S3NTRY11

Before I get to the crux, and before I cop the hot flame of overreaction, I just want to say that this is a concern, not a criticism, and am more opening up a dialogue about the issue, than anything; I would like peoples opinions. I'm sure there are many that won't even see it as an issue at all. I feel that the DCS series is becoming a little fragmented. I think it first occurred with the P51, and was furthered by the UH-1 (although, to be fair, the Huey really is able to span eras like no other system). I think that there needs to be a tighter binding between releases and the era that releases are associated with. While I can fully appreciate that people would find appeal in releases like the P51, UH-1 and F35, the problem occurs that there's no real opposing analogue for what is being released, and it's happening with a lot more frequency. The A10 had the SU25, and KA50 from the same era, but everything since has be anachronistic. The P51 is by itself, without much air or ground kin (Dora is on its way, but not exactly era-comprehensive); the Huey has nothing from its defining era (Mig21 is on its way, but again, no real comprehensive ground or air components). When the F35 is released it will again be effectively in its own element - I don't really see many situations where many aircraft will co-exist in genuine multiplayer scenarios (it's similar to pitting the P51 against the F18 - compleetely unmatched, so it will effectively live by itself in the air - dominating). It just seems like there should be more focus on the main era of 4th generation aircraft and systems, because So much of the assets already exist; So many of the avionics systems already exist; It allows for scenarios involving more aircraft types; The environment can feel more alive with similar systems; It doesn't feel like a joyflight scenario because there's nothing around that is from the same era (scenery, assets, etc); and Resources can be more focused. ED obviously have their plan, and A10c was such a stand-out product ( I cannot wait for the F18 ), I just feel that with the advent of 3rd Party developers coming on the scene, the focus is wavering. Am I justified in thinking so?

Deal. I never had any intention to purchase any of the Flaming Cliffs titles now that my love lies with DCS, but this decision deserves a quid pro quo approach. :thumbup: Just bought myself a copy.:joystick:

Never said they were scamming me, but I certainly feel like I was burnt by it; scamming would imply intent to take money through devious means. Though I think they had the best intent, they simply didn't deliver what I would consider a minimum fair value for the Area 51 community's contribution. But that's action, not intent. So you read my post but ingested none of it. I don't know how else you could come to deliver your previous post. You even went so far as to ask what my point was when I clearly stated what my point actually was. Sigh. And you are quite well splitting hairs by saying one level of support is not support for the project as a whole. Not to mention the fact that if the hosting costs were so damn high "FO" were clearly poor at seeing good value in hosting services. "Cost of maintaining the forums" - yowza, did they hire a Cray? Or perhaps they were counting on much more traffic when they signed up... Not after a time I didn't read Area51 - I'd drop by to check that, yep, not much more than tumbleweeds rolling around here... and obviously after such a long period of ridiculously poor communication not at all. You sound like more than just a worked-up fan of FO B This is the internet, if you're afraid of having people express dissatisfaction somewhere others can read it, you may be in for a tough gig trying to shut it down. No point in giving me grief for sharing a warning with others about the risks of dispensing with money without any real guarantee of anything (sorry, but after 7-odd years I feel that's a pretty fair statement). I could go back to the FO forums, but there'd be all of 5 people there to read my incredibly horrendous ramblings /sarcasm. More to the point, as much as it may not seem that way, but as I did write in my original post, I in fact do hope FO eventually succeeds before I die. And the very same for the F35 project, though as I hinted at, I imagine both the DCS module and the actual aircraft will be here long before FO, in any case.

It's alarming to think you aren't joking. See, I'm a little torn; on the one hand I wanted to help out with a project that really sounded promising. But we were told that as subscribers to Area 51, we would be given regular development news, among other "perks" for our financial assistance. It simply wasn't a "here's some of my cash just because I love you" arrangement. So on the other hand... regular updates were a fair expectation. What's the point of paying for the privilege of having access to essentially nothing -- on an ongoing basis? It seems you're implying that simply having access to certain areas of the site should make people feel all warm and fuzzy for contributing without anything of continued value being provided to match the contributions... I think you're massively missing the point, yourself. Well what a relief. See my previous post. Read my previous post.

To quote a post I made on the FO forum not long before abandoning all hope (there are others, but this is the crux): What's the point of this post? It's a shame that I was burnt by FO, because I would be far more inclined to pro-actively contribute to the success of F35 if not for this. Once bitten twice shy. Also, we were supposed to get a release discount as members of "Area 51". If I ever DO get to cash that in I will be happy in a great many ways, and FO will have truly redeemed itself... albeit approaching (exceeding?) a decade later... As it stands, I can happily sit back and bank on this project at least making it to fruition, if only through the proxy reputation of ED.

Yep, Fighter Ops. They dreamed a dream... but... well... sigh...

Best of Luck It's hard to ignore Wags' follow-up endorsement, but having said that... I was burnt by FO, and I'm fairly unwilling to let my enthusiasm for a product bleed me of cash before-the-fact again. No Kickstarter for me, but I'll happily purchase the product if they make good. Since it's not a joke, I do wish them all the best of luck.

ummmmwhat Just checked the date, and it aint 1APR. Is this a joke I'm just not getting?

My understanding is that the "GE" in EDGE is actually Graphics Engine, and not limited to terrain. Happy to be shown incorrect.

Surely you don't refer to the Eternally Delayed Gratification Experiment

Add a quick/dirty UH60 flyable for CSAR... Heaven.

DMS right short in GUN master mode.

Updated. UNABLE TO EDIT ORIGINAL POST - THIS VERSION CONTAINS G940 PROFILE BINDINGS

lingering dirt/dust being kicked up by rounds would be nice too while we're on the subject. Perhaps variable dependant upon terrain (ok maybe that is REALLY wishful thinking...)

Run TrackIR's control panel and make sure that everything looks ok there, especially the IR reception; no erroneous emissions coming from behind your head, like a light, etc... If that all checks out, make sure your TrackIR profile is not too severe in its axis definitions.

Excellent work! Thanks!

Anyone know where you can import these things into oz from? They're going for $US50 on Amazon, but no international delivery :(

Sure is me, yep. Love the gear! Haven't been doing a whole lot of flying as yet, but that'll be fixed soon enough! Sounds good. I'll PM you!

Just Another Keymap Reference Only XML I've created an xml keymap reference that details all the keys in A10C. It's really just another reference, but it allows easier drill-down into specific keys by category. http://sentry.x10.mx/profile/EVERYTHING.xml It has been created from a Logitech profiler map (for anyone that wants to use it as a template within the Logitech Profiler, simply download the above linked XML (or "view source" and save), open in a text editor and make the 2 noted changes in the header-section of the file - then import into the Profiler). THERE ARE NO JOYSTICK BINDINGS SET IN THIS PROFILE I'll probably post a cut-down one without the views included. Included KEYSTROKE maps are highlighted, ALL known keymaps are included as COMMANDS. Keystrokes are included for those keymaps that require holding down (non-toggle), but I've stayed away from including VIEW keystrokes to minimise clutter within the Profiler. I've also limited the number of keystroke entries, due to the Logitech Profiler's inability to practically display keystroke names. I may put in "view" keystrokes at some point. Tested in Firefox and Chrome; IE8 works, but with layout issues to be resolved. For a local copy of the chart, download the zip. PLEASE NOTE - Chrome doesn't like local XML reads for some reason (may be a security mechanism), Firefox is fine. Thanks to Quirk! http://forums.eagle.ru/attachment.ph...7&d=1286711979 for the original keymap document that the profile was created from

I think thats how it works in BS, but not so sure about W

With the G940, how do you assign trims to axis. Same for assigning coolie hat to hotas slew. Not sure how to do this.

The only thing I could suggest is that you ensure your stick is properly calibrated.

I can't even get ffb to work with mine.:joystick:

Awesome vid. Great music. The more I see it, the more beautiful it gets.:wub:

If you don't like Top Gun, I think you take life far too seriously :D