av8orDave

Only thing that has been a minor annoyance to me is that the JTAC ATHS (the system that transmits JTAC 9-lines to the CAS page) no longer functions (it once worked great).

First, at this point everything you are all debating is just noise. What is ED's plan to keep this from happening going forward? What is their way to fix it for their customers now that it has happened? I have three Razbam modules that are already degrading in terms of functionality, have never received promised features, and it sounds like they'll stop working soon. How is ED going to fix this? Refunds? I'm not interested in "store credits", if that is the solution. I already own the modules I want. Second, what should my expectation be in regards to 3rd parties? The modules I purchase could just stop receiving support at any time? Polychop had some well-publicized issues right after the release of the Kiowa... another reminder of how "fragile" ED's current business model is. Which brings me to the third point: Is there any belief that this business model is sustainable? It takes years, sometimes 7 or 8 years, for these modules to be developed and released between actual development time and time spent in "early access". Does ED believe it is a sound business model to have to maintain an ever-growing portfolio of modules with no revenue stream beyond their initial purchase? Over time, it would become an exponential amount of work to maintain these modules while developing the core game, with the only source of revenue being new "early access" releases that take years to develop. I believe that is why the CH-47 was released in such a bare-bones state, has seen such slow progress, etc. I think the model is bad, and if not already in trouble, eventually will be in trouble without some ongoing source of revenue to sustain the existing modules, terrains, and core game (subscription?). I know it isn't a popular view, but it is real.

I am over it. ED says “alleged”, Razbam says “alleged.” It’s a he said / she said, and it is moronic. At this point it is ED’s problem. If the modules stop working (some already have, AV-8B JTAC ATHS for example hasn’t worked for months), what will ED do? Refunds? What is the plan?

Sure, all is well with what you wrote, but you're excusing ED for not already having a solution in place that ensures the continuity of modules sold on their website, that exist in their ecosystem, in the context of this having happened with another 3rd party before. Not acceptable. Razbam may very well be the party in the wrong here, but shame on ED for leaving their customers hanging because they have no continuity plan if a 3rd party exits or goes sideways.

Allow me to vent for a moment: I'm a long-time customer of Eagle Dynamics. I've played the game since it's inception with the Ka-50 and A-10. I own nearly every module and terrain, including the Razbam AV-8B, M2K, and F-15E. Regardless of how we got here, who is at fault, etc, I find it pretty disappointing that ED hasn't made any progress on exactly how they ensure the continuity of 3rd party modules, and it really, really irks me. This isn't the first time a 3rd party has created noise, and ultimately, it is ED's "ecosystem" to maintain. What is ED's plan for if (when?) an update breaks the Razbam modules? Will there be a refund? How should I be reassured before buying 3rd party modules in the future? What a disappointing situation. I'm pretty well to the point that future purchases are on hold. This exactly. "We're holding up our end of the deal" is apparently too much to ask? The alternative of no statement looks pretty bad.

Today’s newsletter update is truly unbelievable. To say an agreement was reached but hasn’t been implemented, while saying “we can’t say any more”, with the context being that multiple forums say it hasn’t been implemented because ED hasn’t paid, is simply unreal.

My man, the Hornet was released in 2018 and the Viper in 2019. My point stands that these modules are all released early access and remain that way for an excessive amount of time, 7 years in the case of the Hornet and 6 in the case of the Viper.

Without question I understand your point and it is a point well-taken. Having said that, from a pragmatic standpoint, everything that ED and the 3rd parties release is released "early-access", and remains so for years upon years. Some may never reach a full-release state, and it is pretty murky as to when this "full release" actually occurs, so if you're going to buy modules from ED or the 3rd parties for DCS, it'll be in early-access. You don't really have another choice to buying early-access other than to not play the game / sim. Razbam aside, this creates big questions regarding the 3rd party model. I personally have the M2000C, the Harrier, and the F-15E, and I fully anticipate that if Razbam is really a memory at this point, those modules will stop functioning eventually. I am pretty darn reasonable as far as gamers go in my assessment, but even I think ED has some clarifying to do for their customers on exactly how this 3rd party scheme is supposed to work. By virtue of volume, the mass-market non-military popular flight sim does this well as it is pretty well understood that 3rd party aircraft or sceneries are bought on a buyer-beware premise (they may work today, may get developed further, may meet some varying and undefined standard of quality, and may eventually not work in the future). If that is the case with DCS, ED should say so.

As of the last CH-47 update, it seems like none of the user liveries I've downloaded from the user files section show any of the tail markings anymore... just an unmarked tail. Any ideas?

I've played DCS for probably 15 years and never knew this. Anyone know if there is some kind of reference doc or manual that outlines some of the "nuances" or "quirks" about the AI?

Try virtual desktop. The software is considerably better than the alternatives, and performance lately has been quite good.

Regardless of the sim platform, I have enough history with these RB guys now that I’d really think twice before buying anything from them. Wherever they go, a circus seems to follow. I know that is probably an unpopular view, but this deal with ED/DCS, while definitely the worst in their history, is hardly out of character for RB.

This is the answer. Thanks buddy, greatly appreciated.

Maybe this is already known, but I went to use the QAG with the Marianas map yesterday, and the F4U isn't available with the WWII era setting. Also, when selecting the F4U with any setting, carrier start isn't an option. Will this be added?

Thanks for the reply, and I do trust and believe the team is working on it. The reason for my negativity is that this process has been what I would say is really, really long. The link below is from 2021, and estimated implementation of Q3 of that year.

Has there been some news that I've missed regarding Vulkan implementation? It has been discussed for probably five years or more without any actual evidence of the work, so I'm skeptical that we'll ever see it. I hate to be so negative and I'd be glad to be proven wrong.

Any Corsair nerds know why the preferred fuel tank selection for takeoff and landing is the reserve tank rather than the main?

Same as above... would love to know what this option does.

I suspect it maybe is somewhat map dependent. I was getting bad framerates on The Channel map, but good framerates on Nevada. I'm curious what effect the cockpit texture settings have in special options but haven't tried tinkering with them yet.

Works now... you can ignore.

The E-Shop link in the changelog just links back to the changelog page.

I love your optimism. It’s DCS. I’d bet on September.

Are you new here? This is the standard DCS launch process, has been for nearly 20 years.

I chuckled when I read "not receiving timely monthly updates." Not only that, the modules aren't receiving ANY updates. Not only that, core features of the modules are starting to erode. If we're being honest about the situation, the whole "maintaining modules to ensure compatibility" is not really happening. The JTAC ATHS feature on the Harrier, for example, which once functioned, hasn't worked in nearly a year.

Nope. They've already added an additional day.