sc_neo

I kinda feel that a Sweden map is very much coming...thats the only real reason i can come up with why the Viggen main campaign has not been released yet. The module went into early access two years ago. So there must be some bigger reason why the campaign is still in lacking...i.e. Sweden map. I could imagine that the Sweden map will be paid, but owners of the Viggen will be able to play the campaign on this new map at no additional cost.

And all those ai problems from 2.5 onwards are due to a lack of imrpoving the ai to get to grips with the increased environmental fidelity that comes with 2.5? Has there been any development done on ai over the last 2 years to mitigate that?

But it is more demanding on your gpu. I tried this mod myself and it seems to need more vram on your gpu. I am still stuck on my amd 7870 2gb and this little fix makes nttr unplayable for me. But, ED surely sure make this an additional graphics setting in game for everyone thats not sitting on such a low vram gpu like myself.

Hey mate, is this campaign still a thing that might see the light of day. Just curious so i can put this out of my mind if not :)

For me, the question would mostly be one of transparency. For instance, if ED pitched their approach and scope for the new wheather system, what they plan, how many engineers (including hiring additional devs), time and how much money it probably cost etc., then this core platform inprovement could be financed by voluntary contribution. Depending on how much ''crowdfunding'' that particular platform update garners, the bigger, more high fidelty it ends up being and the faster it sees the light of day. Especially those folks that buy all modules ever released to support ED so the sim gets better and better, would actually get what they really want. On the other hand, those folks get a nice thank you by ED for supporting all the platform improvements in the form of at least access to all modules. Hard to tell what most actually prefer. But, with money accepted comes responsibility, and platform improvements should go faster then right now. This ''improvement pitch'' crowdfunding thingy would give folks that want to specifically spend money on improving the platform side of things a way to do so directly. And ED would become a bit more liable for getting things in the game in a timely manner. Dedicated servers, how long did it take to get this finally happening? :) Making this a paid module would run into the same issues like all map packs and dlc that usually split communities. With the downside that you needed to maintain more than one wheather, atc ...whatever system, with all the downside to multiplayer and such. But, ED themselves release one to two aircraft modules per year, and most of those actually bring in new tech that improves the overall sim. Thus modules (including maps) and platform tech go hand in hand and one without the other might actually be detrimental. You guys remember Mustangs map texture 3.0, which did not end up being a paid module, but was released for free once a certain amount of voluntariy contribution was met? Thats the precedent i was thinking of. Mustang

The problem i always feel wheighs in quite heavy; the mod and program ecosystem around a game. What about SRS, Kneebord Builder and OvGME and the like? Kinda annoying that even if DCS would run reasonably well, the hussle would continue with the quality of life things around it. But great for a step towards linux time...

Yep i have asked about this in ED's own campaign section a while back. I don't see why they could not enable this with the caveat that existing campaigns have not been designed with coop in mind. But all the red flags in coop, that would be something.

I really like you guys set up a dedicated factory and did not go the outsourcing route. Good luck for 2019 :)

"About the Gazelle. We plan some updates for it in 2019. When these will eventually make it into the sim is depending on some factors. The biggest factor is time. We have started to recode a new flightmodel with new technologies that Patrick worked on during the past 12 month, which we can hopefully show to the community in the coming months." That sounds very promising! Just to be sure i did not misread this; you are saying here that you guys are recoding the Gazelles flight model as to be in line with your latest tech and understanding of helicopter flight mechanics? If that indeed is the case...then kudos...you can't ask much more of a developer then to have their already released products evolve with their current tech, cheers :)

+1 ...bring it back :)

random,... yes, but averaged around the mean value! So if the launch time had a mean of lets say 4 seconds, than the majority of launches should be around this delay.

So, from what i have gathered in various threads, it sounds like MAC will not be an entirely seperate installation from DCS world, but will share many assets with it, albeit being started via its on .exe file. So far, so good, nobody wants to waste space unnecessarily and have the exact same assets downloaded and stored twice. But, for us not interested in MAC, i sure hope this will not be a mandatory install and part of the overall DCS world installation folder that will be shipped with a DCS World update on launch of MAC, even if we don't own MAC. Any info that?

Yep, i was a bit disappointed to not find a full set of interactive training missions. Hope this will be rectified when the final manual and main campaign arrive and the Viggen really makes it to release.

Ha.. thats exactly what i thought when reading the latest hints about MAC...that is would be a standalone thing seperate from our DCS world install. And if this is indeed the case,...i am not bothered a bit at all. Actually, i kinda like this considering ED wants to try a bit more social media stuff there in the first place. It is a very fine line one needs to walk when trying out new income generating mechanisms. Only the future can tell how ED will tweak, change and adapt their business model. I just hope ED keeps all time micro transaction, lootbox and time limited cosmetic stuff far away from DCS world. A fair amout for a fair value is the way to go, not skins or other mini things for top dollar. And i think ED knows very well how easily a dev can destroy that small hardcore sim market by going flat mainstream. Thus, making MAC a seperate thing, is probably a good idea. As long as they only adapt and trasnfer stuff to DCS world what really fits.

Nope wouldn't pay for skins either. Mainly because that is a very slippery slope and before we know it, monetization around here becomes just like all the AAA lootbox and microtransaction madness. This attracts a different crowd, and then the product and value for money changes accordingly. I don't see ED going this way, but once it starts and a couple years have passed...which developer could say not to all the easy money thrown at them by kids and "whales"?

Ah...Flaming Cliffs 3 owners don't have individual aircraft tabs under instant action, single missions etc. but only a FC3 tab which then contains a long list of missions for all FC3 aircraft, is that it?

as i said in the first sentice of my post, i run the release version, not open beta. Could you be so kind and check the 'change date' of the Su-33 Heavy Sky campaign in your DCS installation folder .../mods/aircraft....etc. And as i said, i have the standalone modules, and i see a tab for the Mig-29 under instant action, but not under Single Missions. You seem to have the FC3 package, so you got instant action as well as single missions for the Mig-29?

Ehrm....with latest release version update notes, it says added 'Single Missions' for the Mig-29 and updated 'Su-33 Heavy Sky' campaign. I can't see a Mig-29 tab in the Single Missions sections, and the Heavy Sky campaign for the Su-33 still has a modified date from 31.01.2018. I have the standalone versions of both modules. Is this a problem with standalone vs FC3, can someone owning the FC3 versions confirm both changes have made with the lates release version patch?

Ian, thanks for the detailed post. I have gone over the change dates of the FC3 modules i own (all standalone) and there has been a regular stream of changes to many missions since 2.5 dropped at the beginning of the year. And yes, the change dates coincide with open beta patch dates, though most of the time this is not mentioned in the changelog. Concerning the SU-33 Heavy Sky campaign, i own the standalone module, and the change date on this reads 31.01.2018 12:49h. Anyway, i can only assume that the last patch probably added this campaign back for FC3 owners, while standalone owners had the updated version since the SU-33 standalone release last year. The only campaign that is one to one with your user files version is the Mig-29 Over Hump campaign. The vanilla even includes your changelog/description txt file. I kinda wish ED would add a version number to every change they make to a campaign. Like change it up one small decimal number per tweak, even if it only concerns one mission. Anyway, thanks for all the effort and help! I think i am all set for now. Cheers!

BTW, the changelog says it was just updated in the most recent patch. But for me the files show a change date at 31.01.2018 12:49h. I have the standalone module, was that recent campaign update for the F3 module only?

Great post! And as always, in the grand scheme of things, a couple of weeks/months delay don't matter a bit. Nobody will care about when this was released in two years time or so. Thus, no work during the Christmas - New Year holiday period! Btw, you probably get things done easier and more relaxed when you guys are properly rested. Making the F-14 is supposed to be fun as well. Cheers

no fictional maps for me neither.

Hey Ian, great that you keep the module campaigns up to date. But as you already hinted, it is quite confusing to know which campaign has been updated in vanilla, and which we should get from the user files for a playthrough atm. For instance: in todays release version update we read ; ''Su-33 Heavy Sky campaign. Total update all missions by Alex Zelog. Changed: payloads, balance of forces, Su-33s TO weight, weather, minors." and further down... "MiG-29 Over the Hump campaign сorrected." Now, i own the standalone versions of said modules, and the Over the Hump campaign was not even present until this patch and i compared it with your repaired version in the user files section, its a perfect match sizewise. The Heavy Sky campaign on the otherhand, has not be touched by todays update, and still says last chagned on 31.01.2018 for most files. Probably todays patch just updated this campaign for the FC3 package version, not for the standalone module version. As you can see...its realy confusing. No idea whats up with the campaigns for the SU-27, F-15, Su-25T and such. So, if at all possible, could you make a thread where you keep track of which campaign is more up to date, vanilla or user section?

So, i finally got back into the Gazelle and took her for a spin in the first mission. And i am bit rusty...so things took longer for me to get done, which brought a couple of issues to light that you maybe can improve on or change. But let me say first...i am hooked for more missions in this campaign! The setup and tone you have created in mission one kinda make you feel like you are really just part of a small detachment despite two carier groups sitting off shore, but if you can keep this feeling going in the other missions, that there is not a myriad of hightech material available and you as a Gazelle pilot matter to get it done. That would be a nice touch. So here is some feedback that hopefully encourages you to keep going with the project :) 1. As i said, i am a bit rusty in the Gazelle, and playing it twice, both times i did not manage get the Gazelle properly started and joing my lead. I got the radio message, but it seems to me the russian lead helo just flys by and past and you have to get up in the air pretty much visual confirmation. So since both countries cooperate on this one, could you maybe make this a radiochecked trigger? Let the russian helo come over to your ship and hover until you radio him to get going? Same for the departure to x-ray. I was busy fuzzing about my NADIR and he just left. 2. Which brings me to point two: its six digts per line. Again, not to firm about the NADIR and coordinates atm, but are those UTM or Geo coordinates? 3. The flare idea to point you where to touch down is nice, but a bit immersion breaking as well. Just me, but i prefer a burning flare on the ground or smoke...less like its new years eve. 4. When you are picking up the General and his attachè, hrm....where do you actually fit those dudes in the Sa-342L? Maybe you could change to the Sa-342 Mistral, shes got a whole nice backbench that easily fits two passengers. And let me add; i really like all the voiceovers you added. May i ask, are those mostly text to speech or did you record some real world stuff? Finally, how about you additionally make this a coop campaign? Imagine in the first mission in coop. One flys and MI-8 for the russians, and the other guy the Gazelle. And this would get even better with coming combat missions i reckon! Anyway, i can only reiterate; i think this campaign can become really enjoyable and once it entails more missions, i am sure a lot of Gazelle pilots here will play it! Keep at it, cheers

Yep, i like the style of the briefing pdf very much :)