Thump

That is a horrendous idea. If you're paying for a discount, then it isn't a discount. It also isn't logical to pay a fee to play EA as it will limit their desire to get as many testers that they need/want in that program. They have already said it is the only way they can accomplish modules. Not to mention, it also defeats a main purpose of buying EA (the discounts). The last sentence is the worst as it is awful for consumers (i.e. you) and only emboldens ED to continue with products not being completed.

No one uses NDBs not to mention they would probably shut them down during actual combat situations.

You completely missed the point of both posts.

If this were the case, then why bother with the ATFLIR which will be cheek mounted?

If it weren't for the vocal "minority" that you seem to despise, you would not have a TGP on the Hornet nearly 2 years after its release. Additionally, the Hornet is capable of having the LITENING on station 4, so in order for it to be "realistic, study sim", all I have to do is change the skin of my aircraft to a country that does use it that way. This "study sim" is more so than War Thunder, but the core aspect of the game leave a LOT to be desired as far as actual hArDcOrE sIm. From the all seeing eye that is the Eagle's radar, to missile behavior, to how jamming/ECM works (which they shouldn't be able to accurately simulate IMO) still makes this in totality, a game. How many times have you seen/been affected by wonkey, unrealistic aircraft/missile/AAA behavior in this study sim? You also aren't forced to use triple rack Mavs on the Viper, nor the fourth station for the TGP. The negative impact to you if others do on an MP server is minimal (viper guys get 4 more kills if they make it to the target, and you "have" to see a TGP on the fourth station of a Hornet). You can also elect to play on servers that restrict their use, giving you back that realism you seek. Lastly, speaking down is definitely not a great approach to community interactions. If they want to deny a specific weapon, weapons rack, or some other thing in the game because of how they envisioned their product, then that's fine. But an antagonistic approach is neither warranted nor helpful, and does not bode well for the health of the developer/customer relationship.

They only capitulated after months and months of customer "feedback" just like the inclusion of the pod in the first place. And once they did finally realize that it would make their customers happy to have the option, they spoke down to us telling us "fine, but it's unrealistic to our very narrowed choice of Hornet." As far as the "duplicate", it was more along the broad terms of what the TGP is and will generally be used for (i.e. Target ID and Lasing) not necessarily the subsystems. We needed/wanted a pod on station 4 to have a viable deep(er), self-sustained strike platform which a TGP on station 4 provides. As far as the timeframe, it was a bit of a jab from me but not far off. They say they are going to be able to complete the Hornet and Viper by end of 2020. We will have to see if they can deliver on this. I am skeptical due to how big of a hit the Hornet took when they pushed (rushed) out the Viper (in what they believe is a sustainable way of doing business). Now they plan on being able to complete two EA jets while pushing out the Super Carrier, Hind, multiple terrains, core fixes, MAC, new A-10C, new KA-50, another unnamed aircraft, and fix what is a burning 2.5.6. I find that believing they can keep pace with the requirements to be overly optimistic and will only lead to frustration when those timetables are missed.

The AI likes to use lazy 8s at 25K in a MiG-29. And, you can generally force a usable gun solution by split-S when they go low.

Good thing they focused on the Lot 20, used by the U.S. Marines and Navy on July 27 2005 at 20:50:34 Zulu and not usable gameplay that the ATFLIR will eventually (read next 3-5 years) duplicate but a bit differently.

They would be waiting for eternity if they relied on ED to released a bugged out and unusable SDK. They are still working on getting cows right.

That's why they released a YouTube video highlighting it

That's expecting a lot out of ED. We just got a working gun sight in the hornet 1.5 years after release.

+1 Not necessarily tricked, but definitely did not expect them to plan a multi year EA and divert resources from the Hornet to the Viper. That was just having two aircraft in EA. The real question will be how they handle EA for the Hornet, Viper, Carrier, Hind, A-10C 2, KA-50 update, theaters, and some other aircraft that will apparently knock our socks off. They are going to more than likely have to "borrow" resources from the Hornet and Viper if I were a betting man.

Principle of the matter. I'm also guessing you're going to tip them $5 to prove you're ok with us taking the extra cost? In addition, purchasing the carrier only feeds their unrealistic reliance on EA. We will eventually have four modules in EA in the near future with the Hind and more on the way to unfinished product purgatory.

I'm well aware of their policy and change in programs. I'm simply pointing out that it does not bode well for customer satisfaction and retention. What this change in programs does and how it was handled tells a customer is that it is FAR better to not buy anything, wait for a sale and protect yourself from the inevitable change in programs that will maximize your monetary value (as long term customers are not valued at the same level as new customers). Again, we aren't splitting the atom, we're working with long division at worst. And they hold the right to change the terms and conditions anyway, so why not do so in favor of your customer? But as you say, it is what it is. There's just a reason behind the dissatisfaction.

Then divide by 2. Human kind has figured out how to put an autonomous robot on Mars, I think we can figure out how to work PEMDAS. This isn't the first time this has come up and does not encourage customers to stay as long term buyers in this company as they are clearly undervalued.

While they are completely two different programs, they were earned in the same manner. Usually using world wide accepted currency (i.e. US Dollar, Euros). There are equivalencies that could be made between programs as well but lets not pretend that I used Orens from the Witcher to previously buy ED products. If one bonus = 1 dollar/ruble/euro, and 1000 miles = 1 dollar, then logically 1 bonus = 1000 miles. Not sayin', just sayin'. There is a reason why older heads who provided support for the product in its infancy are frustrated with this approach.

"Thanks for your support over the years, k thx bai" - ED

Hi Sledge, If you are doing VFR flying (i.e. not in weather), then a primary technique is to find a visual reference in the cockpit that helps you know what 30, 45, or 60 degrees of bank is (i.e. put a bolt on the canopy on the horizon and provide a 2 G pull to maintain level flight at 60 degrees of bank). I would honestly recommend just practicing turning to get a better feel for a level turn in visual conditions. I personally haven't tried to figure out those references yet. Also a point of focus might be the nose of the A-10 and ensuring that it's on the horizon during the turn. This should get you close to a level turn and you can adjust based on your VVI. Just know that VVI is a trend instrument and will take a second or two before it starts to show a climb or descent. If you are IFR, then the ADI and HSI are your primary means of navigation like the others have said. Assuming you are have the EGI button on nav panel engaged, you should be able to select whatever waypoint you want to fly to. From there it should display a marker on the HSI that you can put at the top of the HSI case. That is effectively the way to deal with the lateral nav. As far as the maintaining and/or climbs and descents. You're going to have to play around with it a little as I do not know of any Pitch and Power settings for the A-10. Really, it's just get a feel for what level flight is, trim off the pressures so that the aircraft (mostly) maintains altitude on it's own, and then you can use your throttle (in combination with your pitch) to have smooth descents and climbs. If you are max throttle, then you're only going to be able to climb with pitch. If you are not max throttle, you can use power increases and decreases to climb in a Flight Level Change (or speed on pitch) method (which is safer, but may not get you the VVI you want, especially in the climb). This is because when you trim an aircraft you are trimming to a speed. Any increase in speed means that the aircraft will climb and any decrease will give a corresponding descent. The benefit to climbing and descending in this fashion is that you will never stall the aircraft while changing altitudes. You just need to be careful on the descent as you can achieve some solid descent rates that make capturing your altitude difficult &/or "dangerous." Hopefully this helps a bit. Cheers, Thump

It sounds like a unlocking of features under one aircraft type. So not forced to buy the new A-10 but to effectively purchase and use whatever new weapons/features they plan to release.

Have you tried to lower the seat itself?

The whole "Don't buy EA if you don't like it" is double speak from both ED and others on this forum. The whole point of sending the Viper into EA was to keep the franchise afloat. So you're saying "buy it! but don't buy it if you're going to complain. We didn't twist your arm but we are saying that we wouldn't be profitable unless you buy in. But again, if you're going to complain, don't buy....but still buy otherwise this all goes away." And when has ED released anything without it breaking other things in the sim? If you think a change in how radios work in game isn't going to effect modules, you might want to look around the cockpit to see if you can find radios in your aircraft. If you can, then the odds are, they will have issues down the line (both in stable and EA, since stable isn't a complete product by their own admission).

If I was asked that, I would just look at the TAF and give them a good estimate. Problem solved. Which dove tails perfectly with this situation.

How is asking a question about release expectations inappropriate exactly? If you were waiting for your airplane at an airport and you're just sitting there with the horrible weather, wouldn't you be curious if things were going to be on time? Might you ask a question or look for indications of delay?

Welcome to ED and DCS as a whole.

Yes and no, maybe....since ED has said that they kept the Hornet team working on the Viper to meet their minimum requirements for a Steam release (which promised TWS). If they can't release TWS, then the team doesn't move back over to the Hornet which was the whole purpose of moving them in the first place. So you're looking at delaying the Hornet's development further by delaying TWS in the Viper, effectively kicking yourself in the junk. At this point, it's lose/lose for the Hornet until December/January.