Jarlerus

I noticed this recently. Made 2 test mission with this bug on both Syria and PG. Recorded the issue. Could be a render bug for the moon reflection. BUG TEST MISSION-PG.miz BUG TEST MISSION-Syria.miz

MiG-29 on the list again! xD

It all depends on them actually identifying the issue, and finding a solution - It's very difficult to make a time estimation on issues like this in software development. Ya'll just have to sit back and cross your fingers.

Every time I update my dedicated server it switches back to "-mt" in the autoupdate.cfg file, and tries to start the MT version of the server (that doesn't work). How can I permanently fix this issue? (instead of editing autoupdate.cfg after each patch)

My guess is that more than just a handful of people worked on the F4U back then, and more than full time workdays. Compared to the actual handful of people that do it in their spare time today... ED can't win however they do it - Devs announce it when they start working on it - "Outcry! It's taking too long! Vaporware!" - Devs announce it close to actual release - Other devs didn't know it was being worked on, and get a tiny bit annoyed.. (also, in the meantime; "Outcry! Why isn't anyone working on <insert aircraft> yet!")

I was watching my mates taxi around in the Apache and noticed that at some LODs, the wheels 3D model is rotating, so that the deformation because of the aircraft weight is also rotating, not only the texture. How to reproduce; Observe wheels of the AH-64 during ground taxi, and make not of how the wheels look at different LODs.

Lol... For some reason my game didn't update on start, as it usually does xD yeah, I was a version short.... I was confused, as I saw some units noted as new in the patchnotes, but not the ship. Shame on me Thanks.

It's off - still no go. Under ships, right? xD

Can you even add it in the ME? I can't find it in _any_ lists <.<

If they forgot they wouldn't know that it has been reported earlier.

You know how if you have many things to do, but limited time, so you put the things in a list and complete them in order? That's probably what's happening.

During a recent Multiplayer session with my group we had a massive de-sync in what clients saw, and what the Dedicated Server thought was happening. Skynet IADS script was used. Client (me, Jarl) used ECM to defeat the SA-6 launches. I thought, because the missiles stopped tracking. Server thought otherwise. There was also some odd intermittent "lock" signals on RWR afterwards, but no longer any "launch" indication. Other clients saw the same thing as I did during the engagement. No clients, F-16 nor F/A-18, could get any signals on HAD/HAS or HARM page - respectively. Only RWR indications were observed. This problem has been observed before, but this is the first time I've gotten to report it. Mission file: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1g1n33wRYFPDuth6As9dR_IvVZiXAj7z7/view?usp=share_link Server Track file: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1krCgRQ5TG2O9vM0gGIe7Q-QXkjT_0G3B/view?usp=share_link Client Track file: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1HUPZ5Dj-9_T4PwrzWme1jjQk8Vidjvtj/view?usp=share_link Tacview Server: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1X4iCoybjyfe5cBVjTOOmPP5rJHNG801Z/view?usp=share_link Tacview Client: https://drive.google.com/file/d/18hgKnbVBzFfL3Kx0HolZJ7BptZE1Vu5G/view?usp=share_link Let me know if you need anything more. //Jarl dcs.log

Changed A-4 as "in dev" again (removed Mod entry) False alarm. Moved CH-47 Chinook to "In Dev" Added F6F Hellcat

And MiG-29 is off the list again.

F-100D moved to "In Dev"

Mirage F1 marked as "Released". Any future, more modern, versions will possibly get their own entry.

"fear and loathing"?? That was not my point. I mean it more matter-of-factly. Not any kind of emotional split. If there's two distinct versions of a map, there will be a partitioning of players between them. Compare it with how ED managed the Super Carrier - at first you would have needed the Super Carrier module to even be allowed to join a server with it! So they adjusted that. And yes, if it's only a texture difference, it's a bit easier to manage, as then everyone _could_ potentially still play on the same map. It's the mesh that is critical. (You don't want players with one version of the mesh be seen flying through terrain that is only present on other versions). I only do privately organized MP so it would be a bit easier to manage in a closed group - but we'd still have to decide if we'd force everyone to play on the lower definition map, or on the higher (and potentially exclude some members).

It's not about "figuring out" anything - it would boil down to MP servers that don't want to split the community, having to settle for the lowest quality. And some players would have to install both versions. How nice is that? xD

That would be a nightmare for Multiplayer. You can't have people with different mesh versions play together.

I bought the map, so I feel I'm entitled to share my opinion. I'm not super impressed with the current state of the map. It might be Early Access, but it feels more like "Early Alpha". Some parts of the map look promising, although I don't know if Razbams approach will work in the end. I'm really hoping that Razbam can deliver on their promises of improvements, but time will tell. IMO it wasn't worth the 55€ now - If the price would have been more in line with the current state of the map, I'd be happier.

Late, but updated the Longbow into "released" status Also added the MiG-29 9.12 (Fulcrum-A) as In Dev, as it's been repeatedly confirmed by ED.

Hi. Small bug here. I see that the Chieftain Mk3 tank skins are in the WW2 pack folder, along with all the WW2 pack skins. DCS_folder>Mods>tech>WWII Units>Liveries>Chieftain_mk3 This can't be right //Jarl

F-4E is on the menu again baby!

Some people need to understand that it's their choice: If you don't want to participate in EA stuff - DON'T! Wait for the full release. It WILL be available to you. Christ. Learn already.