desdinova

Please turn labels back off. They take a lot of the fun away.

I last played DCS two weeks ago, went on vacation for christmas, and came back home to the "The Activation Key is not valid any more due to significant changes of the computer hardware" message. I clicked activate and it said it activated successfully, but then that window wouldn't close, proceed or launch DCS and I had to restart my computer to get control back. Now when I start DCS I get the "Unable to run the application due to integrity fault of the activation key" error. This is ridiculous.

I still hope we see a Mig-23 or Su-22 enter development soon. As I've pointed out elsewhere, every single DCS aircraft out of ~20 currently in development is western/NATO.

Mig-23 gets my vote as well. With their Mig expertise and swing-wing experience, they'd be perfect. After that, maybe an F-4...

If I had to guess he meant nondevelopers

We're not asking questions, we're expressing our desire for a product. I can only speculate on ED's business model but most companies that produce a consumer product (like video games) spend a lot of time doing market research and value community feedback, and recognize and respond to customer demand, because it helps them produce a more salable product and make more money.

Well, I hope you're wrong, because that sounds like the absolute worst possible way to run a business.

Did Mikoyan license the Mig-21? If so why wouldn't they approve a Mig-29? Or 27 or 23? At this point they're all obsolete aircraft. Did leatherneck receive any info from Mikoyan to make the Mig-21? I thought the whole reason it exists was because they had a open-source info in the form of an active duty mig pilot on staff. The Mig-29A's in the same position as the Mig-21bis, being an obsolete fighter long out of service with its home country, and even a lot of primary or secondary export countries. There's only about ten years between them.

Considering ED has indicated they would like to do a full-fidelity Su-27 eventually and the Mig-29 PFM is coming (after the Spitfire and F-18 ), it's more a question of priorities than technical ability. The only way to influence those priorities are if the community keeps clamoring for what they want. DCS devs do listen to the community (example: RAZBAM and the Pucara). I'm not saying drop the F-18 and the F-14 and do migs now, but they should be next in line.

All of these aircraft (including the Mig-29 models we have in the game) are no longer in active Russian service, in some cases (Mig-23, Su-17) for decades. They were also all heavily exported in various configurations and information is widely available. The Mig-29G flight manual is available in english in thirty seconds on google.

Of the ~20 DCS aircraft currently in development, all are Western. Every single one. There are no less than six western fourth gen. fighters (F/A-18, Typhoon, F-14A/B, M2000C, F-15E, AV-8B) in various stages of development, and possibly a seventh (Polychop Tornado), not to mention the third gen Viggen, Mirage F-1, and Mirage III. REDFOR's only full-fidelity fixed-wing options are the third gen. Mig-21Bis, first gen. Mig-15, and the L-39, a trainer with marginal combat capability. Right now the heart and soul of DCS gameplay is PvP multiplayer because of the lack of a single player or coop dynamic campaign. But the numbers have always skewed towards BLUFOR, and it's only going to get worse as high fidelity, heavily-hyped aircraft like the F-14 enter the scene. In a couple years, we'll be looking at an environment where we have a glut of relatively recent western aircraft and no one to fly them against. This will quickly become boring. DCS needs more full-fidelity Russian aircraft, especially: Mig-29 (we're already halfway there!) Mig-23 (historical rival to the F-14 and a huge part of basically all post-Vietnam air conflicts) Su-17/20/22 (supersonic 3rd gen. strike aircraft to complement the Viggen and Mirage F1) Aircraft like these would add tremendously to the DCS experience. Considering the success of the Mig-21, they'd probably also sell very well.

IIRC LN stated at one point that the Mig-21bis and Mig-23ML(?) share something like 70% of systems modelling code. We already have a 70's Mig-21, if we had to get another one I'd rather see an early model for DCS: Vietnam purposes. The heart and soul of DCS to me is the multiplayer, and the most fun are servers like Mig-15 vs Sabre or Mig-21 vs F-5. If I was named emperor of DCS I'd focus on releasing roughly similar east vs. west pairs to keep the multiplayer fun and balanced, for example: Mig-19 vs F-100 Mig-23 vs F-4E Su-17/20/22 vs Viggen Ditto Mig-27 Clickable/advanced systems Mig-29 as a counterpoint to the M2000C Mig-25 by itself would be a fascinating addition, if I had to pick a western pair maybe the F-104G But the Su-17, Mig-23, Mig-25 and F-4E are at the top of my wishlist. With those we could wargame basically every air war from 1965 onward, from the arab-israeli wars to the gulf war.

Every single DCS aircraft currently in progress is western. What we really need are more full-fidelity soviet aircraft, like the MIG-23.

I was trying to be diplomatic, the implementation has some really serious issues. But if I have to pick a side I'd rather be able to see targets at 40km vs. not being able to see anything at 5km, because one is basically unplayable. And aside from the extreme range, there's nothing unrealistic about that scenario. In all forms of combat the side that can achieve surprise has a decisive advantage. Also, that's a bit of an exaggeration, because seeing a dot on the horizon doesn't give you speed, range, altitude, aspect, or identity of the target. In the F-5 vs Mig-21 grudge match where you only have two main groups of combatants who know generally where to look, yeah, you can tell pretty quickly where the enemy is, but that's a product of the scenario. In a 40-player server like blue flag that dot could be anything. That's what radar and IFF is for.

AFAIK the server settings override client-side for impostors now