Psyrixx

I was under the impression that "partners" meant "provided the engine". In console development terms, you are "partners" with either Microsoft or Sony if they allow you to develop a game for their hardware platform (XBox or Playstation). So in this case, ED allowed RRG to develop DCS WWII on their platform, the DCS World engine. Doesn't mean ED had any direct involvement or was involved in any deep meaningful way, just as Microsoft and Sony don't have any direct input on many of the third party products that their "partners" provide for their platforms. At least that's how I understood it. :)

Just my $0.02... As a backer who will be receiving all aircraft (so I don't have to worry about what modules I end up getting two of), I do think it makes sense to allow people to decide which module they want a key for. Not to confuse matters in the rewards listing, but instead of P-51 just say "module of your choice" and be done with it. ED/RRG/Whoever were already going to make the modules anyway, regardless of how many people planned on purchasing them after the fact. Everyone who already wants the Mustang already has it (myself included... but that didn't stop me from pledging an irresponsible amount to help the project succeed ;)) and a module is a module. If people want to pass on the Mustang, just give them a key for something else. As I said, it doesn't affect me in the slightest. But it shouldn't be too hard to, as suggested, allow people to just make their selection(s) in their ED Account Profile and distribute whatever modules they desire. It's a very small effort to make a larger portion of backers very happy. In fact, that seems to be the only sticking point I've seen in this thread so far. So in theory that one change would provide 100% Kickstarter consumer satisfaction. And if it's a matter of not wanting to code up a back-end/front-end to handle the module selection, I'll even volunteer my own time to get it done. If it's a "business decision", then it's out of my hands, but I want to at least throw the option out there if it's something that is just not being discussed because of perceived effort required by a team that's already pushing very very hard to finish a rather large and unexpected project that has been sort of dumped on their lap. As several people have already expressed, the fact that the backers are getting anything is incredibly awesome and I'm not here to try and stoke the fire. Just looking to put in the opinion of someone who isn't directly affected by the desire for a module that he won't be getting (since my backer level gets me all of them).

I have a great set of video tutorials for the Su-25T - most of the basics apply to the F-15C and the other Flaming Cliffs aircraft. The first six videos are all about getting started, taxi, takeoff, navigation, landing and countermeasures - and these are applicable to pretty much any DCS aircraft you fly. So you may want to start by learning the basics in the Su-25T, and then taking what you've learned on to the more advanced aircraft. Here's the link, hope it helps!

Here's my own tutorial series for the Su-25T if you're looking for some instruction in English, they're detailed and long, but I've gotten quite a bit of positive feedback on them. Hope it helps!

Correct. And you should, if testing a beta product. Keep 1.2.7 because you know it is stable, install 1.2.8 open beta to play around with the new features and check for bugs. If you find any game killers, you can always fall back to 1.2.7 and report the bugs so that we can confirm and fix them. That is the nature of having betas.

Great to hear guys, this is exactly why I made this mission. Having a blast, whether newbz or seasoned. =)

Thanks for the plug! =) I'll be wrapping up the final tutorials as soon as I have a bit of free time, but these should get anyone going pretty well. :pilotfly:

Also, make sure GUN ARM is off unless you are actually making a gun run. The nose down trim and systems in place to try and keep it there dramatically slow the aircraft down while trying to maneuver.

Wait for the GTX 800 series. :)

Yes and now the 1.2.7 Open Beta can become 1.2.8 Open Beta.

Just remove LockOn. IIRC, the only reason LockOn had to be installed was to satisfy a contractual obligation that Eagle Dynamics had with Ubisoft. LockOn and DCS: World / Flaming Cliffs 3 are otherwise completely separate installations from each other.

There is no difference between Flaming Cliffs 3 and DCS: Flaming Cliffs 3. They are the same product. Your existing Flaming Cliffs 3 will be updated, there is no need to purchase a new key. Honestly, the Flaming Cliffs series is the gift that keeps on giving!

The main goals of v1.2.7 were to squash many existing bugs with a huge focus on multiplayer stability and to provide a platform for the UH-1H Release version. The purpose of the Open Beta was to provide updates in stages to be mass-tested, before issuing a release patch that may have potentially introduced more show stopping crashes than fixes. The MFD bug you refer to has been fixed in our internal version (as stated at the end of your open beta bug report thread), but unfortunately was not integrated into v1.2.7 before feature lock. It will be included in a future update. Rest assured all of the other reported issues are being looked at and dealt with. It cannot reasonably be expected that every single outstanding issue to be fixed before the release of a new patch, otherwise patches would never be released. :) It is, of course, a balance of how severe a problem is, the time required to identify and fix it, and how likely it is to break the current stable version of the program. We're getting there! As for the change logs being identical between Open Beta and Final ... that is the nature of an Open Beta. You release, test, make fixes, and update the beta product. Once the beta product is stable you release that stable version as-is, without introducing any major additional changes between Stable Open Beta and Release. Then you move on to the next round of updates. A release patch change log is rarely much different from the most recent beta change log in any development environment I've ever dealt with. Onward we go! :pilotfly:

It's pretty much any other flight sim I've played, with or without texture packs. :P FSX with REX, for example, has great looking scenery from the air, but it becomes ugly and pixelated the closer you get to the ground. Texture packs or "advanced scenery" don't touch the ugly gray line roads or add traffic. Considering EDGE takes advantage of DirectX 11.2 and handles multiple video cards I'd say they're keeping up with the latest tech. How does it run in practice? We don't know yet. But that doesn't seem to be the issue here, most people just seem to be criticizing the fact that EDGE doesn't look as "pretty" as, for example, ArmA 3 or Crysis (which if you've played ArmA 3, you'll notice that because of such pretty graphics, flying aircraft with the view distance turned way up drags frames down to single digits... and flying with the default view distance is just not a good experience. It's simply not possible to render huge view distances on current hardware with graphics that are *that* resource intensive). Eagle Dynamics are playing the Graphics vs. Performance balancing game just like every other developer, and playing it pretty well from where I'm sitting. EDGE is the best looking flight simulator engine I've seen, and if it runs as good or better across the board than the current engine I think it's more than adequate for our needs. :D If you were expecting photo realism, even tiny-map based FPS like Battlefield 4 are still nowhere near that mark. They spend all of their texture resources on highly detailed small areas, whereas a flight sim has to cover 360kmx360km (or more, in the case of the Caucasus map or games like FSX or XPlane) while still looking good AND performing well. Even if you consider the maximum view distance is only around 100km, that's still a much larger space than even the largest Battlefield map. Also, EDGE has soooo much DETAIL! Fully rendered streets, street lights, 3D vehicles, trees, ground clutter, vegetation, individualized buildings, beautiful lighting effects... even if it's just confined to the "highly populated areas" it's still more detail than Battlefield or ArmA 3 bring to the table. Or any other flight simulator currently on the market with or without high resolution texture packs. I'm really at a loss when people complain about how EDGE looks, because there's just so much to look at! And considering the screenshots we've seen thus far have only been taken in the map editor and not in the game engine with all of the effects turned on, I'd say it'll look even better once it's in our hands. :pilotfly:

By "bar" you mean "target rich environment"? :thumbup: :pilotfly:

The thing EDGE has going for it is the sheer amount of detail possible. I honestly don't care if every single light post has bump mapping and is ultra-realistic (which, for a flight sim, is honestly well outside the realm of reality based on current hardware constraints). But EDGE, even in these outdated videos, is the most detailed flight simulation engine I've ever seen. Other flight sims with scenery add-ons are neat and all, but they don't have forests full of 3D trees, actual street lights at every corner, moving 3D modeled automobiles (so what if they're not Forza-quality... they really don't need to be), rows and rows of actual modeled houses (that are all a little bit unique) rather than the usual rectangular placeholders, etc etc. And honestly, in all the other flight sims I've seen, the ground textures still look pretty bad (but that's to be expected as the regions they cover are huge). If a several year old representation of EDGE looks as good as what we're seeing in these videos from YouTube (which also aren't representative of EDGE on a consumer machine, IIRC these videos are representative of commercial flight training simulators which aren't usually as spec'd out as home enthusiast machines) I definitely look forward to seeing what EDGE looks like once incorporated into DCS World.

To be frank, you shouldn't have copied anything from your 1.2.6 install over to the 1.2.7 Open Beta install. The whole point is to use the updated version for testing in a vanilla state so that mods and other variables for a baseline crash are kept to a minimum. That being said, there's nothing to keep you from installing anything from v1.2.6 over into v1.2.7 Open Beta and if you wish to run v1.2.7 Open Beta as your primary DCS World version you are completely at liberty to do that if you wish. But please note any mods you are running if you encounter bugs or possible glitches when you make bug reports in the Open Beta feedback forum. Furthermore, you are supposed to check v1.2.6 for any bugs you may find in the v1.2.7 Open Beta prior to reporting them as new, since if the bug already exists in v1.2.6 and persists into v1.2.7 it has likely already been reported and should not be posted to the Open Beta Feedback forum. In any case, please do a very thorough forum search before reporting bugs to make certain they are indeed new issues. Like cichlidfan said, once v1.2.7 reaches a production state it will very likely auto-update over your existing v1.2.6 installation. If you don't have v1.2.6 installed, you will very likely need to download and install the full installers again. :pilotfly:

You can also lead a troll to water, but he'll just live under the bridge instead. ;)

Try reinstalling/repairing the iControl PC software. If that does not fix it, you'll unfortunately have to wait for the iControl author to update his program to work with v1.2.7. From what I remember, iControl modifies a few of DCS's files so that DCS knows it is there and can interface with the server. If you have not installed iControl and told it to use the Open Beta install directory, none of these files will have been updated. Also, take a look at item #5 from the iControl FAQ page: http://bit-shift.com/a10vcserver/index.html#faq If you are not able to select which directory DCS is installed to, then unfortunately iControl is not compatible with the Open Beta and you'll have to wait until v1.2.7 Final is released.

Happy to help!

In order for the ground crew to respond to you, four conditions must be met: You must be stopped Your engines must be off and RPM at 0 Your canopy must be open The airfield you are at must be affiliated with your team (red or blue) Please check that you've met these four conditions and if the ground crew still does not respond to you, post a .trk file in the DCS Open Beta Test Reports forum here, under FC3: http://forums.eagle.ru/forumdisplay.php?f=311 Thanks!

DCS World is the download version. It is the base game from which all other games (or modules, as they're referred to around here) are installed and run. DCS World comes with one free aircraft, the Su-25T. It is a Partial Fidelity Survey Sim (meaning it has a realistic flight model, but simplified systems... you don't need to know how the real one works to use it). You can take a look at my tutorial series for the Su-25T here, if you want a quick peek at how it's like to fly it: Combined Arms is one of the DCS World modules. It is a way that the player can control units in single player and/or multiplayer with a top-down map view OR they can jump into ground vehicles such as tanks, AAA, mobile SAMs, etc, and take first person control of said vehicle types. Each pay version (called a module) is an individual aircraft. Each module is downloaded into DCS World and can then be flown/controlled by the user. Modules vary in complexity from very very realistic (A-10C, Ka-50, P-51D, UH-1H) to medium realism (A-10A, Su-25, Su-25T) to fairly arcadeish (F-15, Su-27). See my previous post on the topic here: http://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=1939305&postcount=47. All modules are installed into DCS World. When you play multiplayer, you can play with anyone who owns any module at any time. If all you decide to use is the free Su-25T, you can still play missions with pilots in other paid-for modules, provided the mission you are flying has player slots for the corresponding aircraft. Hope this helps!

I myself have a Thrustmaster Warthog HOTAS at my house, and a Logitech 3d Pro at my dad's house in California. When I'm visiting family (as I'll be doing this coming week for the holidays) I usually fly the FC3 aircraft (primarily A-10A and Su25/T) with the Logitech 3D Pro and have just as much fun as I do at home flying the study sims (A-10C, Ka-50, UH-1H) with my HOTAS. So if you enjoy flight simulators and are primarily into FC3, you should have no problem. Start by binding your flight controls (pitch, roll, rudder, throttle), adjust the axis curves and saturation for more comfortable control, and also bind your triggers (weapons release and fire cannon, if applicable). These are the important things to have immediately bound to your joystick and you'll find out what works best for you as far as other controls over time. Many keys are just as easy to leave bound to the keyboard (gear toggle, flaps toggle) while others you will find are better suited to the joystick (switch weapons, slew targeting cameras, etc). Good luck, and enjoy!

This does pretty much exactly what you have typed above but is a bit more concise. Uses a for loop, at the end of the loop if binCycle is set to true and the counter is at the end of the user flags it re-sets the counter to 1 to start over again. Not 100% sure that this is the absolute correct syntax, and I don't know what the rest of your code looks like, but this should help you out a bit. You declare things like uFlag and uFlagMax (don't know how the uFlag can be 30 if the uFlagMax is 3, but could just be confusing variable naming). -- script to increment a flag from 1 to n at interval intSecs (seconds) local uFlag = 30 -- flag number, 1-99999 local uFlagMax = 3 -- flag value maximum local intSecs = 10 -- interval in seconds local blnCycle = true -- cycle back to 1 local function incrUserFlagFromOneToN(uFlag, uFlagMax, intSecs, binCycle) for i = 1, uFlagMax do trigger.action.setUserFlag(uFlag, i) if(i == uFlagMax and binCycle == true) i = 1 end end mist.scheduleFunction(incrUserFlagFromOneToN, {uFlag, uFlagMax, intSecs, binCycle}, timer.getTime() + intSecs) end incrUserFlagFromOneToN(uFlag, uFlagMax, intSecs, binCycle)

BLASPHEMY :megalol: