Zakatak

They said the exact variant that they were modelling was the Mirage 2000C S-5, which I believe was the "best" subvariant, that carried the RDI radar, Matra Spirale chaff dispensers, Thales RWR, and the upgraded M53-P2 engines. I expect we'll get the following. Matra R.550 Magic II heat seekers Super 530D semi-active radar Mk.82 dumb bombs SNEB 68mm rockets Belouga cluster bomb The rest are "possible but I doubt it." AIM-9L (compatible with R.550 mounts? Not sure) Exocet (it was mainly RDM-equipped exports that could carry it) ARMAT (not much data on it, and nothing suggests the 2000C carries it) Super 530F (not sure if RDI compatible, seems like a bit of a waste) MICA (maybe the IR, almost certainly not the ARH variant) LGB's (if they're in, it will be buddy-lase only)

Just a question that may be to early to answer: will this be sold as a "complete experience" in the same way Leatherneck does it, or are you going to feed us piece by piece like Belsimtek? The former release the MiG-21 with a professional flight model, campaign, training missions, single missions, a complete flight manual right off the bat. The latter release the Mi-8 with some of those components missing, with a completed flight manual still not available over a year after release, while several aircraft are sold in front of it. I'm not saying you shouldn't beta test the Mirage, but y'know, avoid the "endless beta" which seems to be trending in the gaming industry these days. I'd prefer to recieve a complete product shortly after paying you for it. In the mean time, keep up the good work.

Let's compare what it has to offer to DCS in comparison to the Tomcat. Exploration into the mechanics of employing long-range missiles? Nope. Exploration into the mechanics of a Radar Intercept Officer? Nope. Exploration into the mechanics of swing-wing aerodynamics? Nope. Exploration into the mechanics of a single-seat subsonic ground attack aircraft? We have four of those ready to purchase already. It also doesn't give Leatherneck nearly as much money as a sexy interceptor with a large cult following behind it. F-14 please.

You guys are just withholding the Tomcat from us until December 25th so you can claim that you saved Christmas!

I didn't want one before, but with the addition of EDGE, the game should look decent enough from the ground to make a proper tank simulation. Aside from Steel Beasts and Red Orchestar 2, you can't really get any good tank experiences as of now. Preferably a 3 crew tank to give the player as much agency as possible, like the T-90 or Leclerc.

Aww, no Mechwarrior 3?

P-38L please and thank you!

If making a competitor to the MiG-21 is the goal, I'd much rather the F-5E to the F-104.

Would they really be cruel enough to bring us promises of the glorious F-14 before dropping an inferior aircraft on us just so they can hear our collective sighs of disappointment? I mean, if we get an F4F Wildcat or something, I'll willingly type positive things like "looks great" and "good luck" out of respect, but that won't tell anyone how I feel inside. :P Hopefully it won't be the A version if we do get the Tomcat. Gotta have that delicious F110 power with A/G capability.

Why not hit both ends of the spectrum? F-13 for fans of the classics and the 21-97 so pilots can hang with F-16C's.

If they go with the F-4/14, I sure hope they have an excellent AI and convincing voice acting for the RCO. Having one person simulating two crew members is not a proper simulation, and most players do not spend the majority of their time online. The Hornet is currently owned by Boeing.

Aren't you a bright ray of sunshine. EDIT: oh, missed the ellipsis, nevermind.

So assuming the AH-1F appearing in the liveries forum wasn't an error, and I highly doubt it was, how satisfied is everyone satisfied with that being he outcome? It wasn't a poll option, and I'm curious as to how many would have selected if it had been.

I think they went with the AH-1F because they had already begun work on the AH-1G, but a poll revealed the G version had a mere tenth of the votes that the W version had. The SuperCobra is different enough from the AH-1G that they'd more or less have to start over, so they went with the closest version that still had a lot of part similarities. AH-1F is the most advanced single-engine Cobra of the bunch, with a HUD, laser rangefinder, infrared jammer, TOW capability, and a 20mm turret. Just a guess.

I thought about the question when I saw this comparison between this engine and DCS 2.0 which was taken at 50,000 feet. Pretty nice view, right? You can even see the curvature of the Earth. Now I'm a little curious as to how this engine would look from... who knows? 75,000 feet, 100,000 feet, 400,000 feet? I'm not thinking of a specific aircraft, and I'm sure a lot of ultra-high altitude planes wouldn't make sense in a DCS environment, but would you like one? MiG-25RB, SR-71, U-2S, X-15? The last one sort of makes sense in the context of a Nevada map, but nowhere else, the first two can't make the most of their Mach 3 capability due to small theatre sizes, but the U-2S should fit in nicely, but I imagine all of them might have the issue of classified information. Random question: what is the highest altitude you can achieve in DCS right now? I've heard that the F-15 and MiG-21 don't seem to have the high altitude performance they should.

The radar has run out of alcohol to cool it.

Oh I am sure something like that would be a financial flop. Unless maybe they called it a sequel to Pilot Wings 64 and had a variable realism and difficulty options, so it can play like an arcade game.

No, I am not joking. Nintendo is releasing a new 3DS which is quite literally called the "New 3DS" (why would you think this is a good idea?!). Here is what it looks like: It adds a few new features to the original. The CPU is more powerful, the screen size was increased for the smaller version, a second set of shoulder triggers were added to the back, a motion sensor that detects acceleration, a "c-stick" was added to the right side, and the camera is specifically designed to track the viewers eyes. That last feature is to ensure the 3D effect functions at most viewing angles. The stylus is still present for the touchscreen of course. Internal storage is small, but microSD cards go up to 128Gb these days so it isn't much of a problem. While you certainly couldn't with the old one, I think the new version has enough functions to make a fun little on-the-go study sim (more emphasis on study than flying given the control scheme) which is pretty rare since the genre is one of the most difficult to make mobile. Obviously it would be inferior to PC gaming in a lot of ways, but you can use a 3DS anywhere and anytime. The camera should be fine for head tracka ala TrackIR, and the stylus can let you zoom in on certain panels to operate various switches and buttons, and all the physical buttons on the device should be enough for more commonly used/HOTAS functions. You could add lots of cool little gimmicks too, like flipping through pages on your kneeboard, drawing on your map, operating an E6B whiz wheel, doing pre-flight checks, ejecting by gripping all triggers with both hands and yanking the device upwards, etc. Here's just an idea for a 3rd/4th gen military aircraft control scheme: Thumbstick - pitch (up/down) and roll (left/right) C-stick - throttle position (up/down) differential braking (left/right) L/R triggers - rudder/nosewheel position ZL/ZR triggers - weapon pickle and gun trigger A/B/X/Y buttons - D-pad mode (slew control, system management, communications, countermeasures) D-pad - functions depend on above Start - pause menu Select - reset head tracking Stylus - everything else (radio freqs, kneeboard, gear, MFD, de-icing, etc)

Any chance you can give us more than pictures? Give us an idea of how development is going in various areas like avionics and flight model? VEAO, LN, Avio, all the cool kids are doing it.

How classified is the F-117 at this point?

Not to mention that the MiG-25 is extremely fast plane flying in fairly small maps. Straits of Hormuz is only 390x390 kilometres, the Foxbat will cross that in no time.

A-10C = 50$ F-15C = 25$ Su-25 = 15$ Ka-50 = 40$ MiG-21 = 30$ (backer) P-51 = 10$ (sale) X52 Pro = 125$ TrackIR 4 + Clip = 150$ Pretty expensive hobby. I hardly even fly the P-51, F-15 or Su-25.

I think it's more of a flight model issue. The ugly external model shows you how much attention the plane got, I imagine that apples to the FM as well. ED probably fudged some numbers to make it more capable in an Su-27/MiG-29 dominated environment.

How graphically intensive is it compared to other aircraft? Closer to the MiG-21 which takes up a lot more processing power compared to the other birds, or closer to the UH-1H which seems to be on the opposite end of the spectrum? Absolutely gorgeous by the way.

So now that it's out, how do the different missiles perform in comparison to each other?