upyr1

Funny, I hope someone can do the newer flanker and fulcrums lets face it EA works by the developer getting enough data to get a module then slowly works on it over time

I know ED has always said that DCS modules were based on open-source documents and what won't violate security laws. The only thing that may have changed is that we have a better idea of what ED's standards actually are. As I have pointed out the video didn't say the F-35 was coming in 2 weeks and even when it does come out it will be in EA for quite some time. If you have been using DCS enough you'll know that modules can change quite a bit during EA. In short this fits in quite well with the DCS business model. Which is the developers will pick an aircraft they think there is both demand and enough open-source data, and then they will develop it enough to get into EA. Then over time they will alter things. So as I said before, if you think you have the know how and the documents then get started. Even if it is initially just a mod. As I asked earlier do you think you can link to VinntoreZ's MiG-29?

Two things to point out, first the 2025 trailer didn't exactly say the F-35 was going to be available in 2 weeks and my suggestion for anyone who says "ED should do this or that instead of the F-35" All I have to say is let's agree to the Freedy Mercury compromise, shall we? Which is to say "I want it all" There area lot of modules listed on the forum which don't have a release date (A-6, both corsairs, F-8, and others) so if you or anyone else think you have the know how and documents to get a module going then bring it on. You might start with a mod but the more developers, modules, maps, and content we get the better.

The 2025 and Beyond trailer showed a bit about the dynamic campaign. I don't know how far in the future the and beyond part is going to be but with focus on the dynamic campaign does this mean we might actually see it in the near future? If so could we get a discussion thread for the forum?

I'm wondering what they have in the works right now. ED has to be careful on what the release and don't release. One side they have to keep the hype up for what deeper in the pipeline but they also have to focus on what is coming up

The individual units would be fine if it won't kill our CPUs. I figure the best solution is to get them out and then add the crew. edit Depending on the work load I think @Rudel_chw may have a good idea. With the infantry updates being worked up add a unit called crew member that will operate the guns and have them show up when you place a gun. At first they might just stand around looking the part

I'd assume that is the case as well but some flexibility would be nice as well. Such as a quick campaign

I sure hope we can ger more modern adversaries. I don't know what can or can't be done as AI or as a flyable module but bring it on

Any chance we could get the B and C as AI assets while the A is being developed

This might be good for the B

That might be the case but I think the confusion comes from the fact Belsimteck is still listed as it's own thing on the shop page

ED has said they have not changed their rules. They have also said that the problem with more modern Russian Aircraft, even when a lot of open-source data is available, is navigating Russia's security laws. Though I believe they have also said that it might be possible for someone else to do them. Anyway if someone outside of Russia can a super fulcrum of Flanker without violating laws, then I say bring it on. I'd like the link to Vinntorez's project even if it isn't official as a mod it sounds awesome

You can put me in the support category as well. I figure you folks at DCS know much more than I do about all the available open-source material. I figure with the public displays combined with the production of at the Super Hornet and the talk about the NGADF, F/A-xx, and other 6th-gen fighters you folks have probably calculated the earliest time to get started on the the F-35. I know I will have fun with the F-35. I hope someone is able to get enough open source data to add modern red for at least as AI. Thank you.

All I know is I want a solution soon

that could be a possible settlement. ED gives RB some cash and takes over the modules

I know various people at ED have stated that someone else would have to do the more modern Redfor. If I remember right the Red Star simulation which is doing the MiG-17 is German I belive the lead developer's dad was a former East German fighter pilot. Then we have a couple fitters in the works and I believe Dekka said something about possibly doing the Su-30 (I expect that might get vetoed by Bejing) Anyway On the MiG-29 all I have to say is that is an instant buy. The fulcrum is cool

The A-4 team said when they got started they had no intentions of making it official. So that would be a bad example. Though I mentioned a couple modules that got their start as mods. I didn't misunderstand what you stated and the fact real-world military forces want as much of an edge as possible, doesn't change the simple fact that DCS players on PVP servers would like some balance which would be up to the mission designer. That might mean slapping a Su-57 or 75 livery on a F-35 and saying it was flown by the aggressor squadron or you might decide to limit the F-35 to PVE servers and single-player missions. You could also use mods as well.

Quite true, we don't know when they plan to actually release it or how long it will be in Early access nor do we know all their sources. As I have said in the past- good mod support is important. There are some real aircraft and assets which for some reason isn't in ED (yet) either due to the fact no one has got around to it, or the data is missing. Then of course we also have fantasy modules. I also hope to see more assets of all eras

I hope they succeed in doing that. As long as ED believes there is enough data to produce a decent module without changing their standards, I don't care what module. If I am interested in a module I will buy it if not I won't. I'll confess I plan to buy the F-35. I'm happy about that

I hope this happens to some degree with every new module. I know that I have advocated for Naval modules to act as a vehicle to upgrade how ships are modeled

This is why I didn't like the fact MAC is dead.

The Su-30 one of many modules I'd love to get more information about. I would love to see what people can do with the open source material about modern RedFor. While I do want better mod support I also would rather see an official module over a mod any day. that's a bummer

No matter what modules are coming out these things need to be improved. I expect that EW and RCS would be the most difficult due to the lack of information however I still think something can be worked up.

I agree that DCS needs more modern AI assets, so I hope to see Cuban Ace's Su-57 in DCS at least as an AI asset. It is going to be a lot harder to balance PVP with the F-35. I'd also toss in that we also nee more Assets over all though

@NineLine has stated that in the past if you have a mod that you think could be implemented in DCS all you have to do is contact them and they will have a look at it. I know there have been at least two modders I can name off the top of my head who have become third-party developers, for example, the Airplan simulation company who are making the C-130 module as well as IFE who made the MB-339. The C-130 is not going to be identical to the mod as a lot will be added to it, but it doesn't change the fact it happened. Ballance is up to the mission designer, as I stated earlier it is a mistake to assume that some mod will never make it into DCS. The only time you should make that assumption would be if the developers said they had no intention of porting it into DCS or the mod is highly unrealistic. Though knowing DCS's history of seasonal easter eggs and April Fools Day jokes they might be game to add it as a joke.