a 19" screen 1080p, some use a 27" curved 4K screen with Track-IR. Let's just face and accept that DCS MP will never be as fair/competitive as for instance a CS:GO, Call of Duty, or stuff like that. In fact, war is hardly ever "fair" irl, so in that respect, DCS MP is currently actually very realistic

We need a bit more info in order to help you. Some screenshots or, even better, a track file, would help. As for guides, the Apache module comes with a guide. But you can also just Google for: "DCS Apache manual" Also, there's Chucks Guide here: (Which is very beginner friendly)

You, and a few others in this thread, made your point. There's really no need to bump this thread each month @Magic Zach. Please remember that many, if not most DCS players couldn't care less about this. Also, as said before in this thread by many that actually did try VR; there really isn't a proper way to implement a head limiter for VR users, other than an actual physical barrier.

Yes, it has been suggested before, but it's a good wish, shared by many Edit: By the way; everything has been wished before on this sub-forum. So don't let that hold you back

Wow! That'll be super user friendly

About what you and @jnr4817 are saying: Is it at all possible for modders to add/change something to an official module? I don't think I've ever seen that (then again, I hardly use ant mods) Lol, we only saw a few seconds of the Chinook in a video and we are already talking about mods for it. Gotta love this forum

I often find it difficult to judge whether wishes like these are serious or not, but in case it is serious, my vote goes out to: Please don't spend valuable dev resources on creating fictional stuff for DCS. A community mod? sure, why not.

Perhaps my words "perception of speed" were not correct, but to say it simple; things flashing by in the corners of your eyes (big or small, doesn't really matter as long as it has texture/shapes), give you that feeling of speed. Apart from maybe Pimax, no current VR headset accommodates for this.

Well, I suppose "something being in the pipeline" is a broad concept But honestly, I missed that news/message. To bad, I was hoping they'd at least started looking into it.