Jarlerus

Could you define it a bit more? Your request is kind of vague at the moment.

I just noticed today that the Harrier has "Slave DMT to Waypoint"-functionality. (added at least 8 months ago!) Nothing in the manual about it, AFAIK. So I'd say it's very, very out of date... Razbam, come on :P I know progress is slow, but where should I learn about new features? I feel it's a bit silly, atm...

I-ve also been told that the "remove" trigger zone does not work on servers. Needs to be local. (Don't know if it works now though!)

Soviet made. Castings can have deformities in them - Probably what this represents. As for the floating dials and buttons: Might be because these pics don't seem to be captured in game, but in a graphics program of sorts. Can mess with alignments.

My understanding is that a change of graphic settings would mean you'd have to reload the graphics engine every time there's a change. That would give you lagspikes. So guessing this is why it's not done. (And to my knowledge, never has been)

You're talking about "sex" (also called "Biological Sex"). That is biological. Gender's different. :)

I love the Gazelle, but what puzzles me every time I fly it is its inconsistent behaviour. Sometimes it sinks fine at speed and 0 collective, but sometimes, at similar speeds, it won't leave the altitude (0 collective). Sometimes I need to counter with pedals, but SUDDENLY I decelerate under some set airspeed, and I need to compensate a lot. There's no "flow" to the transitions - it makes it hard to predict at times. Maybe it's because of some stabilization system? (seems weird to set it up like that though). Also, the turns one can make in it are insane :P Feels like the G-forces would be insane in some of the maneuvers I pull off, but the pilot doesn't even blink.

First, I have a 3K monitor, and I have great framesrates - :P Would still like to be able to have realistic spotting distances of air targets. Secondly, What is worrying about the LODs is that the newer model (the Blitz truck) is the one that's worse off! So something failed in the QA yet again :P (The Blitz truck is, AFAIK, made by a partner to ED).

+1

https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/tools/lp/Bo/LogicalFallacies/42/Appeal-to-Ridicule

Yeah, it feels like ED are all over the place, fixing one thing there, adding a small thing there. I'd like to see a focused effort in one area instead, for example as OP implies; Update many of the old models!

Nice. Progress! Needs tuning though, as you say there Knock-Knock. ^^

Actually, people are often very self aware - even in games - because other players watch them. So it can be for others. Like helmet-textures. Can be something others see on a taxiway/runway. It amuses me how strong peoples opinions are on a simple request like this xD Other simple requests for visual features don't get _nearly_ as much involvement by the community, often left totally uncommented :P

+1 can't activate pilot Maybe this is a bug for the bugforum?

The Q-5 would require a total rework of both exterior and interior 3D model :noexpression: Not really feasible to have it as a part of the MiG-19 pack..

Sweet!

And there you are, playing the victim.

+1 At least make it available for 3rd party devs to implement at their discretion.

Reporting on another issue (Harrier) I recorded this video that also shows the kind of "lost frames"/flickering I get.

I guess the moderator that moved it deemed it to be a wish for a better damage model :P Which I support. ^^ +1

+1.

Personally, I'd be happy with the ability to kit the present Mi8 more specifically. Like only having door-gunners, without the pylons on. I mean, can the F/A-18 do that, the Mi-8 can. :P

I do support the general idea here, if not specifics of your list. But I think we should be less judging. Using terms like "...is probably REALLY easy to do", "...would not require a major effort at all" and "QUICK AND EASY WIN" presume that they are not working on an old code-base. For what we know the code base could be from the 90's at this point! And as I get the impression that DCS development is mainly driven by engineers, and not marketing. I interpret the sequence of updates as them re-doing/refactoring those old frameworks from the ground up, one big chunk at a time. So I'd assume that the mission editor will get a big overhaul, at some point, and that they are saving their time until they can do it properly, instead of going in and shoehorning in improvements that will have to be trashed once they do the "Big Overhaul". At least, this is how I see it to be able to keep my sanity over the years I've been following DCS.

Updated with the OV-10 Bronco (Not announced yet, but come on, as good as! ;) ) Also moved Buccaneer and Alpha Jet to "Wishlist" as those projects are presumed dead at the moment. //Jarl

+1