Vincent90

Truly great post Nick, you hit the nail on it's head, although I disagree with your last argument about more exposure/advertising. The problem with advertising is that the product isn't necessarily the same as the consumer is made to believe, which will happen a lot with DCS. It isn't War Thunder or even Il-2, which got plenty of exposure back in the day but still operated in a niche. And for every good thing about DCS, there are a lot of cons: DCS is not very beginner-friendly and it takes a lot of hours to learn a module. Even for a basic HOTAS (a peripheral you won't use for any other game genre) and a single module you'll AT LEAST have to spend over 100 bucks. I'm not even mentioning headtrack and rudders, which IMHO are just as essential. It isn't very exciting either. In the movies/on TV there is action every 5 minutes, you can forget about that in DCS. The WWII/Korea modules are even worse, which are nothing more than free-for-all plane vs. plane modules. DCS is true nerd stuff, more comparable to a study course at school then anything else, and ED won't make any friends claiming otherwise. People that are interested in these kind of things will stumble on it anyway, just like you and me stumbled upon DCS. By the way, do we NEED more developers for DCS? If we look at the release schedule we're looking at AT LEAST 16 modules this year, not even counting the carrier modules, maps and campaigns. Even for the most die-hard gamer, that should be more then enough to remain busy. What IS missing however, are non-aviation modules. It still beats me why ED isn't hiring the guy behind SAM Simulator (excellent Sim, very much recommended), or why they haven't resumed creating a tank module. There is always hope I guess....

DCS updater will recognize the files downloaded from the torrent that are already present. It will detect what is already on your PC and reinstall the game into the fresh Windows registry. In any case, don't forget to deactivate the modules before the clean install and you'll be fine ;)

You could create an additional partition specifically for DCS, or use an external drive to temporarily move the DCS folder. How much remaining space do you have left on your HDD?

I'm pretty bummed out that VKB isnt planning a Warthog competitor. I really like their sticks and especially their beautiful quality internals are a thing of joy. Too bad you can only get them when you already have a proper hotas system at home, and at limited quantity at that.

1. Me-262 2. Ju-87 D-5/G-2 3. F/A 18C Damn, posting this makes me wanna drool... :( ;)

I agree with the others, buy it on sale This review is 14 months old, but could've been made yesterday, I highly recommend you watch it, [ame] [/ame] .EDIT: On-sale now! 30% off in the Steam Store! (and useable in the stand-alone DCS)

Thanks for the manual, just bought this aircraft (together with the MiG-15) and was getting scared you guys forgot about this baby ;) Any chance of a campaign in the future?

You mean with the swastika's? This topic will help you out further ;) http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=143254&highlight=swastika

Is there any news/info on a possible revision of the current modelling? As a SP-only player who loves a WWII/Korea dogfight the current situation really is a pain in the bum, and since a lot of other WWII birds are coming out in the near future I hope this is getting taken care of as soon as possible :)

2 (and a half) questions: I've been practicing with losing the wings of the Dora this morning and the only way I can manage it is by going up to 9000m, get into a free fall until the IAS 750 km/h, extend the flaps and pull on my stick 1) Is there an easier way to lose the wings? Every time I pass 6g in a banking, the plane tries to 'wiggle' back into neutral flight. 2) Is it possible to exceed 6g for a longer duration of time in the Dora? And why does the plane automatically want to go back into neutral?

Altough I would love U-boats in the game, I don't really see how this could work, nor how this would be more profitable for a third party dev, than a stand-alone game. Currently, there aren't a lot of systems in place for submarine warfare in DCS. Subsims need HUGE maps and a lot of harbors/milk cows, rely a lot on Time compression and don't forget u-boats are sitting ducks against aerial combatants. On the other hand, the subsim genre has been dead for years. The best subsim out there is still SH3 (which is a 11 years old) and is plagued with outdated software, critical bugs and crashes and a patchwork consisting necessary mods. A modern simulator would blow it out of the water. This shows what a potential money maker it would be, but not in the DCS environment.

Damn, any info on the price range? The fact that the manufacturer doesn't post it online already says a lot...

Patience, when we get our weekly dose of Weekend News at the end of the day we will get our answer :)

And i'm so pleased that take the effort to misinterpret my post, OR don't even bother to read TWO whole sentences and implying i'm a know-it-all dork. I am sincerely interested in the reasoning they cancelled a trainer in advanced state of development to switch it for another trainer. I'm not telling anyone how to do their jobs, and that should be obvious by reading my post correctly.

Thank you for posting it, I'm still on the fence between waiting for the Replika IR to enter production or a more expensive, but faster delivered, competitor and your video really helped in showing what the delanclip is all about and what it offers. Too bad it doesnt have a magnet on it, I dont really see myself taping/zip tying it to my stainless steel headphone =/ Will keep F5'ing this thread for the next couple of weeks then... EDIT: By the way, you can make the PS3 camera less wobbly by making a band of a piece of tape and sticking it between your speaker and camera

I would prefer a Nakajima plane over the A6M, since I doubt a flying gas can with outdated weaponry would be fun in a dogfight (would buy such an icon anyway though)

Why did you guys cancel the T-2 and then start work on yet another trainer? I sincerely don't understand this from a business point of view :huh:

Agreed with Kuky, each side wants to look good andmake the others look bad. The fact that he brings up the MiG-29 combat record speaks volumes about his bias. I've yet to experience an objective 4th gen fighter vs. fighter comparison, by ALL sides in the debate.

We definitely need an Emil in DCS, together with the Spitfire Mk. I and II. I'm actually quite surprised that it hasn't been announced/planned yet, considering the Battle of Britain was the only true air war in history and is very popular in pop culture. :huh:

No trading, mate http://forums.eagle.ru/rules.php#en

Tried to watch it, but says I need the M2000C Module to watch the track. Could you recreate the problem in Mission Editor or Training?

+1 Simulating that kind of hair would need its own engine

I don't understand what you've done with it, but try this: 1) Check if the PC-PS3 switch is towards PC 2) Check the Hotas X profile in DCS if all buttons and modifiers are properly binded 3) Uninstall the drivers through Device Manager 4) Try a different USB port 5) Install the latest drivers through the TM website I only use 6-axis (green) mode, but I can imagine using both can F-up your joystick profile

EDIT: Nevermind...

There is a lot of miscommunication and misunderstanding in this topic. As I interpret this discussion, people confuse a datalink between multiple aircraft with the ability to launch missiles using that same data. However, datalinks ONLY share battlefield information between aircraft. They CANNOT take over weapon responsibilities from other aircraft, for reasons already mentioned. (it's essentially a read-only file like you have on your PC) Here is what datalinks can do in NATO aircraft, as far as is declassified. For the F-22's IFDL: http://www.f22fighter.com/avionics.htm#2.4%20Inter%20/%20Intra-Flight%20Data%20Link%20%28IFDL%29 For Link-16 data in current 4th gen fighters [ame]http://www.idlsoc.com/documents/symposiums/idls2006/3sdl_johnson.pdf[/ame] Data-sharing between 5th and 4th gen fighters without a separate node (RC-135 et al) http://foxtrotalpha.jalopnik.com/here-s-the-first-shot-of-the-f-15c-pod-that-will-change-1750314539 By the way, I highly doubt the Viggen had a data exchange system like earlier mentioned in this thread, as even the latest Gripen versions don't have something like this. They do have another toy though.