HWasp
-
Posts
644 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Everything posted by HWasp
-
Those more modern 29s would be a trap if you are after capabilities a competativeness, because they would not fit well into the late 1980s cold war scenarios, while still at a large disadvantage in more modern scenarios with their base model R-77s against the aim-120 carriers. More air to ground capability but in a worse overall position. The 9.12 we are getting could be very competative in the late 1980s setups against all the other 4th gens limited to aim-7s, the FC3 we have already is. There is an audience for older machines, people buy the F-14A/B, even though it's not the latest version, they also buy the F-4E, even though it's not some late modernised version. I'll skip the F-35 but I'll buy the good old MiG-29...
-
"Free", not free, that is not the same. They received detailed info in return, that would make it possible to sell a high quality and hopefully well selling module for the general public. I don't know the facts either but that way the story makes sense to me. Their M2000 updates in the recent years were based on their work with the French Air Force, I assume you know about that. Other than that, I don't really understand, how people imagine RB and that airforce running a full illegal product on DCS, completely cutting ED out? Run a cracked offline DCS version with their plane modded in? How would that even work? Risk-reward ratio?...
-
Allegedly the Tucano project was for "free" in return for high quality information about the plane. It was not a proper paid project, the DCS version based on that info would have been the money maker. In this case it's easy to see, why they would be reluctant to sign a contract for an expensive licence if they don't actually have a paying customer. That is likely the "small" detail left out the spud vid, otherwise it does not make much sense. A "clever" grey area deal handled in the worst possible way by both parties, that is how I see it...
-
They could have also released all their modules for free from the beginning, then we would not even have this problem now
-
I have no problem with ED using reasonable assumptions and public knowledge to create a sim game module, just don't call it full fidelity then. And since reasonable assumptions are on the table, go ahead and create a J-20 and Su-57 etc with it in the forseeable future, so that this becomes a proper part of the game that is fun to play on the long term.
-
My understanding is that a Tucano module was planned for DCS as well using the info gathered making the MCS version.
-
I think, in this case it would have been a more reasonable reaction to simply stop them from releasing the DCS Tucano. Allegedly they did the military contract for "free", in return for the information, so if they can't release it for DCS, that is clear loss for them and sends the necessary message imo. Another option could have been to increase ED's cut on the DCS Tucano, and cancel the module only if they refuse.
-
The US had a lot of accurate information on Soviet jets (CIA>ED imo ) so I don't think this is a good point. They also acquired Soviet jets to test, when they could.
-
It was certainly a stupid idea on RBs part to do anything with ED's IP without crystal clear written agreements, but overall that Tucano story does not sound malicious to me because they did not just sell something without cutting ED in, they used it to gain info for a future DCS module, that would be sold through ED the usual way later. I don't think this was ok on their part, but suggesting that DCS would potentially die if ED didn't react this way is laughable to me, sorry.
-
Can you quote the part of the official statement where the exact actions taken by ED are detailed? I can't find that part, sorry. Without that I don't know if they went nuclear immediately or not and you don't know either.
-
I don't know why so many people are interested in replaying/playing US vs 3rd world one sided conflicts. Yes, those are the ones that happened in the past and are the most likely in the near future, but still, what is the purpose of it? Roleplaying? That's ok once or twice, but it will get old for me quickly. I have no intention to fly against 4th gens in a 5th gen, or to do "realistic" missions against some old SAMs. I need an interesting environment for this, like J-20s and latest chinese ADs for example, but those cannot be realistically recreated either, because there is simply not enough info out there obviously. The question is then, why would I learn to operate an aircraft in the sim just for the sake of learning, when I know, that it will not be anywhere near as accurate as the F-4 for example, which was created based on tons of accurate docs and SME info (without all the secrecy). My point is, if ED wants to go 5th gen and modern warfare, then just do it separately from the rest. Create a new product line, that is not advertised as full fidelity, and then go ahead and create the proper environment as well with interesting adversaries. I would honestly be interested to fly an "expert level educated guess" of a J-20 or Su-57, knowing very well that it's just a game at that point, but at least it's interesting.
-
Do you have a source? What happened exactly?
-
The honest way to do this would be to introduce a new "medium fidelity" product line positioned between FC4 and full fid. Doing the F-35 is fine, just don't try to pretend that it will be on the same level as the A10C or the F-4 is...
-
This should have been a FC4 level thing with an "educated guess" of a J-20 and Su-57. I don't believe, that this will be accurate, sorry, not a chance. What would I even use this thing in DCS for? Hunt blind 4th gens and drop jdams on targets defended by 1980s SAMs that have no chance?
- 607 replies
-
- 13
-
-
-
If ED had a good case in their favour, then a swift (?) legal decision could have been made in their favour, forcing RB to pay for damages and presenting a clear case for the public if things got out... This goes both ways.
-
Would be nice, if haters on both sides would clear off instead....
-
Who is going to verify the "evidence" for you? How do you know, that the official statements are true? Just becuase they are "official"? There is no neutral 3rd party here to verify things for you. You can read both sides of the story, then decide for yourself.
-
There was on old thread, still with the old FM, where I tried to compare DCS to some HUD footage. In DCS it took quite a bit less AoA to reach the same G. Just for info, as these are of course connected.
-
Did you actually read that thing, we were talking about?
-
Thanks. Even though it's just a private conversation, it paints a very ugly picture. Just the info in itself, that this is not a one time incident, but something that has occured before and was close to reach this point, reduces my trust to zero.
-
We were not talking about random rumors, we were talking about a specific leaked conversation with names. If that was fabricated, it would be basic common sense for the person involved to declare that conversation as fake. The site it was published on has 8k+ members, so chances are, that tens of thousands of people read that thing. Would you be ok with that, if it was indeed fabricated fake with your name in it in that position? I certainly would not be ok with that. On the other hand, if it's legit, confirming it officially would still be a hostile step against ED, so I can totally understand the silence in that case.
-
Of course it can be dismissed, you are free to do so, no problem. I don't think, that everybody else thinks like that though.
-
Let's turn this around: Where is the official denial of this conversation by HB? If someone would forge something like that with my name, in a situation like this, I would be pretty quick to deny it officially.
-
The core issue was/is the split between HB and Mag3, they were one company at the time of the 21s initial release. Mag3 never really got traction and fell behind without any serious releases, it just looks like that they never had proper resources since then. I think the only way forward for them is to finally release the Corsair in an acceptable state, and finally earn some serious money to be able to move forward. I also want a MiG-21 update ASAP, and I'm willing to pay for it. I hope, that once they get some new cash flow, they can finally expand their team and start working at a better rate. That all being said, I'm still a happy customer, I can have fun with the plane as is, but the MiG-21 really deserves a proper overhaul.
-
I agree, especially because the word is out, that this already happened before, it just stayed behind the scenes. For me, that is very serious.
