Sticky

:drink:

Its not ridiculous if you prefer one type of cockpit to fly in over the other. Its not at all about nationality, since im neither american or russian. I used to admire the russian planes very much, but now after flying so much russian planes after all these ED sims with russian planes I have lost some respect and I can say I MUCH prefer western type modern cockpits and weapon systems. I agree, its all precious work from ED yes, but if we get for example Su25 again then I will keep to the A10C because I just dont like those types of cockpits. I think they suck TBH. And we wont get a modern russian cockpit since they are so new ED doesnt have all the info required to make one. Just my opinion :)

He has to stay close to the first helicopter, even while using the shkval and finding the target etc, he should fly so that he is still close in formation. Good luck

Not F16 specifically, but as you can see I wrote F16 and F18, and the very simple reason is that I want a DC and if there is no DC then I would rather see my favourite planes pushed further up in the DCS to do list ;) Get it? I dont want to fly my favourite planes in a non DC environment. Very simple. But this is just my opinion, and I wrote IMO twice :P

Only if it comes with a good dynamic campaign IMO. If not, then the "other side" can have a plane, until they make a good DC, then it is time for F16 yes. I have wished for an F16 or F18 before, but what if it comes without a DC? Better then to wait until they have a DC ready for us IMO.

I think what you are asking for can only be done with a really good dynamic campaign. I also hate repeating missions. I hate having to kill a million targets to get the "finished" status so that I can play the next mission. But im sorry to say we wont see a dynamic campagn yet. I think you should give DCS:WH a try anyway, from what I have read it has many improvements over DCS:BS. Hopefully next DCS will have a dynamic campaign.

It can still be a problem, a big problem even, what if the enemy SAM hides behind trees? You cant see him on your targeting pod because of the trees but he can still track/shoot you.

Do you think that it will be easy for ED to change this? Just a small patch? Just a small easy fix so that your computer can run it as good as your "buddies with upgraded PC´s". Do you really think it would be that easy and fast to change it?

Edit: Removed since yellonet changed his original one sentence reply to a more complete reply.

Edit: Removed since yellonet changed his original one sentence reply to a more complete reply.

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/congress-drops-funding-controversial-jet-engine/story?id=11634886

Yes thats the way it works, but you are not new here, you should know this.. Yes see Eddies answer, and again, you are not new here, you should know this.. These questions (why wont they TELL us) are very old and frequent, by now someone who registered five years ago and has almost 500 post should have picked this up perhaps :music_whistling: Anyway I agree with you 100% on the importance of good AI and I hope in the final product we get as much AI improvements as possible.

Im with you :D Elitist and proud! But I have to admit, after I came to the conclusion that "this sucks" and "this is crap", I still kept playing it and finished the campaign :music_whistling: And I also admit that the terrain impressed me. I even used trackir... It was fun for a short while, but tetris can also be fun for a short while.

Sorry, I dont understand what a "simulation game" is. For me something is either a simulation OR a game. The closest thing I have seen yet to a simulation is DCS:BS but it didnt quite make it all the way because of some of its flaws (Ground AI, wingmen AI, trees, and some other things) so it came close to a simulation, but fell short. So im gonna call DCS:BS a game for now (it may be upgraded with some of DCS:WH improvements and perhaps ill change my mind then). But I would not call anything "simulation game" because for me those two words cannot be combined in that way. BUT english isnt my 1st language (english was the 4th language I learned) so im no expert in definitions, I can only say what it means to ME.

No I dont agree, a really good simulation is not a game. But yeah for me FC2 is more of a game than a simulation. So in the case of FC2 yes its a game.

Say what you want but the terrain is very good looking. Maybe if we are lucky ED will decide that a completely new terrain is needed for the next DCS ( which should be the F16C ofc ;) ) and we can have something that looks better than current dcs terrain. I dont know about hawx2 but the first hawx had very good looking terrain. I didnt like the trees and "forests" of hawx1, but im sure with new terrain and new trees Ed can make something even much better than hawx, and large areas. Given time ofc :) (ofc I understand that the differences between the two in complexity in other areas than just graphics when it comes to the terrain means that you cant really compare, im just hoping one day we can have something complex AND good looking)

No, probably the testers dont have the dx11 version, but nice try :thumbup:

I think Nate is right here, no dx11 pics yet.

While we are on the subject, why cant my cd player play dvds? I may have misunderstood you though, so take this as just a joke ;)

Just a few more days now. I expect you guys to write reviews for all the rest of us. With lots of pics :) Or even put a video review on youtube perhaps? The rest of us who havent decided yet will appreciate very much your input on the stick. But to be honest it wont take much right now to make me put an order.

Been waiting for this!!!!! :D

:thumbup: Thanks, any updates are very much appreciated :D

You are right of course, it is technically wrong, but I think its a good word for most situations, because most ppl in here knows what we mean when we write "lock" : "automatic optical tracking using the TV image from the Shkval camera". If its good enough for ED to put in the english manual its good enough for me.

Nitpicking? Its a good word IMO even if it may not be 100% correct in describing what actually happens and they use the word "lock" in the manual, im guessing they chose that in order to help the learning process.

If the targets arent moving you can guide missiles to them without a lock. Do you use the nightvision goggles? With nightvision switched on I can sometimes make out targets on the target screen and if they are non moving get a kill with the vikhrs without a lock. EDIT: Since the word lock can cause confusion, fear, misunderstandings etc I will try to refrase: If the targets arent moving you can guide missiles to them without the Shkval camera automatic optical tracking mode. Do you use the nightvision goggles? With nightvision switched on I can sometimes make out targets on the target screen and if they are non moving get a kill with the vikhrs without engaging the Shkval camera automatic optical tracking mode. EDIT2: You can of course do this with moving targets also but I didnt write that the first time since its hard enough to do that in daytime with a moving target (depending on angle ofc) I didnt think you would be interested to try that at night. But yes you can do the exact same thing with moving targets aswell. :)