Grizzly1606688174

Sorry. I though we where talking about the TM warthog. My fault.. I couldnt understand why you guys could get the warthog so cheap, until I read it was the TM Hotas x. ;) I would definitely choose x52! I have also owned a hotas x, and the wire length between the throttle and the joystick is too short in the HOTAS X, and there isnt enough buttons for sims like DCS. But all in all an okay joystick anyway. Feels good, in someways better than the x52. They both have their differences, but the x52 is more suited for flight simulations because of the many features and buttons it has.

I have both, and I would say without a doubt that the Thrustmaster is the way to go. Best joystick I have ever used, and it is so well buildt. I dont get how TM is 88$, it should be the other way around? It is the very best you can get..

+1

Yeah, I also just want this map now-ish.. Who cares if there is missing a building or two, with the "auto-patcher" thingy they talk about it should be easy to make us happy with small continuous changes. :)

So 2300 individual customers where the most part is happy about it and gives it 9/10 points isnt enough "evidence"?

T90 costs somewhere between 2 and 4.5 million USD. M1 abrams costs between 6 and 8.5 million USD with inflation adj. (numbers based on wikipedia) Who cares what is better. Theres between 2 or 4 t90's for each abrams so they need alot of ammo if it comes to that. post #0 Great that the T90 is being added, and its looking beautifull aswell. Looking forward to be tearing that one up with my air superiority. :thumbup:

You need to be aware that MP lag in arma now depends on how the mission is build. Not the game itself. If its a bad mission with a bad server and alot of scripts running with invisible script errors all the time, the server can lag alot, but it has decreased dramaticly over the years. (Domination or MSO as the most common ones and also that retarded gamemode "dayz") These missions really stretch and pushes the old arma 2 engine to its limits now. Hope arma 3 gets a touch better on that. Anyhow, I think ED needs to keep focusing on the flight and strategy part of DCS and the CA module and continously improve them instead. (Nevada map, future maps, future airplanes and so on). I would rather have a JTAC/FLIGHT/STRATEGY game that is super realistic and high functioning in those parts with alot of gameplay than a game that does it all in a "semi-blah" way like arma and most other games does today. If their resources goes to making infantry parts and what not like suggested here in this thread, they simply wouldnt have as much time/money/manpower to put into the detail DCS is know for right now. Detail equals time. //Mug. - Arma and DCS player.