dimitrischal

Because they are FC3? You need a crash course in full fidelity modules vs FC3?

First of all it’s a matter of principle. We want realistic avionics not player friendly avionics in sim mode. Options are good but being unable to force full realism as a mission maker in a sim is ridiculous. Second the harrier is in beta so it’s normal for things not to be implemented. But now we have confirmation that things will stay like this on release version. And third and worse for me is developers making shortcuts for actual aircraft weaknesses and flaws to cater for casual players’ demands in full sim mode. This is detrimental to the overal experience of determined and invested players and a total buzzkill in MP. Another developer admitted tweaking the fm of their product making it LESS realistic but easier and received severe backlash. Isn’t this a simulator after all?

I think this thread belogs in the dcs world forum as it affects the game as a whole. Avionics reproduction accuracy in mp is not a personal choice, ED have no option like this except in avionics game mode, same as other developers. RAZBAM make modules of iconic planes that appeal to the casual player so their choice of implementation caters for this crowd but is fundamentaly wrong as this game is in it core still a simulator. Other planes have INS systems, why should razbam only get to do this and everybody else has a proper start sequence in place( and no way to skip the alignment in sim mode)? And furthermore why shouldn't the mission maker have a choice?

LOOL INS alignment in MP is definetely NOT personal choice. Goes a long way in showing what developers' goals are and realism is not RAZBAMs.

That’s the same with the mirage isn’t it? The options define the client setting and the MP setting is defined in individual aircraft as they are placed.

Nose wheel steering button calls up the radio menu when airborne. Same as the real plane.

We want this not to be allowed by default in ME which contradicts directly with other aircraft that don’t have this option at all. Failures can be implemented if you want A10C or F18 quick align not. 30 minutes refuel and rearm might be possible if one desires so. All this stems from 1 thing only that we must all admit. 7 minutes is along time to wait and people got bored waiting in the mirage.

Nobody argues about the option, but the fact that it is on by default in the settings. Right now in every dcs server (except maybe blue flag) you can do 1 minute preflight and takeoffs in the mirage whereas that is impossible irl and no other full fidelity module has such an option let alone turned on by default. Being on by default leads to it being overlooked by mission creators rather than being a conscious option to allow this.

Easter eggs are the pilots teeth rattling with the canopy open in caucasus winter or hal9000 in the nav computer and not ins auto aligned with zero drift. Get your facts and definitions straight. Allowing single player options on in mp by DEFAULT is bad practice and on the mirage the option is like that on PURPOSE. Sugar coat it however you like it is not a FEATURE. INS auto aligned and zero drift belongs in game avionics settings and not a hidden option turned on by default in the editor.

I dont have a problem with arcade avionics or the F10 map or anything else ,stop putting words in my mouth, and stop trying to convince me that me that when i build a mission and have to go find the option to force align and drift on the mirage is the right way to do it when all the other assists are by definition turned off. The proper way would be like with easy avionics to have the option turned off from the start of a blank mission. There should also be separate ME options for the drift and alignment so clients don't waste time on the ground but the ins behaves realistically in flight. As a matter of fact another aircraft that suffers from drift the viggen has no menu options to zero it, funny how that developer choses another approach which is the same as ED on an ground attack aircraft that can have its weapon employment crippled by excessive drift and become practically useless.

I am pretty sure it was put there so people could avoid the 7 min alignment process and no other reason. I am perfectly aware how ins and ins gps works and ins needs time to align and drifts . All else is cheating. Period. And please stop calling realism shortcuts features. Maybe a moderator can split this thread from the AV8B INS thread?

And ED chose not to implement such a thing (or allow any sort of shortcut) for the negligable minority of the hardcore simmers much to the dismay of the bigger casual player base it appears. Odd indeed.

A10C doesn't have it nor F18 at this point. I wouldn't have a problem if it was an additional option in the server settings but the default option allows this, so the better compromise is to have it the other way around with the mission makers willingly making the choice to allow this. I wonder how you would feel with instant radar operation or maverick zero cool time which should be also allowed then. Also this is a simulator and if people think waiting for the ins to align is a waste of time for no lifers should really look the word simulator up in a dictionary. Also auto rudder and take off assist might cater for some people who don't have rudder pedals what does insta align cater for? People with no patience?

I don’t want to sound like a killjoy but would like your modules to align with ED policy and remove the already aligned option. It offers an unfair advantage in turnaround time on mp and is unrealistic. People can have the plane start hot and already aligned if the wait is too long for them.

These threads keep popping like a cancer metastasizes lol. Both ED and the community have pinpointed some deficiencies in missile implementation and they are being worked on like the guidance logic and energy loss in turns. The fixes surely will not come anytime soon as this is a complicated matter. Everything else is just conjecture and bitching about people’s favorite sides with opinions presented as facts.

I know. But it can still be used as a counter argument. I’d really pay for any love they showed the f5 but I doubt anyone will bother. I bet my money on expansion of the Cold War ecosystem to bring more attention to the f5 but it appears this is a bit low on EDs list of priorities seeing they bumped the F4 several years in the future and the absence of the much awaited SA2 and assets.

Also now with the NS430 add on you can get basic gps functions on the F5 as well.

I didn’t say it was the worse, they could have gone with the A or B even. It’s actually really well suited for the Cold War stuff although people use it to take on everything lately with great success. It still is a niche plane regarding the dcs crowd though.

I don’t think it’s a conundrum for the main player base. They want only the boomstick... I don’t know why they went for the era they did, probably they had the right documentation for most of the systems, and honestly it’s a great little plane but it will never appeal to the majority with the current capabilities. With the mig 19 and 23 coming I can only dream of the fights to come for the little tiger!

Well this is the best F5 upgrade proposal ever put on the table. Well articulated and backed by data. I ‘d buy it in an instant but I don’t see it happening. It also fails to appeal to the core of dcs fans by not upgrading the boomstick capabilities hence the market appeal would be pretty low...

Do you really believe the harrier can carry harpoons? I mean ffs they would be inches from the ground just crying for an accident to happen. How would you target them without AG radar? As for payable expansion weapons... well that would be a nightmare....

Dude chill. New Version with dm completely overhauled is coming, current one is primitive at least. Besides there are bugs EVERYWHERE that are more important than the dm right now. Patience in a virtue lacking in some I guess...

This is amazing! Really can’t wait!

Of course but opening a discussion everywhere about the bugs affecting missiles isn't useful or appropriate. More so when the bugs have been recognized and are being worked on. Besides blufor wasn't so handicapped in wvr fighting with the 9M in any serious way. And now they get something that is at least a gen ahead of the R73. Hardly a level fighting field with opfor in any distance anymore.... Even with the AIM120 energy bugs not sorted yet.

Wasn’t this thread about the 9X? lol guys stop comparing it to the Phoenix and enjoy what we have the way it is. It’s gonna get improved eventually but bitching about it in every single thread won’t make it happen sooner. I think there are a couple of missing texture threads that don’t have posts bitching about draggy missiles in them but that’s it.