StandingCow

Waiting for reviewers to get their hands on the chips before you get too excited.

F-16C is getting the CBU-105 SFW per Wag's post in that section. That weapon is apparently specifically designed to take out sections of tanks. It's a 1k pound bomb filled with guided munitions.

You aren't going to draw me into this argument. :music_whistling:

I just want to say thanks to those of you that worked on the F-16s in the past (I was a Crew Chief on the KC-135) and are providing valuable feedback to not only ED but to us as well. Some people just don't want to listen, it's a shame. As much as I would love the have the F-16 with 3 mavs... if it didn't happen in real life I think ED should stick to their guns and keep to what was actually used. This isn't some sort of game where min/maxing is the purpose, it is a simulator where we strive to be as close to the real thing as we can. If you want to alter loadouts use mods, etc.

Sounds like they are going to allow this now: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3920366&postcount=21 I mean I am happy that we get heavier weapon loads (more boom, hooray) but I am also a bit... I guess the word would be bothered (even that is too strong a word) that ED caved to a loadout that was never actually used. This isn't some sort of min/max type game, loadouts and capabilities should be as close as possible to the real thing, that's what ED strives for isn't it?I dunno, I know this will be an unpopular opinion, but ED should give us what was actually used or what they feel is best.

I can understand needing a break... I just hope this isn't permanent as we appreciate the input you provided on there (well at least most of us do). One thing I hope to never experience is what you all and some "internet famous" people have to deal with and that is being flooded with negativity... I can only imagine how that must impact a person's emotional/mental health. You have have 100 positive comments and 1 negative but for some reason the human brain REALLY focuses on that 1 negative. I am sure it has negatively impacted some of the devs as well.

Should be per this: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3918703&postcount=19

If your graphic settings are Custom do you need to add something like "options.graphics.Camera.Custom.dynamic = {300, 60000}"?

Disable PMs and report the posts you find to be out of line. You gotta let the mods do their job, or at least give them a chance. There is a reason even the forums here have a report button, you guys can't catch everything, and neither can they. Sadly toxicity exists in every gaming forum nowdays as devs open themselves up on social media. It sucks but it comes with the "territory" as there are people out there that don't know how to control themselves when there is a computer screen instead of a person in front of them. The majority of hoggit users are civil and love DCS, but you have a very vocal minority that can be very loud and may not give constructive criticism or resort to personal attacks. It would be a shame if ED shut out this source of feedback which has 24.7k of your customers participating.

As big of a project as this is... I would expect it to be a few years out. 2020-2021.

Since the chit-chat one was closed as well it seems ED doesn't want us talking about it. I can only suggest non-official places like /r/hoggit to discuss the module.

I prefer EA, lets me learn systems as they are implemented. Has been nice on the hornet, even if I do wish it was a tad faster.. :)

I will say it again... it isn't about ED charging, it isn't about the price... it is about splitting the community. Nobody is saying ED shouldn't be compensated, we are waiting to throw our wallets at the screen to get this... or at least we were.... As it is now it would be a terrible value and I as well as many others wouldn't get to enjoy all of ED's hard work because many of us are on MP primarily. I highly doubt any large MP servers will bother.

Yep, the 3-4 folks I play with said nope once they saw this news.

At least we will have the heatblur forrestal class carrier, that will probably just become the default on most servers.

Yep, that's the problem most people have with this. Hell, I'd be willing to pay double the price they are planning if it meant they would get rid of this requirement to have the module to play on the server.

From the NJ guard base where I was stationed for a bit (Jersey Devils): Would love to see these in game.

The amount of liveries has no impact on aircraft development time. The folks that do the art aren't the ones doing the system programming, etc.

Dunno, saw it here: It's cool man, I don't have a great solution to the issue either, I just don't care for their current implementation.... based on what my wingmen are saying and what a lot of the community are saying they aren't going to bother with a module that they WERE excited about. This is only because we will barely even be able to use it, now that isn't the case with a lot of folks who primarily play single player.

Well, ideally they would just see the current carrier... but that is apparently not feasible with the ED engine. Maybe just make it non-pay if there is no other way to go about it. ED could do other things to make money like cosmetic micro-transactions (generally accepted in the gaming community) for aircraft skins, etc. I highly doubt they are willing to do that due to the amount of work... but if there is no alternative i'd rather see it be free.

Nobody is complaining about having to pay (or at least shouldn't be). The entire issue MOST people have is the paywall it creates, they know that splitting the community is a bad thing for the health of DCS as well as the community.

From the NJ guard base where I was stationed for a bit (Jersey Devils): Would love to see these in game. :)

I really hope ED reconsiders this statement from the official DCS account: "If the host is using the new Nimitz-carrier module with new comm, animated deck crew, new ship, player LSO and air boss stations, etc., the clients would have to own the module to join." This only splits an already niche community into even smaller segments. I am not only talking of the big multiplayer servers (which could never run this and stay popular) but what about smaller hosted servers that want a mix of air force and navy jets? Does this mean your A-10C buddies, etc will either have to buy the better carrier or the navy planes won't be able to enjoy the better nimitz because their buddies don't own the module? This would be an even bigger problem once we get the dynamic campaign from ED, are we going to just have to deal with the silent "dead" carrier in multiplayer dynamic campaign servers? Or just hope that all the folks flying the non-navy jets (including the new highly anticipated F16) buy the improved carrier? I really hope ED can come up with a way to monetize without further splitting the community. It's hard to come up with solutions without knowing the limitations of the DCS engine, was it not possible for non-owners to just not see the improved carrier and superimpose the current one over it? There must be a way for everyone to play together and ED still get paid for the hard work they do? As one of the many that were looking forward to buying this module I now see no reason to do so...my wing men and I play primarily mutiplayer (blue flag, GAW/PGAW, etc), why would we buy this and almost never see it?

I really wanted to see Hodor as a white walker. :(

It's not only broken in VR, but multi-monitors as well.