LooseSeal

No no... what I'd like is the ability for the canopy to fog up, and then using VR hand sensors I can use my fingers to write little messages and draw little pictures in the condensation. Now that's realism. Before the blades start turning. Obviously. Then my little drawings would disappear. But then the next time I hop in cold and dark... the drawings would come back! REALISM.

Certainly seems like an early version of what we'll be getting, given that Eagle Dynamics is mentioned as a partner at the bottom. It's also kind of exciting/interesting that we'll be getting a product that has so many professional partners on board, like the Luftwaffe and Eurofighter Consortium. (Even if we don't get the 100% accurate product that the military will be getting, it's still pretty cool) Nice to see they already have a flyable model. Hopefully progress continues as swiftly as possible!

That's strange. I use a 1080 as well and as outdated as it is, it doesn't really do too badly. I mean sure, if I do a Liberation mission on the Syria map then there's issues. But I can run at decent settings, ultra clouds etc with no real stuttering in most normal scenarios. As said above, something else might be an issue.

My honest opinion... and I mean absolutely no disrespect to the guys who created it whatsoever, because it's obvious they put a lot of effort into it and tried to make it as best they could, as well as Baltic Dragon being the king of SP campaigns as far as I'm concerned. But - for me, it's just hamstrung by the absolute lunacy and unpredictability of the AI, which is nothing to do with the creators. I do think it's a good idea, and I do think it provides a certain amount of content if you have the time and the patience. If you're used to the AI and not too concerned with allies being shot down in silly ways, then go for it - it will give you a decent 'dynamic' way to practice the Hornet outside multiplayer. As an aside, the Liberation mod is worth a shot if you're looking for new content.

I'm fairly sure ED have said they're working on AI behaviour both in the air and on the ground. It's just a matter of waiting to see what they're working on. I can't see us finding out until next year, maybe in the start-of-2022 'roadmap' update if we're very lucky. It goes without saying the AI in general needs a lot of work. But I have to assume ED knows that for the dynamic campaign, which they're putting so much effort into, to work then it will need an AI capable of presenting a realistic threat, challenge and behaviour to the player. So these developments should, hopefully, be occurring in parallel.

Argh, really? I somehow did not know that at all. I guess I've never seen it used before? I always thought the EWRs were essentially just there for the benefit of the AI. Ha! Let the kicking commence!

That we can contact via radio to request pictures, etc? If I've missed the ability to contact EWRs via radio over the last 5 or 6 years I'd really be kicking myself...

I think it would be a very interesting thing for DCS to implement full ground-based controllers, which are contactable via radio. It would really expand the capabilities of nations in the game which don't have access to AWACS in reality. For example, Iran surely guides its aircraft from the ground, yet if I were playing a Liberation campaign, we have to put an unrealistic A-50 on the Iranian side in order to balance it out. Hopefully something for the future ATC overhaul, perhaps?

Some say December is less than five days away. I'm not so sure. Only time will tell.

I'm not religious, but if every time I pray to God Wags for an Apache video and he delivers one this quickly after - I will absolutely join his church.

I'm most interested in getting a tangible look at the dynamic campaign, and some confirmation of where we're at regarding AI improvements. As for modules, personally I'd go for a Tornado for fixed wing, and UH-60 (and its many variants) for rotor. I think the MiG-29 (or whatever is possible on the Redfor side) is really important for balance purposes. A Flanker is a lovely dream. I imagine a lot of the ED team would absolutely love to finally get to do a Russian module. A Raptor just isn't feasible... ED have said they want to make modules that are as realistic as possible while still legal. With a Hornet, you can get realistic and still remain outside classified territory - but not a Raptor. They'd have to employ so much guesswork in the simulation that it would end up being unrealistic (and therefore against their modus operandi) - if they got even close to real capabilities they'd simply be told to change it. Or else. And man, would it ever be a boring module... just plinking things in BVR and hardly ever being in danger

Oh man, the idea of having to do a commute through (what I can only imagine is horrendous) Las Vegas traffic isn't quite why I play DCS. As for FPS. Thanks, but no thanks. Plenty of other better, more dedicated platforms for that. As for the 'walking' animation, I believe ED have said it's something that will come in future. Particularly with regards to the Supercarrier.

In terms of extra immersion... I'd be interested to know from any of the Apache guys whether its canopy was susceptible, in desert conditions, to getting dusty. There are plenty of photos of Chinooks and Black Hawks with dust-covered glass, but hard to find any of the Apache. I'm guessing the sponsons block a lot of the dust or just because the cockpit is fairly high off the ground? It would be interesting, in appropriate modules, to have dust accumulate on the glass over time, particularly during landings/take-offs/low hovers, and then need to wipe it off.

I think they probably should be. After all, the AI flights use those waypoints to spam their JSOWs and whatevers (and in my case, all fire at the same single target out of a collection of multiple....) But yeah, they should be. Quick question... has the number of included campaigns been drastically cut? There used to be one on the Syria map, Russia vs Insurgents, which I used for a Hind-based campaign. But it's gone... in fact, the list of pre-made campaigns seems really small compared to what it was at one point.

It would have seemed about right to me. In terms of how they look, the Ka-50 is a rather chunky beast with a big, thick tail boom while the Apache is somewhat more... spindlier and conservative in its architecture. I'm also not sure, but I think the Ka-50 has more of an all-surrounding armour around the cockpit. And this is just pure guesswork, but something tells me Russian construction materials (for the armour, for example) may well be heavier and more steel-based, while the US may prioritise lighter, more composite materials.

Goodness, this rather strict rule on realism rules out 90% of the current DCS campaigns. Basically all the Hornet campaigns in the Caucuses would be null and void, given carriers can't pass through the Bosphorus. Orrr.... it's a game, not reality, and we can imagine interesting situations that challenge our virtual piloting abilities and is supposed to be fun? As for me, a mission where we get to strap two Royal Marines to the sides of the bird and fly a rescue mission into hostile territory sounds good But really, I'm just glad people are out there already planning missions/campaigns like this (because I'm utterly useless with the ME). The more single-player content available at/soon after release the better! Will happily pay for all the campaigns you guys can throw at me. Realistic or not.

Are they functional in any module that has them? They usually move, but not actually do anything of note.

So I would suggest using something other than Grim Reapers, like the excellent Spudknocker below, but that's just my personal preference. However, it's been a few months since I used Harpoons but... I don't believe there is the connection between the radar and the weapon you seem to be looking for. It doesn't 'guide' the missile like an Aim-120 or anything like that. As Spudknocker demonstrates in that video, it's mostly used to find and identify contacts. But you locking a ship on radar has no impact on the Harpoon, which should be set up on its own terms.

He responded to comments on the video that it is part of an upcoming eastern expansion to the Syria map.

Absolutely agree with this and have thought so for a long time. It would add so much to the immersion and to potential 3rd party campaign content, and yet cost relatively little. I mean, amateur 3D artists can do this stuff in their spare time and they do it well. I really hope ED have factored this into their plans for the dynamic campaign. It would be such a waste of all the resources being spent on that if, on starting the dynamic campaign for the first time, we suddenly realise all the targets are low-polygon Tech Combines and Comms towers. Or worse, the 'railway station' that is completely indistinguishable from any other generic building

Then you'd miss the pre-order discount. I mean, I've already ordered it, but I think that's what he's getting at. Personally, I think the AI being able to identify a T-55 from an Abrams is absolutely key. However... I'm not convinced if he should be able to 100% guarantee that the unit is friendly. For example, if we're doing a mission on the Caucuses map where both Georgia and Russia are using similar equipment... mistakes can be made. I think it should be up to the player to gather intel, etc, and determine which T-72 is which, otherwise it gets a bit easy. Friendly fire shouldn't be eliminated as a possibility. It's a really tricky question, and I'm sure it's a tough one for ED to try to balance correctly.

It certainly seems to be still worked on. The 5.0.0 version is updated all the time. The only frustrating thing is every time I look at it some new task has been added to the 'to do' section. At this rate 5.0 will merge into 6.0! I think we were spoiled with rapid updates and development over the last year and a half probably due to a lot of the guys being stuck at home or off work due to the pandemic. Sadly, life might have got back in the way again!

I'm not sure I would necessarily link the dynamic campaign and this world map idea. Certainly, that's not the away I read it in the interview - they seem very separate things. We'll doubtlessly see the dynamic campaign long before a world map is implemented. I'd be surprised if they even tell us how they're going to do it for a long, long time. At the top of mine as well, but as I said - be excited for the dynamic campaign, maybe temper expectations of a world map for the next few or several years.

I've literally never done an auto-start in any module. But then I do have an obsession over procedure

So this is a strange one, and the second time recently I've had an issue with moonlit missions. I started up one of the early missions in the Persian Lion campaign and was greeted by the brightest, most intense seas the world has seen since that fiery episode of Game of Thrones. I've attached the screenshots and I'd say they speak for themselves. It would only look correct if all the coastlines had been doused in napalm. I haven't seen anyone else mention this, so maybe it's something to do with my settings? Screenshot of those attached too. The other issue is the weird and highly distracting/obfuscating glow around both the HUD and the rear of the aircraft. Lights are off, and the glow does not diminish depending on direction or angle to the moon, etc. Will post examples of that as well. More screens.