remi

cool, thanks!

The question is, for the real fighter pilots out there, is this a realistic simulation of the vibrations felt as a pilot?

I just wanted to clear up that it is definitely lever length that affects perceived stiction the most. The longer the lever length, the less force that is required to exceed the static friction of the ball-joint of the warthog base. There are multiple ways to "fix" the stiction: 1) Decrease static friction - Relubricate the joint with new lubricant - Sand the surface of the joint - Downside: --- possibly sever the control cables threaded through the ball joint --- invasive procedure which is time consuming and requires repeat procedures --- cost of lubricant 2) Increase torque - Buy or manufacture tube to extend the warthog grip away from the base - Downside: --- cost of extension --- higher grip elevation resulting in shoulder pain unless the base elevation is decreased --- decreasing base elevation with table mount is costly and requires desk compatible with mount --- wider throw of the warthog grip, which can interfere with desk surface and chair 3) Change warthog base to gimbal system - Downside: --- cost of new joystick base --- possible incompatibility in software For me, the obvious solution is #2, for cost, simplicity, and greater fidelity to real cockpit in terms of throw of grip (except to F-16 I believe).

I don't feel stiction, but that's because I use the extensions. Stiction is entirely related to the torque and lever length. :laugh:

I don't want physical media, but having a physical package would be a nice addition for a premium version. Like a spiral bound manual, chart, poster, etc.

Since tomcat and hornet share the same carrier ops , I don't think carrier would be included with either, though both could be bundled. I think hornet and tomcat will be same price, lest one be bought preferentially over the other.

Honestly, I will pay whatever ED will sell it for. I have been waiting for this game since 1992 (the original F/A-18 Hornet 1.0 on Mac). If there is one module to have, this one is it. Has everything you could ever want, and the systems they modeled for it are breathtaking. I'm going to speculate on a bundle though, and I will say: $99.99 for module, $69.99 pre-order price, $29.99 carrier ops module (including training), $39.99 for SOH. ($150 for everything?)

Based on Chizh's musings, what do you think the price will be for the module?

I'm hoping for a B57.

Modeling a growler would probably not be possible, the ECM technology is pretty well protected by the government.

Looking forward to the new effects, probably more so than the caucasus map, because that's the only graphics change that hasn't been implemented yet. Better performance for these things would be great too. Has anyone else noticed that sometimes clouds and contrails and missile trails sometimes flicker?

This ignores all the users who say once you go 144+, you can't go back. You even recognize the difference between 144 and 120.

Are you referring to the specs in your signature? Why wouldn't an i9 7920x w/ Titan Xp in SLI be able to run DCS in 4k? GTA5 runs over 100fps easy on 4k with all settings maxed. I'm specifically asking regarding gameplay. Is it easier to stay zoomed-out in 4k? If I can stay zoomed out and still read the gauges, then horizontal real estate isn't really necessary then, especially if I have to zoom in on 1440p, which narrows the FOV anyways.

https://rog.asus.com/articles/gaming-monitors/the-35-rog-swift-pg35vq-gaming-monitor-turns-hdr-and-quantum-dots-up-to-200hz/ Which is better for DCS, having more horizontal view and zooming in more to be able to read the gauges and displays, or having a limited horizontal view, but staying zoomed out because it's easier to read the gauges and see threats? Performance wise, I think the next gen CPUs and GPUs will be able to render DCS at the maximum refresh rates, so this is purely a gameplay question.

Why doesn't it look like this as far as shadowing?

It looks like they took the Hornet cockpit from the 3d modeling software and pasted a random nevada screenshot beyond the cockpit. No lighting effects at all in the Hornet shot, so it must not be from in-game yet.

It's not complete without the pacific theater!!! :cry:

I wish Nevada was the new defacto training arena for every aircraft module in DCS, but no such luck. I don't think it will ever feature training or true war campaigns. Have to wait for 2.5. :(

But I think just one island is not enough. I would also expect there to be models for all the cruisers, battleships, destroyers, carriers, etc, and I'm not sure if LNS can handle the scope of a full theater. Iwo Jima is also such a limited battle as far as fighter aircraft. Battle of Leyte Gulf would be supreme. Midway, Mariana Islands, Okinawa, Guadalcanal, etc.

How hard would it be to get a Pacific theater map? I really want to experience ww2 Pacific combat.

Press "F" to pay respects.

Honestly, was expecting the gear to collapse, followed by bitchin betty saying "ENGINE LEFT, ENGINE RIGHT!"

Great update, looking forward to hearing more!

Would wait until F/A-18 is released. And at that point, carrier ops would be following, probably as a module package. That's my guess.

Still voting for Miramar or Barbers Point. Don't think carriers will be implemented in time for LN's map release. Makes more sense for a training location that can incorporate carriers down the road.