mmaruda

Yup. F-16, dynamic campaigns, accurate flight dynamics and missile behavior, accurate AI tactics and several different theaters with stable and lag-free online for anyone to enjoy for the price of $5. True simming heaven.

FFB did not lose popularity - the tech is widely used in simracing wheels. It lost popularity in flight sims, because IL2. Apparently you could not be a proper Soviet Sniper Ace with FFB. Back in 2007 I saw a joystick buying guide stating to keep away from FFB sticks, cause you won't be accurate in IL2.

Yeah NV drivers have been increasingly crappy recently. With all the data mining and stuff I am trying to find the last good batch.

I tried it and it does not help much, not to mention re-launching the game a few times to assign control hardly makes it more convenient. I also found that turning off the VR option helps a little, but it's still a PITA.

Maybe it's an MP issue only? The radar seems to work fine when I use it in single player sorties.

Do they work properly in Windows at all?

Option 2 seems easier to read for me.

Just put the remaining part of the wire and the metal pin into the connect and solder it together with the yellow wire (take some of the yellow plastic off first so you have anked wire). Put some isolating tape around it afterwards, that's what I did with the broken cables inside the stick (the ones for my TMS switch). It does not have to be pretty, as long as the solder provides contact and does not short with anything else, you should be fine. Edit: Two other options: - de-solder the wire from the pin and follow Marluk's advice. - scrape the insulations from the yellow wire, connect the wires and glue them together with super-glue (ghetto but should work)

I also have this issue on the Warthog. Both for buttons and axis. It's infuriating really as it takes forever to assign controls.

Nope.

That is a valid argument, but at the same time, if the price was more reasonable, everyone would buy it and in turn the general profit would be bigger. At 15 bucks, some will cough up the cash no problem, some people will not be able to afford it, since it's better to save up for a full module, and a great deal of people will simply no spend those 15 doritos out of principle, because you can spend it on something else and get a better value for your money. What this "DLC" is, is essentially a paid mod and we've seen how well that went for Skyrim. The sheer amount of controversy this has produced in mere hours warrants some consideration.

Will buy, when it's on sale or when I get some virtual ED moneys from buying other stuff to offset the price. 15 doritos for a retexture mod is waaaaay too much. Cut that to 9.99999999 cabbage money at most and you'll get more customers. Not because people can't afford it and are cheap, but because such a price is far less cringe-worthy. That amount of money can buy a crapload of games on Humble Bundle, which to any sane mind will seem like a better deal than pimping out the map everyone is bored to death with. Ok, maybe except John.

My personal opinion is a bit pessimistic, but I consider any module that comes without a proper theatre of operations more of a novelty, rather than a full game. That said, here is my list: 1. Ka-50 Black Shark - the least painful entry to the study-sim genre, a very interesting machine that comes with two campaigns, a great manual and in-game tutorials to flatten the learning curve. It's also very fun, very manly and not to hard to fly. 2. Su-25 - does not come in full simulation mode, but it's a legendary Russian ground attack plane for real men with hair on their chests. Not very complicated to operate, but very challenging to fight in and very satisfying. 3. A-10C - it was a pinnacle of combat flight simulation when it launched. Nuff said. My only gripe with it is that the whole conflict in Georgia is a bit of a stretch - it's completely implausible that the USA would get engaged in such a force in such a conflict. 4. UH1 - legendary helo, though not really fitting modern conflict scenarios, but it was a lesson in humility to learn to pilot this baby, so in essence, for me it was sort of a milestone in flightsimming career. 5. Su-27 - yet another not fully modelled plane, but I have a sentiment for the Flanker since I loved it since Flanker 2.0 and it's something of a flagship for ED products. Also works very well online and as I said, it fits the setting. What should be on the list but isn't: 1. Mig-21 - poor manual and a very user unfriendly controls list that makes assigning everything the way I like a problem, so I never got to learn the plane. But it is on the 'to do' list. Also it had a lot of bugs and performance issues. 2. Mi-8 - where is mah manual!? 3. All the WWII planes with the Dora leading the pack... as soon as the map arrives, they will be my top planes to fly. 4. Mig-15 and Sabre - same as above 5. Combined Arms - huge potential, but still miles to go, before it's reached. I'm still hoping for a good armour simulation sometime in the future.

It would not really be such a big surprise. It is the easiest module to master IMOH and it comes with 2 campaigns and fits the current map setting. I have also noticed recently that it has interactive tutorials now (not sure when that happened), so in essence I think this is the best module to get one into study sims.

So today I found that the low-pitch sounds are inaudible. After an hour of reinstalling drivers checking everything etc. the solution was quite simple: I have my speakers connected to the back audio port and headphones and mic on the front port. The driver mutes the rear audio and plays everything through the headphones in all games... except DCS. DCS rather thinks that you have actually 4 speakers so only half the sounds get transmitted to the headphones while the other half is going through the muted speakers. :doh: Unplpugging the rear audio solved the issue. But I think this is a bug.

So I just noticed that in the newsletter ED used the term "Early Access"... :cry:Probably everyone here does not pay much attention to wording, we all sort of know what to expect, but somehow I feel like they better stick with "Beta". So far Steam's Early Access program has been seen a synonymous to cancer in many gaming communities. I may seem like I am overreacting, but somehow I feel like by using "Early Access" in reference to the Hornet, they put themselves in the same bag with a bunch of hacks and their low-quality Unite asset-based "products". The amount of crap [pardon my French, I cannot seem to find a more polite word] that has been poured into Steam's Early Access program just make terms like alpha, beta or constant development sound much more respectable. I know that this is not always the case, but Steam policy of not curating anything they put on their store, has made many people see red flags pop all over whenever they see "Early Access". Might not be the best marketing to advertise with the tagline. What do you guys think? It's obviously nothing to argue about, but I sort of felt like getting the above out of my system.

Yes and it's stupid. Only the Mig-21 poses such problems. Why the hell are we still stuck with this Starforce bull? The only thing all this DRM does is inconvenience paying customers.

As someone who enjoyed most of the Ace Combat games, I don't mind fictional countries. However, in order for something like this to feel right, there needs to be a really good story and some "lore" behind it.

Hats off to Yo-Yo, not only a master at his work, but also a very communicative and humble person. Seriously, where else does the chief FM engineer answer all the communities questions (which pop up like every 5 minutes, because everyone is the expert :joystick:) with such patience and professionalism. Also, what is this all about? :huh: I have trouble understanding. Last time I checked there was nothing out of the ordinary with the stick behavior.

Same here, update dropped - now Mig-21 needs activating. Oh and then the activation program crashed.

Just checked out of curiosity. It's playable for me, at least at free flight, but the FPS is far from solid and regularly drops with frequent stutters. This is with an i5 2500K@4,5GHz and a GTX 980 plus 16 gigs of RAM. I have a feeling this has something to do with the textures - not much stuff in the Mig that might cuase a drop (MFDs, mirrors), but the pit itself is definitely higher rez than other planes. Looks great, but I'd rather have more FPS. :(

Everything depends on how much WWII aircraft experience you have in dogfighting. It's hard to give specific tips, but some universal advice is to keep your speed and try to gain as much altitude advantage as possible. If you see the enemy turning tight and diving, do not dive as steeply as he does, try to keep slightly above him - that will give you some energy advantage and ultimately he will run out of space to dive and will have to pull up (AI likes to do it right in front of you muzzles). Another good tip is to always try to turn in yoyos. For example, if you are to turn right, roll round 30 degrees and start pulling the stick, at about 45 degrees pitch, start increasing your roll and pointing the nose down, while still pulling. That will allow you to turn tighter and also get some altitude, which will translate to more potential energy. If you cannot keep turning with the enemy, try to get some separation, climb and re-engage. Being greedy always gets you in trouble. As for evasive action, spit-S and steep climbs are always worth trying. Tight turns are not - you will end up full of holes. The 109s are better at vertical manoeuvres - stick with those. One crucial thing to remember when flying German planes is the tactics they used - avoid long turn fights, stick to boom and zoom, never enter combat, if you are doing less than 350 kpm and always try to keep above that speed. After some practice, I found that fighting AI Mustnags in the K4 is pure overkill. Basically, if you do it right, you should be able to get on his six after 3 turns and blast the crap out of him with your superior armament. The K4 climbs better, accelerates better and is less prone to stalls when doing high G turns. Oh and easy on the MW50, I found it's almost too easy to blow your engine with that thing on. It's there for emergencies, so leave it for those. And once you hit that switch, don't turn it off when at full throttle. Actually it's just better to never turn it off after activating, just use the whole tank, if you have to use it.

This seems consistent. When flying you do have significantly more speed than on the ground, so more air passes around the rudder. It would be interesting to try setting up a mission where you are parked on the runway and have a very strong wind towards the nose. I wonder, if that would increase rudder authority on the ground. Would test it myself, but it's about 36 degrees C here, so no gaming until ambient temps drop. :cry: Again, I do not take any sides in this discussion, just participating out of curiosity.

I voted for the rudder being correct, since as a layman, I cannot really express a vailid opinion one way or the other. However, I DO have a great deal of experience in WWII flight sims, so here is something to think about for all those people who say the rudder authority without applying power is too little. If you compare the DCS 109 to say that of IL2 BOS (or any other plane in there), the rudder authority in DCS is just on a luxury level. In BOS after landing, you need to apply like 30% throttle when stopping so that you do not ground loop. With German planes it's actually easier since differential braking, but yeah, that feels totally weird and completely wrong. That is an issue that was also discussed on the game's forum and guess what, some people claiming to fly taildraggers in real life claimed this is correct. I am not saying this or that game has it better, but a lot of stuff that we a simmers are 'feeling' to be right or wrong might be completely opposite IRL. Probably the best way to go about this is to stick to math calculations.

It has: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/askjack/2015/jun/25/microsoft-windows-10-free-upgrade-7-questions-answered "So, keep your current system, and do an “in place” upgrade to Windows 10. Use a Microsoft identity – such as an Outlook.com or Hotmail email address – to create your Administrator account to access the online Windows Store. The store-based license key will supersede the registration key that is locked to your PC’s motherboard. After that, you can change the motherboard, check that activation still works, then do a clean installation to a new drive." Also to everyone not being able to delete the windows.old http://www.tenforums.com/tutorials/2066-windows-old-folder-delete-windows-10-a.html EDIT: to everyone upgrading, having doubts about Win 10 and so on, I suggest you google the hell out of any thoughts you might have, because this is the most convoluted scheme M$ has come up with (make sure to read the TOS). Also, go to reddit, check out the r/windows, r/pcmasterrace and surprisingly r/piracy - lots of useful knowledge there with tutorials on how to upgrade, uninstall crap you don't need and avoid tracking (as well as giving the boot M$'s idea of turning your PC into an update server).