FoxOne007

Yeah pretty much :megalol:

That is unknown at the moment, a decent rule if thumb is, if there is no video from Wags about it, then expect it to not be included

We will be getting the HTS at some point, but I’m fairly sure we won’t see it in the coming update with the HARMs

As long as ED doesn’t call “A-10C II Tank Killer” (which is MEGA CRINGE, ED) I’m happy

AGM-65 Mavericks (both LAU-88 Triple rack and the LAU-117 single launcher) can only be carrier on stations 3 and 7, not on the most inboard or most outboard wing pylons or on the wingtips

a $9.99 upgrade price is a literal STEAL for what you are getting, this upgrade should be a no-brainer for any active A-10C user

It might be a DCS related issue, not a Syria Map related issue?

Let's hope this thread can stay open for longer than 2 days thanks to Razbam haters only being able to attack and not move on.... But welcome Elmo!! :thumbup:

Chuck’s guide has an overview and summary of all DED pages, using pics from The Other Sim

Ah yes another forumquaker that thinks he knows better than an SME.... You’re just making up things to try and justify having something added of which there is no mention, picture or document around to prove it was actually used. And again, it wasn’t so no it shouldn’t be added

Yep, SP (SnowPlow) is the way to go in that case

You’re wrong though, these things are in the module albeit bare bones and in need of improvements. Don’t act like you know everything better than a dev....

Thanks for the statement Ron! Looking forward to future fixed and improvements to systems

A. Modelers are easier to find than competent coders. B. RB has 3 modelers (one is which is Ron himself) and they have 2/3 coders C. It is a lot easier to bang out a new early WIP model and show that... what else should they show? 60 lines or code that make sense to nobody.... If you don’t understand how game design works then don’t comment on it!

For the millionth time: CODERS ≠ MODELERS. GET THIS IN YOUR HEAD!!

An absolute truth bomb!!! Though RB should care for their customers unlike how they are doing now.

The models have been in the game files for nearly a year (albeit not functional), both were more than likely slated for this OB release anyway, especially the GBU-54 ofc since that comes out with the A-10C II.... common sense really..

Never used and will never be used..... They’re also not the same weapon so it’s not sensible at all..... You are better off using AI Hornets or Vipers for radar engagements..

At this point you are more hopeful than any if us, maybe in 10 years when it finally leaves EA it will be somewhat oke. I agree with BKthunder, such a shame to see such an iconic aircraft get ruined due to incompetence. Afaik ED still decided if a 3rd Party gets the license to an aircraft, shame they allowed to wrong team to do it and didn’t choose to do it themselves [ED].

SAM mode in RWS allows you to acquire a single target while the radar keeps scanning the area around the bugged target. If you want to bug multiple targets you will need to use the TWS radar mode. I recommend reading the FCR section of the Vipers early access guide fro more info on both.

ED showed a GBU-32 about 2 years ago so yeah it makes sense for them to not do double work and just wait for ED to eventually add it (would be nice to see it soon ED). And as for the GBU-54 it would require ED to update the Laser Seeker and GPS logic in DCS due to the way the GBU-54 operates. So no it is not a cheap excuse it makes perfect sense. Again why waste time on something that is being made by the main game company already that you can then easily include....

We can only wish, this would allow a competent dev to take over the F-15E license and to it justice (like ED)

This is an awesome idea, big +1 :thumbup:

Yes yes we get it now, you have said literally the same thing for the 6th time now, so take a chill you've made your point

They’re even more arrogant than I thought, they really have no intention of cooperating