upyr1

I've got no objections to the F-35B, or giving the F-16 the Lantern pod. I'm also looking forward to the A-6 and would love the F-111

The problem with this is that people want the F-15E, Mirage, MiG-19 and Harrier. Do you know what that will take? Becuse I don't. Now unless that happens we're left with two options lose the aircraft or another developer produces some modules.

Why not multiple versions?

I don't know the timelines but given the choice between buying replacements and not having the aircraft in question I would rather buy the ED Harrier

Hopefully we'll see a Razbam/ED reunion. I know a lot of mud was flying but when money is involved emotions can get high but portraits of Mr. Franklin or King Charles' can calm things down. If Razbam isn't coming back the I hope they are willing to sell the modules to Eagle or other developers. My dream would be to see HB take over the Mud Hen so we get jester as the F-15E WSO

@NineLine Would have more information but if nothing changes the module will stop working after 2.9 so this means we'll either need to maintain an old DCS 2.9 along side our hardrives, ED and RB have to come to an agrement, or ED needs to step in and get replacement modules going. I know that ED has given some people refunds for the Strike Eagle it was for in store credits.

Since it looks like the sun is setting on the Razbam modules. I'm wondering it would be out of the question for Ed and possibly some other developer to get started on a replacement for them.

Exactly why I suggested it. We would have a clear distinction and it would use a real term to do it.

how about making it optional? Looking at the super carrier I can see why the overlay is a good and why it isn't

If this is added, the way point action should be called search kill box.

No argument there, I'd love to have both stand alone and Campaign CSAR missions. Also I'd love to see Sandy missions for the A-10, A-1, and A-7

I put this in the core wish as well. This needs to be added before the Skyraider

I was playing around playing with the Corsair on a modern carrier to see what would happen they seem to launch from the Super carriers, Tarawa, and go insane with the others. Which got me thinking about the Skyraider the first photo is an Essex-class carrier Lexinton the second photo is Ranger which is a forestal-class carrier in both cases we see them using the catapult.

I know the F4U did not need a catapult when taking off from a fleet carrier. However it would be nice for the F4U to have that ability. The corsair did use catapults when taking off from escort carriers and it would be nice to have that feature for the corsair. I don't know if the Essex ever used their deck catapults in WWII

I'd love to have the catapult work on the essex and the corsair

https://joytokey.net/en/ here is Joyto key, it would be nice to see more options for controllers. I fly with a warthog suplmented with an x box controller for WSO stuff

back to the topic at hand I think this should be implmented with an official mod manager

It would be nice to have older variants and a G of the phantom

that would be cool to have. I think it would be nice to have both. Either have AI direct you to a landing beach , the marker, and then if you are using that they can climb

The issue I'm thinking is a multiplayer server you would only want the FAC/FO to designate 1 unit at a time. So the differnce might be scripting and targeting prioity. Frankly I don't care wich path they use as long it works for both single and multi player games.

I'd want improvements to the visual recon mode to make it easier to act as a AFAC/FO My question is if any military branch combines the FO and FAC roles doctrinally. From an AI/software design I could see arguments for a combined FO / FAC but I could also see some idiocy behind it as well

Right now I'm hoping for a visual cue so I don't place my disembarking point on a cliff. That would be fine if we had ropes , and troops that could climb things, but until that day comes. Also natural obstacles that are modeled in DCS would need to be factored in.

Any order. More ammo types- there should be options for smoke, guided shells, VT shells and regular HE shells. Fire missions and Forward observers- instead of making "fire at point" the only option, when an artillery piece has ammo but no assigned target it should fire at targets within visual range of air and ground-based FOs. Also the presence of a forward observer should improve the accuracy of pre-planned barages. So when there is a "fire at point" waypoint and FO the FO will call fire on targets in the zone. I guess he would be a place to roll out some of the dynamic campaign AI. I'd also give JTACs the same treatment. more artillery types - static SP guns name it, these bad boys for example, would be period for the German map they were retired in 1994 edited to add the fire at point bit @Silver_Dragon please add your ideas

It's mostly abut showing a flat beach you can put troops on -if you aren't carful you you will try to land the troops on a cliff.

This was the first time I saw an 5-inch gun get a kill