FoxOne007

They did and it was terrible, had horrible performance and wasn’t very accurate. They have now adopted ED’s API which has been a big improvement. Also 1,5 years ago DCS was in a very different state compared to 10 years ago

When you play JTAC in CA you always have to use a vehicle, unfortunately you can't turn off the engine so you get stuck with listening to it endlessly (yes you can turn of audio completely but then you also miss out at getting audible on planes), also making it harder to listen to the Radio when talking to aircraft. it would be great if we could turn off the engine of our vehicles when we have set up at our overlooking position via a keybind.

An AWACS but for tracking ground targets?! Sign me up! the E-8C would be great, and now that we have an AG radar, very useful

The reason it was paused for a lot of those 10 years was the lack of an AG radar, which is a key part of the F-15E, so instead of releasing it back then with hacky or missing major features they opted to wait until ED made the AG Radar API last year. and by now a lot of the 3D stuff and other tech has also had MAJOR upgrades compared to 10 years ago. There is no point at looking back for 10 years, it's not at all relevant for today anymore

Well their website is being overhauled, that’s why it’s down. As for updated you’re wrong, please see this thread: You clearly have no clue about module development. I suggest you educate yourself on that first before making unfounded comments

I believe we will be getting the newer mask/helmet, not the old school one

Sorry do you work for ED?? You might not have Block 40 docs but that doesn’t mean ED can’t get access to those via their contracts! I for one would love a 90’s Block 40 with the LANTIRN stuff, it would definitely change F-16 game play and mission execution in general. And people calling it “just another AMRAAM carrier” need to do better research before they make dumb statements like that

I would love to see some older style F-16AM MLU's used by a lot of European countries. Along with older USAF Block 40's with the LANTRIN system. Defo wouldn't mind those as small payed additions requiring the current Viper module as main source. Say like $10-$15 per version. then we could perhaps even have some export versions in there like Israeli and Taiwanese ones. BUT, ED really needs to properly finish their current modern modules like the A-10C II, F/A-18C and even our current Viper before even considering these kinds of options. they are struggeling enough already while trying to pump out more modules and leaving released ones in a FUBAR state

There is. under planned for end of 2021 features

No one said the asset pack should be a separate purchase though. It could/should just be included with the map (like RB is doing with the Falklands). We desperately need some better middle eastern assets as both Syria and PG feel very empty.

I rather have a bit of a mish mash if that means more playability overall than having some half paved runway that is more “accurate for 2016”. You can always add missing objects yourself and for devs to constantly update things on a map as things change irl would be a huge waste of time, money and resources. The map is very detailed as is and no one is gonna notice if riverbed area X looks slightly different IRL than it does ingame

+1 on this!

The Harpoon is a weapon that isn’t in the USAF’s inventory and probably also not incorporated in the USAF F-16’s software, unlike export versions. They aren’t really comparable. ED has also said no on the Harpoon multiple times already

Nothing ludicrous about it. It’s just like IRL

Agreed, at least a great substitute to the F-15C is being developed In the form of the Eurofighter

Again, it won’t! They’re making an F-15E not an F-15C

Dude… that’s exactly what you keep on doing in this thread. People who have actually worked on/in the jet have commented multiple times saying you are wrong about the F-15E without CFT’s handles/flies/acts the same as an F-15C, which again it does not!!!! I can also confirm that CFT’s will not be removable (thank god, reason: you would need a whole new FM). You can find all the info on the jet and systems here, which was all provided by RB on their discord: Also @BIGNEWYcould you please just close this thread. It’s endlessly arguing with someone that can’t accept he’s wrong, and Devs already having said no to what he is continuously going on about

The actual NTTR is filled with structures/targets because well that’s what the range is all about, then adding any extra threats is something the player then can do. But the fact that you need a mod to actually make the map complete is beyond me.

How can you have an NTTR map but then not actually do anything with the NTTR..... you need mods to actually turn it into the proper ranges... your comment makes 0 sense

Well we try to but when you then day things like: “oh sure, the purple will be removed” you can expect us as the community to react if the change is something that was realistic to something unrealistic

Update on the 3D scan of the Pilot body, here's how it turned out:

Why will the purple be removed? it's an accurate color. the MFD readability and brightness is what should be tweaked

A lot of people put in steerpoint information manually when they are in the cockpit, so no points in the ME are usually set up, and a 25 point flightplan is a ridiculous thing to have. So I hope the logic behind it get’s changed soon so it supports the change when it’s manually input in the cockpit. And that when the BE DED page finally comes it will allow us to set any steerpoint to be set as Bulls, as described in -34 manual

Razbam has said they have a solution for both parties, leading most (including me) we’ll be able to swap them in the special options menu. Which is similar to say adding/removing the fuel probe on the JF-17

I’m gonna go out on a limb and say the “asymmetrical load” is being able to load a GBU-54 and a GBU-38. They are kind of the same bomb but not fully of course. It’s the same on the F-15E, where they can be mixed and matched on a CFT. Being able to load say a JSOW and GBU sounds illogical and is something I’ve never ever seen, to not get started about potential clearance/separation issues