WinterH

All that matters is we hopefully get a 75 to 80s F-4E, anything else is an amazing bonus for me. That E tho... that one is just pretty much necessary for DCS... I am afraid if it is a Heatblur project, they may end up only doing a naval one, in that case it is better off not being made as far as I'm concerned... -_-

Basically this is all that needs to be said. I like DCS for experiencing individual aircraft with their quirks and subjective "feel" as well as objective numbers. I don't give a single damn about potential online competitiveness in team deathmatch. It would be a shame if online competitiveness would be a deciding factor in all module development, as that would preclude some amazing aircraft from being developed, like the very cool to fly I-16 we got. I'm not saying it shouldn't be given any weight at all everytime. But arguing not to get something as iconic and crazy to fly like Mitsubishi Zero just because it wouldn't be most competitive goes against everything I and many others like about DCS.

As far as I'm concerned, I'd much, much prefer 75-89 versions of them first. After that's a done deal, and DCS' environment is more suitable to simulate Vietnam war, I think devs can strip systems/tweak flight models etc for making a Vietnam version for a discounted fee to owners of other versions. And I'd get it myself too. But later 70s/80s F-4E, A-6E, A-7E would all fit into and add to DCS a lot better for now, thus as far as I am concerned these are the correct versions TBH.

And you're almost completely wrong. This isn't about slightly different aircraft, or a few more weapons that can be restricted out. Almost everything even immediately post Vietnam War is vastly more capable then their Vietnam versions in ways that change how they operate. Because that's how tech develops, you fix the deficiencies occured in the last war. But those deficiencies defined the realities of air war over Vietnam: complete lack or very crappy RWRs, often unreliable radars, very unreliable missiles, little to no guided ground attack weapons until fairly late, few aircraft with the ability to be accurate with unguided ground attack weapons, little to no emphasis on agility for the most part etc. MiG-21Bis is a relatively less of far cry, but even it is not appropriate as it just has a lot better thrust, range, and radar than closest variant actually served in Vietnam, the MF. Besides, MF was late and few in numbers, most MiG-21s served in that war were PF, PFM, and even F-13s. Bis is an incredibly far cry from any of those. I've already listed in my post what is correct, what is good enough as a fill-in, and what isn't. Though, I was too generous on the F-5E-3, as it really is superior to any F-5 served in war by some margin. Take that away, we have 1 blue helicopter that mostly fit with very little weapon restrictions, 1 blue attack plane (but it is a mod, making its inclusion on official campaigns for example, rather unlikely), and 1 red fighter in existing modules. So that's like 2 and a half existing modules, and 1 blue and 1 red fighter in upcoming ones. Razbam wanted to make a Bronco at some point, but it doesn't look like in active consideration anymore (I'd love it TBH). A-6 is almost certain to be vastly more capable than Vietnam versions, A-7 is very likely to be so too.

Corsair vs Zero was a thing, and Zero pilots did get kills, yeah, Corsair is superior, but it's not like matchups in DCS aren't lopsided in other periods either. There is enough info to do some of the Japanese birds, Zero being one of them. It's not like P-47 has been easy for ED for example, as many of its docs were apparently shredded when Republic went bankrupt, but using info from whatever's available, still flyable airframes, and CFD analysis, ED pulled through. Also it is always being hinted that ED's CEO loved Hellcat and wants one in DCS at some point. Also shared by ED is a plan to make a WW2 version of Marianas Islands map in future. Leatherneck will also create WW2 pacific AI assets for their module. So yeah, there is a drive for Pacific already. I'm much more interested in Pacific aircraft than Eastern Front, because we have seen a whole lot of Eastern Front since 2001 in various flavors of IL-2 sim series. The last time Pacific birds, especially the Japanese ones done justice was... ? La-9 would be a super weird choice BTW... Only fits Korea. La-5FN or La-7 would make much, much more sense. There are many WW2 Soviet aicraft I like, Pe-2, IL-2, amd a whole bunch of Yak fighters. But I'd rather like seeing less often done periods/theaters at this point: Pacific, Battle of Britain, and in general aircraft from early to mid war.

I am against this idea. Which will prove unpopular I know... but let me list the reasons: - Vietnam when? The conflict lasted over a decade, and aircraft early, mid, and late war are far removed in capability between one another. - Map of the conflict is incredibly HUGE and very densely packed with jungles and cities, more so than any map thus far. - There is a huge cost of opportunity in getting Vietnam versions of aircraft instead of post war variants, later 70s and 80s is one of the best fits for DCS, considering available and upcoming assets, playable and AI alike, as well as the maps. - We don't have appropriate aircraft, let me detail below: My notes next to the type in above quote. We don't have proper AI aircraft, we don't have nearly enough of proper flyable aircraft, relatively little fitting ground assets, and map is mostly unfeasible from what we see in DCS maps thus far. Vietnam War is very interesting, and would be cool yeah. It is not like I dislike it or don't care or anything like that. However, it is far from being feasible when you look at it, and getting Vietnam appropriate versions of the aircraft would be in expense of getting versions that would fit many decades following, with many existing fitting assets that can oppose or ally them. DCS: Vietnam is kind of a pipedream, and we'd better have 75-90ish period better fleshed out instead. After that, and if/when map tech allows for doing the theater justice, yeah, why not. But I'd say Vietnam anytime soon is not as good of an idea as it may seem at first.

If it's a website, and it's the website I'm thinking of, I wouldn't put much faith on what's listed there. Seen it some years ago, and was full of inaccuracies.

Having a naval variant is great, but if it is the only variant, and F-4E isn't there, I personally wouldn't buy it. A naval F-4 can in no way shape or form represent an F-4E. E is just a lot better in strike missions with its oldie targeting pods, self lased LGBs, TV guided bombs, Mavericks, Shrikes etc. And it has a huge worldwide service history, with many conflicts/operations etc. Some countries still fly it. As far as I'm concerned, no F-4 is a lot better than naval only F-4, because then at least there'll be hope someone might still do the E soon.

And why would that be? I'd rather have Pacific planes from both sides than Eastern Front myself.

The two (31 and 25) share little between them beyond a passing resemblance. We can say same family, yes, but they are very much two different aircraft. As for the MiG-25PD in DCS, so far I don't recall anyone showing an interest in that. And an air to air radar with working radar guided missiles would require SDK access as far as I know, barring community mod idea. However, there is one effort at a community MiG-25RBT. Maybe if they can become a 3rd party, they can entertain the idea of a payware PD after it. That is, assuming even the mod become an actual thing of enough quality.

Wow... just please NO. Deka is almost the only dev we can look forward to for getting something different. We already have an ocean of existing and upcoming western aircraft from everyone. Are there western aircraft I'm looking forward to? Yes, many. But I'd still be disappointed if the next deka aircraft isn't something different like JF-17 was.

I'd be happy with more Chinese aircraft though...

To be honest, I didn't see anything linking those A-4AR videos to Razbam. They look like artist's showcase material. Also I think current Mirage III modeler is someone else, but don't recall the name. I find Qiou87's estimation above to be likely: would be happy to see a Mirage III in next half decade.

I've seen MiG-23 cockpit scans on their discord a while ago now. Pucara will be AI first, and probably also a module at some point, like in distant-ish future. Same for the Mirage III, it's external model is in progress, I've seen WIP images in last few months. But at first it will be AI for South Atlantic map, and later a module. I don't see anything other than F-15E, MiG-23MLA, and Super Tucano releasing from Razbam in at least next 2 years personally. I mean, even if all 3 of these release in that time frame, I'd be somewhat surprised.

You can actually remove other assignments to slew the sight. They are not under "Mi-24P Sim" but something like "Mi-24P Operator" or "Mi-24P sight" don't exactly remember now. Go there, and from there choose axis assignments, there you should find the sight slewing controls. Unassign the ones you don't want to affect your aim.

I have a feeling that they will be piggy backed on Shturm pylons, and I wonder if they may or may not preclude using them both at the same time. Or perhaps they will use wing pylons only, and in that case will probably won't be compatible with most unguided weapons. I really wish we could get them before whole IR remodeling happening. They'll add a good bit of variety to Mi-24's capabilities even in current implementation

Personally, I really hope if/when we get a Cobra, it will be an 80s-90s one. Either F or W. Would be a different experience from the modern Apache, and would go along very nicely with Mi-24P, and would add to that time period in DCS, which is the most plausible and (almost) well fleshed out imo. Getting a 2000s W or worse, a Z would be weird imo. A modern (2000s+) Apache Longbow is cool, and I'm glad for the folks who love modern stuff, don't get me wrong. And while fixed wing had many advanced stuff with more on the way, there weren't truely modern helicopters. So in some ways I understand/appreciate this variant too. But even without radar it'll be a far cry from 80s-90s Apaches. And even an 80s-90s Apache would be the most advanced helo anyway

Yeah the lag from loooooottts of bullets and their ricochet is neither new, nor a Hind thing. GUV-8700 pods have been on Mi-8 forever now, and can cause the same issue, so does UH-1's miniguns. I can happen to a less degree in some fixed wing aircraft too, I think the main issue is really when the rounds ricochet.

This is the exact thing that keeps me interested in DCS though. Not trying to be a contrarian, just to voice that there are many different ways in which people enjoy DCS. They are often mutually exclusive, but that's ok. However, devs focusing on modern aircraft would be the end of purchases for me personally. It won't be for majority, of course, but I'm pretty sure it will still be a good bit of lost sales.

A good substitute when a module isn't available to country you desire: use either Combined Task Force Blue/Red or USAF Aggressors. These factions have everything available to them, except skins usually aren't accessible through them. But yeah, flyable modules are almost always available to all countries anyway.

Sometimes it does. However, many, many times, communication with consumers around here went like: DEV: Here, some in dev stuff Community: BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD! SKULLS FOR THE SKULL THRONE!!! BLALSLGASEARARASRAGSDAHAGRHHRRR!! It was never as clear cut as "EA in May", they have said something to the effect of "hoping the first version being ready for early access can be in about 6 months". When it comes to DCS module releases cchedules are bad, deadlines are unhealthy, for bug fixes etc, yeah, I'm fully behind them. But making a module ready for limelight takes time. And we have had info since that "hopefully in 6 months" comment: had a video, screenshots in a few occasions as far as I can recall, and in one of the recent newsletters they've said something like "C-101 is in release status now, and full attention is directed to Mirage F1"

As far as I know, BS3 will get a MAWS but not the DIRCM it was originally intended to also include. So it will have part of the President-S suite, I think.

The way I see it, what Razbam did wrong was later starting to add more modern features like APKWS and LJDAMs, and then arbitrarily deciding it's now a "2010s+ plane" and only include stuff from that period. You either define the exact variant in the beginning and communicate it in the beginning, or don't. For example, Kh-66 on MiG-21Bis is not supposed to be there, but it is too late for it now, people paid for the module thinking it is, and has been in for years. I don't see that being removed without people going ape over it. And that is something that can legitimately argued to be not possible on depicted variant, unlike the IR Mavericks on AV-8B/NA. Besides, why do we have to get the most modern variants of everything even if it means guesstimating or later finding out stuff in dev? At first I was like QuiGon "ah, nice Razbam is finally sticking to realism on variants" but then realized it doesn't quite seem that way with AV-8's case.

From what I can follow so far, Razbam's current new module development priorities are Super Tucano and Strike Eagle, and MiG-23 will follow them. Again, this is mostly my impression based on available data/statements etc. There is also the Bo-105, but that's almost entirely a separate independent team. Their Mirage III, right now, is being modeled as an AI asset first, for their upcoming South Atlantic map. It will later be made into a module, at some point. More or less everything else they have announced, showed, teased etc also either fall this category (AI first, module later at some point), or way down in their pipeline. So I personally wouldn't expect a DCS: Mirage III in near future, or even in next couple of years really. Again though, that's just my (semi-educated-observation-driven) guess.

Been in the sim for quite some time now I think, like months or a year. But I don't think any aircraft uses it right now. Doesn't seem to be in Su-34's options for example. As far as I know this is similar CBU-97, bomblets/skeets are guided on heat sources on ground ad perform top attacks on them.