Vivoune

Just to be picky: "stand-alone module" doesn't make sense, it's simply a DCS World module. A Standalone module would be a module that run on its own and doesn't need DCS World at all. :) Thanks for the clarifications though as I first understood they abandoned the idea of separate modules all together.

Well some models got to be included no matter what, that's the whole point of DCSW, you can play with people that have modules you don't, so you got to be able to see it on your end. But like other modules, most of it have to be downloaded still to actually use it, cockpit, systems etc. I think.

No problem. I also find the view is a bit weird on the F-15C. the pilot's 'cam' gets blocked in an invisible box that is a tad too narrow. Can't zoom enough to see the HUD well, just enough for the instruments/gauges. I find adding some permanent zoom helps a bit.

Not to piss on the party but usually KS pledge levels are the lowest on weekends and holidays and highest during the week.

I stand corrected, thanks for the link.

BC2 I think are proper interactive missions like for the A-10C. For all FC3 aircraft though it's the same old quality videos, makes you wonder why it's 3Gb+, some of them even have fun bugs like undrawn object or models 'look at how I shoot that plane' -uh what plane? X)

Maybe I'm missing something but making a 'Standalone' client aside DCS World built around the F-35 doesn't make sense considering ED went into much trouble to specifically design DCS World as a core to unify all modules into one World. If 3rd parties start building standalone clients around DCSW's 'modules' DCS World falls apart. It makes even less sense considering said 'standalone' gotta use the DCS assets I figure and DCS World is free for everyone. Our niche community doesn't need further splitting.

They update automatically to the next WPT if you pass by it yea.

Hitting the Nav mode command key allows you to switch back and forth between Nav and ILSN. Switch Nav mode to get out of ILSN and use the next waypoint/Airfield/Target command key (Lctrl+` I think) to change the waypoint in nav mode, Airfield in ILSN mode and Target in Combat mode.

Be that as it may (being myself one of those people), give that project a chance and maybe stop calling it a failure, there's 9 days left out of 15 and even if it's not looking too good a fair amount of KS projects made the most pessimist predictions lie.

This Nevada map thing has been going on for a long time, and it feels so long since it'll be available that I just can't get myself to be excited about it despite my wish for variety. Personally I'd prefer they finish a new graphic engine all together instead of ''wasting'' resources on terrains that might or might not port over to EDGE. That said, in the same manner, I'm also having a hard time being excited about the new graphic engine/Image generator considering how far off it seems and how little I know about it. Still I gotta say, I'd be fine paying for map modules and/or for a new engine just like we pay for an aircraft.

Hmm interesting. the first time I did it, I tried ignoring them considering the AWACS called them at a range over 100 and the convoy on a parallel course, (they were 'hot' tho so probably a mistake on my part in hoping they'd turn cold) but I ended up with a 120 that came out of nowhere, although I did put myself between the Su-25 and the F-16 to 'protect' the flank so I might have entered their ring of engagement. Thanks for the intel on what's to come! *sweat* Edit: tried the F-15C, it might just be me but it feels like night and day compared to the Su-27, the radar is nice and handy, AIM-120 missiles lead my tgt so despite some expected misses I get to hit things (yay), the horsepower seems to make it a nice energy fighter too and that punch comes in handy given the yoyo I tend to be in mid range dogfights, all in all my success rate sky rocketed (well.. nothing extraordinary considering it was probably nearing like 10-20%). I'll probably stick to the F-15C for now, grab some fighting xp and try the Russian fighters later on when I feel more comfortable in my understanding of the dogfights subtleties. Edit2: Just retried a sixth time that Su-27 mission but the F-16s come to the su-25 despite me staying out of it all, so you are supposed to fight them, which obviously is way way over my skill set even with labels on. I can't fight decently with the Su-27, F-15C landing is bugged as hell, well, that was the two aircrafts I was interested in FC3. Back to the A-10C.

I think anyone has an opinion on what a module that bear DCS's name should imply in terms of quality and it can be the source of an infinite debate given our opinions are as wide as our crowd is a niche. I think if someone doesn't trust in Kinney Int's project, that someone should above all trust in Eagle Dynamics judgement and so far that F-35 project is also under their wings, I might not like it but that's good enough for me.

You got one wingmen and the both of you must protect four Su-25, three F-16 flank you after you rallied. From my understanding of the situation you got to go head on and engage the closing F-16 or else they just got a chance to engage the Su-25 which are pretty much sitting ducks and busy aligning for an objective of their own. Only time I got a kill was when I actually wasn't doing my job too well and 1 of them focused on the Su-25s (which got utterly ripped apart) the other was handled by my wingman which left me on a regular 1 on 1, I got close enough that I could get him with a heater, then my wingman lost his fight, 2 Su-25 were downed and I was up against the last 2 F-16, but when I realized that I already had a 120 moving in my turbine uhuh. eject eject eject. They sure are fearsome opponents. I am merely starting FC3 though, just acquired it during the recent sale, so I know I probably am missing a lot of intel and doing enormous bad judgment calls and tactic choices but damn, it's really frustrating to see a mid-range semi-active missile behaving like an unguided rocket. ^^ I'll probably switch and try the F-15C, see how things fare from that side of the fence.

Well, I spent some more time on the Su-27, felt confident enough to get in its campaign, but I just can hardly hit anything, not that the enemy's having a great hit ratio either but I don't know, it feels a bit off. I really want to love that aircraft though. Quick question: regular head-on fight, I got the enemy locked head-on aspect, waiting for the DLZ to be almost in the no-escape-zone then release an ER (while keeping the tgt lockedat all time until impact obsly), is it an optimal use of the ER/R? Cause a bunch of chaffs and a simple bank seems more than enough to completely loose the missile long before it even could be a threat to the maneuvering craft. I'd love to have the 'pros' opinions. Anyway it seems I just can't survive any fight with 2 or 3 F-16 against me and their 120 salvo spams and since that's a requisite to pass the first real mission of the Su-27 campaign I guess it's time to try the F-15C!

Sometimes TV here talks about the F-35 and yea, from what I've seen, every time the camera man gets in an angle that allows him to see the rear a bit too close there's someone running in hand up on the cam saying 'you can't film the rear'. I think I recall it being more or less handled by the ground crew though, meaning a few parts were 'naked' that usually aren't when in flight.

Ahah, one thing is sure about that aircraft though, it sure calls for a lot of ink.

Ouch. It's obvious the F-35 raises serious questions given it's competence amongst the objective crowd. I tend to think the F-35 will be a huge failure in so many ways and I admire the resolution of the people in charge that keep on going forward and forward no matter the raising concerns. Now that that's out of the way, I got to give that airplane some credits, you can't really compare it like that to other aircraft, I mean on paper at least, it's supposed to be stealthy and all so, supposedly, it doesn't really need the same specs as other aircraft.

I wish I could help you popcorn, sadly I'm merely learning FC3 too. Trying to get into the Su-27 I can't see any 'LRS' or 'Visual' mode (Guess its an F-35C thing). As far as I can remember there's only BVR mode (SCAN or TWS) and CAS mode (with all the different sights it includes: boresight, vertical sight, helmet sight Fi0, Funnel, etc), I don't care much about the air to ground mode. On both modes you can use RADAR and/or IRST acquisition systems. The buttons to increase Scan ranges are "Radar Scan Zone Increase/Decrease". Maybe try hitting the corresponding hotkeys assigned to it while in the control menu to see if it works as it should and highlight the command. I'm just getting into the FC3 module, and I gotta say, these R-27ER mid-range missiles behavior are very hard to grasp. Sometimes it misses but it makes sense, sometimes they just don't even try to lead the target despite having a clear radar lock, launched at a reasonable range given the DLZ and still misses by several miles. It's probably just me and my inexperience in that module but often on head-on fights, a second after missile launch it just goes straight forward, just like a rocket would do, no lead whatsoever. Looking at it through tacview tells me it most of the time goes right through the first batch of counter measures the enemy fighter released before usually banking left or right (nothing fancy). It's as if the missile just ignored my radar lock and just goes all nomnom for the first tasty chaff it sees. The only time I get successful hits with R-27ERs are when I use it on bigger targets, or if I use it as a close range missile (with the right angle), but not in BVR. Besides, as far as I can tell, it seems my targets are within visual range when I reach the ER missile's optimal range anyway (even if 'optimal' is relative to any situation). All in all, what happens now is that I load a few ERs for testing and trial then I switch to 73ETs, 73Ts and R-73s when I can't afford to mess around.

For fixed wings, from my (all relative) experience in the A-10C, rudder pedals is a must have for: -Cross wind take-off/landing -Gun run precision -Advanced turns and it's great for: -Taxiing, progressive braking -Formation flight I spent a few months searching for a great set of pedals but sadly only SAITEK is on the market and other more underground higher quality brands either closed shop, doesn't respond or have a pro only price tag. In the end I went with the SAITEK Combat set, it gets the job done, it's not great, feels a bit like a toy but it's precise enough. I still long for the day a company stands up to SAITEK with a higher quality set of their own.

I'd vote for the A-10C too. Although supposedly knowing how to operate all the systems only means you can start to learn actually flying it, it still makes for a rewarding experience on its own given the level of complexity. Like old school games, the harder it is the more rewarding it feels. It's a delight to 'hop in' the Warthog and feel at home ready to fulfill your mission. Especially considering you have the dedicated TM HOTAS. :) Just learn a few systems at a time, fly a mission to use it, get used to it, and repeat with another system. In no time you'll be having a blast I'm sure. Maybe fly with Labels on though, so you actually spend more time exercising rather that trying to find targets.

What's wrong with crowd funding that you'd only consider it as a last resort? You involve and get to reach your fan base (which is beneficial in so many ways), you secure some money right from the start that doesn't need return on investment since it's basically pre-orders & you keep investors at bay that would otherwise dictate your marketing & development directions being concerned about the money ratio rather than the product quality. Amongst other things.

Thing is, from our point of view it is indeed rather obvious what needs to be done and easy solutions exists but from my experience, indie developers and tiny studios have a hard time in dealing with such things, because it takes an incredible amount of time and effort to communicate properly & keep everyone updated, that's as much time and resources away from developing. There usually isn't a full time paid community manager to support such tiny projects and with good reasons. ^^

Nor Kickstarter nor Paypal nor both combined would reach such tremendous fees. For example, on the back of my head, Kickstarter fees are 3% IIRC. Gotta keep the campaign moving though and throw in content updates regularly to keep the pace, the last few days usually aligns to the firsts in term of pledges so what happens in between is, in this case, critical.

Or it's just a means to secure future investment by showing them there's interest, the 75k being merely a bait. It can be anything really.