Horns

Fair enough, I stand corrected, thanks for the info :)

They did that with the AV-8B, that was my logic at least. I think the F-18 came out on May 31, and if I’m calculating right that would have been a Thursday, so still not a patch day. Either way, my guess is just that, I have no idea lol

Cheers, March 15 it is then ie the Friday following the Open Beta update.

My guess is March 8 or 15 whichever is OB update week

Nothing other than on/before last day of Winter has been said to us afaik

If you look at my post, I was responding to the suggestion the M2K not being mentioned as an air-to-air fighter, not saying more people want to fly the M2K than would want a Full-Fidelity Eagle. I don't doubt that a lot of people would rather an F-15, in fact I probably would myself. I'd certainly buy the module. I'm sure a bunch of people will move to the F-16 from the Mirage - I'll buy the module too. For someone who wants one airframe for everything the Viper will be better. For those who only want an air-to-air platform the M2K will be better, and that advantage increases at dogfight range. Anyway, I think on-topic you and I agree that it would be great to see a hi-def Eagle, and let's hope it gets to cut in line before some of the other upcoming airframes :thumbup:

Don’t sleep on the M2K. She may only carry four missiles with modest range, but in the hands of a capable pilot she can be a WVR beast.

I think a full-fidelity -C might be a good way to showcase the difference between full-fi and FC3 modeling. I’m sure their marketing people will have a way to spin it to encourage people to try both - maybe offer new FC3 Eagle buyers a credit when upgrading to full-fi, and/or offering a refund to people who use the full-fi version less than x number of hours and want to revert to the FC3 version. Personally, I would want an Eagle for similar reasons to the Tomcat, but the two are distinct enough that owning one would not make me hesitate to buy the other. While I look forward to the carrier ops and long range combat the F-14 offers, being able to pilot and fight in an Eagle solo would be incredible. If it were to follow the Viper, imagine the mp 4 v 4: 2 x F-15 + 2 x F-16 vs 2 x F-14 + 2 x F/A-18...

Very good point. Understanding the danger of an adversary catching up to US air capability produced the Tomcat and the Eagle. This time it produced the F-35. That speaks volumes.

This. There is plenty to be said for both. On one hand the F/A-18 was built to complement the ‘Cat, not the other way around. On the other the F/A-18 showed enough substantive and upgrade potential that, when the Cold War ended, the Hornet served as the basis for the ‘Cat’s replacement. Makes me wonder what kind of combat aircraft we might have today if the USSR had persisted and had unveiled tech like the PAK FA, but we’ll never know because they had to go and collapse. Inconsiderate ****s, don’t they know we have a game to play?!

The timetable is exactly the same as when Shagrat explained it to you previously. Until March 21 2019 it is up to them whether they should move it to EA or keep working on it.

Just curious, you seem to be saying that as you see more of the plane in the newer videos you lose interest, but it was watching and talking about the early videos that drew you in, is that accurate? If so, what was it about the early videos that got you interested? Was it the action-set-to-music cinematic style, the focus on dogfight maneuvering, seeing the plane mainly from the exterior rather than the cockpit, and/or something else? I'd just like to understand :)

I agree the threats of legal action are ridiculous. I was pointing out that providing the plane during Early Access is actually something HB is obliged to do, but they don't have to do it before the timetable they set out for themselves. I think you (Shagrat) and I generally have the same view of this.

It is an oversight not to mention it more specifically, but when you click more (on the E-store listing as well as the Products page), first bullet point: "The simulation of both the A* and B model Tomcat, the A model following the B later during the Early Access period." They have undertaken to deliver the -A during the Early Access period, and deliver the -B earlier. Those are part of the terms. They have undertaken to provide Early Access, it's not a gratuity.

I agree. I could just imagine Cobra sitting at his pc, thinking of the ways he’d like to mess with us, so I thought I’d share. EDIT: In all seriousness, Cobra has been clear that he would give a lot of notice before the start of EA so people could buy knowing both the EA date and that they could get the discount. Apologies if my joke made it appear otherwise.

Unless he's decided to troll the player base right back haha

I really hope you know something I don't...

Do you have the "APU start" switch on your HOTAS in the "on" position? If not it might be worth a try EDIT: Never mind, it's not that

Ok cool. Ftr I’ve bought every combat plane that’s come out since I’ve been involved in DCS during pre-sale, as I personally view it as a kickstarter-type of thing. I haven’t complained at any point and I don’t intend to start. Also, just to be clear, I was saying Heatblur and ED have done this in an exemplary way. Still, I’d like to clarify whether I have understood you correctly, but after that I’ll let it drop regardless... Are you agreeing that the customer doesn’t necessarily know what they will initially receive when they consider whether to buy a module in EA? EDIT: I should have asked: Are you agreeing that the customer doesn’t necessarily know what they will initially receive beyond the short description of EA on the E-shop when they consider whether to buy a module in EA?

Personally I don't think what we see is devs not bothering to develop a module any further when it enters EA. I think what we see is that pre-EA devs can focus their development efforts so they can make a lot of progress in a short amount of time. Once a module hits EA resources are split between development and bug squashing, so it takes them longer to make the same amount of progress. I expect that's part of the reason Cobra wants to get as much completed as he can before the due date. I think part of the problem here is that 'Early Access' doesn't really mean anything. We've seen the term 'beta' used interchangeably, and I think that's supposed to be the phase where the product is feature complete or close to it, requiring only testing, bug squashing and maybe a little polish before release - which I read as being what we will get with the Cat. As someone mentioned, ED were really specific about what people would get at EA and what would come later. In fact, I would love ED to require devs to conform to their template.

+1

If DCS includes something in the future that makes one's partner/orientation relevant then yeah, they should probably talk about inclusiveness. I don't imagine DCS making the jump to roleplaying game anytime soon, but in twenty years, who knows? The pilot body is in the game because people wanted to be depicted. The pilot body that was made happened to be male. Women play too, so they deserve to be depicted. It would be the same thing in reversed circumstances.

Mistake not making the female pilot body available from the start. If it's such a money/resource drain they wouldn't have bothered making different pilot bodies to begin with, or maybe none at all. Love the sarcastic comment, says more about you than I ever could :)

I'd like to think that the reason female pilots weren't available from the start was oversight rather than intent, and it would be nice to see that mistake fixed. There is every bit as much reason to do this as there is reason to have a pilot body at all IMO. Glad the kids come up with these jokes too, it's nice they can still contribute when they don't have anything meaningful to say.

My father has a tomcat. Believe me, you don't want to smell its gas :D