MethWolf

No; its pretty clear he means that you won't have to own it to host a server running it. You will have to own it to join a server running it, unless something changes.

So are you planning on restricting servers with CA to only players that have purchased CA? If not, what differentiates CA from the Nimitz, either from a user or business standpoint?

This is exactly it; I'm participating in this discussion because I want this for free but because I do want to pay for and use it. And there's no way I will, nor anyone I fly with, if it gets implemented in this way.

Arguing that the reason for this is "immersion" , then admitting that the real reason is "we think this will get us the most cash" after several others point out how nonsensical the "this inhibits trolls" argument is, sounds like a textbook case of a bad faith argument to me. I think you are incorrect that this is the best way to make money on this module, but you saying so isn't condescending or disingenuous the way that telling me that this is the way to protect module owners from "trolls" is.

This makes your previous "scenarios" comment seem in bad-faith.

This is the most obvious solution beyond just considering it included in the $80 price tag of a carrier plane: carrier doesn't respond to you on comms and you can't catch wires or hook up the cat. Shame all of this work on a carrier ops is gonna go to waste when nobody buys it.

Pretty much this; DCS is really unstable to play online, even on small group coop stuff. As much as I'd love to see the big servers work well, I'd be a pretty happy camper if i could play with my friends.

autistic

You didn't have to hazard a guess, though.

There are afterburner effects, just not the ones you get on the player aircraft. If they are missing on your computer than there is something wrong in your dcs install, but it looks like they are there from your screenshots. They are just much fainter than what you're looking for. Like Cobra said, they are the same fx on all the ai aircraft. I made a screenshot comparing the fx at night on an ai ajs-37 (i don't own the viggen yet) and the ai f-16. When i was writing this post i thought about it and went ahead and added an ai mig-21, which is an aircraft i do own and is activated. As you can see, they are all the same effect and none of them are the fancy looking stuff you see in screenshots of player craft. I don't think changing this is high priority for any of the devs right now. It might be an awful lot of work for something that isn't broken, but who knows.

thanks for posting thanks

or you don't understand: he gave reasons why a mig-23 might be an attractive model to develop for. These speculation threads aren't really any more useful than the wishlist threads. And, for the record, if it was based on facts it wouldn't be speculation.

You getting angry at a two year old post written by a guy who was banned a year ago, chill out.

New maps only require 2.0, which has a built-in map browser and the like. They wouldn't have to release a new branch for every map, 3rd party or not. That said, afaik no third parties have indicated that they'll be putting a map out before 2.5 anyways. Normandy/Straight of Hormuz won't be issues to release before then to 2.0

to back that up... https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2937728&postcount=2093