Diabolus

Thanks for the quick replies all. I had a feeling that would be the case but never hurts to ask. Cibit - thanks for the links, appreciated! Chichlidfan - thanks for the correction to Cibit's typing :lol:

Mission and campaign building Quick question and I know it will be informed guesses and assumptions but there are those that know a darned sight more than most in this forum. I want to learn how to put missions and campaigns together and now that I have the time that shouldn't be a problem. Q is, is it worth learning with the current mission/campaign building tools or will DCS World 2.0 and Edge mean that there is a new mission/campaign building engine coming! Should I wait?

Great job PeterP, very much appreciated :thumbup:

A really good point and I guess confidentiallity must be a huge commercial issue. Thanks for that - I'm slowly realising that there may not be as many hidden agendas out there as is first perceived.

Thanks for the reply and please don't get me wrong, I love DCS, all of it and ED. I do however believe that they and third parties could do more, not necessarily in relation to completion times but to rule things in or out, such as info on the Corsica map. I also feel for Wags, he's obviously doing the best he can in a tough business environment. I take what you say about the business side and fully agree it must be tough fo ED in that environment. Developing any kind of investment capital is difficult as it must be for ED. Anyway, here's hoping we get Edge soon and at some point we get an Edge SDK. I reckon there's a great deal of talent on this forum and around the world that could do well with Edge. We'll have to see!

We've all seen the endless speculation, guessing and often pure dribble over things like the Corsica map and Nevada map etc etc. Why on earth don't developers just come clean -howabout for example - 'We can't use this Corsica map in DCSW at present due to licencing issues; if the situation changes we'll let you know'. Exactly how difficult can it be? It's obvious now that we, as patrons are waiting for Edge (and for a looong time by the way) at the expense of commercial projects. In a business context I understand that but why can't developers just 'man up' and say so instead of shining us on with 'it'll be finished when it's done' and 'we have no idea when it will be ready'. Developers and I anclude ED and all other third parties - get a grip and be a little less economicle with the truth!!

Be nice if they could incorporate a dynamic traffic system for the air bases - bring some ambient life to them. Looks great tho!:thumbup:

Yes, I get it too! lol :megalol:

Unbelievable! - I'm fuming:furious:

I'm done with this sim now! A fundamental of usability in this sim is comms and if they can't see that it's just dreadful. The use of JTAC is also an integral part of the realism and I'm just beside mysel that they haven't fixed it. Priorities - yeah right!!!

Why?

I totally agree! Let's see a high quality basic platform and as Sith states add the other layers later with smaller Kstarters. They would also, in all probability, have some income from sales to contribute to development too. Proof of the pudding maybe?

BBQ, I see and experience exactly the same as your vid. Do you think this is how the trimmer has been modeled or is this something that needs fixing?

Did RRG know that Sithspawn and Luckybob were developing the B17 before they announced their intentions to do so?

Agreed! It's been said before - get the current platform in good shape before ploughing off into the distance developing new stuff. True enough, we all want this sim to develop but we have to be able to use the current one to a high percentage of playability before moving on. I'm not being ungrateful because I love this sim - for me it's the best on the planet - but it needs to be stable and playable. PJ