NeilWillis

Back of the queue pal!

I have a similar set-up, with an i7 6700 K. I don't have any issues at all with multiplayer frame rates. There is something amiss with your set up I suspect, and you can obtain a far better online performance than that.

Yes. For every M2000C owner that uses this forum there will be hundreds that don't. Just because a few make a lot of noise, doesn't make them a majority.

With inflation running at around 2% a year, your $59.99 would be inflated by 20% which gives a direct comparison price wise of $71.98. So in real terms you're paying just $8.02 more than you paid then. If you factor in all the additional systems available in the F/A-18C like the helmet aiming system, carrier capability, extra weapons systems, and afterburners, I'd say as a defence buyer you'd consider that lot for $8.02 per airframe a real bargain!

It might be worth reading the stuff connected to the F-14 and the carrier crews they have been developing. The infrastructure for animated infantry is already part of DCS World I understand, and with what has been said in connection with the F-14 project, we may well see some form of animated deck personnel in the future. With any luck, it's on the radar at ED too, but we have heard nothing regarding the Nimitz DLC content yet. Fingers crossed, because it'd be a great immersion bonus.

There will be a number of high resolution 2nd gen VR sets appearing in the coming months I suspect. I'd expect that Oculus are still going to be market leaders and we'll hear from them soon. HTC seem to have jumped the gun and announced an intermediate solution already, but they've probably got more to announce too. We can expect wireless solutions, glove controllers, wider field of view, forward facing cameras to implement augmented reality too. Star VR have a lot of catching up to do, so it may be a bit of a leap in the dark if you pin your hopes on them at this stage. You're right not to leap right now, because these developments are probably less than a year away now. Best advice would be to wait and see what the reviews say when the press get hold of the 2nd generation equipment.

You'd add some brand new car stereo to an old wreck of a car 2 months before you were due to scrap it, and not consider the work a waste of time? Why not spend the time adding the feature requested to the new system? We have managed for a good many years without, so why is it suddenly so pressing a matter that it should be done now?

No it won't be fixed because 1.5.8 is in the final couple of weeks of it's usefulness. When 2.5 arrives, it will be consigned to the virtual land fill site.

There is supposed to be a dedicated server project coming our way once 2.5 is out, so this feature might be a waste of time until that aspect of DCS World is in place. I would definitely like to see it too however.

Up sun crazing is a feature, not a bug. If you find that distracting then I'd say you're being a little precious. If anything, 2.5 will make your life more difficult as there are new reflections being added to the cockpit. Have you ever looked through Perspex in sunshine?

Wait for the reviews then.

It is possible there might be at least a few training missions included. Start up procedures will be pretty much complete anyway for example, so I wouldn't rule the possibility of some basic training missions.

You're implying that the European cold war environment would be survivable. It was never envisaged that any asset would be safe. The entire purpose of the western defences was to make it impossible for opposition forces to attack without insuperable losses through the use of killing grounds. Vast numbers of tanks were anticipated, and any war would mean virtual annihilation of both sides. Life expectancy would have been measured in hours, not days - for anything close to or beyond the FEBA. So, Warthogs, being as exposed as they inevitably must be, would be wiped out very rapidly, as would anything else that moved on the battlefield. Camouflage and ambush was the doctrine for ground forces, deployed in areas where ATGMs could hit opposing forces in the rear, by funnelling them through killing zones. Air assets were assumed to make one or at most 2 sorties. The chances of being able to land at a conventional airbase after war broke out would have been highly unlikely too it was assumed. So yeah, SAMs were going to be a thing, and were always anticipated as a threat. The Gulf war was a very asymmetrical situation. Don't for a second think conventional war means one side plinking targets with impunity.

It does sound like the main board is fried. I have replaced it in mine too. It's easy to swap, with no soldering or anything technical involved. They're not cheap at 40 odd euros plus postage though. Hope you can get it sorted soon.

The Carrier will be a separate purchase initially. If you wait for the sales, you might get a bundle deal for them both, but I predict that will not be until well into 2018.

One of the best newsletters for years and years. Congratulations to the ED team for reaching the point of pre-release sale. I think this will be a huge step forwards in flight simulation, and will probably be talked about for years to come. Thanks for the herculean effort behind this very very welcome announcement!

I am afraid you are so way way off the mark you make yourself look absurd. You cannot possibly compare ED with EA - the scale of a mass market product has no relevance when it comes to niche item like the F/A-18C. When your volume of sales is a hundredth of the totals that mass market stuff, how can you even think of comparing prices? It's like comparing a Nissan Micra with a Rolls Royce. Sure the Roller will be pricey, but it's built to a far higher standard, with none of the economies of mass manufacturing. No comparison stands up. What we have in the F/A-18C is licensed from Boeing - which is never a cheap undertaking in itself, spread across a finite number of sales. We also have the culmination of years of research and coding - and coding will continue for a number of years - at no additional cost - after release. The F/A-18C will break new ground in terms of realism, accuracy, and depth of detail. When you start to see the reviews it'll get, you'll see that it is a significant item. I have been flying the A-10C for years, and still haven't discovered every nuance of what the module represents. I have flown almost a thousand hours mostly in this one module. I have had more entertainment from it than any single other hobby or activity I can name. Also, behind the pricing of this module is the fact that a lot of people have poured hundreds of man hours into such a small volume commodity. The revenue will ensure a continued presence in the world of a unique software house that have pushed flight simulation far beyond any other organisation in the industry, which puts a lot of their rivals to shame. Do you want the workforce to have a future or not? And finally, if you really aren't ready to pay for a module, you can always keep your wallet in your pocket. Complaining about stuff seems to me to be far too prevalent I'm cyberspace, and frankly it cuts no ice.

He's a lumberjack and he's OK, he sleeps all night and designs missions all day... Doesn't quite work, but you get the gist. What are your views on girlies clothing and hanging around in bars though?

The fact that the Viper also has a heavily reclined seat to counter Hi-G loadings may have led the designers to opt for a side stick perhaps? It would mean it could be positioned further aft, giving an ergonomically better configuration whereas with your shoulders further back, a centre stick may have needed pilots with arms like gorillas.

The fact that there has been a lot of extra work going into the ground radar, folding wings, tail hook, helmet mounted sight, an additional MFCD, additional weapons systems, fly by wire, extra bit tests for all those systems may also have something to do with it. Regardless, it is still a step forward in flight sim technology, and as we're getting 2.5 free of charge, I wouldn't begrudge ED wanting to maintain a cash flow in order to be able to continue producing cutting edge software. Do you really feel hard done by in having to pay the going rate for some leading edge software?

It's already been announced that the Hi-spec Nimitz class carrier will be a separate DLC purchase. Do you really think the Hornet is over priced at $59.99 ($79.99 after the pre release phase)? Have you read the description?

Apart from the Harrier being the wrong type, and the Mirage being an entirely different aircraft - sure!

What you're buying into is intellectual rights. Their value remains the same globally, and the suppliers are not responsible for the economic welfare of any corner of the globe. Why should ED be worse off because your nation's exchange rates may be unfavourable? There are no refunds available because you will be in possession of computer code, and in effect, once it is on your system, it cannot be reliably and accountably removed. You are paying for the right to possess something that once you possess, you cannot prove you no longer possess. As in all things, you have a choice, enter into a binding contract or don't enter into it. Once you buy, it is yours, permanently. Yes, there is always a degree of good faith on your part. The transaction is also entered into only when you agree to the end user license agreement. If you don't like it, you have a very simple choice. Walk away, and don't buy.

Since the announcement we have had both Friday and Wednesday updates. But as was stated by Skatezilla, there has been the small matter of Christmas. Plus I dare say 2.5 is holding up a lot of the more routine items on their list. As long as we get an update at the end of January, I wouldn't be too disappointed by a lack of weekly changes.

The F10 problem is probably as simple as not changing at least 1 aircraft from AI to either client or player in the "skill" drop down menu. JTAC depends on a number of factors. First You must place a suitable vehicle, then set up a JTAC role for it in the advanced waypoint options. (Perform Task; FAC - Assign Group; and allocate a target). You will also find it helps to add (Set Option; ROE; Weapon Hold) and (Perform Command; Immortal AND Invisible) to ensure survivability, and ensure that the JTAC doesn't just eliminate all the nearby opposition. Finally, in the "Battlefield Commanders" Tab (click on the two crossed flags menu button) ensure that there are JTACs available in the mission/multiplayer roles. They can be made to spawn under triggers too of course. Do a search here for more info on mission building. It is a hugely complex subject.