Jester986

I 100% agree but there have been clues to some issues at ED for awhile. This will generate a huge amount of cash for them so there’s no stopping it. Probably their answer to avoid a subscription model. The more positive possibilitie is they have a deal with an Airforce to make an F-35 and they got permission to release it to DCS if they tweak a few things off from actual and don’t admit that they’re working for a government customer.

I don’t care about balance. DCS should NOT be balanced because the real world isn’t. But I am highly skeptical an accurate version can be made and lowering the standard of what’s required to make module is disappointing. But I’m sure it will be a cash cow for ED.

Yea. I no longer buy everything that’s comes out just because. We don’t have any better options to take our business elsewhere so we’re stuck with ED but it’s definitely a hostile relationship.

Refunds for years old modules aren’t reasonable. And I’m sure there’s a you own nothing and are entitled to nothing clause in the EULA. Refunds for the 15 are a nice good faith gesture. But I’ve been flying and enjoying the others for a long time. Also an example of the good a payment model that shall not be named. If something goes wrong with a module you stop paying for it.

I wasn’t going to buy the 15 because of previous experiences with Razbam. But a squadron mate bought it for me saying “no they got it right this time” and then this happens go figure. If the Mirage, Harrier and mig 19 break. Well I’ll be upset but I won’t quit DCS since it’s the only game in town. But now I’m worried about the longevity of the platform. Hopefully I’m reading too much in the tea leaves.

To those flying on it If I enjoyed South Atlantic at launch would I be happy with the state of this?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2024/04/28/world-war-i-tactics-make-a-comeback-as-a-ukrainian-gunner-in-the-back-of-a-propeller-plane-shoots-down-a-russian-drone/?sh=6b08c98232c6 Yak door gunner when?

Well all that being said I really look forward to flying the 47 when it’s in a state that I find good enough.

Hard to believe this was three years ago… Abandoned

You should migrate to standalone. I know steam is convenient but ED would be in a better place if they weren’t paying steam their cut. There’s no benefit to being on steam other than all your games are in one spot. And I don’t see the advantage of that when I still launch DCS with a desktop icon.

Excellent flight model and systems. Good but not frame rate murdering textures. Logistics ops that impact the battle. Fat cow. Visible crew and cargo. Some generic cargoes are fine but variation based on whether it’s food ammo tents comms gear etc would be nice. Paratroopers. Fast Ropers would be a stretch goal. Load and unloading animations. Oh the crew chief actually has some buttons to press in the back. It would be nice if those work. I actually hate long lining in dcs because I do it in real life and it doesn’t translate well. oh this is super high priority for me. Weight and balance and performance planning. This is such a critical part of being a pilot I can’t believe it’s not in the game yet. We need a way to calculate fuel burn and at least IGE and OGE hover.

I’m not mad about the 47 but I won’t be purchasing until I see some good reviews on it. There’s a problem with modules getting to 90% but can’t go the last mile. I think the business model is in trouble with the work debt versus cash flow problem. I’m sure the chinook will be great, and I’ll happily buy it then. But I’m predicting either a rough launch or a long delay or both. And I’m not thrilled with how things have gone with the lower tier modules. Again no pitch fork and not trying to be rude. I love DCS but my trust is waning.

With logistics set to become a bigger part of DCS with the Chinook and Hercules we really need a way to do proper flight planning. Required take off and landing distance. Fuel burn. In ground effect and out of ground effect hover. Trying to find the real world performance charts in the wild is a huge pain. DCS already does the calculations. Can you please add a way for us to seem them in the mission editor/planner? Please start working on this if you haven’t already.

This just seems like a bad idea and is putting up red flags for me. I’ll probably wait for the map to be complete before considering a purchase.

Big Newy, I remember a long time ago the towed decoy was on the roadmap for the F-18. I’ve seen it mentioned for the F-16 but not the 18 recently. Is it still planned for the 18? also I love DCS and the progress it’s made this year. I especially love the integrated comms. But the Yak-52 still leaves much to be desired and does not receive updates. I know it’s not making you money. But we paid money for it. How should I determine which modules will be completed so I can avoid buying an abandoned one in the future?(rhetorical) FIX THE YAK.

While I’ll get the Afghanistan map since I spent a little time there, I am over it with the Desert maps. This isn’t anger or complaining. Just expressing my opinion for the sake of feed back.

Hoping to see a solution for infantry not taking cover or entrenching. But otherwise great news! Can’t wait to see it in action.

Looking forward to it!

While I don’t think a slow news week is anything to care about I wholeheartedly agree on the Yak. I feel really let down on that one. I trusted ED to put the same effort into that product that bears their name as anything else that does. Obviously I was wrong. I love DCS. But not more excuses for the Yak. How it’s been handled is just wrong.

Just discovered this bug myself. Looking forward to its resolution.

Honestly I only skimmed this, but as a Huey pilot she does feel a little weak to me and the tail rotor authority is a little lacking. But I can’t be bothered to break out the charts and really dig into the weeds. In my opinion she’s close enough and the autorotation performance feels shockingly right. My biggest complaint is that we don’t have a weight and balance and performance planning options. We should have a weight and balance graph showing our load and way to calculate HOGE/HIGE in game. How are we supposed to be able to plan a mission without this? How many troops can I take? How far can I take them? What altitude can I drop them off at? No idea. It would also have the benefit of putting the performance accuracy question to rest.

It was a prototype. Is ideal? No but you work with what you have. Like the KA-50 vs the 52

Developers are people too. They’re building the plane they can get enough information on. I imagine it would be disheartening to be excited to announce your new module and have people crap all over it. Are their planes I would have preferred? Absolutely. But that doesn’t mean the J-8 won’t be a great addition. Of course everyone is welcome to voice their opinions. I’m just voicing some encouragement.

Uboats and team, I’m sorry to see people complaining about the aircraft and variant we’re getting. You’ve done great work with the JF-17 and I’m excited for the J-8II. Keep up the hard work.

This. While I’ll get the BS3. It’s a bit of an annoyance that these mentioned modules are in much greater need of a refresh than BS2.