Horns

Yeah, I think there is an aggressors BFM campaign for the F-5 and the F-15C too. I was thinking more of the application of 4th gen tech like modern radars in one of our DCS level sims, but I should have acknowledged the F-5 and F-15 campaigns in the OP.

Not talking about pvp Probad, but thanks for contributing :thumbup:

A campaign focusing on specific BFM Maneuvers (like high and low yo-yo, flat and rolling scissors etc) would be a fantastic resource for players who want to learn air-to-air. The training missions could start right before the maneuver, with both the player and the target's a/c in the correct relative positions. Like other training, these training missions could start in active pause while a voice over could explain some theory and direct the player's attention to certain details (eg Angle Off Tail). That would give the player the chance to see and learn to recognize the situation where the maneuver should be executed, and it would be time efficient enough that a player could get the reps they need to improve. Further training missions could be included that talk a player through the approach that could create the situation where the maneuver could be used to best effect. Tracks could be included showing one of our RL fighter pilots flying the same mission - but that's getting pretty greedy. The F/A-18 Hornet seems like the best airframe for this application, given that it is so broadly owned and its low-speed prowess. The M2K or the F-16 might also make sense. I'm not sure how closely the mission designer can script AI behavior, so that might be one challenge this would need to overcome. EDIT: There is an Aggressors BFM campaign for the F-5 already. I think that focuses more on skirmishes rather than individual maneuvers, as this one would. I think the greatest benefit would come from doing this in one of our more modern DCS level airframes, with modern aerodynamics, avionics etc.

I take "delayed" to mean after March 21 has passed - in that situation I would be annoyed.

Perhaps the condition is due to consuming too much water? I’ve got it! Someone worked out how to turn whine into water!

That has been going around for a while, and has since been corrected.

I'm still pretty new here and ED have given expected final dates for the release of DCS World 2.5 and the F/A-18 Hornet, but I believe they were very reluctant to do so previously because dates do have a habit of sliding here. I figure that when the dev has a good idea of when they can release they put it up for presale, and when they know a firm date they'll give it. I try to take any date given before they start accepting money as a 'best guess'.

Not unless his personal investment is in the custody of ED right now... EDIT: That was confusing by me. What I was getting at is that the post where he explained why he thinks he's an investor is all about money, not emotions.

The first time you suggested in this thread that you were an investor could have been sheer ignorance. It was made very clear to you that you are not an investor at all, but you try to rest a question on the same assumption that you know to be wrong. Please don't try this a third time.

Methinks this will wind up as a community contest eventually...

This I agree with. If you're unsure about pre-purchasing it's better to avoid it.

You have an interest rate of over 200% pa? I'd love to join that bank...

The OP's core question was "what is the plan for the early access path to release?" Cobra847 has said that they will illustrate this before launch. Many of us have given our opinions on the OP's question itself and the comments surrounding it. Those of us (including me) who want to have the argument over whether EA needs to change had/have plenty of other threads to comment in and the OP didn't ask anything about that, so I don't think turning this thread into another one will serve much purpose. Just one guy's personal opinion.

If you are not comfortable purchasing without planned dates for completion of EA, I think the obvious answer is to not purchase until a firm date on the end of EA is provided. It has been said that the Tomcat will release in a more complete state than other modules. However, unless someone from Heatblur tells you differently, no one can put a firm date on when it will be complete. This isn't about shirking transparency, but simply that any date someone gives will be a guess. It is usual for modules to stay in EA longer than 12 months. Again, the philosophy of the release of the 'Cat seems different than other modules, but personally I would say you should be prepared for it to be in EA for up to two years, as with any other recent EA module.

Lol cool cool :)

You don't think it will release for more than a year? I hope that's not right :(

If you are talking about the F-14, that might be a shorter timeframe than other recent releases because Heatblur have chosen to approach EA differently, so maybe there was a reason to conclude it was months and not years for the 'Cat. Slightly OT for a moment: in case you're unaware, I think Heatblur offered to refund preorders, so if you'd rather not be on the hook I think you have an 'out'.

Again, three modules ever. I'm not going to bother repeating all of the reasons your suggestion couldn't be used even if someone wanted to. You're either thoroughly deluded and deliberately ignoring the reality of the situation or you're straight up trolling, so I won't be wasting futher energy on trying to have a genuine conversation with you.

One thing you and I do very much agree on is that the solution for customers who are wary of EA as it is practiced now are best off waiting until a module reaches release before buying. I disagree that EA as it is now is bad for vendors, but I'll let it rest there rather than risk taking this to a circular discussion.

Ok, what abuses do you see now and what restrictions would eliminate or mitigate them?

Your comments earlier in this thread seemed to say that devs were selling a module in EA, moving on to the next one without completing the previous one and repeating the process. If they are getting the same money for less work, wouldn't that put them in a better business position instead of a worse one?

No reading of this forum needed at all. A link to the ED definition of Early Access is right there in the E-Store in the module listing. The information is as available as it could possibly be and is frank about describing the various and unpredictable paths Early Access can take. There is no way someone can read that and conclude that an Early Access module is a known quantity. ED empower the customer rather than restricting them, because the best person to make a consumer decision is the consumer.

Thank you for explaining, I understand what you meant now. I don't think such a process should be required, but if a dev did choose to seek ED's business advice they could do worse. This isn't a coin toss. VEAO are the one developer ever who has ceased business in DCS without getting a module past EA. You suggest that ED should judge the quality of the business model for a module, and ED are currently in the process of putting together Modern Air Combat - an FC3 level package with the MiG-21 as one if its cornerstones. They appear to have little doubt about the module or the developer's ongoing business stability. They only released too early if you think EA should be limited to a year. As you say yourself, DCS is ED's 'lifeblood', and they don't think an EA timeline of over one year for their flagship module jeopardizes that. There is no need for the DCS business model to change. Buy or don't buy on your own terms. If you are concerned that a module won't see full release, wait until it does. All of this is very straightforward.

I agree, it doesn’t limit anyone to one year total development time, it limits the range and scope of modules to however long they can fund development from their own capital reserves plus 12 months. I think a language barrier is preventing me from understanding what you mean about expertise that should be paid, but if you mean ED should front the money for experts the business relationship becomes much more complicated and very different to what it is now.

Can anyone advise which modules entered and completed EA within 12 months?