Dagger71

That is the most accurate guess when looking at current Steam matrix/MP server populations. Say on a given day there are 500 MPs on concurrently . Go to steam metrics and you will easily see 1500-2000 currently playing. Now multiply that by a factor of 4 (just to be conservative it could be 8-10X) and you will get the stand alone players. It will almost always be a 10/1 ratio. Now its hard to do these days due to the OB bugs (people have rolled back) but when we have a good patch, these number come up consistently.

Because many of the issues encountered in MP, these players tend to be the most vocal. I admit to usually playing MP but I have no doubt that SP is by far (10x) more popular. As someone pointed out, on a weekend you will see roughly a few hundred people in MP during peak times, but even on steam metrics, you'll see several times more playing DCS than on MP at the same time, and they (Steam players) also represent a small minority of overall player base . But I do "guesstimate" that players MP play more hours per player/week than say a SP. In the end, ED have the exact numbers and make their decisions base don these numbers. Edited to change 100X to 10X which is what I wanted to say in first place.

Trying to get passed first mission FA18 over Caucasus-Multirole Destroy EWR Problem is OPFOR keeps sending wave after wave after wave of interceptors/fighters. So I eventually loaded up the entire flight of 3 with 10 AAMRAM and myself 8 AAMRAM and 1 HARM and 1 CBU99. They intercept us on the way to target, our 2 CAP flights of 2 F15 all get shot down and so we are stuck having to destroy multiple waves on our own. Last time I tried, eventually all my wingmen were dead , I had 1 CBU99 left getting ready to drop it... get shot down from Su24M that had just taken off Do I need to ignore the target and just setup as a CAP flight and keep destroying what comes at us, reloading/re-arming AAMRAMS until the entire OPFOR airforce is eliminated, then re-arm for the main target???

I have no idea, and wouldn't even want to speculate how that happened. But you don't really see too many American companies making these types of study sims (Arma3, the Czech gamea also has a military version of their software). But again who knows, there could possibly be 2 dozen American companies also providing training sims and its just classified info.

Not talking about SRS. You have to select the proper preset in the plane. It's setup by the mission designer. PTT Push to talk button in the keybindings. It's all in the manual.

Dude you hit the ground and flipped it at what 2000 mph??? It should have exploded on first impact! Not sure why you think it should only catch fire and burn for a while. This is nowhere near to being a bug.

do you have the PTT in game settings right? are you using the right radio channels?

One is a port from LOMAC and the other was built from the ground up as a training simulator for the airforce and released as a study sim for the public. They do not compare to each other, in systems, FM flight model, DM damage model, weapon employment etc etc.

This^^^^^^^^^ He's right you know!

Well it would be amazing. Like I said as well, if they did a suite 7 A10C, then it would go down as the most realistic up to date military simulator ever made. The HMIT system was only first tested in 2010 and Suite 8 released 2014 with HMCS, along with Sniper XR pod which very new in military "years". It would be the biggest surprise ED would ever release and definitely would pay full price again for this upgrade. But we must be realistic and I know whatever small change coming to the A10C will be welcome.

Look at my specs I gave them and even specified that it was a modest system. I never lied about my system, you on the other have. So explain what exactly is your problem with the game.where are you having issues. And seriously what are your real specs? Is it a 2080 or a 1050ti? How much RAM do you have?

Pu239 does not reach 4000 degrees C. That is false. Neither does it take 52 trillion years to become inert.

This is one of the most insane, incoherent forum posts I have ever read anywhere. There is something SERIOUS going on. Schizophrenia, or some serious personal dissociative disorder and needs medical help ASAP before his reality continues to dissolve into some complete delusional fantasy world and he ends up arguing with garbage cans on the street and accusing cats of giving his mother herpes.

Well if they go from a suite 3 A10C to suite7, it will easily be the most realistic up to date study simulation of any military aircraft ever produced, since they would be replicating systems that aren't even adopted by all squadrons yet! I am more guessing we will see some minor upgrades (which will be greatly received by all A10C "pilots"), but I can't see a major upgrade that would bring us systems that have only been introduced recently to the real world.

I don't mean to dash your hopes but I seriously doubt we will be getting anything close to a suite 7 upgrade. I don't see JHMCS being released in the DCS A10C upgrade. But who knows possibly they actually did close a deal with the USAF and actually will introduce a newer suite.

I might not be following all the Dev threads lately due to work, but I don't remember them ever saying the A10C was getting the JHMCS. Isn't that from a much more modern suite?

that is rich coming from a guy who's been spouting complete nonsense this entire time. I really want to know if you are serious about everything you said here and in those videos.

This thread gave my eyes aids. I've never seen a troll be so wrong on everything he said, but then again that may have been the point all along. if so touche! If not, I wouldn't even know where to start to debunk this nonsense.

Interesting considering your post from June 2018 Aren't you the same guy that went on a rant last year then insulted everyone who responded, you even suggested I was raised by same gender parents (even if true why would that be an insult???). I don't know where you are getting your info from that the Vulcan API is going to radically change anything in complex study sims like DCS, but I am suspecting your expectations are much much too high. I, as many on here, have a modest i7, 16gb and a 1060 and can hadle this game without any major issues. You need to give us much much much more information as to what exactly you are experiencing.

I doubt anyone will post because there is nothing to post. no bug

need way more information. are they not appearing even as ambiguous contacts? is AWACS also not reporting them? What happens if the f18 interrogates them? As far as I am concerned the C101 will remain ambiguous because it has no IFF but the harrier should appear as friendly after interrogation or donor contact. why are you submitting bugs on behalf of others when you cannot provide a track or other info?

oops forgot to enable EPLRS command in the ME. So looks like everything works now, SA map, DL, INS. You need to change the date value in camp_init, open both Miz files in ME, change the dates as well, and add the command in advanced waypoints for EPLRS for each (AWACS and other FA18C groups) that uses it. During start up I saw all planes on DL, the WP distance is updating and you get the moving HSI map as well.

ok so by changing the dates in the miz files and some of the lua file I was able the INS now fully implemented and working. DL is working as wel, l except not all flights have theirs turned on so I am guessing there is some flag that is set to false. Can you guide me which lua file has it disabled? I can't find it in db_loadout.

so no chance of making a modern version of this campaign? That's too bad. If you ever change your mind and give us a dynamic campaign for the FA/18C version we actually have, I'd actually help to pay for it.

Is there any way to release the same campaign but during a more modern timeframe? For whatever reason the INS fix does not work for me, and to be honest I think many would prefer to have all currently available systems and weapons. I would at least like the option to use what I want. I think your DCE are great!!! But this one falls short because it is completely disabling too many systems of the FA18 we have.